Hacker News Reader

Comment by coreypreston | Hacker News Reader

They're 6 months away from becoming a case study in squandering momentum.

The goodwill has already been squandered. There’s simply nowhere else to jump to (jitsi lol). As soon as a viable competitor launches, everyone will jump. Same thing happened from Skype to Discord with the gaming community.

Jitsi Meet's not a viable competitor?

It's simpler to set up (accounts and password protection are optional), IMO easier to use (eg. the hand button is on the bottom bar with mute, etc. and not in a menu labeled "Participants") and higher quality according to the New York Times, who deemed it "reliable and easy to use": https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-video-confer.... I've introduced it to extended family members who've used Zoom prolifically, with zero complaints.

Can you name a single disadvantage?

We tested it at my org, it doesn't scale past 15 users

Yeah, something like BigBlueButton might be better for big business meetings. (it's built for them and education, and claims to support 150+ participants).

Participant limits in Jitsi Meet are a bit confusing. There's a lot of variables to consider. https://community.jitsi.org/t/jitsi-meet-performance-compari...

> 1. Room hard limit is 75 users, recommended 35 users. > 2. The limit with more than 15 users with camera is the user’s PC. > 3. Working test with a good bare metal servers, 115 mute users and 5 users with camera. > 4. Test in progress for 500 simultaneous users.

Heh. I like that this thread reveals Zoom's true advantage: it scales like hell.

If you are looking out for a BigBlueButton service provider who can enable the Virtual Classroom for the organization with unlimited number of users and setting the correct concurrent users then connect with 3E Software Solutions.

We are available at hello@3esofttech.com

Jitsi has audio problems for several people in my peer group. I think from other audio work that it may be that they're using too small frame sizes, although it's possible that something else in their audio pipeline is busted.

Audio capture APIs often suggest it may be possible to use very small frame sizes, which naturally promise much improved latency. Going from 100ms of audio latency to 20ms is great so surely going from 20ms to 5ms is even better right? Well, the hardware underneath that API may not be able to deliver, at least it may not be able to deliver consistently. If your 5ms buffer isn't filled on time, what do you send? A partially filled buffer? Silence? The last 5ms of filled buffer again? All bad answers.

Tool A with 40ms of latency may feel imperceptibly worse than Tool B with 30ms of latency. But Tool C with 10ms of latency but frequent "drain piping" as audio frames are garbled or undelivered is clearly much worse than either.

The name Jitsi is a disadvantage.

I'm not being facetious. If you compare the name Zoom to Jitsi, people will choose Zoom 9 out of 10 times. You won't get many people to even try Jitsi.

Zoom is quickly becoming a verb similar to what Skype used to be. Let's Skype. Let's Zoom. Everyone understands what that means.

Let's Jitsi... Let's what?

Skype was never a real player in the gaming community, it was really just Teamspeak, Ventrilo, and Mumble

I was always a big fan of Mumble and their "latency first, even if you sound like a robot" approach. There are a lot of times in raiding that an 0.5s delay means everyone dies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com