What is Join.me and what are its top alternatives?
Join.me is a popular online meeting and collaboration tool that allows users to host online meetings, share screens, video chat, and collaborate on documents in real-time. Key features of Join.me include easy screen sharing, customizable meeting links, integrated audio, and the ability to schedule and join meetings from any device. However, some limitations of Join.me include limited free features, lack of advanced collaboration tools, and occasional connection issues.
Zoom: Zoom is a widely-used video conferencing platform that offers features like HD video and audio, screen sharing, and virtual backgrounds. Pros of Zoom include a large participant limit, breakout rooms for collaboration, and integration with third-party apps. Cons include potential security concerns and limited meeting duration for free users.
GoToMeeting: GoToMeeting is a professional meeting tool that provides crystal clear audio and video quality, along with screen sharing and meeting recording capabilities. Pros of GoToMeeting include reliable performance, flexible pricing plans, and integration with Microsoft Office. Cons include a higher price point compared to some alternatives.
Cisco Webex: Cisco Webex is a secure and reliable video conferencing tool that offers features like HD video, screen sharing, and virtual backgrounds. Pros of Cisco Webex include end-to-end encryption, integration with popular apps like Microsoft Teams, and the ability to join meetings without downloading the app. Cons include occasional audio quality issues and a slightly complex interface.
Microsoft Teams: Microsoft Teams is a collaboration platform that includes video conferencing, chat, file sharing, and integration with Microsoft Office. Pros of Microsoft Teams include seamless integration with other Microsoft tools, advanced security features, and customization options. Cons include limited meeting recording capabilities and occasional performance issues during peak usage.
BlueJeans: BlueJeans is a video conferencing platform that offers high-quality video and audio, screen sharing, and real-time chat. Pros of BlueJeans include advanced features like Dolby Voice for crystal clear audio, integration with popular apps like Slack, and simple user interface. Cons include limited customization options and slightly higher pricing compared to some alternatives.
Google Meet: Google Meet is a video conferencing tool integrated within Google Workspace that offers features like screen sharing, real-time captions, and participant management. Pros of Google Meet include free unlimited meetings, easy integration with Gmail and Google Calendar, and automatic subtitles in multiple languages. Cons include limited features in the free version and occasional connectivity issues for some users.
Whereby: Whereby is a simple video conferencing tool that allows users to create virtual meeting rooms with a custom link. Pros of Whereby include no downloads required for participants, easy-to-use interface, and customizable branding options. Cons include limited meeting duration for free users and lack of advanced collaboration features.
Jitsi Meet: Jitsi Meet is an open-source video conferencing platform that offers end-to-end encryption, screen sharing, and recording capabilities. Pros of Jitsi Meet include free and open-source software, no account registration required, and support for large meetings. Cons include occasional performance issues with larger groups and limited customization options.
RingCentral Video: RingCentral Video is a comprehensive video conferencing tool that includes features like virtual backgrounds, team messaging, and calendar integrations. Pros of RingCentral Video include unlimited cloud storage for meeting recordings, support for up to 500 participants, and integration with popular productivity apps. Cons include a higher price point for larger organizations and learning curve for new users.
BigBlueButton: BigBlueButton is an open-source web conferencing system designed for online learning that offers features like real-time sharing of slides, video, and audio recording. Pros of BigBlueButton include integration with learning management systems, support for breakout rooms, and whiteboard capabilities. Cons include a steeper learning curve for new users and occasional technical glitches.
Top Alternatives to Join.me
- Zoom
Zoom unifies cloud video conferencing, simple online meetings, and cross platform group chat into one easy-to-use platform. Our solution offers the best video, audio, and screen-sharing experience across Zoom Rooms, Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, and H.323/SIP room systems. ...
- GoToMeeting
It is an online meeting, desktop sharing, and video conferencing software package that enables the user to meet with other computer users, customers, clients or colleagues via the Internet in real time. ...
- Webex
Collaborate with colleagues across your organization, or halfway across the planet. Meet online and share files, information, and expertise. Collaborate from wherever you are with Webex mobile apps for IPhone, iPad, Android, or Blackberry. If you can get online, you can work together. ...
- Skype
Skype’s text, voice and video make it simple to share experiences with the people that matter to you, wherever they are. ...
- GoToWebinar
It is an online meeting, desktop sharing, and video conferencing software package that enables the user to meet with other computer users, customers, clients or colleagues via the Internet in real time. ...
- TeamViewer
Its aproprietary software for remote control, desktop sharing, online meetings, web conferencing and file transfer between computers. ...
- JavaScript
JavaScript is most known as the scripting language for Web pages, but used in many non-browser environments as well such as node.js or Apache CouchDB. It is a prototype-based, multi-paradigm scripting language that is dynamic,and supports object-oriented, imperative, and functional programming styles. ...
- Git
Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...
