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 over WebSockets

  • 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. WebSocket is a protocol that provides a full communication channel over a single, persistent connection between a client and the server. The low-latency and persistent communication of WebSockets make it suitable to set up a video chat program. Combining the two requires you to use WebRTC on the clients and creating a WebSocket server that establishes the video link between the host and recipient.
  • Pros:
    • Optimized Real-Time Communication: WebRTC is specifically designed for real-time media applications, providing high-quality video and audio streaming. This ensures an excellent user experience in video chat applications.
    • Low Latency: WebSockets offer a persistent, low-latency connection that is ideal for sending real-time control messages, chat, or updates during a video call, enhancing the interactivity of the application.
    • Scalability: Using WebSockets for non-media related data (like text chat, file sharing, or control signals) offloads some tasks from the WebRTC layer, potentially improving scalability and performance of the video chat service.
    • Compatibility: Both technologies works in most modern browsers without external dependencies.
  • Cons:
    • Complexity in Implementation: Integrating WebRTC with WebSockets adds complexity to the development process. We need to handle two different technologies, each with its own set of APIs and quirks.
    • Handling Disconnections: Both WebRTC and WebSockets require robust handling of network disconnections and reconnections, which can add to the development complexity.
    • Security Considerations: Both technologies require careful attention to security. WebSockets need secure handling to prevent attacks like message interception or spoofing.

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