I have emailed them 8 times over the past many days and have received ONE response (from Nick).
#Securityspy software software#
So if you have the luxury of a dedicated powerful server for your camera recording then EvoCam is probably the most cost effective option, but if you want something that works reliably and doesn’t take over your machine then SecuritySpy is well worth the extra investment.Įvological has a pretty decent site and what seems to be some pretty cool software but their customer service appears to be non-existent. That’s quite a difference and it’s very noticeable when you try to use the same host machine for other work. In these examples (from a Mac Mini 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with 4GB RAM), EvoCam consumes 85% CPU and 90MB real memory, while in comparison SecuritySpy consumes a meagre 6% CPU and 21MB real memory.
For reasons unknown it ties up the processor for even a simple one camera recording setup.Īctivity Monitor output taken for identical recording sessions is below: I’ve had an opportunity to evaluate both products and have come to the conclusion that you really do get what you pay for.ĮvoCam does the job well enough and has a more polished user interface, but it also suffers from a major problem that lets it down badly, almost to the point of being unusable.
On price alone you might be tempted by EvoCam as it costs just $30 (under £20) for an unlimited number of cameras, while SecuritySpy will set you back £30 for a single camera license and a whopping £500 for unlimited camera support. The options for network camera recording software are a bit limited on Mac OS. The two most popular products in this space are Evological’s EvoCam and Bensoftware’s SecuritySpy.
0 kommentar(er)
