TL;DR verdict

Livestorm is the stronger choice when the deciding factor is day-to-day video conferencing workflow fit, while Dialpad Meetings has the clearer case when pricing shape, deployment control, or rollout risk matters more. For meeting-heavy teams, the practical decision is not feature count; it is which product better supports teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration without forcing a costly migration six months later.

Quick comparison

FeatureLivestormDialpad Meetings
Starting priceFree planFree plan
Free planYesYes
Open sourceNoNo
Self-hostableNoNo
G2 ratingNot listedNot listed
Best forteams that want a mature, full-featured video meeting toolteams that want a focused, lighter video meeting tool
Starting priceFree plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits.Free plan available; paid tiers depend on usage and plan limits.
Free planYesYes
Open sourceNoNo
Self-hostableNoNo
Deployment modelsaassaas
Best forteams that want a mature, full-featured video meeting toolteams that want a focused, lighter video meeting tool
Primary riskFree-tier limits can hide the real cost until workflows move into production.Free-tier limits can hide the real cost until workflows move into production.

Meeting reliability and call quality

Winner: Livestorm

Winner: Livestorm. For meeting reliability and call quality, Livestorm is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Dialpad Meetings can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

External attendee experience

Winner: Livestorm

Winner: Livestorm. For external attendee experience, Livestorm is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Dialpad Meetings can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Adoption also depends on who touches the system every week. A tool that is powerful for admins but slow for contributors creates shadow spreadsheets, skipped updates, and cleanup meetings. In this pair, Livestorm has the clearer adoption story for teams that want less training friction.

Recording, transcripts, and AI notes

Winner: Livestorm

Winner: Livestorm. For recording, transcripts, and ai notes, Livestorm is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Dialpad Meetings can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Governance is where hidden costs show up. Compare permission boundaries, audit needs, export options, SSO expectations, and whether the deployment model matches your security review.

Webinars and large sessions

Winner: Dialpad Meetings

Winner: Dialpad Meetings. For webinars and large sessions, Dialpad Meetings is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Livestorm can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

Admin, security, and compliance

Winner: Livestorm

Winner: Livestorm. For admin, security, and compliance, Livestorm is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Dialpad Meetings can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan.

Cost for meeting-heavy teams

Winner: Livestorm

Winner: Livestorm. For cost for meeting-heavy teams, Livestorm is the safer default because its catalog profile fits the way meeting-heavy teams usually evaluate this decision: workflow fit, rollout cost, ownership model, and how quickly the team can prove value with real data. Livestorm is positioned as browser-based video engagement, while Dialpad Meetings is positioned as ai-powered video meetings; that difference matters when the comparison moves from a feature checklist into daily operation. If your team is using this category for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration, test the winner against one production workflow, one admin workflow, and one reporting workflow before committing. Dialpad Meetings can still be the better pick when its ecosystem, existing contracts, or migration path reduces change management, but it asks for a more deliberate rollout plan. Cost should be modeled over twelve months, not from the first plan label. Include seats, usage, storage, integrations, onboarding, and the time spent recreating automations.

Pricing deep-dive

Livestorm

  • Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in video conferencing.
  • Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan.
  • Pricing model: freemium; license is proprietary; deployment type is saas.

Dialpad Meetings

  • Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in video conferencing.
  • Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan.
  • Pricing model: freemium; license is proprietary; deployment type is saas.

Pricing verdict: Neither product has a clean universal pricing win from catalog data alone. Livestorm is cataloged as: Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in video conferencing. Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan. Pricing model: freemium; license is proprietary; deployment type is saas. Dialpad Meetings is cataloged as: Free plan: available for evaluation or limited production use in video conferencing. Entry paid tier: starts from free, with paid usage or feature upgrades varying by plan. Pricing model: freemium; license is proprietary; deployment type is saas. Build the comparison around the plan that supports your real production workflow, not the cheapest plan each vendor advertises.

How to migrate from Livestorm to Dialpad Meetings

Data export
Export the core video conferencing records from Livestorm first: users, projects, configuration, activity history, files, comments, reports, and any objects your team relies on weekly. Use CSV, JSON, API export, or vendor backup options where available, and keep a read-only archive until the new workflow has survived one reporting cycle.
Import support
Start with Dialpad Meetings's native importer or API, then migrate a representative workspace before moving the whole account. The first test should include permissions, integrations, notifications, and one real production workflow so gaps appear before stakeholders are invited.
Does not migrate
Automations, saved reports, dashboards, custom roles, webhooks, notification rules, SSO settings, billing configuration, and integration credentials usually need manual rebuilds. Historical activity may import as flat records rather than fully functional native events.
Time estimate
Plan two to five days for a small team with simple configuration, one to three weeks for a mid-size team, and longer if compliance review, data cleanup, custom fields, or external users are involved.

What real users say

Livestorm: Livestorm users usually praise the parts that match its positioning as browser-based video engagement. The recurring criticism is predictable: once teams push it beyond that core use case, they run into plan limits, integration gaps, admin overhead, or migration work that was not obvious during evaluation.

Dialpad Meetings: Dialpad Meetings users usually praise the parts that match its positioning as ai-powered video meetings. Complaints tend to cluster around pricing clarity, onboarding effort, reporting flexibility, or the amount of manual process needed to keep the system accurate over time.

Sources: Pattern synthesized from catalog data, vendor positioning, public pricing availability, and common review themes; verify current review excerpts before quoting users directly.

Final verdict

Choose Livestorm if...

  • Choose Livestorm if your team needs browser-based video engagement and that positioning matches the work people will do every week.
  • Choose Livestorm if its pricing model, deployment type, and governance profile are easier to approve than forcing Dialpad Meetings into the same workflow.
  • Choose Livestorm if migration risk is lower because your current data model, integrations, or team habits already resemble its default setup.

Choose Dialpad Meetings if...

  • Choose Dialpad Meetings if your team needs ai-powered video meetings and would otherwise customize Livestorm heavily to fit.
  • Choose Dialpad Meetings if it gives meeting-heavy teams a clearer path for teams that rely on external calls, recordings, classes, interviews, and live collaboration without adding admin work after launch.
  • Choose Dialpad Meetings if its free plan, paid entry point, open-source status, or managed service model better fits your procurement constraints.

Consider neither if: Consider neither if you need a fundamentally different video conferencing model: open-source control when both are managed, managed support when both require ownership, or a narrower specialist tool for one workflow. In that case, review the broader category page and adjacent comparisons before committing.