Google Meet, formerly Hangouts Meet, replaces the former Google Hangouts as the company's G Suite integrated web conferencing tool, allowing users to join meetings directly from a Calendar event or email invite from a computer, phone, or conference room. G Suite's Enterprise edition also creates a dial-in phone number for each meeting, as an additional convenience.
$6
per month
Lyssna
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Lyssna (formerly UsabilityHub) is a user research platform used to test digital products with real users and gain insights into their audience. Its tools and features help Lyssna to optimize users' designs and create more engaging user-friendly experiences. Lyssna is a research platform, offering a broad range of testing features including: Five Second Testing - Used to quickly test the effectiveness of landing pages, messaging and designs by showing users a…
$0
per month (3 seats included)
UserTesting
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
UserTesting helps UX researchers, designers, product teams, and marketers gather actionable insights through research, testing, and feedback. With a network of real people ready to share their perspectives, UserTesting enables organizations to make customer-first decisions at scale.
N/A
Pricing
Google Meet
Lyssna
UserTesting
Editions & Modules
Google Workspace - Business Starter
$6
per month
Google Workspace - Business Standard
$12
per month
Google Workspace - Business Plus
$18
per month
Free
$0
3 seats included
Starter
$99
per month 5 seats included
Growth
$199
per month 15 seats included
Enterprise
Contact Sales
custom seats
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Meet
Lyssna
UserTesting
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Discount available for annual plan. Panel responses are priced seperately.
Lyssna is certainly the least expensive, most basic and easy to use out of the range of usability tools I have used in the past. Depending on your maturity as a business and the projects that you are doing, this can be a great starting point before scaling up.
We have evaluated two other platforms - UserZoom and UsabilityHub. We ultimately decided to maintain our relationship with UserTesting due to the overall usability and the functionality that it offers. The features better suited our needs, and it met a price point that worked …
UserTesting is more robust. We also use UsabilityHub, but for different purposes - one off tests that don't require many screens but do require more responses.
If you have a small team, use Google Meet. If you want to have a weekly check-up, use Google Meet. If you want to do a small hosting of conferences — kind of like a webinar, I would say to be very specific — Google Meet is really, really good. So that’s what my recommendations are.
UsabilityHub is well suited for remote unmoderated testing. Responses are captured very quickly and live updates allow the user to keep track of how the test is performing. The types of testing that make the most sense to use on UsabilityHub are preference test, first click test, navigational, and design surveys. It is less appropriate for one-on-one testing and lengthy questionnaires.
UserTesting has been great for moderated customer interviews/usability testing as well as for unmoderated testing of messaging, imagery, prototypes and live experiences. I would say that the scope of what you want needs to be limited, as the participants are only paid so much and tests are supposed to not exceed a certain amount of time. For customer interviews, I think it can be difficult to onboard customers to UserTesting if they have never used it before. If I set up interviews, I don't even have them use the UserTesting scheduling tool, I actually set up all the interviews with the customers myself through the tool (being mindful of time zones!). When we run the meeting, they really don't even know UserTesting is involved. Might be nice for UserTesting to allow the upload/connecting to of a Zoom interview and let it do the transcription/analysis from there.
One of the challenges that I see is that whenever we have in a meeting, we won't be able to drop some of the documents that we have. That's one of the big challenges which I see in Google Meet. At that point of time, we either have to Slack or we have to share an email. We cannot do that, like sending that particular document in the Google meet chat.
Add additional demographic sorting options for the audience to better meet the needs of B2B users - for example include industry type, functional area, etc.
Sometimes there are restrictions around types of research that can be used for moderated user-testing with our own users.
For tests on relatively small areas of a website or app, the AI analysis seems rather overblown, like it's trying too hard to come up with something insightful when the test is actually about something quite small (e.g. structure of a mobile app menu).
It's difficult to invite our own users to unmoderated user-testing because they wouldn't know how the UserTesting interface works - this is particularly an issue for mobile research.
This app is still having a lot of redundant features as compared to other industry apps such as Zoom and Webex which offers much more on the functionality side along with the option to have greater user access control to the admin/host of the meetings. A sense of interaction is always found to be missing in Google meet which can be easily adopted in the Zoom
I'm very happy with my experience of the product and the level of service and learning resources they provide. If the service becomes more expensive than it currently is then we might not be able to justify additional cost - but this is theoretical. I would recommend UserTesting and would ideally renew our contract.
Google Meet is very easy and simple to use. I can schedule a meeting right on my calendar - it literally takes a few seconds. There is no additional app I have to open to schedule anything. Guests can click on the link easily to join any meetings. 10/10!
Due to its simplicity and design it is really easy to navigate. You can clearly understand which sections you have completed and which are still left to be done. It is also really easy to change ordering of content etc, which I have found hasn’t been an option in other tools which means it is a really lengthy task of rewriting all of the tasks or questions to get them in the correct order that is desired.
It's very good, I have used other tools in the past and this is by far the most intuitive and user friendly. Testament to this is the ease with which other non researchers who have been onboarded to the tool with our additional seat have found it easy to use
Google does a great job of providing tech support for this product, as it does many others. Similarly, Google has FAQs that cover a large amount of issues faced by users. Problems have not persisted in our use of this product. Problems are resolved quickly and easily, with or without personal Google support.
I have contacted UserTesting's customer service online, by email, or by phone a few times, and each time, I have encountered the same professionalism and expertise. Even in person during a work event, they were there, and it was the same experience.
From a technical perspective, the implementation was extremely smooth. Most of the change management / implementation hurdles were clearing use of the tool through our various security, legal, and information privacy teams. Once these concerns were addressed (UserTesting.com was very helpful in providing all the needed documentation), the implementation process was very simple and we were able to get going right away.
The main positive feature in Google Meet over Zoom to me is the fact that Google meet can be seamlessly deployed in the browser with its full functionality. Unlike Zoom for which you need to download an extra application to use. This consequently makes workflow smooth when transitioning between something like emails and taking part in a meeting.
UsabilityHub provides very fast, short responses to specific questions about a static image of a website. This is useful for checking what is most prominent on a page, what they would click on, what they see/read within the first 5 seconds of landing etc. WhatUsersDo is a broader tool, that records the screen and audio as a user navigates the website. You can set tasks and ask questions, but it much more about the user journey experience and their opinion, rather than testing a particular feature. Feedback also takes a bit longer. Hotjar is a combination of both, its a screen recording which helps you to see where users click and move to, but there is no audio or text feedback, just heatmaps/click maps for watching user behaviour.
The quality of the participants: they usually have good feedback and act like "professional" users. Which is good when we want a few insights in a short amount of time. Also, the interface is good. I miss having more features, like a good transcription tool like we have in Condens
I wasn't involved in the unit pricing factor. So far I used Google meet in the office where I got access to all these Google applications including the Google Meet feature. So I wasn't involved much in this pricing factor of Google Meet and also regarding the contact terms of the product.
This is very good in the professional services as I started using this first for the professional service only. While using this Google Meet itself gives a professional feel as the UI works in a professional way. The video background modification, multi-screen feature, and some other features help in professional service.
Negative: on each webinar someone from our team had to write manually the people that were participating and after that matching it with the registered people list. We wasted time. It could be easily resolved by adding the export list feature
Positive: Collaboration and internal meetings. Calendar integration helps us save time.
