Web-based real-time communications (WebRTC) offers a wide variety of potential uses that are rapidly growing into reality. With UC vendors trying to figure out how to keep businesses afloat in the face of a technology that makes communications so simple as to be launched from a Web browser, that's making for a lot of possibilities, both good and bad, as companies begin to consider how making calls directly from a Web browser can impact the corporate way of life.
Formerly, real-time communications were often difficult to deal with, requiring plugins or native apps, and getting different native apps to work together was a difficult proposition at the best of times. Currently there are several solutions out there for real-time communications, starting with dedicated software like Skype, Facetime, GotoMeeting and a host of others, and that's before the issue of instant messaging comes up, and doesn't even factor in the VoIP phones that are on desktops, or the RTC apps that show up on mobile devices. But interoperability is often a problem, where it even exists, and for some, getting these apps to work well all the time is a challenge of Sisyphean dimensions.
This leaves many users looking wistfully at plain old telephone service (POTS) and wishing the whole “real-time communications” thing could pan out like that. That's just the kind of prospect WebRTC is looking to, at least eventually, realize. WebRTC is geared to work for anyone with a Web browser—which is virtually everybody as most computers come with some kind of Web browser installed—and a microphone. The service can accommodate video calling for those with a camera as well, but it's not strictly necessary.
WebRTC can easily connect to other Web browsers, allowing for connections to be quickly made and properly supported throughout the conversation. First, the browser makes a connection between itself and the users' cameras—where applicable—and microphones. This actually couldn't be done until recently, when the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)—the group that's behind a lot of the conventions online—brought out the Media Capture API to help browsers make that connection. A great start, but it took the help of other APIs to fully bridge the gap.
Naturally, this being the Web and all, nothing is completely smooth. There's some resistance to WebRTC, from major firms like Apple and Microsoft. Microsoft is developing its own RTC format in CU-RTC-WEB, and Apple is keeping mum about the whole business, though it likely senses at least some trouble ahead for Facetime, so Apple may ultimately resist. A resistant Apple could mean trouble on the mobile front as many mobile devices are Apple's.
But mobile will likely get a big boost from the Android market, which has no problem with WebRTC other than the occasional mechanical problem. WebRTC also has some issues when it comes to larger groups; right now, the top limit for WebRTC seems to be about five, and once more users than that get in on the action, the demands on bandwidth and routing start to get too heavy.
But there are still clear possibilities ahead for WebRTC. Small groups—and definitely one-on-one—will have a lot of benefit from a system that can make calling as easy as clicking a link in a Web browser, and with plenty of systems able to use WebRTC, that's a big point in its favor. This is likely to bring a lot of changes to a variety of different fields, and being ready for the implications of WebRTC will pay some significant dividends down the line.
Edited by
Alisen Downey
