51–60 of 129 posts
We use BlueJeans at work, and for my part time master's program. It doesn't have virtual backgrounds like Zoom, but it is very reliable and easy to use.
I've seen about 10 different articles against Zoom during the past 3 days. I really don't enjoy using Zoom, but the volume and frequency of criticism is odd. Has anyone figured out where it's coming from?
The macOS version of Zoom installs or installed an unannounced web server on macOS that runs even when Zoom isn't running, and could perform remotely controlled actions on the macOS host.
Fortunately OS X released an update to make this impossible for Zoom and anyone else.
I've seen about 10 different articles against Zoom during the past 3 days. I really don't enjoy using Zoom, but the volume and frequency of criticism is odd. Has anyone figured out where it's coming from?
So, why? Anything you'd like to disclose? dang ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before COVID most non-remote companies could still function if their VC was broken; now it's impossible without VC.
Is video really that important? Sure it has benefit of being a bit more cozy, but in reality phone is sufficient to discuss work. Screenshare is much more important, especially for knowledge workers.
Videoconferencing is used for a lot of things that don't involve reviewing a document or pair-programming. Many people find video quite helpful for such situations.
Zoom has about 130,000 subdomains. Cisco, established 20 years earlier and operating in the same space and many more, has 45,000. About 40-50k of Zoom's subdomains are customers. Company.Zoom.Us. About 5k of the subdomains reference MMR. Likely this means "Meet Me Rooms" which are seen in data centers. About 200 contain the word tracking, 300 the word face, and 400 the word elasticsearch. Something like 700 contain t…
Reliability goes a long way and Zoom is very reliable, especially considering the recent spike of users. I value privacy, but I think the jury is still out on this company. They need time to react to the public scolding they're enduring as of late. Hopefully things change for the better and they take security more seriously after this. EDIT: A word
Had a meeting tonight with over 50 participants. Screen sharing. Not a single hitch or problem. In the past tried multiple times with Hangouts (dies after you get more than 4 on board), jitsi meet (not good with bad connections), Slack (good luck with video), Hipchat (video doesn't work for more than 3 participants) and Skype (connection drops). On one of my previous gigs, we ditched everything and took Mumble + goog…
However I've used Zoom once or twice, for interviews or in one case working with a friend on a pair programming session.
At my company we use teams, slack, skype and discord (yes, really).
Heres the thing though; The first time I used Zoom I was actually petrified (as I usually am) that I have to install /another/ application and figure out compatibility issues, especially because I'm one of those crusty die hard linux users. I panicked so bad that I resorted to using my phone.
(Tip: don't attend interviews with your phone recording from your hand, it looks super unprofessional I'm told)
The second time I had a zoom meeting I just clicked the URL in the meeting request and it worked!
You have to understand, I'm coming from a place where things almost never work. Exchange? nah, maybe 2007, or was it 2003, who knows. Teams? Their linux port not only consumes all available CPU on my laptop (which is not a slouchy laptop) but it doesn't even function correctly with basic stuff. Slack works a treat (as long as I don't do screen sharing) and I suspect that this is largely why it caught on too.
My point is simple here: Proper convenience is hard to get right. On-boarding is a enormous part of why Slack is trouncing other instant messaging efforts (IRC especially).
The security is lackluster but very honestly (and with a heavy heart) I have to say that the majority of people don't care until it affects them.
We don't know how Zoom will respond, but for what it's worth, I like that their product works well on my platform, they deserve massive props for that.
Whoever is orchestrating this hitjob against zoom, is doing a bad job of it. Most people are going to ignore articles like this. After a certain amount of stories, outrage fatigue sets in and people start to see it as a hit piece and dismiss it, no matter how bad it really is.
I don't think it's a hit job. It's a side effect of the covid crisis, which is itself an instance of the 'major ongoing story' dynamic on internet forums: black hole story attracting all mass. More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22751116 . In fact, the wave of objections ('why is X taking over HN') is a manifestation of the same dynamic; it's just the second-order version of it. When those get repeated en…
Very well put!
I would much rather use an open technology with FOSS software with end to end encryption and all the nice things but I know from experience that no such app is going to be on every platform with all the features and be useable by non-technical people.
There is a lot of negative media being generated at the moment and while I can see the problems and I am sure the people reporting them are all genuine in their motivations I don't trust the media not to be pushing an agenda when one company is doing so well out of this and their competitors are struggling. Skype had Zoom's space, and many of the same security and other problems and they were bought and mismanaged into irrelevance. Whatever Zoom is doing, they are still doing it better than most of their competition.
I think we need to give Zoom a bit of space to make things right. They are suddenly under a huge spotlight. People are so divisive and ready to attack. Save your energy for battling bigger problems like staying alive and keeping an income.