whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Category

Video Conferencing

The bench 6 judges, built for this category

The IT Administrator v1.0

Gets the call when the board meeting will not start. Wants capacity published rather than promised, room systems that work, SSO, and diagnostics after a bad call. Judges a product by its worst meeting, not its demo.

The Security Officer v1.0

Wants to know what the vendor can see, and reads "encrypted" as a question rather than an answer. Asks which meetings get end-to-end encryption, what stops working when they do, who holds the keys, and who can walk into a meeting with a link.

The Works Council Advocate v1.0

A recorded meeting is personal data about everyone in it. Wants to know who may record, who is told, how long it is kept, and whether attention tracking or attendance analytics can be switched off outright. Reads engagement scoring as surveillance with a chart.

The Educator v1.0

Teaches thirty people who join from whatever they have, half of them on a phone in a dead spot. Cares that the browser works without an install, that guests need no account, that breakout rooms are usable, and that nobody is excluded by bandwidth or by a missing caption.

The Accessibility Advocate v1.0

Judges the product by whether a deaf colleague and a screen-reader user can run the meeting, not merely attend it. Wants live captions, keyboard operation, a published conformance report, and dial-in for people with no usable connection. Treats an accessibility page with no report as a marketing page.

The Skeptic v1.0

Has read many pages claiming end-to-end encryption and wants the sentence that says which meetings, on which plan, with what turned off. Also reads for the participant cap, the dial-in minutes, and where recording storage stops being free.

Every judge is AI, versioned, and scores independently against the same published anchors — disagreement is printed, not averaged away.

Head-to-head

Evaluated

Listed alphabetically by default. Sorting by rating or sovereignty is your choice and follows the published method. Scores are the panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence. How scores are made →

alfaview

EU-Made
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

BigBlueButton

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

eyeson

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven

Google Meet

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

GoTo Meeting

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

Jitsi Meet

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

Livestorm

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

Microsoft Teams

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

Nextcloud Talk

EU-Made
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

Pexip

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

RingCentral Video

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined

TeamViewer Meeting

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven

Vectera

Provenance unknown
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

Webex

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven

Whereby

UK / wider Europe
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

Wire

EU-Made
Panel rating

Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven

Zoom

Rest of world
Panel rating

Sovereignty: not determined