Have you used Jitsi privacy aware video teleconferencing freeware - what do you think about it?

[Arlen Holder]

*Are you familiar with _Jitsi_ teleconferencing cross-platform freeware*?
o Multi-platform open-source video conferencing
<https://jitsi.org/>
"At Jitsi, we believe every video chat should look and sound amazing,
between two people or 200. Whether you want to build your own massively
multi-user video conference client, or use ours, all our tools are 100%
free, open source, and WebRTC compatible."

"Web, Android, iOS, React-native, and Electron apps.
Ubuntu and Debian Packages install in minutes"

If you've used Jitsi on Windows, Linux, iOS, and/or Android, please let us
know here what you think, as it's suggested as a privacy-aware alternative
to Zoom conferencing in this article published today about Zoom privacy:

o *Zoom is a big privacy headache. Here's how you can lock it down*
<https://www.wired.co.uk/article/zoom-privacy-settings>
"Zoom has become the video-calling app of choice.
That doesn't mean it isn't slurping up your data"

The hints they provide are:
*[You] "would do well to look at alternatives. Other services,*
*including one called _Jitsi_ are available, but are more complicated*"
--
Usenet allows purposefully helpful adults to share technical solutions.

[Mick Finnlay]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@anyexample.com> wrote:

> If you've used Jitsi on Windows, Linux, iOS, and/or Android, please let us
> know here what you think, as it's suggested as a privacy-aware alternative
> to Zoom conferencing in this article published today about Zoom privacy:

I am using it on Linux (in a browser) and Android (as an app) as a Skype
replacement for a few years now. It's a bit fiddly at times but it works
well and is now the standard video calling stuff for our extended
friends and family.

For those with some tech know-how (not too bad though) and their own
server hardware, Jitsi can be self-hosted. This leaves commercial offers
dead in the water. IMHO and YMMV.

--
Mick

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Mick Finnlay <Mick.F...@yopmail.com> wrote :

> I am using it on Linux (in a browser) and Android (as an app) as a Skype
> replacement for a few years now. It's a bit fiddly at times but it works
> well and is now the standard video calling stuff for our extended
> friends and family.
>
> For those with some tech know-how (not too bad though) and their own
> server hardware, Jitsi can be self-hosted. This leaves commercial offers
> dead in the water. IMHO and YMMV.

Hi Mick Finnlay,

Thank you very much for your purposefully helpful review & suggestions, as
I'm fully aware of the risks in offering your heartfelt purposefully
helpful advice.

I much appreciate that you opined it works well but it's a bit "fiddly",
where I installed the Windows, Android, and iOS apps but I haven't fiddled
with it yet.

Your comment that it doesn't need to be hosted by a commercial venture is
also nice, since I might be able to dedicate a Linux desktop to the server
role (but my Internet isn't the greatest since it's WISP and not ISP).
--
Usenet is where purposefully helpful adults publicly help each other.

[Mick Finnlay]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@anyexample.com> wrote:

> Thank you very much for your purposefully helpful review & suggestions, as
> I'm fully aware of the risks in offering your heartfelt purposefully
> helpful advice.

<rolls eyes>
I am getting to the point of writing a filter for your posts so that I
don't have to read this sort of redundant crap. Say what you have to say
but do it concisely and precisely.

--
Mick

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Mick Finnlay <Mick.F...@yopmail.com> wrote :

> Say what you have to say
> but do it concisely and precisely

ty

[Jasen Betts]

On 2020-04-01, Arlen Holder <arlen...@anyexample.com> wrote:

> o *Zoom is a big privacy headache. Here's how you can lock it down*
><https://www.wired.co.uk/article/zoom-privacy-settings>
> "Zoom has become the video-calling app of choice.
> That doesn't mean it isn't slurping up your data"
>
> The hints they provide are:
> *[You] "would do well to look at alternatives. Other services,*
> *including one called _Jitsi_ are available, but are more complicated*"

We're using https://bigbluebutton.org at work

It's definately more complicated if the user needs to provide, or find, a
server, but being fisrt-party hosted helps with privacy.

