3 ms·
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 suffic
by 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 agoit'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.