Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Microsoft Reportedly Releasing A New Skype For Linux Soon

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    No organisation in the history of mankind has collected more data than google.
    MS collected by far more data than google and collects equal amount right now.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    You need a G+ account, and that requires a real name.
    Wrong, it requires a name, that looks realistic. Their justification is that they don't need any bots misusing the network or socially hacking.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Hangouts is a tool for collecting data about you, just like every Google tool in existence. Claiming that Google does not do data mining is pure comedy.
    Hangouts is a strict communication tool, where Skype is a proprietary blackbox network, written by Kazaa guys with huge security history.
    Dedicated hardware skype decryptors were also been available to gov't since ages.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Perhaps, but you can use skype with a pseudonym and without selling your browser history. And voice and video are what people use skype for, and those work on everything.]
    Given the history of skype tunneling a copy of local /etc/passwd, this argument is laughable.
    Also, Hangouts is dedicated software only on Android. Its built as plugin for all other platforms, which is much more versatile.
    Skype is in contrast - a dedicated blob, that has full functionality only on windumbs.

    Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    I hate skype, btw. I wish there were an open alternative that is feasible.
    The major problem is beating network transitions/constant handle. This is why people pay for accounts on SIP servers.
    The day, someone invents Skype-ish feature reduced P2P network, for the sake of stable account handle storing, will be the day when floss VOIP skyrocket.
    Majority of todays open solutions share common problem: difficulty to connect to other member from any country in the world.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by brosis View Post
      The major problem is beating network transitions/constant handle. This is why people pay for accounts on SIP servers.
      The day, someone invents Skype-ish feature reduced P2P network, for the sake of stable account handle storing, will be the day when floss VOIP skyrocket.
      Majority of todays open solutions share common problem: difficulty to connect to other member from any country in the world.
      And you will have every telco in the world who supplies data doing everything in their power to stop such software. One tactic is to nurf your data allowance. I remember when there were unlimited plans, and only recently (4 years ago, now).

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by dee. View Post
        Well, it pretty much is! But not due to any action from ms... ms phones are doing even worse. Android smashed both of them to the ground a long time ago...
        Yeah Apple is really struggling to ship them iPhone now huh

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by scottishduck View Post
          Yeah Apple is really struggling to ship them iPhone now huh
          with 13% marketshare according to the IDC and consistently falling, yes yes they are.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by UraniumDeer View Post
            Does anyone know of any other P2P VOIP clients? I don't care if its unable to use Skypes network, or unable to call phones.
            There is a perfect alternative: your browser!
            Be it Firefox or Chromium, they are perfectly capable of WebRTC.

            Go there: https://appear.in/
            Pick a name, and video/audio with friends and family works.

            Advantages:
            - If you have a available "route" between the peers in communication, it will use this route. In my case, I was used if with my mother, and the communication went through the VPN I have set myself (with my own private keys). This is obviously one of the only solution that provides you this.
            - Even if you don't have a VPN as in my case, the communication is encrypted by default.
            - Even if you don't have a "common route" (eg both persons are behind NATs with no open ports), the communication will use a "relay". But as it is end-to-end encryption, the relay has no possibility of decrypting the conversations (assuming the are not "evil"!)
            - It is the only solution I saw working on low-specs PC. My mother has a very not-powerful 6 years old Celeron 1G Ram, all the other solutions like Jitsi, Linphone failed to work correctly due to this CPU limitations. My image could be displayed, but displaying at the same time both images was impossible.
            - The quality is very good, does not require a lot of bandwidth (typically 1Mbps for audio+video is enough). It does also adapt to the available bandwidth, as I tested while consuming bandwidth with other operations and it continued to work properly, although with lesser quality.


            What it does NOT do:
            - Availability
            - Signaling (although appear.in added this function if you use Chrome, I have not tested it).

            These 2 items are different features you might want to have (or not!) depending on your use case.
            It is typical features you would find in a communication software, although for POTS (Plain Old Telephony Systems) we never had "Availability" and we managed without it for years!
            POTS has "signaling" on the other hand. It is simply the fact to be able to "ring" your correspondent to let him know you would like to engage in a conversation. There could be also more sophisticated signaling such as warn for a double call.
            This feature obviously requires that the device (Plain Old Telephone in this case) is always listening for the "signaling" of incoming calls.

            If you transpose it, it means that your browser MUST be open at the page of appear.in (or similar site) and be able to notify you (which chrome can do) if some one tries to "call" you.

            So these features : signaling, and the optional "availability", are not 100% fine in todays WebRTC solutions.

            But if you don't mind ring your friends/family with POTS (for the easy "signaling") then switch on WebRTC, the solution is to my point of view the best one.

            Furthermore, used through Firefox, it is almost 100% FOSS (apart from the commencement of the call that occurs at appear.in).

            Comment


            • #51
              Yeah, Microsoft is doing many innovative things these days and Skype for Linux is latest from Microsoft`s belt. But for better and easy online meetings, I would still recommend using RHUB`s web conferencing severs because of its unprecedented security.

              Comment

              Working...
              X