Looks like few components including the "Generic Dewarping" and the "Time Compressor" may carry a significant risk of IP infringement. This is something that may not bother Russia origine company but will certainly be a risk factor for customers in the N. America market.
Axxon Next VMS 4.0 Tested
may carry a significant risk of IP infringement
Are your a patent attorney or just a competitor trying to use IPVM to attack a competitor?
If you have some specifics to substantiate your claims, feel free to add.
I don´t know which information Manufacturer 1 has.. but...
As far as I know, the Time Compressor technology is patented by BriefCam and they cannot sell this technology in countries where Briefcam has patents such as in the US.
About Generic fisheye dewarping, I´ve been told by some companies that does 360 dewarping that some technology are patent protected and a generic fisheye dewarping engine would infringe that, but I´ve seen some VMSes offering generic fisheye dewarping, so, I´m not sure how that would hold up in court...
We (AxxonSoft) have US patent for Time Compressor!
Also important to say that we do generic fisheye dewarping and ImmerVision dewarping by using GPU only!
Well, by the title, searching for objects in video data received from a fixed camera is not time compressing, it looks more like analytics
Well, by the title...
Fortunately we're not limited to the title. IMHO, they have some primary elements that bear resemblence. I'll be the first to admit what distinctions the PTO would make I can't guess.
It would be interesting to get Mr. Altuev's take on it though, as I'm sure he would have an opinion one way or another.
From technical point of view there are major differences. BriefCam makes some preprocessing and stores results of it, so you need more CPU power and a lot of storage. Axxon doesn't preprocess anything and needs no storage. We can do TimeCompressor based on metadata received from camera with zero CPU utilization during runtime. BTW, we have our own Axis plugin to generate metadata on camera side!
I didn't notice you mention what OS the client software supports. Is this a Web based client? Is there a PC/Mac/Linux client? Does the server software run on Windows or Linux or do you have to buy their hardware? . Thanks for the otherwise very detailed report.
Good point, I'll add that in.
Client and server are Windows only. There is a web client which is multiplatform.
They don't sell any hardware, software only.
Just want to add that Linux server is available on demand.
What does "available on demand" mean? You don't make it normally available? Can you explain exactly how/why it's not available normally? This doesn't inspire much confidence if you don't like giving it out. Exacq provides Windows and Linux versions right from their downloads page, always keeps them both up to date and releases both versions at the same time, and they both work flawlessly. Do you have more information about the Linux version? Is it experimental? How well supported is it?
Both versions are always compiling together on our build machines, but only Windows version goes through all QA procedures.
We are ready to give Linux distributive on demand and support it, but once we have more requests from market, we are ready to double QA resources and release it officially.
As a German Integrator (and formerly Axxon employee) I just wanna add, that we are using this SW in projects from 3 to 120 cameras without any major issues. A Linux-Server-Version is on the way. Client-Software is Windows-only, Web-Client runs on all modern browsers.
So, if anyone has questions about Axxon Next or Axxon Intellect, feel free to contact me.
Harald, it is important for members to know / note that you worked there for nearly 6 years. Some may find that to be a positive (he knows it well) or a negative (he's using what he's most familiar with).
Agreed. Anyone can access my LinkedIn Profile to see that I worked for aimetis as well and that I'm just started as official Trainer in Germany for Milestone-Software - which I'm now using as well ;)
Do you would feel calm in case of a thousen cameras project? What can we expect from the system in large projects?
Generally speaking, in the past we did the bigger projects with Axxon Intellect (> 600 Cams). Currently, we are implementing Axxon Next in a project with about 300 Cameras on 5 locations. No problems so far.
Intellect, by far the "older" Axxon software, has still more features. As always, it's a question of requirements. Axxon Next features "Green Stream" and Motion Wavelet recompression, both features very useful in projects with more than one location aand larger projects. On the other side, we are waiting for the feature "Two-mans-rule" (two people need to login at the same time to get access), a feature often requested in Europe. In such cases we use Intellect even in small projects.
I found insufficient documentation about "Green Stream" and "Motion Wavelet"... do you can tell a little more about?
Green Stream means that Client automatically gets the appropriate stream. Example: Client watches full screen: Axxon Next gets High resolution stream from Camera. Clients watches 4x4 Split Screen: Axxon Next gets VGA resolution from Camera. That saves enourmos power on clients and bandwidtch between locations (remote monitoring).
Motion Wavelet recompression helps to recompress any kind of Camera Stream (mjpg, mpg4, h264/265) to any other resolution based on Motion Wavelet. Could also help to minimize bandwidth between locations.
[Note, 3 is from Axxon]
Thanks for the review. It's very informative.
Though I couldn't find a single word about the most important feature of Axxon Next 4 - the Intel Quick Sync support, which can basically reduce the required hardware by half (or even more). So Axxon's systems integrators silently save a lot of money. Would be very helpful to know how efficient this software is against Genetec and Milestone in terms of CPU load and hardware specs.
Yes, thank you for highlighting performance issues. We really tried hard to reach the best performance possible in every aspect.
It will be really great if performance comparisions made by IPVM.
Apart from using GPU for dewarping, we implement some other techniques to reduce CPU load on client both on decompression and rendering sides.
We compared Milestone QuickSync with AxxonNext4 QuickSync implementations.
Core i5/i7, H.265 Full HD
Milestone - 12/13 cameras
AxxonNext - 35/34
Milestone - 4/8
AxxonNext - 6/13
I hope that IPVM can confirm this.
What about their facial recognition module? How their technology is classified on market? What is their target customers?
Did anyone test it or compare with other vendors?
What is the accurancy / hit-rate (on field, not paper)?
What is the server usage?
our face recognition module is based on deep learning analytics and accuracy may reach 95-99% with proper lighting conditions. We have customers in Retail, Law enforcement, Financial, Education, Safe Cities.
Free demo is available, you may test it on site (up to 60 days).
Concurrently you can use 20 face cameras per server.
Here is our demo: