Comments on: Polycom wants to build a modern conference call that doesn’t suck

By: Dave Michels

Dave Michels — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 21:01:05 +0000

Tsahi,
There is a big difference between what Poly announced as what Blue Jeans (and Vidtel) offer, namely, video interoperability. The headlines all say Skype and Google Talk, but it is just IM and presence. Polycom’s answer to seeing people on Google or Skype is to send them a Polycom link.

By: Stacey Higginbotham

Stacey Higginbotham — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:29:52 +0000

So I asked about WebRTC and Polycom said it wouldn’t be averse to using that. But, the truth is, the adoption there has been slow and Web RTC implementations today are not as user friendly. It may become user friendly, but it’s not there yet.

By: Madlyb

Madlyb — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 14:04:43 +0000

This is so freakin’ hilarious. One of the primary reasons a ‘modern’ conference call sucks is you can’t hear people in the room…and guess whose phone is usually sitting on the table.

Physician, heal thyself…and the rest will follow.

By: Tsahi Levent-Levi

Tsahi Levent-Levi — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:24:27 +0000

I fail to see the big difference from this to the Blue Jeans offering – other than the fact that this is Polycom doing it.

The idea of an interoperable cloud that can connect multiple vendors together is a compelling story, but not one that can hold water in 2012 – without WebRTC – native broweser connectivity, this belongs to the legacy room system market of Polycom.
If (and when) WebRTC becomes dominant and widely available, why will I even need such a service? I can simply schedule a meeting without thinking of what others have – they can just join in via a URL link and we’re done.

It is a smart move, but it won’t be enough. I’d even say it is a bit late.