<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Did you read the following sentence: "Share computer audio is
still available, but a participant must be viewing that shared
screen to hear the computer audio."? Nice try but not enough! In <i>Jitsi</i>,
i would not be limited to only hear the audio of the screen-sharer
but of every participant.</p>
<p>In addition: can <i>Zoom</i> beat <i>Jitsi</i> by allowing
participation with no account creation requirement? Can it even
get close to it? Can it offer a public room without any
credentials for anytime? i guess no because they might be
interested of controlling what is going on. i would like you to
prove me wrong. i am not a protector of <i>Jitsi</i>. you can
offer a better alternative as long as any proprietary software is
excluded and your offered software is FOSS.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 28.09.22 18:17, Martin Sievers
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:99ba0094-fb45-98e9-f23b-865430b846e6@schoenerpublizieren.de">Am
27.09.22 um 22:45 schrieb peacecop kalmer::
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">[...] The former does not allow everyone
to share their screen at the same time. The latter allows it
which makes it so much more useful than /Zoom/: nobody has to
stop sharing so that anyone else can share their screen. [...]
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Zoom does allow this as well, cf.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/115000424286-Sharing-multiple-screens-simultaneously">https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/115000424286-Sharing-multiple-screens-simultaneously</a><br>
<br>
Best regards,
<br>
Martin
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>