--
Jasen.

[Flasherly]

On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 03:24:35 -0000 (UTC), Jasen Betts
<ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

>> "Zoom has become the video-calling app of choice.
>> That doesn't mean it isn't slurping up your data"

>We're using https://bigbluebutton.org at work
>It's definately more complicated if the user needs to provide, or find, a
>server, but being fisrt-party hosted helps with privacy.

It does mean Zoon can be expected to play zoontunes, as expected.

I saw where a class action lawsuit was filed against Zoom for selling
user information. How long did that take? As to expected, in who
might that market then be -- Facebook owns all, readily will comply to
buy it if not another of similar stature among shorefronts trading in
data for today's World Leaders. Along with three or four VPNs, also
caught doing the same thing, possibly, if not elevated within an inner
circle of celebrities with a token payout to acclaim payoff lawsuits
by personal acclaim, then already switched vis a backdoor CEO rollover
into a new storefront buyback for usury pirating in how business as
usual continues along. Quite the grind at times, work during an open
season, when so many haven't that luxury now. Must be a tough line to
pull when rolling with these visionary sorts.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Rabid Roach <ro...@fake.site> wrote :

> There's Jami, which is a GNU package and doesn't have any ads at all in
> there. It's encrypted at both ends and fairly lightweight.
>
> http://www.jami.net

Thanks Rabid Roach for that information about Jami communication tools:
o <http://www.jami.net>

Their home page is surprisingly utterly devoid of an actual description.
o But the "Downloads" page contains this one-line description...
"Jami is a free and universal communication platform which preserves
the user's privacy and freedoms."

They have a typically very light Jami FAQ here:
o <https://jami.net/help/>
(Note: Most FAQs are not FAQs; they're just a bunch of marketing answers.)

While Jami seems to say they work best on Linux, they do support the five
common consumer platforms (Android, iOS, Windows, Mac, & Linux).
o They even seem to support Surface & Android TV.

The key question, to save people time, is which is "better" from the start?
o Jami?
o Jitsi?

See also:
o Have you used Jitsi privacy aware video teleconferencing freeware?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/2kYzsqNurOc/zkjpZXERAgAJ>
--
Usenet is a public permanent archive of useful technical discussions.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Rabid Roach <ro...@fake.site> wrote :

> On 2020-04-09 3:43 a.m., T wrote:
>> On 2020-04-08 22:09, Paul in Houston TX wrote:
>>> My employer uses Skype for vid conf.  It's simple and easy.
>>
>> 1) is it cross platform with Windows, Android, and iPhone?
>
> Skype and Jami (that I mentioned earlier) is on every platform you can
> imagine including Linux.
>
>> 2) there is going to be some really private stuff going
>> across the wire.  is it encrypted?
>
> All Skype communications are recorded by the NSA. In the case of Jami,
> it's encrypted in the most secure way possible.

Hi Rabid Roach,
I don't disagree with a word you said, where Skype is likely just as
compromised as WhatsApp apparently is.

My key question for you is where is there more bang for the testing buck?
o Jami <https://jami.net/download/>
o Jitsi <https://jitsi.org/downloads/>

On cursory inspection, both seem to be similar in many ways
o Other than Jitsi seems to "explain" themselves better than does Jami. :)
<https://jitsi.org/what-is-jitsi/>

As you may know, the high cost of freeware is in gaining the knowledge to
choose the best one first, which, if you have to test them all, is the
expensive part of freeware (IMHO).

Googling for a comparison between Jitsi & Jamu, I find as the first hit:
o Join.me vs Jitsi detailed comparison as of 2020 - Slant
<https://www.slant.co/versus/3601/4648/~join-me_vs_jitsi>

What's odd is that is the only hit in the first couple of pages that was
even close to my search of "jami vs jitsi", which is odd to say the least.

