←back to thread

279 points arkadiyt | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
jwr ◴[] No.22662783[source]
I highly recommend using solutions based on WebRTC, which is present in all modern browsers and is really good (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFil-ZPE0-g for a comparison with Zoom).

Whereby (formerly appear.in) https://whereby.com/ has a really nice and simple system. No more jumping through a dozen hoops, no more installing software with glaring security holes and borderline malware behavior (looking at you, Zoom).

replies(2): >>22662842 #>>22667048 #
Quanttek ◴[] No.22662842[source]
How does WebRTC compare when you have a lot of callers (e.g. 20 people in a call)? From my understanding, it is p2p, so the network throughput required would be a lot higher, correct?
replies(4): >>22662904 #>>22663835 #>>22674875 #>>22683334 #
1. cloverich ◴[] No.22674875[source]
Yes p2p, so to support higher numbers of people you'd need either a server somewhere doing compositing or selective forwarding (etc). I think a smart front-end client could do selective forwarding but would be tricky to get right (e.g. to consistently detect and forward the speaker).

EDIT: I meant to include, WebRTC itself does not prohibit such things, so the point was for small stuff it works w/ minimal setup, dumb client, and for bigger stuff it would still work, but would need more robust supporting code.