Slashdot Mirror


Skype VoIP Software Released For Linux

pmf writes "Skype Technologies has just released a free beta version of their software for Linux. Skype is well known P2P VoIP technology that, according to them: '...is addressing all the problems of legacy VoIP solutions: bad sound quality, difficult to set up and configure, and the need for expensive, centralized infrastructure.'"

251 comments

  1. If it's not Ogg.... by orthogonal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Skype Technologies has just released a free beta version of their software for Linux.

    Ok, but the important question is, does it use Ogg? I mean, Vorbis?

    1. Re:If it's not Ogg.... by p80 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Are you talking about Ogg Vorbis or Ogg FLAC or Ogg Speex? Speex is better for that kind of task.
      "Speex is an Open Source/Free Software patent-free audio compression format designed for speech" and speex is part of the xiph foundation :-)

    2. Re:If it's not Ogg.... by sik0fewl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not only is that an unimportant question, it's also a stupid one. If they *had* to go the free software way, Speex would be the codec to use for VoIP.

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
    3. Re:If it's not Ogg.... by Boltronics · · Score: 1

      That codec is used by firefly by Freshtel - an Australian company.

      --
      It's GNU/Linux dammit!
  2. They must not know Linux users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Difficult setting up and configuring things is part of the fun! It's not a real install unless you need to do a Google search for something.

  3. Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seeing as how this is from the Kazaa people, are we to expect spyware in this product?

    1. Re:Spyware by mrwonton · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Seeing as how this is from the Kazaa people, are we to expect spyware in this product?


      Always expect spyware. The question is whether we'll be pleasantly surprised.
      --
      Not more than you need, just more than you want
    2. Re:Spyware by XaviorPenguin · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have Skype on my computer for Windows and have not had any spyware on my computer from its installation. I check my computer daily to make sure no spyware is loaded on from Skype.

      I can tell you that if the one for Windows sounds this good, quality wise, then the one for Linux should be better. It freakin sounds like the person you are talking to is in the same room with you. It also uses minimal bandwidth, anywhere from 4kb to 10kb for a single conversation and 10kb to 20kb for a conference call. It is awesome!

      Congrats to the Skype crew for making one for Linux!!

      --
      Friends help you move...
      REAL Friends help you move dead bodies... ^_^
    3. Re:Spyware by Octagon+Most · · Score: 3, Informative

      In case you were wondering...

      From the FAQ:
      Q: Will Skype for Linux beta be made available as open source code?
      A: No.

      So don't expect any potential spyware to be sitting there in the code for you to look at.

    4. Re:Spyware by msh104 · · Score: 1

      There is picture on the site showing a "no spyware, no spam" logo. so I guess we are on the good site. not that saying something means it is also true, but if they wanted spyware in there product, there probably wouldn't show such a picture on their site.

    5. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now tell us, why exactly should the Linux version sound any different or even better than the Windows version if they're expected to be compatible?

    6. Re:Spyware by Murf_E · · Score: 2, Funny

      how long before we get skype lite and skype lite resurrection

      --
      this sig intentionally left blank
    7. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Linux users have no reason to ever expect spyware. Hopefully this never changes.

    8. Re:Spyware by sp0rk173 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Because everything sounds better on linux! DUh!

    9. Re:Spyware by starflt · · Score: 5, Funny
      [JARRING CHORD]

      Nooooobody expects spyware! Our chief weapon is surprise. Surprise, and Internet Explorer exploits... Exploits and surprise. Our two weapons are surprise and Internet Explorer exploits... and uncaring users.. . Our *three* weapons are surprise, IE exploits, and uncaring users... and an almost fanatical devotion to an annoyance-marketing based business model. Our *four*... no... *Amongst* our weapons... Amongst our *weaponry*, are such elements as surprise, IE exploits... I'll come in again.

    10. Re:Spyware by XaviorPenguin · · Score: 1

      It was my mind set that Linux is a little bit more stable than Windows....;)

      --
      Friends help you move...
      REAL Friends help you move dead bodies... ^_^
    11. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too, I did scans before and after installation of the Windows version and never had a single spyware indication from AA or S&D. The quality is awesome and I can't wait to try this version for Linux.

    12. Re:Spyware by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      So did Morpheus, before they went all evil. Not to be a zealot, but closed source freeware doesn't get installed on my computers as a matter of policy. (I've been burned too many times)

    13. Re:Spyware by sigaar · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can confirm this. I signed up with Skype long ago, so they have my e-mail address. I also e-mailed skype to ask if they will be releasing a linux version in the future. I got a mail back saying "not at this time." Then, some months later, I received a very polite, plain text mail, informing me that, indeed they would be releasing a linux version soon, and would let me know when it is available.

      Then, last night, I got a third e-mail from them informing me that the linux version is available, and where I can download it from. Seeing as I e-mailed them asking, I don't consider this spam at all. I also haven't found any spywhere on my Windows box.

      --
      sigaar
    14. Re:Spyware by Rexdude · · Score: 5, Informative

      The guys behind this are the ones who *invented* Kazaa and the FastTrack protocol-they later sold it to Sharman Networks, who are the ones who added the spyware. There's no spyware in this-their website boldly displays this fact, instead of burying it under legalese.

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    15. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA you twat!

    16. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off Troll! Skype is guaranteed to be spyware free.

    17. Re:Spyware by Jugalator · · Score: 1
      Seeing as how this is from the Kazaa people, are we to expect spyware in this product?


      Unless they added it in the Linux version -- no.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    18. Re:Spyware by ohad_l · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why the hell should we not be expecting spyware? Spyware is indeed extremely improbable in open source software, but here's a great example - Skype - of an application that is not open sourced. Linux does not inherently make spyware impossible - it's just that most software that is used with Linux is open-source, and therefore easily freed of spyware.

      Skype could indeed contain spyware. We can and will probably use the flexibility of various firewalling and sniffing utilities to block it.

      --
      If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
    19. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, linux doesn't have spyware, our shit is called
      'trojans' or 'rootkits'

      linux users actually should expect to find spyware, after we get a strong enough market or if they want to start adding it to routers (adaware for windows can't do shit if its your router/gateway that is watching your browsing habits)

    20. Re:Spyware by Squareball · · Score: 2, Funny

      So my girlfriend will finally sound stable when I talk to her via this software on Linux? Sweet!

    21. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it was funny that they have a big red circle with the word "Spyware" curved around the top, then "NO" in the middle, then "Adware" curved around the bottom. I read it as "Spyware - No adware", thereby confirming that it is indeed spyware!

