Reasons not to use Skype (2012) • Hacker News Board

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#21

Post by dandandan » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:33 AM UTC

wonko1 wrote: post #18

dandandan wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stallman won't like it but Facebook Messenger has voice calling built in now and it works very well. I was calling someone in SE Asia from rural Massachusetts recently and the quality was great with very low latency. It felt like a natural conversation given the connectivity challenges on both ends.

Interesting. I can't see myself using it for work though, which the majority of my Skype calls tend to be.

You don't need to be Facebook friends to complete a call but I can still see that expectation being an obstacle to establishing one. Is there a space for a very simple WebRTC call application? It seems like everyone is focused on video calling or more full-featured products.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#22

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:37 AM UTC

Is there any usable alternative for voice calls? Ring and Tox had problems setting up connection from android to debian linux last time I tried both of them.

I really want to replace Skype with something so I can stop using Google Play. Signal is not an option as it is only available via Google Play too.

[0] https://ring.cx/ [1] https://tox.chat/

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#23

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:42 AM UTC

joe563323 wrote: post #10

Skype is owned by Microsoft. No worries it will die out eventually.

Maybe they'll accidentally delete the production database and then realize they don't have any backups. You know, as is tradition?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Sidekick_data_loss

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#24

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:44 AM UTC

nkkollaw wrote: post #14

joe563323 wrote: post #10

Skype is owned by Microsoft. No worries it will die out eventually.

Microsoft has been around for almost 50 years, though. They must do something right?

Microsoft has acquired very few products, and of those a shockingly slim number have succeeded.

I can only think of Excel as being the real survivor here. Others, like SoftImage, were a fleeting acquisition. Many more were buried alive.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#25

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:45 AM UTC

raverbashing wrote: post #15

What is a good solution that allows dialing to pots? Google voice and what else?

Roll your own with any VOIP software?

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#26

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:46 AM UTC

This is apparently from 2012 but not labelled as such.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#27

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:46 AM UTC

joe563323 wrote: post #9

roesel wrote: post #5

I am not sure who this guy is, but he seems a little out of this world.

RMS is a legend. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman . Every one would be living in a little bit of a different world and all the computer tech guys would be living in a completely different world with out RMS.

[deleted]

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#28

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:49 AM UTC

lightedman wrote: post #20

joe563323 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RMS is a legend. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman . Every one would be living in a little bit of a different world and all the computer tech guys would be living in a completely different world with out RMS.

"Every one would be living in a little bit of a different world and all the computer tech guys would be living in a completely different world with out RMS." Someone else would've likely done the same thing sooner or later.

Free software was not necessarily an inevitability, but efforts to accelerate that certainly pushed it forward.

The problem now is this rampant hostility towards all proprietary software of any form for any purpose. The FSF is still fighting the same pointless war against proprietary operating systems when the real threat is IoT junk, cars, and medical devices full of unauditable code.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#29

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:49 AM UTC

fsiefken wrote: post #11

I use the Matrix messaging client riot.fm instead

What is riot.fm? Maybe https://riot.im/?

Is it able to do at least audio calls?

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#30

Post by wonko1 » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:51 AM UTC

dandandan wrote: post #21

wonko1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I can't see myself using it for work though, which the majority of my Skype calls tend to be.

You don't need to be Facebook friends to complete a call but I can still see that expectation being an obstacle to establishing one. Is there a space for a very simple WebRTC call application? It seems like everyone is focused on video calling or more full-featured products.

I'd love it if the default was to use some very lightweight WebRTC app where you just created a new link for each conversation.

I don't think it's likely to happen any time soon unfortunately.

Regarding Facebook, it still feels weird, I'm not sure I can put my finger on exactly why. I just want to keep "friends" and "business" totally separate.