Join.me alternatives & related posts
- Web conferencing made easy25
- Remote control option16
- Draw on screen13
- Very reliable12
- In-meeting chat is pretty good11
- Free9
- Pair programming sessions with shared controls9
- Easy to share meeting links/invites8
- Good Sound Quality7
- Cloud recordings for meetings6
- Great mobile app5
- Virtual backgrounds4
- Recording Feature4
- Other people use it4
- User Friendly actions4
- Reactions (emoticons)2
- Auto reconnecting2
- Chrome extension is great to easily create meetings2
- While sharing screen, you can still see your video2
- Mute all participants at once2
- When ending the videocall, everybody gets kicked2
- Different options for blocking chat2
- Easily share video with audio1
- /zoom on Slack1
- Registration form1
- Meant for business and education1
- Zoom0
- Limited time if you are a basic member20
- Limited Storage14
- Hate how sharing your screen defaults to Full Screen11
- Quality isn't great (Free)10
- No cursor highlight on screenshare.9
- Potential security flaws8
- Onboarding process for new users is not intuitive7
- Virtual background quality isn't good5
- Security5
- Editing can be improved4
- Doesn't handle switching audio sources well4
- The native calendar is buggy4
- Dashboard can be improved4
- Pornographic material displayed3
- Any body can get in it3
- Not many emojis3
- Past chat history is not saved3
- Recording Feature3
- En In reality,the chat in the meet not is excelent,noo3
- Zoom lags a lot3
related Zoom posts
Hi, I am building an enhanced web-conferencing app that will have a voice/video call, live chats, live notifications, live discussions, screen sharing, etc features. Ref: Zoom.
I need advise finalizing the tech stack for this app. I am considering below tech stack:
- Frontend: React
- Backend: Node.js
- Database: MongoDB
- IAAS: #AWS
- Containers & Orchestration: Docker / Kubernetes
- DevOps: GitLab, Terraform
- Brokers: Redis / RabbitMQ
I need advice at the platform level as to what could be considered to support concurrent video streaming seamlessly.
Also, please suggest what could be a better tech stack for my app?
#SAAS #VideoConferencing #WebAndVideoConferencing #zoom #stack
Using Screenhero via Slack was getting to be pretty horrible. Video and sound quality was often times pretty bad and worst of all the service just wasn't reliable. We all had high hopes when the acquisition went through but ultimately, the product just didn't live up to expectations. We ended up trying Zoom after I had heard about it from some friends at other companies. We noticed the video/sound quality was better, and more importantly it was super reliable. The Slack integration was awesome (just type /zoom and it starts a call)
You can schedule recurring calls which is helpful. There's a G Suite (Google Calendar) integration which lets you add a Zoom call (w/dial in info + link to web/mobile) with the click of a button.
Meeting recordings (video and audio) are really nice, you get recordings stored in the cloud on the higher tier plans. One of our engineers, Jerome, actually built a cool little Slack integration using the Slack API and Zoom API so that every time a recording is processed, a link gets posted to the "event-recordings" channel. The iOS app is great too!
#WebAndVideoConferencing #videochat
- More control over participant’s webcams and chat2
- Lock the meeting room1
- Display 25 camera at a time1
related GoToMeeting posts
- Secure5
- Good branding - Cisco3
- High Quality3
- Easy to Use3
- Horrible voice quality, voice gaps, drops1
related Webex posts
Uploadcare is mostly remote team and we're using video conferencing all the time both for internal team meetings and for external sales, support, interview, etc. calls. I think we've tried every solution there is on the market before we've decided to stop with Zoom.
Tools just plainly don't work (Skype), are painful to install for external participants (Webex and other "enterprise" solutions) can't properly handle 10+ participants calls (Google Hangouts Chat).
Zoom just works. It has all required features and even handles bad connections very graciously. One of the best tool decisions we've ever made :)
I am looking for the best video conferencing software corporate license. Kindly advise on pricing as well as features between Amazon Chime and Webex, which one to choose. What is the best choice for a corporate license?
Skype
- Free, widespread258
- Desktop and mobile apps147
- Because i have to :(110
- Low cost international calling57
- Good for international calls56
- Best call quality anywhere, generally10
- Beautiful emojis5
- Chat bots4
- Translator2
- Skype for business integration with Outlook2
- United kingdom1
- Not the Best, but get the job done1
- Really high CPU utilization during video/screenshare5
- Not always reliable3
- Outdated UI3
- Birthday notifications are annoying3
- The worst indicator noises of any app ever3
- Finding/adding people isn't easy2
related Skype posts
Uploadcare is mostly remote team and we're using video conferencing all the time both for internal team meetings and for external sales, support, interview, etc. calls. I think we've tried every solution there is on the market before we've decided to stop with Zoom.
Tools just plainly don't work (Skype), are painful to install for external participants (Webex and other "enterprise" solutions) can't properly handle 10+ participants calls (Google Hangouts Chat).
