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

Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

blog.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 183 posts

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#161

Post by kyro »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #143
kyro wrote: post #66

Yes, please, please, please kill Skype. Kill it mercilessly. Using it has been the worst experience I've ever had with an application. I've been in a long distance relationship for a few years now and Skype has sadly been our main mode of video communication. The app crashes when I search chat history, can take upwards of 90+% of my CPU, literally forcing me to shut down every other application I have running. The fo…

I'm the opposite. I don't want to use anything except Skype for voice chat. Nothing comes even remotely close in sound quality. If I had the same cpu/crash issues as you I'd be loudly cursing it's name. Luckily I don't and until something can provide better quality I won't be using it.

Right, for voice it's fine. For video it's garbage. I don't quite see how you're the opposite.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#162

Post by drivebyacct2 »

comex wrote: post #133
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They recently appeared behind an about:flags flag. :)

Well, when I heard that WebRTC was in Chrome stable I thought this must surely include DataChannel, since it's simpler than a full-blown video stack. So although it being behind a flag is better news than it not being there at all, I was still pretty disappointed when I read that page :) edit: also, I don't see it as an about:flags flag. edit 2: I should just tunnel data through video then, what could possibly go wro…

Sorry, I forget not everyone is on the Dev channel, but I have this available:

Enable RTCDataChannel. Mac, Windows, Linux, Chrome OS, Android: Enable experimental RTCDataChannel for peer-to-peer data communications. Disable

Version 26.0.1397.2 dev

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#163

Post by drivebyacct2 »

pthatcherg wrote: post #148
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already are. But sure, you could do that if you wanted.

It's true that the audio, video, and data are all encrypted. But it's not the case that you can send audio and video over the data channel. Well, you could send audio and video data, but there's no way to pipe audio and video data into the data channel. That's an interesting idea, but it would probably take a long time to figure out and become part of the standard, if it ever happened at all. We'd probably need a wor…

My bad, I haven't played with this stuff in... jeez, nearly a year. I had a PoC with an signaling server written in Go, but it hasn't even been updated since the move from ROAP to JSEP and I haven't played with the compat js shim either...

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#164

Post by nextparadigms »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #158
chrisdone wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Nothing comes even remotely close in sound quality.” — Mumble?

With Skype I can play games with a group and put the mic in always on mode. No feedback, no audio from speakers, and no keyboard clicks. It's pretty damned amazing to be honest. Ventrilo and Mumble do have far superior support for massive number of people in a chat room. If you're participating in large MMO raids or Eve Online type festivities the Skype doesn't have the necessary features. For my ~5 player parties Sk…

WebRTC incorporates the SILK audio codec Skype is using, too, except it can go even higher bitrates. WebRTC should sound at least as good as Skype.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#166

Post by cookiecaper »

chrisdone wrote: post #157
forrestthewoods wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the opposite. I don't want to use anything except Skype for voice chat. Nothing comes even remotely close in sound quality. If I had the same cpu/crash issues as you I'd be loudly cursing it's name. Luckily I don't and until something can provide better quality I won't be using it.

“Nothing comes even remotely close in sound quality.” — Mumble?

Mumble definitely is the best VoIP solution I've used in terms of sound quality.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#167

Post by weavejester »

temp453463343 wrote: post #142
aeflash wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless the NSA/FBI/whatever is decades ahead in mathematical research from what is common in academia, or has computers that are many orders of magnitude faster than what we have today, well encrypted data is basically random data to anyone who lacks the keys. That's a pretty tough locked box.

"Unless the NSA/FBI/whatever is decades ahead in mathematical research from what is common in academia" I wouldn't be surprised. Basically 9/10 people that study cryptography in the US end up working for the NSA. Look at the NSA's budget, and then look at how many cryptography professors there are. However, that said, IF they managed to decrypt AES somehow, they are severely limited in what they can do with that info…

The NSA has not only got to be decades ahead of the rest of the world, it has to be completely certain that no-one else in the world will make the same discovery for at least another few decades.

It seems unlikely in the extreme that the NSA is both so far ahead of the rest of the world, and so sure that their discoveries will not be replicated for decades.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#168

Post by ngoel36 »

kyro wrote: post #66

Yes, please, please, please kill Skype. Kill it mercilessly. Using it has been the worst experience I've ever had with an application. I've been in a long distance relationship for a few years now and Skype has sadly been our main mode of video communication. The app crashes when I search chat history, can take upwards of 90+% of my CPU, literally forcing me to shut down every other application I have running. The fo…

Google+ Hangouts are infinitely better. Here's a writeup I did on the benefits: http://slant.co/topics/what-is-the-best-video-chat-service/o...

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#169

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

pjscott wrote: post #109
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what really excites me. I want to build a P2P DHT in the browser, basically see if I can implement something like Freenet entirely in JS.

You might be interested in KadOH: https://github.com/jinroh/kadoh It's a JavaScript implementation of the Kademlia DHT. It doesn't support WebRTC as a transport yet, but they're working on it. The code looks pretty reasonable, and they seem to have some momentum going.

Thanks! This looks really interesting.

Re: Hello Firefox, this is Chrome calling

#170

Post by ZeroGravitas »

nextparadigms wrote: post #164
forrestthewoods wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With Skype I can play games with a group and put the mic in always on mode. No feedback, no audio from speakers, and no keyboard clicks. It's pretty damned amazing to be honest. Ventrilo and Mumble do have far superior support for massive number of people in a chat room. If you're participating in large MMO raids or Eve Online type festivities the Skype doesn't have the necessary features. For my ~5 player parties Sk…

WebRTC incorporates the SILK audio codec Skype is using, too, except it can go even higher bitrates. WebRTC should sound at least as good as Skype.

Mumble currently uses CELT and Skype currently uses Silk.

The two codecs have been merged/improved into Opus, which is one of the mandatory audio codecs for WebRTC.

But all three are moving to Opus, so very soon it's not going to be the codec itself that will differentiate audio quality between them.

Post reply on HN