Hacker News Reader

Comment by adamwathan | Hacker News Reader

Really disappointing news, rolling Screenhero into Slack doesn't solve the same problem at all.

I work for myself and have a large contact list of people who don't know each other who I often pair with or screenshare with. With Slack, there's really no way for me to create the same setup.

I'd need to create a new team called "Adam's Screenhero Contacts", invite all of my contacts (who don't know each other) to be part of this "team" together, and I'd have to foot the bill for the whole team since there's no way for each individual to pay for their own Slack account.

Is there a viable Screenhero alternative out there yet?

View on HN

They can't take control of your screen but I like https://appear.in/

I’ll second this, appear.in is great for lightweight small-group video chats.

I think this might fall under "doesn't solve the same problem at all".

You can share your screen but you cannot share control of your screen. Screenhero was the word on sharing control.

We use appear.in through our paid Slack accounts. I don't know how our admins set is up but we just type /appear in any channel/chat and immediately get a link.

It's a plugin. But it's also trivial to get a URL from the site and paste it in.

In the Slack admin panel you can change the default call provider from slack to others, one of those is appear.in. Doing this will cause the “call” button in the slack app to auto generate a unique link for appear.in and add it to the chat. Works well if your company won’t scrape together for paid version of slack (such as mine).

There is a way for each individual to pay for their Slack account: Shared Channels! https://slackhq.com/introducing-shared-channels-where-you-ca...

This doesn't solve it either, however. As an example, if I'm friends with 5 people who each have this setup, I'll have to pay to belong to each of their 5 separate shared Slack channels. And they would need to do the same for each of THEIR friends.

GoToMeeting is rock solid if you only need to broadcast a single screen at a time. (Only one "one-to-many" screen; no collaboration, no multiple cursors.) It's low-bandwidth, supports dial-in and recording, and has a native app.

I think single channel guests would work?

Yeah it would be a little obnoxious but I think it would work

If Slack brings calling to shared channels, will that fit the bill?

Slack shared channels already has calls (including screen sharing / shared control).

I use zoom.us

Reply on news.ycombinator.com