    22. Re:Spyware by i_r_sensitive · · Score: 1
      I would think so.

      The funny part is in the legal information they specifically bar you from ditributing such software via their service.

      You also indeminify them against repsonsibility for any such infestation should any other user break that guideline.

      And, if you really think you got a legal leg on them, think again, you'd have to pursue such a claim in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which, unless the legal strata has changed, means your basically trying to paddle up a river of shit with your bare hands.

      Personally, knowing it came from the fine folk who brought us Kazaa (hell it ieven will accept your acceptance of the Kazaa license agreement in lieu of a seperate one...) I'll keep it the hell away from my machines, thanunk-you.

      --
      "Talk minus action equals nothing" - Joey Shithead, D.O.A.
      "Talk minus action equals /." -
    23. Re:Spyware by MAPA3M · · Score: 0

      Spyware is debatable, but we can certainly expect that some of the phonecalls made to, say, "Broter Bear" end up rerouted to ,say, "teen young lesbian porn"

    24. Re:Spyware by It'sYerMam · · Score: 3, Funny
      I didn't expect any kind of spyware.

      [JARRING CHORD]

      Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as surprise, IE exploits, uncaring users and an almost fanatical devotion to an annoyance-marketing based business model. And nice bulk emailers, OH DAMN!

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    25. Re:Spyware by aztektum · · Score: 1

      If you check out their site, you'll see a big red "NO ADWARE/SPYWARE" logo on the Windows Client download page.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    26. Re:Spyware by learza · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is from the same programmers who wrote Kazaa, not the same business that now owns it. There's a big difference. As far as I have been able to tell Skype does not install any spyware (but of course that's not saying they won't).

    27. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is, without doubt, the funniest comment I've ever seen on Slashdot.

      You, my good man (woman?), have made my day.

    28. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder why all the hysteric "beware: spyware!" posts get score:5, informative while all the reasonable ones saying that the guys behind the original kazaa and Sharman Networks are not the same ones only get 1-3 ?
      ---
      Well, I don't know about all you broadband guys, but Skype is the best VoIP thing in case one of your contacts is on a dialup somewhere in Russia - at lest it works much better than everything I've seen so far.

    29. Re:Spyware by anthony_baxter · · Score: 1
      According to the CEO of Skype,

      Would [Skype CEO Zennstrom] make Skype open-source? No - that would make its strong 1024 bit encryption and security vulnerable: "We could do it but only if we re-engineered the way it works and we don't have the time right now."


      more here
    30. Re:Spyware by kalinh · · Score: 1

      Actually the pre-sharman Kazaa and it's sister product grokster both had a good deal of spyware bundled. Just not nearly as much as post-Sharman. The popular Morpheus version of the Fast Track client was the one with no spyware.

      --

      Metamuscle.com - News in the Iro

    31. Re:Spyware by jpop32 · · Score: 1

      Linux users have no reason to ever expect spyware. Hopefully this never changes.

      So, what you're saying is that you hope Linux stays a niche, server platform, with a marginal desktop usage?

      Yes, I can see how that would be preferable for some people.

    32. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No - that would make its strong 1024 bit encryption and security vulnerable"

      That's quite curious, being at the same time both stupid and interesting to hear.

      Proper encryption and security is by no means more vulnerable if the code is public, so this means one or more of the following:
      1/ This product is crap. Why I would use a crappy product?
      2/ Its CEO is dumb. Why I would use a product from a company I know its CEO is dumb?
      3/ Its CEO is a liar. Why I would use a product from a company I know its CEO is a liar?

      At the very end, I only use open source software if at all possible. And I do this from a technical standpoint since it protects me from the points exposed above.

    33. Re:Spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what?

  4. skype == spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    please read the EULA.

    1. Re:skype == spyware by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the parent poster is accurate (which I have no idea about), then why is this on slashdot? Just because it's for linux doesn't make it good.
      Sounds like this product is only beer-free.

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    2. Re:skype == spyware by ChazeFroy · · Score: 1

      Thankfully you don't need to be root to run this version, so the damage will be relatively limited when compared with MSFT installations running crap under the Administrator account.

    3. Re:skype == spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you aren't able to use Windows efficiently. On Windows there're more accounts than the Admin account and you can run programs as any user you want. Provided you set up the file permissions correctly it's just like on Unix.
      So please please don't bitch about it if you obviously don't understand it.

    4. Re:skype == spyware by bersl2 · · Score: 4, Informative
      /home/bersl2/.gconfd
      /home/bersl2/.gconfd/saved_s tate
      /home/bersl2/.gnome2_private
      /home/bersl2/. qt
      /home/bersl2/.Skype
      /home/bersl2/.Skype/bersl 2
      /home/bersl2/.Skype/bersl2/config.lck
      /home/be rsl2/.Skype/bersl2/profile256.dbb
      /home/bersl2/.S kype/bersl2/index.dat
      /home/bersl2/.Skype/bersl2/ config.xml
      /home/bersl2/.Skype/shared.lck
      /home/ bersl2/.Skype/shared.xml
      Those are the only files I found that it could have modified or created, unless it has some kind of way of changing the associated times on files. So it's not permanent.
    5. Re:skype == spyware by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      It is my understanding that the reason so many people run Win NT as root is that lots of programs require root privileges. If you're already running buggy, insecure code as root, why not go whole hog and login as root too? At least that's the mindset.

    6. Re:skype == spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the parent poster is accurate, it'll be the first popular spyware for Linux! That is news. Look how far we're behind we are.

    7. Re:skype == spyware by sp0rk173 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First off, we know you like *nix, but there is not "root" user in windows. Sorry to be surley, but how would you feel if some MCSE told you that you need to be "Administrator" to install a program globally in linux? Just because we don't liked Windows doesn't mean be have to be fucktards.

      Thirdly, there is a problem, as i understand it, in the win32 message passing system. This design flaw allows a message to be sent to any running process without it's source being checked. This basically negates any kind of user-level security at the message-passing level. So, yes, any program could theoretically run without any kind of access control on windows. The grandparent's comment that windows is just like Unix if you set up user's and permissions correctly is wrong.

      source: here Note also that i just woke up, and i could have made a few errors. In anycase, the site i linked to explains it much better than i.

    8. Re:skype == spyware by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      changing associated times on files? like, using touch -t time?

      and it's not like you can know what the program does by just looking at the filenames. if the eula gives them 'permission' to listen to your calls i'd be a bit wary...

      besides. the company uses fuckin assholistic spyware, that's reason enough to not use their software that isn't really the only solution in the world.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    9. Re:skype == spyware by katsushiro · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just a note, I'm fairly anal about spyware/adware. I have AdAware, Spybot S&D, and SpywareBlaster on my Windows PC, and I keep them updated on a daily basis, and scan the computer before and after installation of just about any program, not to mention on a weekly basis no matter what.

