4 ms·
This looks interesting but when I scrolled down I saw the message "Built for Chrome" and I'm left with the impression that this software is for Chrome only. Is
by tombrossman 12y ago
This looks interesting but when I scrolled down I saw the message "Built for Chrome" and I'm left with the impression that this software is for Chrome only. Is that correct? I use Firefox so won't be able to use it.
If the notice is just about the website, I'm left wondering why they would include an advertisement for a browser from an advertising company on the site?
Users that are okay with ads and vendor lock-in already have plenty of bigger and more established options, so I'm still trying to figure out how this service might appeal to me - maybe not at all?
- hardwaresofton 12y agoMy guess is that their product is supplying the fallback TURN/STUN for WebRTC connections, and some multi-person call algorithms. WebRTC is by no means Chrome only (see: http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2014/10/16/test-the-new-firefox-hello-webrtc-feature-in-firefox-beta/ http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2014/10/16/test-the-n...). They may currently only have tested on chrome browsers (maybe someone tried it once in FF and something broke so they didn't bother).
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- trizko 12y agobuilt for chrome, still building for firefox.. lol The 2 browsers still have not agreed completely on implementations for WebRTC, but we are definitely working on it. Thank you
- tombrossman 12y agoOkay, well good luck with the project then. I think I'll stick with Firefox Hello for now, but I'd love to be able to implement a 'video click to call' button on a website using WebRTC. Much like Skype but using no plugins and with the option to self-host it.