3 ms·
Nice, quality imagery on the demo pages. And looks like they have a pretty full feature set already available. But the title is rather telling - do they make
by cdrxndr 15y ago
Nice, quality imagery on the demo pages. And looks like they have a pretty full feature set already available.
But the title is rather telling - do they make a compelling argument why I want Google Hangouts without Google? Do you hate using existing GMail contacts without having to grant complete access to a 3rd party site? Do you often invite people from Facebook or AOL to your business meetings?
Seems they should ditch the "hangout" with coworkers (a la the defunct SocialEyes), and focus on "meetings". But then Google isn't their foe at all - it's Cisco.
Feels a little me too with the "Hangout" and "Telepresence" allusions, but no convincing reason why I should use this product. Will check back in, but it's a tough gig getting people to use browser-based conferencing (so many little hassles both tech and cultural), and corporate is pretty strongly wed to WebEx/TeamViewer/GoToMeeting.
- jrockway 15y agoWill check back in, but it's a tough gig getting people to use browser-based conferencing We use Google+ Hangouts for our conference rooms at Google. It works much better than the system we're replacing, but the video quality is not quite as good as the multi-million-dollar Cisco telepresence systems. (Those are basically room-sized screens that have tables in front of them so that when you sit at the table, the people on the other end of the conference look exactly the same size as they do in real life. The effect is quite convincing, even with US-to-India latency. G+ hangouts still seem like a meeting.) The ability to share your screen to the projector (and attendees) without cables is the best feature, however; something I've not seen anywhere else.