Related
Understanding Solid Authentication
Exploring the workings of OpenID Connect, the Solid Community Server implementation, and reverse-engineering client authentication with Python...
In light of Twilio Video Calls reaching its end of life, the quest for a new video call service provider - for our startup Little World - is essential for seamless communication experiences. This comparison focuses on technical capabilities, overlooking aspects such as server hosting locations and GDPR compliance which are beyond the scope of this review.
I've experimented & compiled the following table, to compare various services based on criteria essential for React-based web and native applications. These criteria include unique authentication for rooms, server-side token generation, webhooks, device detection and permissions, compatibility across platforms, mobile redirection capabilities, pricing, React SDK availability, self-hosting possibilities, and practical implementation tests.
| Feature / Service | LiveKit | Dyte.io | Jitsi Meet Self Hosted | Jitsi 8x8 Conferencing | Zoom |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unique Authentication Required Rooms | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Server-side Token Generation | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Webhooks (Join/Leave) | Yes | Yes | No #1 | Yes | Yes |
| Built-in Device Detection & Permissions | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Cross-Platform Compatibility | Yes (React Native) #2 | Partially (No WebView) #3 | Yes #5 | Yes #5 | Partially #5 |
| Mobile Redirect for App Calls | No | Uncertain #5 | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Affordable & Scalable Pricing | Yes | Yes | Not really (Consider Maintenance) | No #6 | Yes #7 |
| React SDK Availability | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No #8 |
| Self-Hosting Capability | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| Practical Implementation Test | Not yet | No | Yes but no sockets! | Yes | Yes |
Notes:
- #1 Jitsi Meet Self Hosted: Webhooks would require custom implementation.
- #2 LiveKit: Exclusive React Native integrations for Android and iOS.
- #3 Dyte.io: Limited to native apps, lacks in-browser video call support.
- #4 Zoom: Compatibility issues noted with WebView; native or react-native Zoom clients necessary
- #5 Jitsi: Even has mobile webview / capacitor support ( no need for native / react native )
- #6 Jitsi 8x8 Conferencing: Expensive for broader usage.
- #7 Zoom: Pricing model based on usage; but specificly low entry pricing / many free minutes per month
- #8 Zoom: The SDK constrains customization options, offering default Zoom UI.
For developers seeking to replace Twilio Video Calls, this comparison sheds light on several viable alternatives. Each service offers a unique blend of features and constraints, making it crucial to align the choice with the specific needs of your application and user base.
Further exploration and prototypes are valuable steps toward identifying the most suitable video call service. Additionally, reviewing discussions and feedback, such as those found in community forums, can provide insights and considerations from a broader development community.
Conclusion
To me, it seems that LiveKit is the most promising solution. It allows full UI customization, has the required socket integrations, React Native SDKs, and can even be self-hosted. I was surprised to see how difficult and annoying it is to use the Zoom SDK with a custom video call UI; other than that, it's probably the best in terms of pricing. Jitsi is also quite good in this regard, but the missing WebSocket integrations (offered by 8x8 Conferencing) make it hard to use for web applications.
Dyte also looks fairly strong, but I haven't investigated it as much. In my opinion, it loses to LiveKit for not being open-source or self-hostable.
This comparison is not exhaustive in any regard, please contact me for comments or improvements!