Answered

Help me identify a web-meeting software that meets a strict criteria

  • 15 March 2020
  • 6 replies
  • 774 views

Userlevel 6
Badge +4

Hi Everyone,

I have an urgent request from a colleague and I thought the community might be able to help.

I have a colleague who wants to host a last minute web meeting due to meeting rooms being cancelled at the local library. This is a group of parents meeting, not a business meeting, and because some of the participants are persons with disabilities, there is a strict criteria she is trying to meet:

  1. Free online subscriptionĀ 
  2. Have up to 10 participantsĀ 
  3. Host up to 2 hours meeting
  4. Ability to screen share presentationĀ 
  5. Ability to have closed caption
  6. Ability to record notes
  7. Ability to be downloaded on all types of devices (ipad, IPhone, androids, computers, etc)

She has tried Zoom, Miro, Skype, Google Hangout, Whatsapp, and Gotomeeting, and Webex. Ā Of course all free trials are limited to 30 mins meeting, some limited to 3 participants, etc. Ā 

Through her bueinsss, she has Keyworks has Microsoft 365, Skype for Business and Teams, which allows her to host longer meetings & meet all the requirements listed - however the participants will only be allowed to have up to 40mins call before they start getting charged a fee. Ā 

I canā€™t think of anything that fits this criteira, but maybe someone out there does.Ā 

Thanks Miro Community of awesome people!

Jon

icon

Best answer by Mark J 20 March 2020, 10:35

View original

6 replies

Hi Jonathan,

Uberconference by Dialpad would check all the boxes you'reĀ looking for.

Ā 

  1. Free online subscriptionĀ āœ…
  2. Have up to 10 participantsĀ āœ… 50 participants
  3. Host up to 2 hours meetingāœ… 5 hours
  4. Ability to screen share presentationĀ āœ…
  5. Ability to have closed captionāœ…
  6. Ability to record notesāœ… AI native integration
  7. Ability to be downloaded on all types of devices (ipad, IPhone, androids, computers, etc)āœ… Works on all devices. ( Founder created Google voice)

Ā 

Hope this helps

Ā 

-Mark


Ā 

Userlevel 6
Badge +4

Thanks so much @Mark JĀ ! I will check it out right away.

Ā 

Jon

Userlevel 7
Badge +5

@Jonathan WhiteĀ 
Jitsi Meet is an intriguing play. Opensource video conferencingā€¦Ā 

I think it meets the criteria. Perhaps not live closed-captioning.Ā Ā 

https://jitsi.org/

Userlevel 7
Badge +12

I am seeing that the free account type only supports 45 minute meetings. Plan comparison here:Ā https://www.uberconference.com/pricing

I'm not sure you will check all of those boxes for free. It does look like Google Meet will get very close. While they limit free meetings to 60 minutes, they are ignoring that time limit until at least September 30, as per this blog post.

Given Google's experience with voice-to-text (e.g., Google Translate, voice search, Google Assistant), their closed captioning is stellar. They also have great noise cancellation via their new Cloud De-noiser feature in Google Meet. I did also read their is session recording, but only if the host is using the desktop app, which I would guess is the case the majority of the time.

https://meet.google.com

Userlevel 7
Badge +12

Here's the Cloud De-noiser demo by one of the engineers who created it:Ā 

Ā 

Userlevel 4

@Rob JohnsonĀ 

the noise cancelling is impressive - it did have some effect on his voice I think - iā€™ve seen a few of these recently including downloadable stuff for an ordinary laptop & ā€˜phone# type earbuds w/ mic

@Jonathan WhiteĀ 

Iā€™d guess the captioning requirement above can be done by adding Microsoft translate to the call - then you can have the captions in multiple languages concurrently

for the conferencing have you looked at Lark - upto 100 people- unlimited video minutes for freeĀ  but youā€™ll need another platform for the screen share and your recording is (i think) limited to 200gb

Just a thought/ question - for a monthly subscription (cancel after one month) of 10-15$ there is an almost endless of offerings that look like they offer the need - why the insistence on ā€˜freeā€™ when it costs 1,000$ in lost productivity to save the visible 10$ spend?

Reply