      I've been using Skype on my Windows PC for aboout 3 weeks now on a pretty regular basis to talk to some friends, and so far, it's worked pretty much as advertised, no complaints here, in fact, I'm pretty pleased with it, especially compared to previous VoIP programs I've used before. In that time, before and after installation and updates, none of my spyware scanner programs have detected any spyware, at least, none that I can trace to it. So, so far at least, the 'No Spyware or Adware' button on their website seems to be legit.

      Dunno about the Linux version, but I figure it's pretty much the same way. And the fact that they were willing to change their Linux EULA over spyware concerns gives me a bit of faith in them. Sure, it's from the same folk as Kazaa, but at least so far, it doesn't seem to have fallen into the same trap as the official Kazaa client.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the first one." - Albert Einstein
    10. Re:skype == spyware by anethema · · Score: 1

      I did not read the EULA, but they have a large sticker proclaiming NO ADWARE OR SPYWARE.

      None of the spyware finder programs i've had on my computer have ever warned me about spyware form skype.

      Skype is also encrypted at each end, whcih makes me feel a bit better, even if few details are disclosed.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  5. Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by jamonterrell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The most information I've found is that the software is made by the makers of KaZaa, who is notorious for trying to make money off of P2P. Does Skype have a business plan? Is there spyware/adware/malware? Anyone know?

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    1. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by andymar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is it not allowed to make money off p2p ? They have a business plan, in about 10 days they will release a new version where you can call from Skype to a regular phone at competitive prizes. You need to buy a headset from one of their partners. Why so many critical posts, there is not any spyware in Skype, at least not yet. I think it's great that there is a native Linux version, and not all programs for Linux have to be GPL. We need popular programs for the Linux desktop, and this is one of them. The programmers have said that one version of Skype will remain free for ever, but some more advanced features will cost money.

    2. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is it not allowed to make money off p2p ?
      It's perfectly fine to make money off of p2p, no one said anything to the contrary.

      They have a business plan, in about 10 days they will release a new version where you can call from Skype to a regular phone at competitive prizes. You need to buy a headset from one of their partners. That's a nice service to offer, and could be implemented without breaking the spirit of free-software, but it worries me that they might push advertisement for this service so hard on the free version that it will be not worth using.

      Why so many critical posts, there is not any spyware in Skype, at least not yet. I think it's great that there is a native Linux version, and not all programs for Linux have to be GPL. We need popular programs for the Linux desktop, and this is one of them.
      On one hand I agree, commercial software for Linux should be accepted and welcomed. It helps promote the operating system and increases linux's overall value to corporate and home customers alike. In this particular case, I worry, simply because the company in question has a bad history of pushing spyware/malware/adware in the past.

      The programmers have said that one version of Skype will remain free for ever, but some more advanced features will cost money.
      I like this business model with the exception of the fears I've previously mentioned. I have no intentions of using software that are adware/malware/spyware supported, and I have no intentions, but that's just me. I do have a problem with companies calling this free, they should call it ad-supported, because it is not free, you can only have it if you give something in return... (advertisement/cpu cycles/etc).

      Jamon

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    3. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by goldspider · · Score: 1
      "The most information I've found is that the software is made by the makers of KaZaa, who is notorious for trying to make money off of P2P."

      "Notorious" as in "Known widely and usually unfavorably; infamous" (dictionary.com)?

      "It's perfectly fine to make money off of p2p, no one said anything to the contrary."

      You did.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    4. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by jamonterrell · · Score: 1

      Woops! You're right. What I had meant to say was, "who is notorious for trying to make money off of P2P by packaging spyware/adware/malware.
      my bad...

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    5. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Does Skype have a business plan? Is there spyware/adware/malware?

      No one has detected any spyware or anything that contacts ad servers etc in the Windows version.

      The business plan:

      "During the beta period Skype is free and helps us to refine and improve our product. Eventually, some features and services of Skype will require a paid subscription or prepayment. Our ambition is to keep the basic functionality of Skype (PC to PC calls) free forever. More information will be provided once our beta program is complete."

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    6. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by germanStefan · · Score: 1

      I agree with the post. I send them a friendly e-mail saying thank you for having a native Linux Port. this allows me to talk for free with my brother and dad in Germany. Also just because it sais from the makers of kazaa, dosn't mean that it has spyware. If i remember correctly, these guys sold kazaa to the current company. The current company then put in all the spyware. I could be wrong but I think thats what happened.

    7. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by mistered · · Score: 0, Troll
      Yep. Examples of paid services they're planning are PSTN integration (in, out or both) and voicemail.

      --
      Enjoy your job, make lots of money, work within the law. Choose any two.
    8. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 2, Informative

      What the f*ck would anyone pay for PSTN integration and voicemail when real VOIP systems already offer this for free? (and if you install asterisk, completely opensource too).

    9. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by msimm · · Score: 1
      As Jugalator (259273) points out:
      You're confusing these developers with Sharman Networks. The Kazaa developer team has absolutely nothing to do with spyware, and is only responsible of creating innovative software.
      --
      Quack, quack.
    10. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Informative? There is no free PSTN integration; wherever you attach to the PSTN there is a telco collecting its toll. WTF indeed.

    11. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by Delphinios · · Score: 1

      Actually, as was noted before, these are the people who wrote kazaa. They then sold it and the company that bought it, put the spyware in.

      I'm not to worried, though. I've been running skype for months, and it's a beautiful program. With their proclaimed "No Spyware/No Spam" statement prominant on the webpage, I dount I'm in for surprises.

      One, no matter the EULA, putting in adware or spyware could be prosecutable as false advertising, not to mention the massive PR hit.

      Two, They are moving towards a services-based buisness plan. This means that the majority of their income will be made by selling the ability to call regular phones (or from phones to skype users), voice mail, and similiar services. They get the benifit of reputation and branding, as well as the cash from services.

    12. Re:Does anyone know if they have a business plan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "not all programs for Linux have to be GPL"

      No they haven't. It's only I won't use them, if at all possible (and many more will do the same).

      "We need popular programs for the Linux desktop"

      No, we don't need them. We do need useful free software programs for the Linux desktop. Is this one of them?

      "The programmers have said that one version of Skype will remain free for ever"

      And Saddam Hussein, that he will liberate his country, so what?

