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

Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

jami.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#31

Post by techwizrd »

musicale wrote: post #27

I'm amazed that Zoom has so much uptake. Even disregarding the malware-like behavior of its installer and the ongoing security issues, I've never had a satisfactory experience with Zoom. It's particularly bad for conferences with lots of people - the audio quality is choppy and often unintelligible, and often the audio will just cut out entirely after a couple of minutes. Moreover, the video and screen sharing featur…

To add some add alternative anec-data: I've had poor experiences on Hangouts, Teams, WebEx, Hop.in, etc. Zoom and GoToMeeting are the only options that don't turn my computer into a jet engine. For our government working groups, we prefer ZoomGov because it's fairly painless and has excellent audio and video performance.

It seems that people have had a multitude of experiences, and there are no clear winners.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#32

Post by seirim »

znpy wrote: post #26
terhechte wrote: post #2

I looked into free, native videoconferencing solutions several months ago because I wanted to run conferences on slower hardware. Most webrtc solutions ran too slow for my requirements. Jami worked really well, I could even compile it for my Raspberry pi and it ran with solid quality there. I’m very happy that this exists as open source. Big kudos to the developers.

I've got a feeling that most videoconferencing apps push for highest video quality, when the most important thing is audio latency. I wouldn't care if I saw my coworkers in 640x480 as long as I can hear them loud and clear and they can hear me the same.

I would think "decent quality" video would be preferable anyway. I don't need perfect detail of everyone's wrinkles and blemishes and they don't need mine, either.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#33

Post by spurgu »

ramraj07 wrote: post #30
musicale wrote: post #27

I'm amazed that Zoom has so much uptake. Even disregarding the malware-like behavior of its installer and the ongoing security issues, I've never had a satisfactory experience with Zoom. It's particularly bad for conferences with lots of people - the audio quality is choppy and often unintelligible, and often the audio will just cut out entirely after a couple of minutes. Moreover, the video and screen sharing featur…

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

Have you tried their web client, for those of us who aren't comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans? Pretty much unusable.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#34

Post by Sebguer »

spurgu wrote: post #33
ramraj07 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

Have you tried their web client, for those of us who aren't comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans? Pretty much unusable.

And to that person's point, by using your web client, you are significantly in the minority. Most people are comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans. Whether or not they should be is a completely separate question.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#36

Post by ramraj07 »

spurgu wrote: post #33
ramraj07 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

Have you tried their web client, for those of us who aren't comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans? Pretty much unusable.

Anyone who knows tech reasonably knows Zoom does some "unscrupulous" things to provide a seamless VC experience. To me, it's a bit clear that unless you also control the underlying OS (even when you do apparently), they are doing whatever they need to get what can be considered basic UX needs of a VC app. Contrary to popular belief in places like HN, the average Joe isn't a dipshit, they really don't care about these lapses from Zoom and will very happily make these concessions evenn if they're fully educated on everything to know about security. I'm not a technotard and mostly know everything and I make the concession.

It's not even clear to me they're being genuinely unscrupulous anyway. This is like not trusting the government when they do mass surveillance but more benign. The majority of the population has decided they are not worried about it, right or wrong, they just want to get on with their life.

Keep complaining for sure, we need dissent, but don't argue that Zoom isn't good at what it does, the only argument might be that it's practices aren't ethical. You choose to use the web application it's your choice not theirs.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#37

Post by [deleted] »

ramraj07 wrote: post #30
musicale wrote: post #27

I'm amazed that Zoom has so much uptake. Even disregarding the malware-like behavior of its installer and the ongoing security issues, I've never had a satisfactory experience with Zoom. It's particularly bad for conferences with lots of people - the audio quality is choppy and often unintelligible, and often the audio will just cut out entirely after a couple of minutes. Moreover, the video and screen sharing featur…

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

[deleted]

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#38

Post by AlexCoventry »

spurgu wrote: post #33
ramraj07 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

Have you tried their web client, for those of us who aren't comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans? Pretty much unusable.

The web client has been pretty seamless, for me.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#39

Post by smt88 »

spurgu wrote: post #33
ramraj07 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely in the minority with your experiences then. Zooms success is unarguably due to its comparably smooth operation. Granted, some other services offer better video and audio quality, but it's often dependent on location, and zoom is more graceful at lower bandwidth than most other systems anyway. Most important, it's ease of use (precisely due to their malware like installer behaviour among other thing…

Have you tried their web client, for those of us who aren't comfortable putting up with Zoom's shenanigans? Pretty much unusable.

I loathe Zoom, but its web client works as well as its desktop client.

Re: Together: New version of Jami (alternative to Zoom and Jitsi)

#40

Post by kybernetikos »

mxuribe wrote: post #29
znpy wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got a feeling that most videoconferencing apps push for highest video quality, when the most important thing is audio latency. I wouldn't care if I saw my coworkers in 640x480 as long as I can hear them loud and clear and they can hear me the same.

I agree with you, as did my former work colleagues...BUT, this March i started a new job, and the people at this new job were very much used to work at the office, so working from home (due to the pandemic) is still very weird/tough for them...so they all want the highest quality of video to see each other's faces...and in my opinion it helps zero for productivity...it is all because it makes them just feel better ..…

Helping people feel better can be good for productivity.
Post reply on HN