Zoom just works. It has all required features and even handles bad connections very graciously. One of the best tool decisions we've ever made :)
I use Slack because it offers the best experience, even on the free tier (which we're still using). As a comparison, I have had in depth experience with HipChat, Stride, Skype, Google Chat (the new service), Google Hangouts (the old service). For self hosted, Mattermost is open source and claims to support most Slack integrations, but I have not extensively investigated this claim.
related GoToWebinar posts
- Easy to use2
- Free2
- Whiteboard option1
related TeamViewer posts
JavaScript
- Can be used on frontend/backend1.7K
- It's everywhere1.5K
- Lots of great frameworks1.2K
- Fast896
- Light weight745
- Flexible425
- You can't get a device today that doesn't run js392
- Non-blocking i/o286
- Ubiquitousness236
- Expressive191
- Extended functionality to web pages55
- Relatively easy language49
- Executed on the client side46
- Relatively fast to the end user30
- Pure Javascript25
- Functional programming21
- Async15
- Full-stack13
- Setup is easy12
- Its everywhere12
- JavaScript is the New PHP11
- Because I love functions11
- Like it or not, JS is part of the web standard10
- Can be used in backend, frontend and DB9
- Expansive community9
- Future Language of The Web9
- Easy9
- No need to use PHP8
- For the good parts8
- Can be used both as frontend and backend as well8
- Everyone use it8
- Most Popular Language in the World8
- Easy to hire developers8
- Love-hate relationship7
- Powerful7
- Photoshop has 3 JS runtimes built in7
- Evolution of C7
- Popularized Class-Less Architecture & Lambdas7
- Agile, packages simple to use7
- Supports lambdas and closures7
- 1.6K Can be used on frontend/backend6
- It's fun6
- Hard not to use6
- Nice6
- Client side JS uses the visitors CPU to save Server Res6
- Versitile6
- It let's me use Babel & Typescript6
- Easy to make something6
- Its fun and fast6
- Can be used on frontend/backend/Mobile/create PRO Ui6
- Function expressions are useful for callbacks5
- What to add5
- Client processing5
- Everywhere5
- Scope manipulation5
- Stockholm Syndrome5
- Promise relationship5
- Clojurescript5
- Because it is so simple and lightweight4
- Only Programming language on browser4
- Hard to learn1
- Test1
- Test21
- Easy to understand1
- Not the best1
- Easy to learn1
- Subskill #41
- Hard 彤0
- A constant moving target, too much churn22
- Horribly inconsistent20
- Javascript is the New PHP15
- No ability to monitor memory utilitization9
- Shows Zero output in case of ANY error8
- Thinks strange results are better than errors7
- Can be ugly6
- No GitHub3
- Slow2
related JavaScript posts
Oof. I have truly hated JavaScript for a long time. Like, for over twenty years now. Like, since the Clinton administration. It's always been a nightmare to deal with all of the aspects of that silly language.
But wowza, things have changed. Tooling is just way, way better. I'm primarily web-oriented, and using React and Apollo together the past few years really opened my eyes to building rich apps. And I deeply apologize for using the phrase rich apps; I don't think I've ever said such Enterprisey words before.
But yeah, things are different now. I still love Rails, and still use it for a lot of apps I build. But it's that silly rich apps phrase that's the problem. Users have way more comprehensive expectations than they did even five years ago, and the JS community does a good job at building tools and tech that tackle the problems of making heavy, complicated UI and frontend work.
Obviously there's a lot of things happening here, so just saying "JavaScript isn't terrible" might encompass a huge amount of libraries and frameworks. But if you're like me, yeah, give things another shot- I'm somehow not hating on JavaScript anymore and... gulp... I kinda love it.
How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:
Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.
Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:
https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/
(GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)
Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark
- Distributed version control system1.4K
- Efficient branching and merging1.1K
- Fast959
- Open source845
- Better than svn726
- Great command-line application368
- Simple306
- Free291
- Easy to use232
- Does not require server222
- Distributed27
- Small & Fast22
- Feature based workflow18
- Staging Area15
- Most wide-spread VSC13
- Role-based codelines11
- Disposable Experimentation11
- Frictionless Context Switching7
- Data Assurance6
- Efficient5
- Just awesome4
- Github integration3
- Easy branching and merging3
- Compatible2
- Flexible2
- Possible to lose history and commits2
- Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing1
- Light1
- Team Integration1
- Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system1
- Easy1
- Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast1
- CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome1
- It's what you do1
- Phinx0
- Hard to learn16
- Inconsistent command line interface11
- Easy to lose uncommitted work9
- Worst documentation ever possibly made7
- Awful merge handling5
- Unexistent preventive security flows3
- Rebase hell3
- When --force is disabled, cannot rebase2
- Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly2
- Doesn't scale for big data1
related Git posts
Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:
- GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
- Respectively Git as revision control system
- SourceTree as Git GUI
- Visual Studio Code as IDE
- CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
- Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
- SonarQube as quality gate
- Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
- VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
- Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
- Heroku for deploying in test environments
- nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
- SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
- Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
- PostgreSQL as preferred database system
- Redis as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)
The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:
- Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
- Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
- Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
- Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
- Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
- Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.
Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).
It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up
or vagrant reload
we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.
I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up
, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.
We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.
If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.
The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).
Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.