      And Bush Jr said there were massive distruction weapons in Irak, so what?

  6. Test your connection first... by fiji · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before you download and configure this, test your connection out so see if it can handle VoIP. You can also play with different codecs to see if one is better than the other over your connection.

    -ben

    1. Re:Test your connection first... by Johnny+Doughnuts · · Score: 1

      It's not the same as Skype. Skype = P2P VoIP

    2. Re:Test your connection first... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I just watched that site get /.'d :\

    3. Re:Test your connection first... by orbit0r · · Score: 2, Informative
      Before you download and configure this, test your connection out so see if it can handle VoIP

      From testyourvoip.com:
      Internal Server Error
      The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
      Guess my connection just isn't up to par ;-)
    4. Re:Test your connection first... by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, I scored a 500 also. Is that good or bad?

      --
      I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    5. Re:Test your connection first... by gnunick · · Score: 1
      I explored their site (and skimmed their TOS) and had no problems, so tried to use their test despite a couple posts mentioning server errors. I clicked the button to test my connection to Boston (across the country incidentally), and the server coughed and died. But for some reason I went back and tried it a second time, and had no problem. They must have their service distributed across several servers and one or more of them is down. If you care, just keep trying. Maybe they're just doing it on purpose, to scare off the slashdotters who were just going to click and run, anyway. =)

      So, from the left coast to Boston, I got a 4.0/4.4 possible score. Next I tried San Jose, only about 30 miles away from here--I got under 3.0 on their scale, "worse than a bad cell call". Terribly latency and some packet loss. London? 4.3 out of 4.4! Even Helsinki (4.0?) and Montreal (3.6?) were pretty damned good. I guess. If these measurements are really indicative of anything.

      Reminds me of an early Heinlein short story, in which the shorter distances you sent packages by post, the longer they would take to arrive. Send the packets... er, packages, off the planet and they'd get there faster than light!

      --
      I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
  7. These Guys Are Also the Inventors of KaZaA by Ieshan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Another thing the Linux platform has thus been missing: Spyware.

    I highly doubt that the guys who made Kazaa have taken some great leap into the world of moral business. Bastards.

    1. Re:These Guys Are Also the Inventors of KaZaA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they have in the way of the windows version, I never found any spyware pre and post install. Not tested the linux version yet.

    2. Re:These Guys Are Also the Inventors of KaZaA by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      The "guys who made Kazaa" didn't include spyware. Sharman Networks did when they aquired it. They also changed the EULA.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    3. Re:These Guys Are Also the Inventors of KaZaA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I highly doubt that the guys who made Kazaa have taken some great leap into the world of moral business. Bastards.

      Says the guy who used their software to download music without paying for it.

  8. Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Skype is hype...

    * Skype is proprietary.
    * Skype is using a proprietary protocol that no VoIP carriers/providers will be using.
    * Skype has better sound quality? Let me laugh, it just happens that Skype is only able to do audio, so all your upload can be devoted to audio.

    OK, Skype is a nice toy for Windows users. For Linux users, there is GnomeMeeting (http://www.gnomemeeting.org) and Linphone.

    1. Re:Skype disadvantages by electrichamster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, that may be so - but if you're a linux user wanting to talk to lots of friends who just happen to use windows, its ideal!

    2. Re:Skype disadvantages by symbolic · · Score: 1


      And ultimately, its objective will entail the creation of the very kind of centralized monstrosity its owners complained about.

    3. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Nope. Microsoft Netmeeting, which is included in Windows, is entirely compatible with GnomeMeeting as well as other H.323 compliant products.

      (Yeah, strangely enough Microsoft follows standards for once.)

    4. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least their proprietary protocol is encrypted by default. I have been unable to get that from any free VoIP software (not to mention that all free VoIP software I have tried have convoluted setup procedures and long obscure dependency chains .

      Skype is by far the easiest of Linux VoIP solutions to set up. Maybe some free-as-speech ones will take notice :)

      Most likely there will someday be some free software that will offer the same benefits as Skype, but when it comes to Skype's (promised) extra value (POTS connectivity, server side voicemail, etc.) then this will need some connercial entity anyway.

    5. Re:Skype disadvantages by electrichamster · · Score: 1

      Interesting! I never knew that......*bumbles off to install gnomemeeting*

    6. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But Skpye runs well in some circumstances that prevents other softwares to function.

      For example I am NATted because my IP is a private one (1.xx.xx.xx) and I still can talk (with skype) to people outside my intranet, and also they can call me as well.

      For example this doesn't happen with MSN Messenger.

      Skype is one of the Windows programs that prevents me from running Linux all the time.

    7. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are there any reliable estimates of when gaim-vv will be added to the main branch of gaim?

    8. Re:Skype disadvantages by H_Krosing · · Score: 1

      is Microsoft Netmeeting the same as MSN Messanger ?

    9. Re:Skype disadvantages by weeble · · Score: 1

      If you want an easy solution I use sipphone.com

      This is a voip solution that allows calls to and from landlines. There are windows and Linux clients available too.

      --
      Slashdot Beta should die a painful death.
    10. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. And unfortunately the netmeeting that comes with XP (conf.exe) seems to have trouble with the codecs. Connecting with gnomemeeting to netmeeting on XP can be problematic.

    11. Re:Skype disadvantages by gordie · · Score: 1

      No, but gaim will work with MSN Messanger, if your looking for a good Linux client.

    12. Re:Skype disadvantages by ols22 · · Score: 0

      So it won't replace Teamspeak or Rogerwilco for online gaming communications. Wonder if they'll offer a lighter version for this....

    13. Re:Skype disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NetMeeting doesn't work nicely if one end is firewalled, and doesn't work *at all* if both ends are firewalled.

  9. Uhhh.... by Asprin · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Sez on the linked page this is from the same folks that brought you KaZaa!

    Great. The folks that introduced spyware EULAs to file sharing now want to handle your phone service. OSS or not, can they be trusted to provide any more free downloads?

    --
    "Lawyers are for sucks."
    - Doug McKenzie
    1. Re:Uhhh.... by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Informative

      The folks that introduced spyware EULAs

      You're confusing these developers with Sharman Networks. The Kazaa developer team has absolutely nothing to do with spyware, and is only responsible of creating innovative software.

      Memory Refresher:
      KaZaA sold to Sharman Networks

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  10. Let the Qt Vs GTK wars begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Considering Skype has used QT for their product...

    1. Re:Let the Qt Vs GTK wars begin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      War? What War? QT sucks. Everyone knows that.

