5 ms·
> The native clients offer much better performance on every operating system. Background blur uses significantly less CPU in Google Meet running as a chrome/ch
by throwdbaaway 5y ago
> The native clients offer much better performance on every operating system.
Background blur uses significantly less CPU in Google Meet running as a chrome/chromium tab, than in native Zoom Linux client. Besides, Zoom Linux client also makes some arbitrary decision that my more powerful i7-3720QM is not qualified to have background blur enabled, while my less powerful i5-8250U is allowed to do so. Background blur works just fine with both CPUs in Google Meet.
From your POV, perhaps Zoom product/engineering is doing a good enough job. From my POV, what we have is a crappy Zoom Linux client and a half-arsed Zoom web client. And if corporate wants to give everyone Mac and Windows machines only, just so its highly paid engineers and highly paid product managers can share their screen over a Zoom session, who can argue with that logic?
- avrionov 5y agoMy comments are directed at the general performance of Video and Audio components. Zoom implements their own protocol which performs better than the WebRTC. Their codecs are also better optimized, on of the reasons being that VP8 lacks hardware optimization on many platforms. Background blur most likely require GPU optimization. The implementation on Windows/Mac and Linux looked different for a while. It is possible that they had to deal with compatibility and driver issues on Linux.