Everybody used to have Skype and I would have gladly handed over my data to MS if only it would have been able to do stable video calls. It was often a disaster for just 2-way calls, let alone group.
Stability was the main draw, but company IT departments would have had more power to ban it if there were bigger and clearer risks of corporate secrets escaping.
Some folks are concerned with more than stability and ease of use.
This would mean using only libre/open source software like Jitsu or Linphone, as one could verify the code or higher experts to verify the code.
If this was happenening in any other industry (except fonance?), the perpetrators would be in jail.
That doesn't justify zoom making false claims--I just don't think the companies you're describing would be using zoom.
Defending against sophisticated state-level actors goes even further beyond the requirements of most businesses. Unless you had a specific reason to believe that you were a target of such actors (dealing with national security, or matters of significant national strategic importance), you couldn't justify investing much resource into such defensive measures.
Also due to deception, it auto reinstalled on macs until they were caught.
This is absolutely huge. We've tried Teams (and I have previously used Webex and Hangouts).
It seems like there is _always_ one person that struggles with other video services. Can't join, video/audio issues, CPU usage, latency, etc. Painful when 10%+ of a meeting is consumed by getting one last, key person trying to fix their issues.
Just look at the troubles and hurdles Signal messenger need to overcome to implement some features, while the competition that is not so security focused has them since forever.
They did not provide the service the advertised: they provided something much inferior (and that's actually unsuitable for many industries).
It's not really really about "what would clients have done otherwise". It's a matter of giving money back.
If you pay me to write a program, and it only does half of what I promise, wouldn't you want [part of] your money back?
I imagine some people at Skype probably kept a few instances of Skype running at the office. So they technically hosted a few super nodes, but it wasn't necessarily that they were running some vastly different server version of the app. It wasn't until Microsoft decided to cut down on the P2P aspect of the app and hardcode only Azure-hosted super nodes into the application that this changed.
That is what was great about zoom. The security becomes important after it works.