  11. They have versions for ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Windows, Linux and Pocket PC, but nothing for OS X. Where's the logic in that?

    I guess Amiga is next in line.

    1. Re:They have versions for ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering Windows, Linux and Pocket PC have more marketshare than OS X what would you expect?

    2. Re:They have versions for ... by T'hain+Esh+Kelch · · Score: 0

      The OSX version is in closed beta right now. They should be opening for more volounteers in the next 2-3 weeks. THey've already said to expect the final version in 3 months... THats a loooong time... :(

    3. Re:They have versions for ... by ernstp · · Score: 1

      They are working on it!

      Check out this thread in the skype forums:
      http://forum.skype.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t =2360http ://forum.skype.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2360

    4. Re:They have versions for ... by ernstp · · Score: 1

      Sorry, the link got a bit messed up.

      Link to Skype's forums

    5. Re:They have versions for ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it pretty logical. There are far more users using Windows, Linux and Pocket PC than using OS X. I would've done just the same.

  12. How about the FWD? by Milo+of+Kroton · · Score: 5, Informative

    Free World Dialup makes a good product which I find is better and is the superior option of choices. You can find this with the Google searches for terms like Free World Dialup with the quotes surrounding.

    1. Re:How about the FWD? by nandhp · · Score: 1

      I use FWD, but I haven't managed to get it to work on Linux yet. I can't wait to pester the poor American Airlines flight information number from Linux!

    2. Re:How about the FWD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Haven't got it to work for Linux.... the OS with the free industrial strength PBX?

      I prefer 'real' phones any day, so I have a cisco 7940 sat on my desk connected to a Linux Asterisk server (which is in turn connected to FWD, and POTS via an FXO card). There's a cheapy grandstream in the bedroom as well.

      Sound quality is excellent on both phones... no need for skype (which is nothing more than msn/yahoo + hype really... if you can't dial a POTS line and can't connect a real phone it's hardly VOIP).

    3. Re:How about the FWD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you're almost back to using normal English.

      Seriously, drop the trolling - you get good mods for posts irrespective of the attempt at pretending to be German.

  13. If that's true... by deadmongrel · · Score: 1

    is this the first known spyware for linux...?

  14. Re:Thanks Hemos by stefankoegl · · Score: 2
    Note: grousing about rejected submissions is Offtopic and usually gets moderated that way. It happens, don't take it personally.
    Anything more to say?
  15. One-up on Skype by bigberk · · Score: 4, Informative

    Skype claims P2P but the voice has to go through at least one hop, so the latency is pretty poor and you need other (hijacked) nodes. Check out this VoIP system, which has low latency, direct peer to peer communications even through NAT on both sides. Oh, and blowfish for encryption so good... it may be illegal in your country!

    1. Re:One-up on Skype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have not read the referenced .pdf (this is Slashdot after all :), but I can't see how two NATted nodes can _directly_ communicate vithout cooperation from wirefall, VoIP or not.

    2. Re:One-up on Skype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out this VoIP system

      System? Looks like a PDF file to me.

    3. Re:One-up on Skype by bigberk · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is the technology used. It uses a third party to set up the 'connection', but the third party is only required for connection establishment. After that, data flows directly between the two NAT'ed hosts and not through the third party.

    4. Re:One-up on Skype by nacturation · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here's a choice quote from the PDF you linked to:

      Appendix A. Final VoIP Software

      Please see CD-ROM for the complete software application.


      Huh? Got a download link? BTW, Skype only sometimes requires your call to go through another node such as due to firewall issues. Most of the time, after negotiating the connection, it's a direct connection.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    5. Re:One-up on Skype by JRIsidore · · Score: 1

      I just read the part concerned with the NAT-traversal, but it's a bit scarce on details. They use some kind of handshake with a 3rd party server for the initial negotiation, using UDP and some "seed ports" which the clients use to "probe" each others gateways.
      What I could think of is spoofing the source IP (and port) of outgoing packets to those used in the initial communication with the 3rd party server. Since they use UDP there are no sequence numbers to guess. This way the packets should traverse each client's firewall. Just an idea...

      --
      :w!q
    6. Re:One-up on Skype by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Latency poor? It's practically instant across Sweden at least. Did you even test this software?

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    7. Re:One-up on Skype by anethema · · Score: 1

      You obviously have never tryed skype.

      It slaughters anything i've heard for latency. Teamspeak cant even come CLOSE.

      I was on the phone with a friend halfway across the country, and also on skype..the latency was -maybe- 1/4 of a second.

      Try stuff before you start knocking it.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    8. Re:One-up on Skype by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 1

      haha... for a minute there i was wondering how you got modded up cause i thought that link was to nethack.net, then i clicked and and realised im a retard :P

      --
      TIAEAE!
    9. Re:One-up on Skype by SilentMuse · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but I disagree.

      Re: Spyware. Though I can't promise there's nothing hiding on my computer, I so far haven't found anything, and they're trying pretty hard to distance themselves from the spyare stigma if you read through their website. We'll see how it holds up.

      Re: quality and latency. I regularly call a friend in Hawaii (I'm in Calgary, AB) both from my desktop, and via my PDA from public wifi access points. Generally I always have a crystal clear connection with almost no latency. I do, however, get funny looks from people when they see me sitting at starbucks talking at my iPaq that seems to talk back at me. One time I tried saying "Bad iPaq! Bad! Bad! Bad!" and spanked it a few times. Now THAT got looks, especially when my friend responded with "hey! Don't do that!"

      Re: Propriety. Ok, so it's proprietary. It also works, and works both well, and *simply*. My mom was able to configure and use it. I challenge someone to tell my mom to get hooked up with FWD and have her do it successfully without your help.
      ICQ is proprietary, yet millions use it and are happy with it. So is MSN Messenger. I'm a fan of open source and standards, but just because it's proprietary doesn't mean it's a bad thing by definition.

      The day FWD becomes easier to install and use by my mom and works from behind a NAT with zero configuration, I'll switch. Until then, I'm happy with Skype...

    10. Re:One-up on Skype by don.g · · Score: 1

      Of course, you could just use SIP or IAX2 over IPsec, but I suppose standards aren't really as interesting as exciting new systems that don't interoperate with anything...

      --
      Pretend that something especially witty is here. Thanks.
    11. Re:One-up on Skype by nacturation · · Score: 1

      What I could think of is spoofing the source IP (and port) of outgoing packets to those used in the initial communication with the 3rd party server. Since they use UDP there are no sequence numbers to guess. This way the packets should traverse each client's firewall. Just an idea...