They seem so similar (almost exactly) upon first inspection.
o Anyone on this ng have a good answer for what's different?
--
Usenet is so much more valuable, and pleasant, when people share solutions.

[Mike Easter]

Arlen Holder wrote:
> They seem so similar (almost exactly) upon first inspection.
> o Anyone on this ng have a good answer for what's different?

I'm looking at the link* provided in:

From: kelown
Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-10
Subject: Re: Best video conference software?
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 06:38:28 -0500
Message-ID: <r6n1fk$mdc$2...@dont-email.me>

* https://videoconferencing.guide/

... which compares 16 different features in 26 different apps.

Conveniently, jami and jitsi are side-by-side as alphabet.

They both give very strong results; they differ in participant limit
(follows Jami/jitisi) unl/75; join via phone N/Y; join via browser N/Y;
but both say browser extensions available for chrome & ffx, so I don't
understand the dash symbol for Jami which I interpreted as N.

The guide says that it was last updated today Apr 9. Jami says it added
HEVC / H.265 in Feb 2020.

If you find the info at the Jami site insufficient, it may be helpful to
read the wp article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jami_(software)

This table compares the jami features by client:
https://git.jami.net/savoirfairelinux/ring-project/wikis/features/All-features-by-client

So, it seems to me to perform more as a SIP than teleconferencing.

Here's an article on SIP conferencing
https://www.ronaldschlager.com/2016/sip-conferencing-how-does-it-work/



--
Mike Easter

[Mike Easter]

Mike Easter wrote:
> Arlen Holder wrote:
>> They seem so similar (almost exactly) upon first inspection.
>> o Anyone on this ng have a good answer for what's different?
>

> This table compares the jami features by client:
> https://git.jami.net/savoirfairelinux/ring-project/wikis/features/All-features-by-client
>

This article* compares/overviews Jami, wickr, & wire while mentioning
signal & jitsi and citing the weaknesses of slack and zoom.

Wickr & wire are not found in the previous big teleconferencing
comparison, but signal, jami, jitsi, slack and zoom are.


* https://www.inverse.com/article/57546-private-video-conferencing-2019
Best Video Conferencing: The Best Tools for Protecting Your Privacy in
2019 - Move over Slack and Zoom.


--
Mike Easter

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote :

> Wickr & wire are not found in the previous big teleconferencing
> comparison, but signal, jami, jitsi, slack and zoom are.

Thanks Mike,

I appreciate your purposefully helpful posts with detailed technical info.

IMHO, the high cost of freeware is when we have to test them to figure out
which are the ones to put our energy into - so it's always good to hone
down the list to just one, if we can.

I've "installed" both Jami & Jitsi, but haven't tested either yet.

I'm still in the stage of deciding where to put my energy, where this post
also has a high-level comparison of Jami & Jitsi which may be of use:
o Best video conference software?, by T <T...@invalid.invalid>
Message-ID: <r6m54b$tb6$1...@dont-email.me>
<https://alt.comp.os.windows-10.narkive.com/NbOokgqC/best-video-conference-software#post24>
"Jitsi is needleessly complicated whereas Jami is straightforward.
Also, Jitsi is programmed in Java and a disgusting resource hog."
--
Usenet is a wonderful public permanent archive of useful tech discussions:

[kelown]

> I've "installed" both Jami & Jitsi, but haven't tested either yet.
>
> I'm still in the stage of deciding where to put my energy, where this post
> also has a high-level comparison of Jami & Jitsi which may be of use:

>  "Jitsi is needleessly complicated whereas Jami is straightforward.
> Also, Jitsi is programmed in Java and a disgusting resource hog."

Somewhat shocking that you make no mention of Jitsi's features that
could put it at a great advantage over Jami.

- Jitsi can be run from any WebRTC compliant web browser, so no download
required for PCs. Jami requires a download for all devices.
- Jitsi supports anonymous URL logins, whereas Jami requires an account.

Jitsi works reliably from my experience. Haven't tested Jami.