11–20 of 95 posts
He's expressing an opinion except his style is to state his opinion as fact without providing any evidence at all. It's not worth reading. Now if he had predicted this purchase, that would be different.
Not having that as the default is how we ended up with the terrible popular style "in my opinion it could be argued that for some people it is mostly better if they XYZ, where possible (consult your doctor)".
NB, when I say it's a terrible style, that's my opinion, not a universal truth or peer reviewed fact cited in a published journal.
See?
Skype offers a great foundation for social because the contacts it contains are often better ones than Facebook offers.
By adding to components to what already has an entrenched base, Microsoft can leap forward without trying to "break into" the established market.
But there is something: SAP. What Microsoft should do is take on Oracle and IBM instead of Apple and Google. They should make an offer to that large number of companies who want one thing more than everything else: Peace of mind based on an integrated stack. They are ready to pay up. Microsoft is the master of integration (some call it lock-in). Together with SAP, Microsoft has the most complete enterprise stack imaginable. All of a sudden even Windows Phone would have a place in this world as a BlackBerry successor.
I live in New York but my family is from Australia so I use video-calling them to them all the time. I've tried using Skype but basically it's terrible. Poor audio, choppy frame rates and at some point it will start giving messages about "degraded performance" and we'll lose video.
My setup is a 50Mbps cable line using wireless (N) from a Macbook Pro. The other end is ADSL of varying degrees (1.5 to 10Mbps) on wireless (N) from a Windows PC or laptop.
We've basically given up on using Skype.
What works flawlessly and with much higher quality? Facetime.
Am I really the only one who has had terrible experience with Skype?
My point with this is that Skype is not the dominant video medium it once was, especially not from a technical standpoint.
What's more, video calling is becoming a commodity. I think we're near or above 100M Facetime-capable devices (iPhones, iPod Touches and Macs). Google Talk is available to however many millions of GMail users are out there.
Skype isn't even a strong business (IMHO). Most consumers don't pay, which leaves the business type users who use multiway calling I guess. But where p2p video calling is becoming commoditized, who's to say multiway calling won't quickly follow suit?
Basically, $8.5B for Skype is nuts.
It seems the one who really needed to buy Skype was Facebook who have no video calling to speak of. One wonder if Skype was "the last piece of chocolate cake" syndrome, meaning you want something you otherwise wouldn't just because it's the last piece.
> Microsoft bought Skype to keep Google from buying Skype. Except Google wouldn't buy Skype, according to a recent story: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/05/11/google.skype.wire... ...?
welcome to 90s era tech punditry
He also met with the President of Estonia: http://www.president.ee/en/media/press-releases/6096-preside...
It's interesting that while Microsoft-related Nokia in Finland is decreasing headcount, the southern neighbor Estonia's Skype is looking to potentially grow.
He's expressing an opinion except his style is to state his opinion as fact without providing any evidence at all. It's not worth reading. Now if he had predicted this purchase, that would be different.
It should be the default understanding that what someone says and writes is their opinion. Not having that as the default is how we ended up with the terrible popular style "in my opinion it could be argued that for some people it is mostly better if they XYZ, where possible (consult your doctor)". NB, when I say it's a terrible style, that's my opinion, not a universal truth or peer reviewed fact cited in a publishe…
Some writers online actually do have knowledge of Google's or Microsoft's position with respect to Skype, so when they say "Google/Microsoft wants X," they mean something more factual than "I can speculate that Google/Microsoft wants X."
In particular, I've heard from more informed sources that Google passed on Skype and has its reasons, contradicting one of the post's few concrete assertions.
Am I the only one who has had terrible experience with Skype? I live in New York but my family is from Australia so I use video-calling them to them all the time. I've tried using Skype but basically it's terrible. Poor audio, choppy frame rates and at some point it will start giving messages about "degraded performance" and we'll lose video. My setup is a 50Mbps cable line using wireless (N) from a Macbook Pro. The…
For my own part, I use Skype for almost every outgoing phone call. I spend perhaps 5 GBP/month on threshold auto-credit. The biggest problems with it happen with concurrent upload activity, especially torrents.
I don't believe that at all. Google doesn't need Skype. Microsoft bought Skype because they have large amounts of cash in Europe that they cannot repatriate without taking a huge tax hit. For some strange reason, Ballmer has that obsession with hyperactively pursuing the same consumers that Google and Apple have. That's why he didn't see anything else to buy in Europe (Actually there isn't a whole lot). But there is…