      That's pretty much it. The third-party server (eg: Skype's -- this is exactly how Skype does it) coordinates which ports to communicate on. Alice start sending out blind UDP packets to Bob's IP address on a particular port number. Naturally, these will get blocked at the firewall. Bob meanwhile sends out blind UDP packets to Alice's IP address on a particular port number. These too are likely blocked. But because each has initiated an outgoing connection from their system to each other, the firewall will then let through subsequent incoming traffic to those ports. Voilà -- connection!

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    12. Re:One-up on Skype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It uses a third party to set up the 'connection', but the third party is only required for connection establishment. After that, data flows directly between the two NAT'ed hosts and not through the third party.

      Real VoIP works that way too. Typically the signaling path (connection setup) could involve many nodes. The bearer path (which is the path carrying the voice traffic) is typically setup directly node-to-node (or point-to-point) using protocols like RTP (realtime transport protocol). so i wonder what they mean when they claim skype is P2P voip.... i mean there is nothing new by way of voice path setup......

    13. Re:One-up on Skype by JRIsidore · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much it.

      Well, except for the IP spoofing. The nethack paper from the other reply (found it afterwards) doesn't mention IP addresses, so they either left them out or the firewalls/gateways only use the ports to keep track of connections. Hm, maybe I should try it. :)

      --
      :w!q
  16. Related News by deutschemonte · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news, the baby bells have tapped the RIAA for their team of lawyers to start tracking down individuals that are using their communication networks and are not paying access fees like other phone companies do to operate over their lines. Then they will sue them until everyone gives up computers and goes back to taking the needle of the record so they can ring up the operator for the klondike 5 number of their friend down the street. I can't wait.

    --
    The preceding message was based on actual events. Only the names, locations and events have been changed.
  17. It is a toy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Skype is a toy it dose not use standards, it depends on one single company. There is no code so no warranty at all that it will work in the futrure on Linux.

  18. this is fantastic news by Schlemphfer · · Score: 5, Informative
    For me, Skype is one of the last products that's keeping me tied to an XP box. Your performance may vary, but I've found that the quality of calls I make anywhere in the US is significantly higher than what I get through a regular phone line (assuming both parties are using broadband.)

    Overseas, I've had less luck. From my place in Central NY, my Skype calls to a friend in Amsterdam are generally intolerable, although he reports that it works fine when he talks to his brother in Philly. I've had poor but acceptable connections using Skype to talk to a friend in Madrid.

    Voice quality has continued to improve slightly with each new release of Skype. But for me, the verdict is Skype is sensational within North America, and barely tolerable or outright unusable for calling overseas.

    Still, I wish everyone had broadband and Skype. Even without taking the fact that it's free, it just sounds measurably better than standard long distance calls within the US.

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
    1. Re:this is fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      For me, Skype is one of the last products that's keeping me tied to an XP box.

      I wish I were given a dollar every time someone said "Now I can use Linux always. No - really. I mean it this time. Not like the last 15 times I said it. This time I really truly swear! This is it! The real thing, man. No joke. w00t! Stop looking at me like that. I know, I know. I've said this so many times before. But you have no idea, this is the real deal."

      I'd be a rich man.

      Moderators - do your thing. Flamebait, Troll, whatever... but you know I'm right.

    2. Re:this is fantastic news by hkfczrqj · · Score: 1

      I tried Skype yesterday in my win2k box (I left my tinfoil hat for a while, but monitored the installed files), before there was a linux version available. I tried it on dial-up with a friend in Germany, and the quality was pretty decent (I am in S.America, so the packets are routed via the US). Maybe not the best (I haven't tried other software), but useful, at least for me. YMMV.

      About the spyware thing... Maybe in this beta versions it comes spyware free... spybot/ad-aware detect nothing, maybe skype itself is the spyware. Who knows for sure? What if they really want to do serious, legal, non-(adware+spyware) business? Maybe that partnership with Siemens Mobile they claim to have is for real.

      Cheers...

    3. Re:this is fantastic news by sams2100 · · Score: 1

      This guys sounds like a sales rep from the KaZaa makers.

    4. Re:this is fantastic news by anethema · · Score: 1

      They have a giant notice on their site saying

      NO SPYWARE OR ADWARE!

      Course it could be untrue, but i doubt it.

      Its also encrypted. Good stuff.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    5. Re:this is fantastic news by wfberg · · Score: 1

      Its also encrypted. Good stuff.

      And skype Inc. has the keys. They don't? How do you know? It's not like it's open source or anything.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    6. Re:this is fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know about the notice (it's big, red :) ). But my point is: is the usual definition of spyware/adware the same as skype's? Gator^H^H^H^H^H^HClaria is not spyware, according to themselves.

      BTW, if Skype is *really* spyware, we (the /. crowd) will know. In the meantime I'll use it.

      Cheers...

    7. Re:this is fantastic news by hkfczrqj · · Score: 1

      oops... I forgot to login :) My reply was this AC post

    8. Re:this is fantastic news by Cryptimus · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what people are running on their machines but for me, Skype is tight, fast and has excellent voice quality.

      I'm in New Zealand and I spend a lot of time talking to a good friend in Minnesota. Skype gives me excellent quality, even over 56K dialup and the sucky 128K (yes that's kiloBIT) DSL they have in this part of the world is enough to handle Skype plus a webcam which ties up 64-96Kbit/sec of my available incoming bandwidth. Anyone claiming Skype chews up their bandwidth is - quite frankly - on crack. It does nothing of the sort.

      As far as sucking cpu power goes, all I have to say is, what the HELL are you people doing with your machine? I run Skype while my cpu/gfx card is chowing down on Deus Ex: Invisible War, or Splinter Cell, or Thief: Deadly Shadows and there's no frame slowdown whatsoever.

      I've also seen Skype run on 400mhz PII's and the damn thing seemed to switch codecs to compensate for the decrease in cpu power. The call quality decreased slightly but it was still damn good.

      So enough with the bullshit. Much as I like free software, I give Skype credit for actually working and providing a call quality that is far in excess of any intercontinental phone call I've ever made (and telcoms in Aus & NZ are really good). The free as in 'free speech' people really need to give it a rest sometimes without interjecting their constant 'proprietary is evil' refrain into every single thread on slashdot. Skype is free as in 'beer' and that's good enough for me. If you can't deal with its non-proprietary nature then feel free to write your own, GPL it, make it as easy to use as Skype is and then release it. Otherwise, for the love of Mike, quit whining.

