Last updated: 26 Apr 2021 | Reading time: 4.5 minutes | Watching time: 20 seconds
Whether it’s a game recording or just a tutorial video, an excellent screen recorder can boost the processing time. There are outstanding screen recorders for Windows and macOS computers, but the ideal one is all you need to get the stuff done. The blog post sees both Screencast-O-Matic and Loom and finds the ultimate tool. It is the ultimate Screencast-O-Matic vs. Loom comparison.
One of the tools featured on Advance Market Analytics for its huge market cap, the freemium software is available for Windows, macOS, Chromecast and both mobile OSs. The software comes with most of the screen recording tools you need. The mobile apps are offered in the paid plan and allow syncing with the desktop editor.
The tool supports both screen and webcam recording at the same time, and if you are using the free version, the extension is all you need to record.
The software comes in two premium variation; Solo and Teams. Solo offers two options:
The price for those is $1.65 and $4 per month, respectively. You pay annually for both plans. The team plan also comes in the same variations with some team focused tools.
The cost for the Team Deluxe plan is $9.5 for a team of 10 members and $17.5 for the Team Premier plan. The more members are included, the better the savings. The video editor tool is available in both, so you will have to download the setup to edit videos. The comparison of both the tools is covered in the Screencast-O-Matic vs. Loom section 👇.
Let’s take a look at all the tools the software offers:
- Cut video
- Copy a part
- Remove cursor
- Hide webcam
- Insert media
- Narrate over a video
- Add blur, text, outline, and highlight in a video
- Change playback speed
- Add transitions
- Adjust volume
- Change the resolution
- Add music
Related: Screencast-O-Matic vs. Screencastify
The cloud-based screen recorder is focused on macOS because the macOS version comes with extended features. The software saves recordings online, so it is not recommended if you have a limited data plan.
The free software does not limit the recording time, but the maximum quality it supports is 720p. Like Screencast-O-Matic, Loom is also offered on desktop as a software tool and Chrome extension.
In terms of options, you have share, download, and video speed on the edit page. The major downside of Loom is that the macOS version offers more features than Windows. You don’t get computer audio, 4K recording, and custom recording dimensions on the Windows platform.
Screencast-O-Matic vs. Loom
Screencast-O-Matic on Windows takes about 72MB of storage whereas Loom occupies about 300MB. Considering it is a cloud-based tool, the size is pretty large.
Comparing the video size is a bit tricky as elements such as screen colours, audio level, and graphics play a part. Another issue is that Loom free only supports recording at 720p, but Screencast-O-Matic supports 1080p. On 720p, Screencast-O-Matic does not record the full screen.
By keeping the above concerns in mind, I went ahead, and the results surprised me. I recorded Chrome’s new tab with muted sound for 24 seconds in both. The video recorded on 720p on Loom occupied 17.6MB, whereas the same length video recorded on 1080p on Screencast-O-Matic took only 3.4MB.
As it has already been discussed that Loom does not offer to record computer audio on Windows PC, the game recording was not promising. The below video compares the gameplay of GTA V. The first ten seconds are recorded in Screencast-O-Matic, and the last ten seconds are recorded in Loom.
The table compares the free versions of both the tools.
|Screencast-O-Matic||✔ 1080p recording|
✔ Sharing tools
✔ Narration recording
✔ 30 music tracks
✔ Trim recordings
✔ Zoom in during recordings
|❌ 15 minutes max recording|
❌ Computer audio
❌ No video editing
❌ No drawing during recording
|Loom||✔ No recording limit|
✔ Trim videos
|❌ Access to the last 25 videos|
❌ No drawing while recording
❌ No 1080p recording
❌ Custom dimensions
The table breaks down the plans. The text in purple indicates that the feature is only available in macOS.
Being a YouTuber allows me to test different screen recorders. After using both, I could quickly write a comparison like this, and after reading this post, you would know that Screencast-O-Matic is the ideal choice for now. Loom is new and does not offer many features on the Windows platform.
Anyway, thanks for reading the Screencast-O-Matic vs. Loom blog post. I hope the text helped. Which one are you going to use? Please share your views in the comments down below so other users can decide easily.