91–100 of 279 posts
I however think (emulated) stereo sound and low latency would do wonders. Sadly this feature here will only introduce latency.
Feedback cancellation for external speakers would also be amazing, so you can get rid of your headphones at home. Close up mic and noise gate works, but is fiddly (and no easy noise gate and compressor on linux...)
Meet, to me, is the perfect balance of functionality and simplicity (as an end user). And features like this only make that more apparent. Zoom and Teams always frustrate me, even though they're what I use far more often. It's too bad that video conferencing is largely a game of who has the most boxes checked - IT admins and A/V folk are the ones that need to be convinced, and Meet just doesn't ...meet... their needs
Unfortunately, it's only a matter of time until one their VPs decides to "improve it" with the usual imbecile ideas they come up with.
>Google Meet now scans all your files so they can get shared automatically with all members on the meeting when it is appropriate to enrich the conversation. You cannot opt-out this feature.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, all of them. Wear headphones.
To +1 this, yes, every single one AFAIK. What you're running into is almost certainly noise cancelling. It's turning off your incoming audio so it doesn't intrude on your microphone picking up your voice. Disabling or tweaking noise cancelling or audio modes (i.e. to "headset") on basically every meeting software will eventually get you a combination that doesn't do this. It's sometimes a bit hidden though, and many…
Sadly this is feature-gated behind Gemini :/ > Available for Google Workspace customers with the Gemini Enterprise, Gemini Business, Gemini Education, Gemini Education Premium, and the AI Meetings and Messaging add-on.
I'm not that deep into Google latest rebrand activity... how is Google Meet related to LLM model? or do they call many unrelated things Gemini?
also, in a previous iteration of google's AI branding, meet had a feature that would create llm-generated meeting notes for you. i'm unsure if this still exists
https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/29/23849056/google-meet-ai-d...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Meet requires a Google account to attend a video call while Zoom does not. So if your hosting a meeting with strangers, using Meet is not user friendly. At least personally I refuse to make a Google account bc it requires giving Google my phone number... But I know that's a bit of technoludditism in the current zeitgeist
Is this new? I have definitely joined Meets calls from my personal laptop and I don't have a personal Google account. This includes my last job interview, and, well, I got the job. Perhaps it's meeting specific, or organization specific?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think because Meet is fully browser based, some of the features like sharing audio with screen are only available via chrome or chromium based browsers -- definitely not on Firefox in my own testing. I don't know the exact reason for that, but it's kind of sad.
Which is why I don't use Meet.
I just want to say that this is really actually kind of mind-blowing from an audio engineering perspective. Outputting audio from multiple laptops in the same room is easy. Perfectly syncing it is harder. Implementing echo cancellation across all of that is quite a bit trickier than regular single-device echo cancellation. But then treating all the laptop microphones as a kind of microphone array, having to deal with…
And yet Google can ship it anywhere on the planet via HTTPS and webasm... Things that make you go hmm.
Sounds imprrssive, but also overengineered? Don't headphones solve the same problem? Though I guess in a hybrid meeting they'd make it harder to hear the people in the room. (But you'd hear them through the laptop, normally? I guess there would be an uncanny delay...)
Meet, to me, is the perfect balance of functionality and simplicity (as an end user). And features like this only make that more apparent. Zoom and Teams always frustrate me, even though they're what I use far more often. It's too bad that video conferencing is largely a game of who has the most boxes checked - IT admins and A/V folk are the ones that need to be convinced, and Meet just doesn't ...meet... their needs
It very rarely matters which product is "better" in any objective sense. If you are team that work with Teams, your meetings will be on teams. Teams could be much worse than Zoom or Meet, you wouldn't move your group from Teams for one meeting anyway.
Getting logged in is always a problem. Setting my name permanently is literally always a problem (I have zero idea why). Viewing someone elses screen always stinks because the scaling is just not good.
On top of that you can't compare Teams to Google Meet because literally every organization has theirs configured differently. For some organizations, I can use my phone for audio. For others I can only use my laptop. So it's never an Apples to Apples comparison. Sometimes you have access to chat history; other times if you reconnect you lose chat history. The differences inside a product go on and on.
Meet, to me, is the perfect balance of functionality and simplicity (as an end user). And features like this only make that more apparent. Zoom and Teams always frustrate me, even though they're what I use far more often. It's too bad that video conferencing is largely a game of who has the most boxes checked - IT admins and A/V folk are the ones that need to be convinced, and Meet just doesn't ...meet... their needs
Meet frustrates me immensely because I can't just fullscreen someone sharing an HD screen onto my HD screen and get 1:1 pixels with an overlay of faces (like Zoom does). Instead, I have to either not be able to read small text, or awkwardly pan in the recently-added "zoom" view.