Best open-source alternatives to Zoom
A cloud video conferencing and meeting platform.
Zoom became the default video meeting tool during the remote work shift, offering reliable video calls, screen sharing, breakout rooms, and webinars. Privacy incidents, per-host licensing costs, and the desire to keep meeting data on private infrastructure drive organizations toward self-hosted video conferencing.
4 alternatives listed- Apache License 2.0fully-open
Jitsi Meet is an open source video conferencing project designed for people who want to run or use modern online meetings. It is presented as a browser-based service, with companion mobile apps and SDKs for integrating meeting functionality into other products. The README emphasizes usability across current browsers and highlights core conferencing capabilities such as HD audio/video, chat, polls, reactions, and virtual backgrounds. The project is aimed both at end users who join meetings on the public service and at organizations that want to deploy their own instance. Deployment guidance points to the Jitsi handbook, with Debian packages, Docker-based deployment, and source builds available for self-hosting. The README also mentions Jitsi as a Service (JaaS) for teams that prefer a managed enterprise offering rather than operating the platform themselves.
Cloud OptionalMulti-UserDockerPackageInstall:dockerpackage-managersourceFeatures:
- browser-based meetings
- mobile applications
- web SDKs
- native SDKs
- HD audio and video
+5 more
Auth:oauth - Apache License 2.0fully-open
LiveKit is an open source media server and platform for building real-time video, audio, and data applications. It is aimed at developers who need conferencing, livestreaming, interactive rooms, or other low-latency communication features backed by WebRTC. The project centers on a scalable SFU server written in Go, with support for production use, distributed deployments, and multi-region setups. It also provides client and server SDKs across multiple languages and platforms, plus a CLI, Helm charts, and Docker images to simplify deployment and integration. Developers can use its access-token model, server APIs, and webhooks to build custom real-time apps and automations.
Multi-UserDockerKubernetesBinaryPackageInstall:dockerkubernetesbinarypackage-managersourceFeatures:
- scalable distributed WebRTC SFU
- client SDKs
- JWT authentication
- UDP/TCP/TURN connectivity
- speaker detection
+5 more
Auth:local - GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0fully-open
BigBlueButton is an open-source virtual classroom platform built for online learning and remote instruction. It is aimed primarily at teachers, instructors, and learners, but the README also notes that it can be used for tutoring, flipped classrooms, group collaboration, and online classes. The system supports live audio and video, slide presentation with whiteboard annotations, chat, screen sharing, polling, emojis, shared notes, breakout rooms, and recording/playback for later review. The README also mentions a Learning Analytics Dashboard for moderators and points to technical documentation that covers architecture, features, API, and the default front-end called GreenLight.
Multi-UserBinaryInstall:binarysourceFeatures:
- real-time audio sharing
- real-time video sharing
- slides with whiteboard annotations
- chat
- screen sharing
+5 more
- MIT Licensefully-open
Galene is a videoconferencing system intended for self-hosted deployment. The README emphasizes that it is easy to set up and uses very modest server resources, making it suitable for people or organizations that want a lightweight conferencing server rather than a managed SaaS product. The project provides browser-based access to conference groups and includes documentation for installation, usage, administration, client development, and the client protocol. It also exposes an administrative API and supports local group configuration through JSON files. The README’s quick start shows building the server from source and logging in through a web browser to join a group room.
Multi-UserInstall:sourceFeatures:
- videoconferencing
- easy deployment
- moderate server resource usage
- browser-based access
- group-based rooms
+2 more
Auth:local
What to look for in a Zoom alternative
Evaluate WebRTC quality, participant capacity limits, and server resource requirements — video conferencing is bandwidth and compute intensive. Screen sharing, recording, and breakout room support vary widely. Some alternatives require TURN/STUN server infrastructure for NAT traversal, adding operational complexity.
Other SaaS alternatives
- Cursor IDE (15)
- ChatGPT (14)
- Notion (11)
- Vercel / Heroku / Render (10)
- Make (Integromat) (7)
- Miro (7)
- v0 (7)
- Jira (6)
- Postman (5)
- Lovable (5)
- Shopify (5)
- Claude Code - CLI (4)
- Airtable (4)
- Slack (4)
- Calendly (4)
- Webflow (4)
- Zendesk (4)
- Auth0 (4)
- Mailchimp (4)
- AutoCAD (3)
- Sentry (3)
- Canva (2)
- Twilio (2)
- Buffer (2)
- Typeform (2)
- Midjourney (1)
- Figma (1)
- Loom (1)
- Grammarly (1)
- Datadog (1)
- Authentik (1)
- Listmonk (1)
- 1Password (1)
- Squarespace (1)
- WordPress.com (1)
- Adobe Photoshop (1)
