4 ms·

Very very good, a little bit of stuttering during the honking I think but I like it overall! :D :) Jitsi Meet has been a great alternative to other meeting app

Very very good, a little bit of stuttering during the honking I think but I like it overall! :D :) Jitsi Meet has been a great alternative to other meeting apps in these crazy times.

Kwpolska 4y ago
My experience with Jitsi Meet has been quite bad. My previous employer was a cheapskate, and they self-hosted Jitsi Meet. Random disconnections and instability were pretty much a daily occurrence, some people were disconnected every few seconds. While I suppose the self-hosting by Cheapskate Inc. was the main culprit, Jitsi’s screen sharing wasn’t looking very good.
- spockz 4y ago
  Aside from consuming a ton of resources when screen sharing, my experience with Jitsi meet has been very good. It consumes two cores of my 5900X (1 for the Firefox process, and another for some system process I don’t recall exactly) but it works. This was with sharing a 4K screen. I have run jitsi on cheap VMs and it worked decently. But you need quite some cores to serve all the traffic. Ultimately I ended up having as many 2-4core VMs as I had concurrent calls.
  - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
    how is the meet.jit.si hosted? i assume with lots and lots of random users, the bandwidth and processing costs to be astronomical
    - porjo 4y ago
      For a large proportion of users I expect the audio/video to be peer to peer thanks to WebRTC. Other traffic (for that set of users) should be minimal.
- troyvit 4y ago
  My last employers were cheapskates too (I love 'em for it) and they just used meet.jit.si for calls. It was a lot more stable than self-hosted jitsi. That said there were almost always microphone or video issues using it, just because people weren't used to it I guess. It made job interviews fun. It was a nice live test to show how a potential employee handled adversity.
- saghul 4y ago
  We’ve made significant tweaks to screen-sharing in the past 2-3 stable releases, in case you feel inclined to check us out again :-)
- TingPing 4y ago
  My company self-hosts an instance and it's excellent.
- andrepd 4y ago
  So someone hosted $software on a shitty server, and you blame $software for the shitty performance? To draw any conclusions you should look at meet.jit.si (hosted by Jitsi), no?
shaan7 4y ago
Indeed! I recently used a locally hosted Jitsi to talk to my family in the other room while in COVID isolation. It was a life saver, and extremely easy to setup with docker-compose with only a handful of steps that I could complete even with fever+headache https://jitsi.github.io/handbook/docs/devops-guide/devops-guide-docker https://jitsi.github.io/handbook/docs/devops-guide/devops-gu...
wrp 4y ago
I've been using Jitsi Meet regularly for about a year. It's usually fine, but on some days I experience disconnections every several minutes.

Very very good, a little bit of stuttering during the honking I think but I like it overall! :D :) Jitsi Meet has been a great alternative to other meeting apps in these crazy times.

Kwpolska 4y ago

My experience with Jitsi Meet has been quite bad. My previous employer was a cheapskate, and they self-hosted Jitsi Meet. Random disconnections and instability were pretty much a daily occurrence, some people were disconnected every few seconds. While I suppose the self-hosting by Cheapskate Inc. was the main culprit, Jitsi’s screen sharing wasn’t looking very good.

spockz 4y ago
Aside from consuming a ton of resources when screen sharing, my experience with Jitsi meet has been very good. It consumes two cores of my 5900X (1 for the Firefox process, and another for some system process I don’t recall exactly) but it works. This was with sharing a 4K screen. I have run jitsi on cheap VMs and it worked decently. But you need quite some cores to serve all the traffic. Ultimately I ended up having as many 2-4core VMs as I had concurrent calls.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  how is the meet.jit.si hosted? i assume with lots and lots of random users, the bandwidth and processing costs to be astronomical
  - porjo 4y ago
    For a large proportion of users I expect the audio/video to be peer to peer thanks to WebRTC. Other traffic (for that set of users) should be minimal.
troyvit 4y ago
My last employers were cheapskates too (I love 'em for it) and they just used meet.jit.si for calls. It was a lot more stable than self-hosted jitsi. That said there were almost always microphone or video issues using it, just because people weren't used to it I guess. It made job interviews fun. It was a nice live test to show how a potential employee handled adversity.
saghul 4y ago
We’ve made significant tweaks to screen-sharing in the past 2-3 stable releases, in case you feel inclined to check us out again :-)
TingPing 4y ago
My company self-hosts an instance and it's excellent.
andrepd 4y ago
So someone hosted $software on a shitty server, and you blame $software for the shitty performance? To draw any conclusions you should look at meet.jit.si (hosted by Jitsi), no?

shaan7 4y ago

Indeed! I recently used a locally hosted Jitsi to talk to my family in the other room while in COVID isolation. It was a life saver, and extremely easy to setup with docker-compose with only a handful of steps that I could complete even with fever+headache https://jitsi.github.io/handbook/docs/devops-guide/devops-guide-docker https://jitsi.github.io/handbook/docs/devops-guide/devops-gu...

wrp 4y ago

I've been using Jitsi Meet regularly for about a year. It's usually fine, but on some days I experience disconnections every several minutes.