Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–129 of 129 posts

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#121

Post by cawlin »

catalogia wrote: post #107
macintux wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with phone calls isn't the lack of video, but the lack of a "click here to join the meeting" interface. Group meetings are much less hassle through Skype, or Teams, or Zoom, or whatever computer-based option you choose, than waiting for everyone to drag out their phones, dial the right number, type in the right meeting code.

> The problem with phone calls isn't the lack of video, but the lack of a "click here to join the meeting" interface. If "dial this number to join the conference call" is too hard for modern professionals, what the hell is happening to our society? (I do not believe it's actually too hard for them. I think it's incredibly patronizing to suppose that dialing a phone number might be too hard for otherwise capable membe…

My experience with conference calls overwhelming confirms that dialing in and entering a code will waste ~10 mins of any meeting.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#122

Post by charlieegan3 »

tyre wrote: post #93
sooheon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On-boarding is a enormous part of why Slack is trouncing other instant messaging efforts Slack's separate sign-ins for each space is strange to me. On a new install, I can't log into my account and automatically be connected to every space I'm registered to.

That's no longer true and hasn't been for years. Coincidentally I was invited to Slack for user testing a couple years ago. They asked me to sign into slack and as I was going through that said, "you know what's really annoying? When I do this now I have to sign into each workspace." When I signed in, a list of available workspaces appeared. Turns out I was a user tester for exactly that feature.

This is only true if you’re using the same email.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#123

Post by catalogia »

macintux wrote: post #112
catalogia wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with phone calls isn't the lack of video, but the lack of a "click here to join the meeting" interface. If "dial this number to join the conference call" is too hard for modern professionals, what the hell is happening to our society? (I do not believe it's actually too hard for them. I think it's incredibly patronizing to suppose that dialing a phone number might be too hard for otherwise capable membe…

I didn't say it was too hard, but frictionless wins out more often than not. Why wouldn't frictionless + more features win over tedious and incapable of screen sharing?

Friction isn't a binary, and nothing is truly frictionless. Zoom requires you to install an application, while conference calls only require you to have a phone. I would say the former is more friction, particularly since this particular application is one I'd not like to install on any of my personal devices.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#124

Post by lordlimecat »

bob33212 wrote: post #57
dig1 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In the real world you cannot have everything. Fast, cheap, reliable, scalable, secure, easy to use, os agnostic. Pick several or be disappointed about the theoretical perfect company that should exist and provide all.

We're not talking about secure, we're talking about "not insing unsecured REST APIs on client machines that can't be removed".

Zoom isn't on the secure radar at all. They're fighting to not actively compromise your computers security.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#125

Post by mr_gibbins »

The people behind Zoom have no obligations to you (not you, OP, the general 'you') at all.

They built the product with the Facebook SDK wired up to report your activity back to Zuckerberg. They told you about it in the T&Cs which you agreed to. They built the product, as they rightly point out, for a different, constrained market where Zoom gatecrashing wasn't considered - not the whole world in a pandemic crisis, where people will always try to exploit platforms for exposure and profit.

If you don't like Zoom or what they are doing, don't use it. They owe you nothing. Acting like Zoom have some kind of social responsibility to you because it's suddenly the most convenient tool when you're stuck at home is ridiculous.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#126

Post by justinclift »

tyre wrote: post #93
sooheon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On-boarding is a enormous part of why Slack is trouncing other instant messaging efforts Slack's separate sign-ins for each space is strange to me. On a new install, I can't log into my account and automatically be connected to every space I'm registered to.

That's no longer true and hasn't been for years. Coincidentally I was invited to Slack for user testing a couple years ago. They asked me to sign into slack and as I was going through that said, "you know what's really annoying? When I do this now I have to sign into each workspace." When I signed in, a list of available workspaces appeared. Turns out I was a user tester for exactly that feature.

> That's no longer true and hasn't been for years.

That's weird. For me, I still need to log into every single Slack workspace separately.

Most of them redirect to app.slack.com, however they have no visibility into each other. So it's several browser tabs kept open and left running in the background on those days.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#127

Post by rickisen »

shirro wrote: post #60

Zoom works so well, given a lot of us can't work or learn face to face at the moment, I think we just have to work with Zoom constructively. There are equivalent or better solutions in niches but no general solution that really stacks up. Report security issues. Keep them honest. And don't use it for discussions that are potentially highly sensitive - buyer beware. I would much rather use an open technology with FOSS…

Install Jitsi on your own vps (prefably hosted in your city) and your set.

A vps wiht 2 cores and 2 gb works really well at our company and costs close to nothing. Took maybe 4 hours to set up their docker-compose setup, it even does letsencrypt automatically.

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#128

Post by christiangenco »

dijit wrote: post #58

I have avoided weighing in on all the talk about Zoom recently. Mostly because I'm an outsider, my company does not use Zoom. 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…

Whereby[1] gets proper convenience right on the first and Nth installs. It sacrifices some of the power of Zoom (max of ~16 participants, no dynamic backgrounds) to run entirely in a browser. IMO it's a much better solution for video conferencing nontechnical people that don't know how to install software.

1. https://whereby.com

Re: Maybe we shouldn’t use Zoom after all

#129

Post by dzhiurgis »

catalogia wrote: post #123
macintux wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say it was too hard, but frictionless wins out more often than not. Why wouldn't frictionless + more features win over tedious and incapable of screen sharing?

Friction isn't a binary, and nothing is truly frictionless. Zoom requires you to install an application, while conference calls only require you to have a phone. I would say the former is more friction, particularly since this particular application is one I'd not like to install on any of my personal devices.

Plain phone tends to have worse audio quality
Post reply on HN