Page 79 - Emerging Trends and Innovations in Web-Based Applications and Technologies

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470
low bandwidth conditions. Latency should be minimized reported in larger meetings (Botez et al., 2020).
to facilitate real-time interactions (Patel et al., 2021).
3. Adaptive Quality Management:
4. Scalability: As meetings increase in size, the tool must be The system adjusted video and audio quality to varying
able to handle a larger number of participants without network conditions, reducing resolution and compressing
degrading performance. Efficient handling of high-user audio in low bandwidth environments. However, there was
loads ensures smooth communication during webinars slight visual delay during low bandwidth sessions (Patel et
and conferences (Wang et al., 2018). al., 2021).
5. Security and Privacy: End-to-end encryption is 4. Load Handling:
necessary to protect meeting content and user data. The tool effectively supported up to 50 participants, with
Secure login methods, such as two-factor authentication, slight performance degradation observed in meetings
enhance security, and compliance with data protection exceeding 100 participants, particularly during screen
laws (e.g., GDPR) is crucial to maintain privacy sharing and collaboration (Wang et al., 2018).
(Jahankhani et al., 2020).
5. Security Features:
6. Integration with Other Tools: Integration with external End-to-end encryption was used for secure communications.
platforms like Google Calendar, Microsoft Teams, or The tool supported features like two-factor authentication
project management tools enhances collaboration. API and secure session management. However, advanced
and SDK support further allow for customized security options such as encryption key management could
functionalities (Smith et al., 2017). be more customizable (Jahankhani et al., 2020).
7. Reliability and Stability: The tool should demonstrate 6. Cross-Platform Compatibility:
resilience against connectivity disruptions, with features The tool was functional across desktop and mobile
such as automatic reconnection and session continuity platforms, though mobile users faced limitations in features
to prevent data loss or session disruption (Chen et al., like screen sharing. Compatibility with major browsers was
2020). good, with occasional issues in non-mainstream browsers
(Chen et al., 2020).
8. Cost and Licensing: Competitive pricing models and
scalable subscription plans ensure that the tool can meet 7. Session Continuity and Recovery:
the needs of both individual users and organizations. The tool successfully maintained session continuity, with
Offering free versions or trials allows users to test the quick reconnection after disruptions. However, some user
tool’s suitability before committing to a subscription experience was impacted due to the loss of real-time
(Liu et al., 2019). annotations during reconnection (Khan et al., 2021).
9. Support and Documentation: Comprehensive customer 8. Pricing Flexibility:
support, accessible through live chat, email, or a The free version provided sufficient functionality for small
knowledge base, is essential for troubleshooting. meetings, while paid plans offered additional features like
Educational resources, such as tutorials and webinars, cloud storage and webinar hosting. Users found the pricing
can assist users in maximizing the tool's features (Khan reasonable for the available features (Liu et al., 2019).
et al., 2021).
9. Documentation and Learning Curve:
VI. RESULT ANALYSIS Comprehensive user guides and FAQs were available.
1. User Experience: However, more detailed instructions for advanced features
The tool's interface was easy to navigate, with intuitive would have been helpful for users, as the learning curve was
control of basic functions like muting, video control, and steep for new users attempting to access higher-tier
screen sharing. Users experienced minimal onboarding functionalities (Smith et al., 2017).
requirements, leading to quicker adoption (Sakai et al., 10. Customer Support Efficiency:
2016).
Customer support was accessible via live chat and email.
2. Visual and Audio Consistency: Response times were generally fast for simple issues but
Video quality remained stable under optimal conditions, slower for more complex queries. Live chat was rated more
with some pixelation in low bandwidth scenarios. Audio efficient than email support (Khan et al., 2021).
clarity was generally good, though occasional echo was

Fig3: Enhancing Virtual Collaboration: A Research Study on Video Conferencing Tools

IJTSRD | Special Issue on Emerging Trends and Innovations in Web-Based Applications and Technologies Page 69