Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

nickforall.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 483 posts

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#221

Post by LoSboccacc »

lawl wrote: post #176
LoSboccacc wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

gnome breaks userspace, kde breaks userspace etc. skype is not just linked against the kernel after all, but a whole lot of different components

Gnome and KDE run in userspace. They are desktop environments, they don't "break userspace". I feel like you're talking about GTK and Qt, both of which (don't break userspace either) are libraries you can statically link and nothing will break.

they both break library compatibility and break their environment (like when kde removed the widget toolbar and a whole lot of app suddenly stopped working)

sure you can have bunch of ifdef in the code, and an autoconf, and make sure you support a wide set of options, but that is basically the whole point, it makes for a painful experience and costlier, slower development (for closed source application that comes prepackaged)

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#222

Post by hvidgaard »

toyg wrote: post #140
agentdrtran wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they? What have the done recently that made Hangouts better?

The first step was disentangling it from G+. I hope the next step is a sane API to let third-party clients integrate with it. It does not have to be XMPP, as long as it's something clear and well-supported.

I wouldn't thrust Google for a second. They are not afraid to close down services with a short notice - so unless I can run my own "Hangouts" backbone it means nothing to me.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#223

Post by thirdsun »

junto wrote: post #209
pentae wrote: post #122

What I don’t understand is - Why is there not a serious competitor to Skype? If there was a cross-platform Skype clone that worked on OSX, Linux, Windows, iOS and Android that was stable and secure - the whole world would jump onto it. All it has to do is not be a bloated piece of crap like Skype. Instead, everything else out there is fragmented. We’re all waiting, get on it already!

Indeed. There are lots of apps that cover parts of its functionality, but not all. We keep trying to introduce new alternatives at work, but to date nothing has passed the test. Calls, group calls, chat, group chat, video, screenshare. For one communications client those are the boxes it needs to tick. Any suggestions?

No suggestions, but I think those features scream "Slack" in my opinion. It would make a lot of sense to have those features in a service that is the center of communication for many teams anyway.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#224

Post by xiaoma »

ahjones wrote: post #163
davedx wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet Hangouts is much lower friction and generally easier to use than Skype! What good alternatives are there to Hangouts? Preferably something that doesn't require flaky browser plugins.

I like Zoom ( http://zoom.us/ ). I used to use Hangouts, but it consumed a lot of CPU. The free Zoom account allows you to have up to fifty people in a room for forty minutes, or an unlimited length call with just two participants.

I just encountered Zoom this week! I had a conference with a German (I'm in Vietnam at the moment) and she sent me a link to it. I'd never heard of it and was a bit frustrated to need to install another plugin.

But it was a great experience compared to Hangouts! The connection quality was on par with Skype and it was super light-weight for something based in the browser.

8.5/10, would use again.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#225

Post by 746F7475 »

ElijahLynn wrote: post #167
746F7475 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanna code an alternative then

Other than the obvious, Hangouts, which is closed source and probably just as vulnerable: https://appr.tc/ https://github.com/webrtc/apprtc

Skype is way better than hangouts first of all.

Secondly webrtc requires you to coordinate, it's not like I can just call someone. Just as well we could use TeamSpeak or Ventrilo or any of the old solutions.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#226

Post by vanderZwan »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #128
vanderZwan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when someone tries to innovate in this live group chat space, they get bought out[0]. I doubt we'll see the features of Talko in Skyp any time soon, and I expect whatever creative buzz they had going over at Talko will surely be killed by the forced reintegration into the Microsoft bureaucracy. [0] http://www.talko.com/

They /let themselves be bought out/; big difference there. If their ideology was to create a proper Skype competitor, they wouldn't go for the 'quick buck' / become millionaires overnight.

Fair point! However, I stand by my pessimistic view of how things will develop after the buy-out.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#227

Post by dandelion_lover »

hvidgaard wrote: post #213
anexprogrammer wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most things worked far, far better 10 years ago than today. Apparently this is progress. Social everything means we can't visit a website today without calls to a billion external domains. Phones are doing the same as they're mini-tablets that suck at actual phone calls. Operating systems have taken on mobile centric (and the hideous flatten everything) design that is broken paradigm for a 15" laptop or 24" desktop s…

> we can't visit a website today without calls to a billion external domains NoScript really brings this into visibility. I don't mind the domain running scripts. But the 10+ other domains that needs to run a script - sigh. My wife keeps asking my why I put up with it - it's quite simple; I decide if the page I'm about to visit is worth all the extra crap running and tracking me.

NoScript does not show everything. RequestPolicy opens up a lot more.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#228

Post by malka »

cujanovic wrote: post #29
SunShiranui wrote: post #18

Skype has been getting worse and worse over the years. Personally I've switched to Telegram for chats, and I'll be looking for alternatives as far as voice calls are concerned.

Did you try https://whispersystems.org/ ? There is a desktop version but it doesn't support voice: https://whispersystems.org/blog/signal-desktop/

There is a huge problem with Signal.

Once on of your contact uninstall Signal without disabling it first, you will have to long press the send button EACH time you want to text them. Annoying as hell, it made me stop using Signal.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#229

Post by lawl »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #221
lawl wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gnome and KDE run in userspace. They are desktop environments, they don't "break userspace". I feel like you're talking about GTK and Qt, both of which (don't break userspace either) are libraries you can statically link and nothing will break.

they both break library compatibility and break their environment (like when kde removed the widget toolbar and a whole lot of app suddenly stopped working) sure you can have bunch of ifdef in the code, and an autoconf, and make sure you support a wide set of options, but that is basically the whole point, it makes for a painful experience and costlier, slower development (for closed source application that comes pre…

I feel like you do not understand the concept of static linking, because the entire point is that you don't need a bunch of ifdefs, since you target exactly the version you develop against and ship with it.

Re: Dear Skype/Microsoft: Problems with Linux client

#230

Post by bigjust »

lucb1e wrote: post #205
rdsubhas wrote: post #102

I've been educating as many people (especially Management and Business people) as I can to switch over from Skype to any other alternative (like Hangouts). Because Skype is: * A memory hog * A bandwidth hog (its really inefficient about network usage, and uses a lot of bandwidth even when idle) * Has much lower call quality (a consequence of the above), just try having a call in Hangouts or Skype and notice that Hang…

> * Is now owned by Microsoft This is not negative in itself. I don't like that it's part of a bigger company because of privacy and focus from intelligence agencies and hackers, but that's just me. I could imagine someone else thinking it's positive because it shows professionalism. Why is this a negative point for you? And why would something like Hangouts be better, or what would you suggest if you wanted to elimi…

by itself, not a big deal. But in Skype's case, the number of issues I had with the application had increased since Microsoft took over. A lot.
Post reply on HN