How much of a system needs to be based on standards to be considered “standards based?”
I received an interesting email this week that read: "Are you currently set up with some sort of standards-based system for video conferencing?"
The question itself exemplifies the inability of current players to understand the shift that WebRTC is bringing with it--and here, WebRTC is just a catalyst for a larger industry trend in communications.
I have WebRTC on my browser. I've got Skype installed and Hangouts as well.
Between these three services, do I need any "standards-based system for video conferencing" to talk to anyone?
With a "standards-based system for video conferencing," it takes 15 minutes or more to set up a call (assuming you know who the relevant IT person in the company is, have him on your good-side, and know how to use these systems with their weird remote controls). I can't see how this works for anything besides internal company conference calls.
I'll stop whining here, and ask a better question: What doesn't "standards based" really mean here?
WebRTC is a standard itself (or will be soon enough). It also uses SRTP--a well-established standard.
Skype and Hangouts also use standards. At the very least, they both run over IP, probably with SRTP or an RTP variant. Skype uses SILK--a standard. Hangouts uses voice codecs that are standardized.
Those who whine that you can't make a call from Skype to a video conferencing room system? Remember that you can't do a video call from company A to company B with video conferencing without an effort that is far larger than just using Skype--or WebRTC--or Hangouts.
Next time you ask me about my standards-based video conferencing system, make sure you understand what you are proposing--to use something that is effectively a proprietary communications tool.