  19. Talk to your geek friends only by Octagon+Most · · Score: 3, Informative

    At this point Skype for Linux is being offered without the SkypeOut service that allows calls to go to any telephone, not just other Skype users. Still, it's great to bring new platforms and more users onto this system. Bring on the OS X version!

    1. Re:Talk to your geek friends only by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 3, Informative
      At this point Skype for Linux is being offered without the SkypeOut service that allows calls to go to any telephone, not just other Skype users.
      At this point Skype for ANY platform is being offered without the SkypeOut service that allows calls to go to any telephone, not just other Skype users.

      Come July 1st, they'll open their comp to phone service. Wether or not that'll be in the Linux version then, is anybody's guess though.
      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  20. They lost my interest at the faq by gwjc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    >Technical Questions
    >
    >Will Skype for Linux beta be made available as open >source code?
    > No.

    TY, HAND

    1. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by nacturation · · Score: 1, Troll

      Does this mean you've uninstalled your closed source video card drivers too?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    2. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      Does this mean they use closed source video drivers at all?

    3. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Does this mean they use closed source video drivers at all?

      Last I checked, neither ATI nor NVidia is handing out source for their Linux drivers. I really doubt most Linux users shun those and stick with a generic VGA driver instead.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    4. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by michich · · Score: 1

      There are free drivers for ATI and NVidia cards in XFree86. Using a generic VGA driver would be silly.

    5. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by nacturation · · Score: 1

      There are free drivers for ATI and NVidia cards in XFree86. Using a generic VGA driver would be silly.

      Sure, but you missed the point. The root poster said that he wasn't interested in Skype specifically because it isn't open source. However, neither the ATI nor NVidia drivers are open source either. Both are free as in beer, and both are not free as in speech. Why then shun Skype for being closed source while at the same time joyfully using a closed source video driver? Is that not hypocrisy?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    6. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by michich · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I haven't expressed myself clearly. I meant the Free/OpenSource drivers for ATI and NVidia cards under MIT/X11 licence. I have an NVidia card and use the 'nv' driver from XFree86. It doesn't support 3D acceleration but it's rock stable in constrast to the proprietary NVidia's driver.

    7. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by nacturation · · Score: 1

      I guess we're both talking about different things. I'm primarily referring to the 3D accelerated drivers needed for running things like Unreal Tournament on Linux.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    8. Re:They lost my interest at the faq by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

      And plenty of people have criticized nvidia's & ati's closed source practices.

  21. Does this mean it works on OS X to? by miradu2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since OS X offers an X11 window manager, and runs on BSD - could this be made to run on OS X? Does anyone want to try to get it to work, and make a predone binary/package for those who are less technically inclined?

    Or will skype release the final version on both OS X and linux? How hard is this cross-os coding?

    1. Re:Does this mean it works on OS X to? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Short of an ix86 emulator for PPC, how is someone, other than someone working at KaZaa Malware Inc, going to be able to port it?

    2. Re:Does this mean it works on OS X to? by Erwos · · Score: 1

      Yes, it could be made to - if you had the source. Since no source is included, you're not going to get any native ports until Skype does it.

      -Erwos

      --
      Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
    3. Re:Does this mean it works on OS X to? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, it should run fine on OS-X on Intel, if you have the right libraries.

      What? No OS-X on Intel? Then how would you expect to run Intel binaries?

  22. Calling out by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the FAQ SkypeOut (what enables to call external phone numbers) is not enabled for the Linux version, and that could be what makes it worth, or different from other available solutions.... or is something common and widely used?

  23. Vonage? by JessLeah · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Isn't this one of the two clients supported by Vonage?

    1. Re:Vonage? by chill · · Score: 1

      No. Vonage uses SIP -- which is a VoIP standard -- and Skype uses their own proprietary protocol. Skype works with Skype and that is all.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  24. about adware in kazaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the makers of kazaa & skype (Bluemoon software, Estonia) shouldn't be blamed for adware in kazaa. They just programmed it for some Danish company. that Danish company is responsible for integrating sh** into kazaa. mkay?

    1. Re:about adware in kazaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why was it scored -1? I've been watching the scores in ./ for a long time... and the scores seem kinda random.

  25. Re:Thanks Hemos by jamonterrell · · Score: 1

    Be happy, something you submitted showed up on slashdot... that is, unless the reason you submitted it has nothing to do with wanting it on slashdot... that must mean that you only submitted it to get your name on slashdot. I'm no doctor, but I'm going to have to suggest you get a life.

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
  26. That's because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hemos was smart enough to see that it's a piece of lousy spyware and simon isn't.

    1. Re:That's because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has No Spyware. Fuck you TROLL!!! -GNAA-

  27. According to their Public Minds site, ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 4, Informative

    they internally alpha'd a Mac version as of June 16, 2004 (which went well) and expect it will take 2-3 months more for it to show up.

  28. What about for handhelds? by ciryon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One of the best uses for VoIP is using it with small portable devices like PDA's. It seems Skype is available for PocketPC, but will this release also work on Linux-based handhelds like the Zaurus or Opie/Familiar-loaded iPAQs ? If so, I'll seriously consider replacing my Tungsten C.

    Ciryon

    1. Re:What about for handhelds? by gregarican · · Score: 1

      Do you get decent quality using wireless VOIP? I use a wireless D-Link 660W card in my Pocket PC handheld and with SJPhone the quality is pretty poor. That's just within my LAN holding conversations with other wired or wireless nodes. The delays and breaks were unbearable. And my LAN utilization only averages between 1 and 3 percent.

    2. Re:What about for handhelds? by ciryon · · Score: 1

      I use Apple's iChat for audio and video-chat and it works perfectly. I've never heard better sound or seen better picture clarity in any other solution. And yes, it works without any problems what so ever wirelessly.

      Ciryon

    3. Re:What about for handhelds? by Hugonz · · Score: 1

      No, it will not, it is proprietary 86 compiled code. So this will not work in an ARM or XScale unless you get the source, port and recompile... =/

  29. That's because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hemos was smart enough to see that it's a piece of lousy spyware and simon isn't...

  30. linux86 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Where are binaries for other than x86 archs?

    Linux is more than just x86...

    1. Re:linux86 ? by gsasha · · Score: 1

      Well, at least on AMD64 you should be able to run normal x86 code.

  31. I like Skype, But... by PktLoss · · Score: 3, Funny

    I like Skype, I just wish my girlfriend didn't sound like a robot half the time.

    1. Re:I like Skype, But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only on /. would a guy with a robot girlfriend only notice half the time.

