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

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#161

Post by morganvachon » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 7:14 PM UTC

striking wrote: post #138

morganvachon wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mumble's requirements are fairly low, you could get by with a $3/month VPS or even a RasPi. Maintenance is down to keeping the OS updated, which is trivial on pretty much any VPS Linux install, as well as Raspbian. If you're truly paranoid there's a Mumble port for OpenBSD, though that obviously wouldn't fit Stallman's definition of Free.

Last time I tried it, you had to do stuff like generate certificates and open ports and while it wasn't too much of a big deal and improved voice quality a lot , everyone wanted to stay on Skype. Until we moved to Discord. Which has equally good sound quality, a fantastic chat and role system, and the ability for people to just jump into your voice call instead of having to be invited (which was what killed Skype for…

I used Discord for a while when I played Rust (post apocalyptic sandbox MMO) and was a member of a clan on there. It worked great, and the Windows client is fantastic. Basically, Slack+TeamSpeak.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#162

Post by astrodust » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 8:08 PM UTC

tonyplee wrote: post #140

astrodust wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

DOS is a acquired product, for $50k? :-) They only finally disable cmd.exe in the latest update. .bat files still run.

Somehow I overlooked that, but it's true, that's their first and most significant acquisition.

They didn't buy the company or talent, mind you, just the software.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#163

Post by FabHK » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:10 PM UTC

Does anyone have experience with Wire? It sounds good:

* open source, code on github

* e2e encryption (apparently derivative of Signal's Axolotl double ratchet)

* chat/voice/video, and group chats (all encrypted always)

* based in Switzerland

* clients for iOS, Android, Mac, Windows, Linux, Web

* can sign up with phone number or email or username

* reasonably responsive on twitter

* yada yada yada

I use it on iOS and quite like it, but not that many people on it yet :-/

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#164

Post by FabHK » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:13 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #42

It sucks - but as is always the case with free vs nonfree software - there are few alternatives. Among the few alternatives available are Google (hangouts) and Facebook. Stallman waves his hand and mentions Jitsi and Mumble which aren't comparable in features to Skype (Chat + Voice + video + desktop sharing on all platforms including mobile). Jitsi does look promising but not quite complete. A chat/voice app is like…

> Among the few alternatives available are Google (hangouts) and Facebook.

I wouldn't want my communication go via exactly those two firms that suck all the data they can out of everything they can get hold of.

I'd consider Signal, Wire, and possibly Telegram more suitable alternatives (all free, and at least as polished as Skype, which isn't saying much... :-)

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#165

Post by FabHK » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:17 PM UTC

MarcScott wrote: post #111

sschueller wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about wire? https://wire.com

So I had a flick through the website, and I fail to understand how this service makes any money. This automatically makes me suspicious that either they'll eventually start collecting data, or the service will disappear as soon as they are acquired.

I seem to recall that they aim for a freemium-ish model, i.e. sell extra features or charge for features designed for businesses/teams etc.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#166

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:29 PM UTC

MarcScott wrote: post #111

sschueller wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about wire? https://wire.com

So I had a flick through the website, and I fail to understand how this service makes any money. This automatically makes me suspicious that either they'll eventually start collecting data, or the service will disappear as soon as they are acquired.

At least they explicitly promote with "No profiling or data gathering" with a link to https://twitter.com/wire/status/768797320792117248

Also they promote Spotify

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#167

Post by ycmbntrthrwaway » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:39 PM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #87

ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #22

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/

How about wire? https://wire.com

Looks great, I was not aware they had open source client.

Given that they were forced to release their Axolotl (aka Signal protocol) under GPLv3+, they try to add some strange restrictions [2]:

"Additionally, if you choose to build an Open Source App, certain restrictions apply, as follows: a. You agree not to change the way the Open Source App connects and interacts with our servers ..."

As I understand I am free to ignore any additions to GPL.

[1] https://medium.com/@wireapp/axolotl-and-proteus-788519b186a7... [2] https://github.com/wireapp/wire

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#168

Post by detaro » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 10:42 PM UTC

ycmbntrthrwaway wrote: post #167

sschueller wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about wire? https://wire.com

Looks great, I was not aware they had open source client. Given that they were forced to release their Axolotl (aka Signal protocol) under GPLv3+, they try to add some strange restrictions [2]: "Additionally, if you choose to build an Open Source App, certain restrictions apply, as follows: a. You agree not to change the way the Open Source App connects and interacts with our servers ..." As I understand I am free to…

I read it as that only applies when you connect to their servers, and is the usage policy/Terms of Service for their servers, not a code license.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#169

Post by whack » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 11:40 PM UTC

uiri wrote: post #157

whack wrote: post #147

It's hard to take this article seriously when it starts out with stuff like " A nonfree program denies users freedom, which is unjust in itself. " If you don't want to use Skype, I can respect that. But to accuse the developers of moral failure just because they didn't make their software free... That is an absurd view of morality.

The author is Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU project and the Free Software Foundation. He has spent the last 30 years trying to rid the world of proprietary software; first by working on free alternatives in the form of GNU and later through his activism work. The Open Source movement grew out of a group of pro-Free Software people who felt that Stallman's morality-based arguments were ineffective at convincing…

Your entire comment is a reverse ad hominem. Just because Richard Stallman did a lot of great things doesn't make his view of morality any less absurd. There's nothing unjust about a Software company choosing to develop and market "non-free" Software.

Re: Reasons not to use Skype (2012)

#170

Post by alkonaut » Sat, Jan 07, 2017, 11:55 PM UTC

usernam wrote: post #64

alkonaut wrote: post #42

It sucks - but as is always the case with free vs nonfree software - there are few alternatives. Among the few alternatives available are Google (hangouts) and Facebook. Stallman waves his hand and mentions Jitsi and Mumble which aren't comparable in features to Skype (Chat + Voice + video + desktop sharing on all platforms including mobile). Jitsi does look promising but not quite complete. A chat/voice app is like…

But did you _actually_ try the alternatives? I've been using mumble for more than a decade now, and I've pushing it into 3 working places as a substitute to skype, asterix and lync (the microsoft voip solution). It's not really oriented for 1-1 conversation, which is odd to use at first, but once people start to use channels and the built-in chat you hardly go back. The latency and voice quality is stunning, even acr…

Nope - didn't try them after reading the spec list to see if they check the boxes. They didn't as far as I could see, or they made terrible marketing!

The problem with replacing Skype within an organization is that it can't just be better at some things, it needs to at least do all the things. We also already use other software for desktop sharing, and dont call to phones, so that's handled - but the biggest hurdle when evaluating alternatives is to get a good app for 1-1 chat, group chat, 1-1 calls and group calls, that handles persistent groups (e.g per project, recurrent meetings,..), persistent (server based) chats, and does all of this without requiring multiple contact lists for different tasks (e.g one for voice and one for chat would be a complete no-go)

Also, the fear of crap software in a large corporation is zero, and the switching cost would be nonzero, so the alternative would also have to save money through efficiency or provide some other very tangible benefit such as reduced risk of Trojans, otherwise there would never be a switch.

Hangouts is the best candidate I have found yet, but it's google, and not really better than Skype.

This is a "non computer business" so hosting anything would likely be out of the question, as would anything other than a "run this msi and install the app from AppStore on your phone" kind of setup for each client.