What do you like best about Bluedot?
Previous Response: BlueDot stands out as a reliable AI note-taker with strong transcription accuracy and an intuitive interface. Its real-time processing is quick and consistent, making it a solid companion for meetings, interviews, or lectures. The ability to integrate with popular calendar and conferencing tools is a clear advantage, streamlining the workflow and reducing the need for manual setup. Users also benefit from features like speaker identification and searchable transcripts, which make reviewing and organizing content much easier. It is one my favorite ones because it delivers what it is meant to do and is easy to use with no need to use bots in meetings.
Update: While I still find BlueDot to be one of the most functional and user-friendly AI note-takers available, I would caution that it is best suited for general-purpose meetings where privacy is not a critical concern. Its strengths in speed, accuracy, and ease of use remain impressive. However, for professionals who handle confidential or regulated information, the lack of visible privacy controls and limited transparency about data handling may be a barrier. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
What do you dislike about Bluedot?
Previous Response: Despite its strengths, BlueDot still has notable limitations. The summarization feature often oversimplifies nuanced conversations, omitting important context or misrepresenting the tone. Customization options are limited, and users can’t easily fine-tune how transcripts or summaries are structured. The platform occasionally struggles with accents or overlapping speech, leading to transcription errors that require manual correction. Privacy controls also feel somewhat opaque, raising concerns for users handling sensitive information. Finally, the pricing is steep, especially for users in countries with lower purchasing power, such as Brazil, making the service less accessible for a global audience.
Update: After posting my review, I was contacted by a representative from BlueDot. Instead of addressing the concerns I raised in good faith, the exchange quickly became defensive and dismissive. My original comment pointed to a lack of user-facing transparency around privacy controls, which is a critical issue for professionals like myself who work with sensitive information. I made it clear that I do not dispute BlueDot's use of encryption or its compliance certifications. My concern is about the absence of visible, granular user controls and the risks posed by integrations with third-party AI models like ChatGPT, which are not appropriate for clinical or confidential contexts.
Rather than engaging with these points, I was told I had made a "false and misleading" statement and was questioned for continuing to use the platform, despite having explained that I only use it for general meetings where sensitive information is not shared. The conversation ended with the representative advising me to look for another service, instead of engaging in any constructive dialogue.
This experience has only reinforced my original concerns. BlueDot may offer solid technical features, but it is not currently suited to privacy-critical use cases. Professionals considering this platform for healthcare, legal, or other sensitive fields should be cautious. To fully address these concerns, the platform would need to offer a truly local processing option that eliminates any cloud dependency or third-party model integration. Without that, it remains unsuitable for scenarios where data confidentiality is non-negotiable. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
