←back to thread

796 points _Microft | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
aequitas ◴[] No.22736838[source]
Not that I'm in favor of this practice, but the one key feature that conference software must have is: it just works™.

Nothing turns you off more from a conferencing solution than: any problem getting it working right now.

When there is just the slightest issue, one person not being able to join, one person not getting voice to work, bad audio, your entire team is blocked/distracted. Which results in a collective distain for the solution and video conferencing as a whole.

This extends to getting the solution working for greenfield installs as simple as possible. Because who knows which non-tech users from which department all need to join and can't figure out how to set the permission in their browser right or install/use the other browser that is compatible.

So sadly, from a functionality point of view, you want have the software be able to force itself onto the user in the most usable state it can.

replies(8): >>22736886 #>>22737349 #>>22737355 #>>22737357 #>>22737381 #>>22737449 #>>22738084 #>>22738434 #
t0mas88 ◴[] No.22736886[source]
I'm still curious why everyone thinks Zoom "just works" while others don't. Because in an enterprise context it is often hard to download an executable and run it with sufficient permissions. While Google and Microsoft both offer a product that "just works" with only a browser. What makes Zoom more "just works" than that?
replies(16): >>22736916 #>>22736940 #>>22737051 #>>22737108 #>>22737143 #>>22737238 #>>22737841 #>>22738424 #>>22738725 #>>22739146 #>>22739536 #>>22739595 #>>22739641 #>>22739741 #>>22739848 #>>22740219 #
impendia ◴[] No.22737238[source]
I'm a college professor, and I'll share my perspective.

For one, Zoom did just work. (At least as a participant, rather than an organizer.) I tried it out, and it immediately worked. It did what all of us were expecting, with no fuss.

I also tried MS Teams. It seems designed with a different philosophy: that you use the software to do many different things, and you want them all integrated. (For example, it posted my meetings automatically to my Outlook calendar. I had never used this calendar before, and was only dimly aware that it existed.)

Moreover, it seems that the expected setup is a bunch of people, all at the same workplace, who communicate with each other consistently. My needs are different, with wildly disparate use cases: a departmental meeting; classes to teach; an online conference (https://www.daniellitt.com/agonize/); an online social gathering. Many of the people with whom I communicate don't work for the same employer. And I don't want to configure all of these "teams" in advance.

That said, I tried to get MS Teams up and running, to teach my class. This involved multiple emails back and forth to our tech support (it seems that I can't set up a "team" myself; I have to ask IT to do it for me). It didn't have its own whiteboard functionality so I had to download and run some separate software.

And, then, in the end... it didn't work. I was trying to teach a class, but my students couldn't see what I was doing. I had no idea why.

replies(6): >>22737398 #>>22739151 #>>22740879 #>>22741348 #>>22745843 #>>22746426 #
1. nextweek2 ◴[] No.22746426[source]
Did you try Microsoft Teams live events? Which seems aimed at your use case.