Skip to main content

User Quality of Experience Comparison Between Skype, Microsoft Teams and Zoom Videoconferencing Tools

Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST,volume 382)

Abstract

In 2020, we investigated the quality of online meetings to find out whether various video and audio degradations can affect end-users’ perception and experience. We collected a total of 542 questionnaires that were suitable for analysis. This paper uses the results to compare the Quality of Experience for three popular videoconferencing applications: Skype, Microsoft Teams, and Zoom. Due to the COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease 2019) and anti-epidemic measures, survey participants were all faced with using these applications daily, whether for work, attending lectures, or keeping in touch with friends and family. They rated their frustration level for specific quality degradations (e.g., blocking of the image or echo in the audio). The paper shows how the three applications compare to each other when different network performance degradation situations occur and how they affect the end user’s perception.

Keywords

  • Videoconference
  • Application
  • Online meetings
  • Telecommuting
  • Quality of experience
  • Survey

T. Šoštarić—Graduated with a masters’ degree.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-78459-1_22
  • Chapter length: 9 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-78459-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Hereinafter refered as Teams.

  2. 2.

    Note that the distinction was made between Skype and Skype for Business.

References

  1. GrandViewResearch. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/video-conferencing-market. Accessed 05 June 2020

  2. Gminsights. https://www.gminsights.com/industry-analysis/video-conferencing-market. Accessed 05 June 2020

  3. Skillscouter. https://skillscouter.com/video-conferencing-statistics. Accessed 06 June 2020

  4. Bakar, G., Kirmizioglu, R.A., Tekalp, A.M.: Motion-based rate adaptation in WebRTC videoconferencing using scalable video coding. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 21(2), 429–441 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2018.2856629

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Boyce, J.M., Ye, Y., Chen, J.L., Ramasubramonian, A.K.: Overview of SHVC: scalable extensions of the high efficiency video coding standard. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Video Technol. 26(1), 20–34 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSVT.2015.2461951

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Hu, H., Zhu, X.Q., Wang, Y., Pan, R., Zhu, J., Bonomi, F.: Proxy-based multi-stream scalable video adaptation over wireless networks using subjective quality and rate models. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 15(7), 1638–1652 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2013.2266092

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Hosking, B., Agrafiotis, D., Bull, D., Easton, N.: An adaptive resolution rate control method for intra coding in HEVC. In: IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Shanghai, China, pp. 1486–1490. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Li, CL., Xiong, HK., Zou, JN., Wu, DPO.: Joint dynamic rate control and transmission scheduling for scalable video multirate multicast over wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 20(2), 361–378 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2017.2745709

  9. Al Hasrouty, C., Lamali, M.L., Autefage, V., Olariu, C., Magoni, D., Murphy, J.: Adaptive multicast streaming for videoconferences on software-defined networks. Comput. Commun. 132, 42–55 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2018.09.009

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  10. Vučić, D., Skorin-Kapov, L.: QoE assessment of mobile multiparty audiovisual telemeetings. IEEE Access 8, 107669–107684 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3000467

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Matulin, M., Mrvelj, Š., Abramović, B.: How frustrated are you? User perception about different videoconference quality degradations. In: 5th EAI International Conference on Management of Manufacturing Systems (EAI MMS 2020), EAI, Online (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Belmudez, B.: Audiovisual Quality Assessment and Prediction for Videotelephony. Springer, Berlin (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14166-4

  13. Matulin, M., Mrvelj, Š.: Modelling user quality of experience from objective and subjective data sets using fuzzy logic. Multimedia Syst. 24(6), 645–667 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00530-018-0590-0

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. ur Rehman Laghari, K., Issa, O., Speranza, F., Falk, T.H.: Quality-of-experience perception for video streaming services: preliminary subjective and objective results. In: Proceedings of The 2012 Asia Pacific Signal and Information Processing Association Annual Summit and Conference, Los Angeles, USA, pp. 1–9 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Li, Y., Zhou, Z.: Subjective video quality assessment and the analysis of coding strategies in video communication scene. In: Proceedings of The 13th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI), Chengdu, China, pp. 52–55 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/CISP-BMEI51763.2020.9263575

  16. Schmitt, M., Redi, J., Bulterman, D., Cesar, P.S.: Towards individual QoE for multiparty videoconferencing. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 20(7), 1781–1795 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMM.2017.2777466

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Rao, N., Maleki, A., Chen, F., Chen, W., Zhang, C., Kaur, K., Haque, A.: Analysis of the effect of QoS on video conferencing QoE. In: 15th International Wireless Communications & Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC), Tangier, Morocco, pp. 1267–1272 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/IWCMC.2019.8766591

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marko Matulin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. The results were not influenced in any way by any organization mentioned in the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Matulin, M., Mrvelj, Š., Abramović, B., Šoštarić, T., Čejvan, M. (2021). User Quality of Experience Comparison Between Skype, Microsoft Teams and Zoom Videoconferencing Tools. In: Perakovic, D., Knapcikova, L. (eds) Future Access Enablers for Ubiquitous and Intelligent Infrastructures. FABULOUS 2021. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 382. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78459-1_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78459-1_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78458-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78459-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)