101–110 of 117 posts
Just happy that M$ is showing more love of Linux. I never thought a new version would ever get out!
Success! I've finally done it, ineluctable proof that my time machine works. The Nineties was a great time, I'll be able to experience the release of the PlayStation again, Ultima Online in its prime and the Initial release of Linux; just in time to get rid of that pesky Finnish fellow before any widespread adoption.
Ooh! Ooh! Does it have the new Conversation Ads feature? http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skype_advertising_update.h... I, for one, cannot WAIT to see these new ads, which Microsoft describes as "content that could spark additional topics of conversation that are relevant to Skype users." Isn't that great? Ads are now "content." And the motivation isn't to make a bundle of money on ads, it's to "spark conversations.…
no ads in this client, on any screen, presumptuous one. next time look before you embarrass yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This a i3 M370, but I run a 32 bits OS because I got tired of running 64 bits with applications with no support for 64 bits (read: Flash browser plugin and Skype). After some time I've found that there's no real advantage for me on a 64 bits OS for a laptop (ie. I have only 3GB of RAM, performance looks the same, etc).
Flash has been X86_64 compatible for a while now... sh-4.2$ rpm -q flash-player flash-player-11.2.202.236-91.1.x86_64 (rpm query on openSUSE Tumbleweed) sh-4.2$ file /usr/lib64/browser-plugins/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib64/browser-plugins/libflashplayer.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped
I'm not a heavy flash user, but after 6 months I was really frustrated. The 32 bits version works great in comparison.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I apologize for the digression, but what's wrong with running 32bit linux on a desktop/laptop?
Apart from it being a measurably slower architecture (15-20% is typical) and the only sane way of dealing with large memory machines? (Laptops with 8G are routine today, and require a PAE kernel on i686). Refusing to upgrade is the reason that products like Skype continue to refuse to support 64 bit targets. Just try it. Chances are you won't even notice the difference, except that your battery will last a tiny bit l…
Another reason that I keep 32bit is portability, as I have quite a peculiar setup: I keep my Linux on a removable HDD, and boot off it on several different machines, which may or may not support 64bit. (So I don't have to tow my laptop to work and back every day.)
Ooh! Ooh! Does it have the new Conversation Ads feature? http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skype_advertising_update.h... I, for one, cannot WAIT to see these new ads, which Microsoft describes as "content that could spark additional topics of conversation that are relevant to Skype users." Isn't that great? Ads are now "content." And the motivation isn't to make a bundle of money on ads, it's to "spark conversations.…
I'm inclined to agree with your points, I always preferred the linux client over the windows one, but skype just gets on my nerves recently. My team has switched to mumble for meetings and stuff and we find it immeasurably better. Plus, channels are a much better method for general collaboration than the outdated concept of conference calls.
The best thing about how big skype is is that they have to maintain backwards compatibility (hardware skype phones that can't upgrade) so you can use whatever old version you want and it has to be supported by them. Which means you can stick to the old version which works fine without having to suffer through the new and "improved" glitzy version that is popup crazy and wants to hog all your system resources for what…
> old version which works fine And has a bunch of security holes.
Can't run two instances at the same time. Complete deal breaker for those of us that use a personal account and a professional one.
Create two user accounts and run one instance in each? This is Linux...
I find it sad that Skype has evolved to be MSN Messenger-replacement, there were so many good alternatives. At one point MSN was even usable-ish, as you could choose whatever client you wanted. With Skype, not so much. I'm switching a lot between OSX and Windows, and sometimes even Linux, and the clients are totally different on each platform to the point where it get's hard to use. And don't get me started on that A…
I've been annoyed by this too, how hard is it to keep the UI somewhat alike, at least between the desktop applications?
Anyone know if the version in the Debian Skype repo ( http://wiki.debian.org/skype ) will be updated?
It has been already updated in Arch Repos. I see no reason Why Debian would block it.