Comments on: 3 Advantages of WebRTC Embedded in the OS https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-embedded-os/ The leading authority on WebRTC Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:14:36 +0000 hourly 1 By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-embedded-os/#comment-118295 Sat, 17 Oct 2015 07:52:35 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=9997#comment-118295 In reply to Aswath Rao.

Aswath,

While this is correct, it still means someone needs to install that first app; with new apps relying on its existence.

]]> By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-embedded-os/#comment-118294 Sat, 17 Oct 2015 07:51:29 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=9997#comment-118294 In reply to Lennie.

True. Just wanted to make it even easier – especially on those who need it inside standalone apps.

]]> By: Aswath Rao https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-embedded-os/#comment-118293 Thu, 15 Oct 2015 15:17:38 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=9997#comment-118293 Supposing there is an independent app that is for all practical purposes a WebRTC enabled browser, but used exclusively for WebRTC sessions, not general browsing. Then when another app wants to establish a WebRTC session, it passes the required information to that independent app via a Custom URL scheme and establishes a communication session.

Agreed that the session is not part of the app that is initiating the communication session. But so what? If we could relax the condition of integration, then much can be accomplished just as when WebRTC is embedded in the OS. Yes?

]]> By: Lennie https://bloggeek.me/webrtc-embedded-os/#comment-118292 Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:40:06 +0000 https://bloggeek.me/?p=9997#comment-118292 Less variability: that completely depends on if the OS gets updated and if it includes all the codecs. Browsers get updated & upgraded pretty fast these days. That is the reason it works (pretty well ?).

]]>