5 ms·

I'm not sure I entirely agree. It definitely can be, but I think adjustments can be made. I usually point at the way F1 teams do their meetings where everyone

I'm not sure I entirely agree. It definitely can be, but I think adjustments can be made. I usually point at the way F1 teams do their meetings where everyone wears a headset, even if a bunch are in the same room: https://tinyurl.com/2uenm69f https://tinyurl.com/2uenm69f But often if you suggest this to traditionally office based people they feel daft doing it and plough ahead with a mic/speaker in the middle of the room and the remote guys become second class citizens, not being able to hear half the room.

stephc_int13 3y ago
On mixed config, remote people will always feel and be treated as lower rank. They will miss a lot of "inside" information and personal dynamics.
throwuwu 3y ago
This is where remotes are trying to force the in office people to cater to them. A proper compromise would be better microphones like lapel mics that are used in panel discussions or a single high quality conference mic. One of the reasons people want to be in an office is to have better meetings, taking that away from them is the same as taking away a WFH perk like forcing you to use a standardized work station and chair instead of your own setup or something.
bombcar 3y ago
As a side note the Logitech rally systems are quite good and you can get more mics to cover a room quite well. The only thing they do not handle well is multiple simultaneous conversations and people talking over each other, but those shouldn’t be happening anyway.
nemetroid 3y ago
There are a few technical hurdles that must be overcome for "everyone wears a headset to work" to work at all. * The headphones must block outside sound sufficiently, so you only hear the people in the same room through the call and not directly. * Your headset must not pick up when other people in the same room are speaking. But even then, it has serious drawbacks compared to an in-person meeting: * Latency. With anything over a 50 ms roundtrip (including hardware), people inadvertently start speaking over each other, and typical latencies are much much higher than that. It becomes more difficult to break into a discussion, trying to make a small interjection often disrupts the flow of conversation. * Lack of non-verbal communication. Webcams remedy this to some extent (though many are negative to using webcams in their home for other reasons). It can be argued that this is a small price to pay for the ability to WFH, but it's disingenuous to say that pushback against "everyone on headset" is just due to people feeling "daft" doing it.
- cs02rm0 3y ago
  it's disingenuous to say that pushback against "everyone on headset" is just due to people feeling "daft" doing it It's just the reason I've been given. It would have been disingenuous for me to say latency or non-verbal communication was a factor because no one's given me either as a reason. Possibly because I'm talking about what are already hybrid environments trying to improve, as opposed to assuming an office environment is the default position - so neither of those were differentiating factors because they were already present.
sigstoat 3y ago
> plough ahead with a mic/speaker in the middle of the room and the remote guys become second class citizens, not being able to hear half the room. there’s really no excuse not to have a decent conference phone in meeting rooms. i’ve seen them in use since 2000 at least, and personally purchased one that wasn’t even $1k. we had meetings and calls with remote people long before covid.
- cs02rm0 3y ago
  I've never seen (or rather heard) one that worked well enough. Most recent one I've used was a Meeting Owl 3 which I think was in that $1k ballpark. It has quite a novel way of picking up on the 360 camera who it thinks is talking which works pretty well, but the audio just isn't anywhere near as good as everyone having their own mic attached. I'm not sure anything could be.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
> I usually point at the way F1 teams do their meetings where everyone wears a headset, even if a bunch are in the same room That's because F1 cars are LOUD and without noise cancelling and headsets you may miss someone's comment.

stephc_int13 3y ago

On mixed config, remote people will always feel and be treated as lower rank. They will miss a lot of "inside" information and personal dynamics.

throwuwu 3y ago

This is where remotes are trying to force the in office people to cater to them. A proper compromise would be better microphones like lapel mics that are used in panel discussions or a single high quality conference mic. One of the reasons people want to be in an office is to have better meetings, taking that away from them is the same as taking away a WFH perk like forcing you to use a standardized work station and chair instead of your own setup or something.

bombcar 3y ago

As a side note the Logitech rally systems are quite good and you can get more mics to cover a room quite well. The only thing they do not handle well is multiple simultaneous conversations and people talking over each other, but those shouldn’t be happening anyway.

nemetroid 3y ago

There are a few technical hurdles that must be overcome for "everyone wears a headset to work" to work at all. * The headphones must block outside sound sufficiently, so you only hear the people in the same room through the call and not directly. * Your headset must not pick up when other people in the same room are speaking. But even then, it has serious drawbacks compared to an in-person meeting: * Latency. With anything over a 50 ms roundtrip (including hardware), people inadvertently start speaking over each other, and typical latencies are much much higher than that. It becomes more difficult to break into a discussion, trying to make a small interjection often disrupts the flow of conversation. * Lack of non-verbal communication. Webcams remedy this to some extent (though many are negative to using webcams in their home for other reasons). It can be argued that this is a small price to pay for the ability to WFH, but it's disingenuous to say that pushback against "everyone on headset" is just due to people feeling "daft" doing it.

cs02rm0 3y ago
it's disingenuous to say that pushback against "everyone on headset" is just due to people feeling "daft" doing it It's just the reason I've been given. It would have been disingenuous for me to say latency or non-verbal communication was a factor because no one's given me either as a reason. Possibly because I'm talking about what are already hybrid environments trying to improve, as opposed to assuming an office environment is the default position - so neither of those were differentiating factors because they were already present.

sigstoat 3y ago

> plough ahead with a mic/speaker in the middle of the room and the remote guys become second class citizens, not being able to hear half the room. there’s really no excuse not to have a decent conference phone in meeting rooms. i’ve seen them in use since 2000 at least, and personally purchased one that wasn’t even $1k. we had meetings and calls with remote people long before covid.

cs02rm0 3y ago
I've never seen (or rather heard) one that worked well enough. Most recent one I've used was a Meeting Owl 3 which I think was in that $1k ballpark. It has quite a novel way of picking up on the 360 camera who it thinks is talking which works pretty well, but the audio just isn't anywhere near as good as everyone having their own mic attached. I'm not sure anything could be.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

> I usually point at the way F1 teams do their meetings where everyone wears a headset, even if a bunch are in the same room That's because F1 cars are LOUD and without noise cancelling and headsets you may miss someone's comment.