Zoom alternatives: a comparison of the main competitors

In order to facilitate networking over vast distances, many companies, sole traders, and educational institutions are making use of video conferencing software. The US service Zoom quickly became a popular option for many businesses and private users. However, there are plenty of other providers which offer sophisticated technologies for network-based video telephony. Find out which are the main alternatives to Zoom in the field of internet telephony (also known as ‘Voice over IP’ or ‘VoIP’).

* The parentheses denote a rating level. The Jitsi Meet services almost reaches the maximum rating, but falls short due to minor flaws, therefore receiving ‘++(+)’ instead of ‘+++’ in security.

For detailed information about the tools listed in the table keep reading.

Zoom’s cloud-based infrastructure is rated as powerful and stable by users. Video conferences usually run smoothly with HD sound and image quality. However, the software has attracted criticism when it comes to security and data protection. Although the service managed to resolve its security issues quickly, there is still considerable criticism concerning data protection. End-to-end encryption is initially only planned for paying customers.

IONOS’ Zoom alternative allows you to organise smaller online meetings very quickly and easily. You do not need to register to use it, nor do you need to download and install the software. IONOS Online Video Chat works in your browser, and at the moment Chrome or Edge are supported. Open your own conference room via the homepage, and you can then invite more participants (up to 24). They can then either use the provided link or enter the corresponding conference ID on the software’s website. A password can also be set up so that no unauthorised person can hijack the meeting.

According to their information releases, Skype encrypts all voice and video calls, file transfers, and instant messages between users with 256-bit encryption. This service partially encrypts text messages during transmission with the TLS protocol. Another positive thing about data protection is that Skype has been offering optional end-to-end encryption for private chats since 2018. Microsoft relies on the signal protocol, which is generally classified as safe.

Despite these measures, there has been repeated criticism concerning the security strength of Skype’s regular service, since the company previously shared information with state authorities. Although Skype’s owner Microsoft is registered under the Privacy Shield Agreement, there is some conflict between the Cloud Act and Europe’s GDPR.

Until recently, all Skype users had to register and create an account. As of April 2020, users can participate in a ‘free conference call’ without having to provide payment or registration details.

Some users have criticised Skype for making it difficult to create an account and making it harder to manage their contacts, compared with Zoom. There are also significant user complaints concerning incorrect updates. Another disadvantage of the free version of this Zoom alternative is that if you have a poor internet connection, you cannot dial into a video conference by phone.

Skype is primarily aimed at private users and small teams or businesses with less than 20 employees. Microsoft Teams is more suitable for organisations and teams who want to leverage an efficient collaboration tool, and increase productivity.

All the major video conferencing features a typical user would need are available with this Zoom alternative, including desktop sharing, instant messaging, and file transfers during video calls. As with Zoom, the background can be adjusted during a meeting. Telephone dial-in during a meeting is also possible. Technically, however, Microsoft Teams can only display four video feeds on one screen at a time. In the paid version of this Zoom alternative, whiteboards can be used for interactive collaboration and video chats or conferences can be recorded.

Up to 10 gigabytes of cloud storage are available per account when sharing file attachments. Currently, video conferencing for up to 250 people is possible with the free version. To avail of the service permanently, a cloud-based Microsoft account is recommended for fixed teams and guests. If guests do not have a Microsoft account, they will have to go through a one-time registration process. Guests can also participate in group or individual chats without a Teams account via an invitation link.

One of the key features of this Zoom alternative is its comprehensive integration with the Microsoft 365 cloud. Work processes benefit from these integrated features and productivity can increase significantly. Files can easily be synchronised and edited together in the cloud, an interface for the SharePoint online tool makes it easy to save, share, and manage digital information in your organisation. A more comprehensive user management with different roles completes the range of services.

In reality, users report that with a bad internet connection, video calls often end abruptly. As a result of the Coronavirus crisis, this alternative to Zoom has also experienced bottlenecks and performance degradation, which led to limited image and sound quality. Microsoft prioritises that online and cloud services are maintained around Microsoft 365. This means that stress peaks can be detrimental to free users with a focus on video conferencing features.

Microsoft Teams also faces some criticism concerning data protection. Despite having Privacy Shield certification, and being committed to high data protection standards, the US company is still required to comply with the terms of the Cloud Act which conflicts with the GDPR for European users.

The situation is mixed in terms of data protection and safety. Cisco Webex applications and Webex Cloud communicate through encrypted channels. The TLS-1.2 protocol and the Advanced Encryption Standard are used in the 256 bit version (AES 256) for video recordings. Chat security can be increased through end-to-end encryption, but this limits the software’s functionality. With a Privacy Shield certification, the Zoom alternative guarantees a certain amount of data protection. Nevertheless, this US provider faces a similarly difficult situation concerning GDPR and the Cloud Act for European users.

Users praise the service for having good overall quality and an easy-to-use program. However, they also demand additional support from the help team and complain about deficiencies in sound quality.

Another Zoom alternative is GoToMeeting, a product from the US company LogMeIn. All common devices and operating systems are compatible with GoToMeeting video conferencing.

With the free version, meetings take place on their web app which is supported by all major browsers. However, GoToMeeting recommends using Google Chrome, especially if you are the meeting’s organiser.

The paid editions extend the usual range of functions and are aimed at increased productivity. This removes the time limit for meetings, and raises the number of attendees to a maximum of 250. Calendar integrations (like an Office 365 plugin, for example) make it easier to schedule and process in groups, and unlimited recordings in the cloud provide sessions for later evaluation, for example. In addition, there are other business functions like a personal meeting room, a lockout function for meetings, and an admin centre for invitations and administrative tasks.

In comments, users praise the uncomplicated initial setup, the simple operating concept, and the reliable technical infrastructure. At the same time, they criticise the audio quality and customer support provided by the Zoom alternative. When it comes to data protection, LogMeIn cannot disregard the Cloud Act, even with their Privacy Shield certification. Nevertheless, the provider is security-conscious and uses 128-bit AES encryption for online meetings. However, there are many other providers that use the superior 256-bit encryption.

Image transmission is usually relatively stable, but users do repeatedly criticise mediocre quality and poor video connections. If you are hosting an important meeting, it is advisable to test out the service in advance to see whether the connection is sufficiently stable.

Jitsi’s quality also depends on which provider is used. As hosts, they provide the service with an infrastructure and decide what capacity they will provide to Jitsi on their server. Hosts also have an impact on the range of functions and the maximum number of conference participants. You should, therefore, try to use the available Jitsi Meet servers, especially during Coronavirus.

The Zoom alternative offers a special advantage over its competitors: Within a company, in-house IT teams can set up their own Jitsi meet server with tailor-made features and therefore have a greater impact over the quality of their streams. Extensive control over the security of streamed data can be guaranteed this way.

If you are not afraid of having to depend on an external service provider and are looking for a more business-oriented solution with a high security rating like Jitsi Meet, you should contact the service provider Wire for more information.