Skip to content

Video Chat Stack Options

Jump to bottom
Arvind Kasiliya edited this page Dec 15, 2023 · 16 revisions

Introduction

Being a telehealth app, our senior design project needs to facilitate a video conversation between a doctor and their patients. Therefore, we looked at different technologies to add video chat functionality to our app. Below, we describe each framework and highlight their key features, advantages, and disadvantages. Although options such as WebRTC and WebSockets would've given us the most flexibility and been most conducive to learning how these technologies, we decided to go with Agora.io because of its simplicity and generous free tier limits.

Options

1. WebRTC

  • Description: WebRTC (Web Real-Time Communication) is an open-source project that provides web browsers and mobile applications with real-time communication via simple APIs. It supports video, voice, and generic data to be sent between peers, allowing developers to build powerful voice- and video-communication solutions. Developed by Google, WebRTC was released in 2011. It was designed to enable peer-to-peer communication natively in browsers without the need for plugins.
  • Pros:
    • Open-source and free to use.
    • Supports peer-to-peer communication, reducing server load.
    • Works in most modern browsers without external dependencies.
  • Cons:
    • Can be complex to implement from scratch.
    • Handling different browser implementations can be challenging.
    • May require additional server components for features like signaling and NAT traversal.

2. Twilio Programmable Video

  • Description: Twilio Programmable Video is a cloud platform service that allows developers to integrate video and audio communication into their applications. Twilio, known for its communication APIs, expanded its services to include video around 2015, aiming to provide a scalable, easy-to-use service for app developers.
  • Pros:
    • Easy to implement with comprehensive documentation and SDKs.
    • Scalable and reliable, with global infrastructure.
    • Provides additional features like recording and screen sharing.
  • Cons:
    • Cost can be significant for high usage.
    • Less control over the underlying technology compared to open-source options.
    • Requires reliance on a third-party service provider.

3. Agora.io

  • Description: Agora.io provides a platform for real-time communication that focuses on delivering high-quality, low-latency video and voice calls. Founded in 2014, Agora.io has focused on providing real-time communication solutions that are easy to integrate and provide high performance.
  • Pros:
    • High-quality video and audio communication.
    • Extensive global network to reduce latency.
    • Includes features like noise suppression and echo cancellation.
  • Cons:
    • Costs can escalate with increased usage.
    • Some developers may find the SDKs less flexible than other solutions.
    • Potential privacy concerns with third-party hosting.

4. Daily.co

  • Description: Daily.co is a video and audio call API that's focused on ease of integration, offering both pre-built UI components and low-level APIs for custom solutions. Emerging as a player in the RTC (Real-Time Communication) field, Daily.co has gained recognition for its simplicity and user-friendly API.
  • Pros:
    • Very easy to integrate, especially for quick deployments.
    • Offers both pre-built components and the ability for customization.
    • Good support and documentation.
  • Cons:
    • Might offer less control for highly customized solutions.
    • Dependency on a third-party service.
    • Pricing may be a concern for large-scale applications.

Conclusion

Clone this wiki locally