3 ms·
It's "incredibly simple to use" only when the asynchronous use case you describe is desirable. Consider this very basic use case: my mom and I want to be alway
by ronjouch 10y ago
It's "incredibly simple to use" only when the asynchronous use case you describe is desirable.
Consider this very basic use case: my mom and I want to be always able to call/interrupt each other.
- Skype fits the bill: I just double-click her name in the contact list. She hears the ringing, and answers.
- WebRTC-based services do not: I have to generate a link, email it, and hope she sees the email (she won't) then join asynchronously.
Put dryly, basic WebRTC-based services like Hello lack the notions of a contact and a presence mechanism. That's a deal-breaker for my use case.
EDIT: I see you mention "services surrounding video calls, for example a contact list". Agreed, but to me it's more than an additional service, it's a core feature.
- vidarh 10y agoBut nothing prevents people from building such a presence mechanism as an app, or using browser notifications. The point is that with WebRTC the hardest bit is taken care of. The number of people who have the skills to meaningfully innovate on the surrounding UI and capabilities is vastly greater than the number of people who'd be able to come up with usable video calling.