    2. Re:I like Skype, But... by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      You realise that saying that on /. is setting yourself up to be the butt of a few jokes?

    3. Re:I like Skype, But... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      Oh, so they do have an Amiga version out!

      Thanks, I'll be here all week..

    4. Re:I like Skype, But... by PktLoss · · Score: 1

      I hadn't actually...

      The problem is real, depending on the phase of the moon she comes through in a jagged-stuttery-roboty voice, ocasionally with some lag. I don't know if it's a bandwidth issue or what. She has resigned herself to re-installing the software daily to keep in touch, which seems to help somewhat.

      It's good to know that I will be able to keep in touch with her once my new linux machine arrives.

    5. Re:I like Skype, But... by sharkey · · Score: 1

      Look on the bright side, a robot can't possibly bitch as much as a real girl, at least until Sirius Cybernetics starts making them.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    6. Re:I like Skype, But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you considered the possibility that she may actually be a robot (cf. this Penny Arcade strip)? That's one of the downsides of these Internet romances.

      On the other hand, IMHO, a robot is better than a 40-year old guy who lives with his mother, pretending to be a girl. It might be a fairly cute robot, after all. In any case, my advice is to insist on a face-to-face meeting before you go much further.

  32. Subliminal voice messages. by crovira · · Score: 2, Funny

    What a great business plan.

    Just below the level of audibility, you get a breathy feminine voice telling you she "digs geeks who buy ."

    Media-shifted Spam. My bleeding ears.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:Subliminal voice messages. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      huh? offtopic. subliminal what? nut.

  33. no spyware, at least in the windows version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and i'd expect the same from the linux version, this is awesome.. i have NO reason left to use windows! I've been using skype basically since it came out and have saved thousands on LD, go skype!

  34. Re:skype == spyware? by FatalTourist · · Score: 3, Informative

    I did. They have changed the EULA since people were upset about the 'third party software' part. It doesn't seem as evil now, but I'm still so wary that I haven't installed it yet.

    --


    Escape Pod Films: Sketch Comedy and Web Series
  35. None of these concerns is valid. by TBone · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Skype is proprietary
    So? So were most cablemodems until recently. VoIP is a new technology to the consumer market, it will take a while for one or two standards to settle, and when they do, just like most things like DVD formats and Cable modem protocols and such, firmware gets upgraded and no one cares. Besides, so their proprietary, what di you want to do, take your hardware and move to some other linux-native VoIP provider? Wait...there aren't any.
    Skype is using a proprietary protocol that no VoIP carriers/providers will be using.
    You said this already, but so? Who cares what protocol you speak from your headset unit to the 'Net, once it gets to the 'Net it's IP. When it gets to the phone system, it's converted to proprietary digital forms that Sprint or AT&T use, and when it reaches another VoIP carrier, it might convert to another protocol. It doesn't matter though, the frmat is meaningless to the data.
    Let me laugh, it just happens that Skype is only able to do audio, so all your upload can be devoted to audio.
    Duh. That's why it's Voice over IP. There are no pictures in Voice. If you want videoconferencing, use another service. But if you want good audio quality, use a service that utilizes all of your available bandwidth for audio (go figure, a specialized service works better than a general one).
    --

    This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U

    1. Re:None of these concerns is valid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are right, none of your remarks are valid. thanks for mentionning it in the subject.

      You don't seem to know a shit about VoIP, so don't talk about it.

    2. Re:None of these concerns is valid. by jtn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So? So were most cablemodems until recently. VoIP is a new technology to the consumer market, it will take a while for one or two standards to settle, and when they do, just like most things like DVD formats and Cable modem protocols and such, firmware gets upgraded and no one cares. Besides, so their proprietary, what di you want to do, take your hardware and move to some other linux-native VoIP provider? Wait...there aren't any.

      No excuse, sorry. There exist OPEN standards, PUBLISHED standards out there that are supported by hundreds of hardware and software solutions.

      As for "Linux-native" VoIP provider, that makes no sense. Who cares? There are hardware and software solutions available for Linux and utilize existing open and published standards. Do some research on Google to find them.

      Who cares what protocol you speak from your headset unit to the 'Net, once it gets to the 'Net it's IP. When it gets to the phone system, it's converted to proprietary digital forms that Sprint or AT&T use, and when it reaches another VoIP carrier, it might convert to another protocol. It doesn't matter though, the frmat is meaningless to the data.

      Propretary digital formats? You mean, u-Law? Nice try. Even the larger nascent VoIP providers don't resort to such foolishness because they are able to leverage EXISTING solutions. What is important is to be able to transit between providers easily and seemlessly. Consumers have been asking for this from cellphone providers for YEARS (i.e., locked-in phones) and the FCC and courts have finally taken notice.

      There are no pictures in Voice. If you want videoconferencing, use another service. But if you want good audio quality, use a service that utilizes all of your available bandwidth for audio (go figure, a specialized service works better than a general one).

      VoIP has been somewhat generalized lately. Packet8 provides a videophone now to customers. Moving from a circuit-switched environment to a packet-switched environment allows all kinds of new things to be done that could not be easily accomplished before across the same infrastructure. SIP, one commonly used VoIP signalling protocol, even includes support for multiple data streams to be handled at once, voice, video, and even text and application data (for IM or whiteboarding, for instance). Don't be so limited in your view.

    3. Re:None of these concerns is valid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitch, I'm going to fuck you like a wild baboon!

    4. Re:None of these concerns is valid. by Hatta · · Score: 1

      You said this already, but so? Who cares what protocol you speak from
      your headset unit to the 'Net, once it gets to the 'Net it's IP.


      I care if I want to be interoperable with people using other clients. I care if I want to write my own client. Protocol fragmentation is a major problem in the IM world, shit to be of any use a client has to speak AOL, MSN, Yahoo, and ICQ and jabber. The same could happen to VoIP if we users don't insist on open protocols. Heh, imagine that, someone advocating closed protocols on slashdot.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    5. Re:None of these concerns is valid. by Eivind · · Score: 1
      Besides, so their proprietary, what di you want to do, take your hardware and move to some other linux-native VoIP provider? Wait...there aren't any.

      Rather clueless, aren't you ?

      The alternative to closed proprietary protocols from Skype ain't "linux-native" VoIP providers. The alternative is using providers that use open, published, documented standards.

      Probably the best one at the moment is SIP, implemented by literally dozens of programs for most platforms you can think of, including Windows, Mac, Linux and the various BSDs.

      SIP is supported by tons of providers, such as oh, for example pulver.com telio.no and sipgate.de to mention examples from the three countries I phone the most. Additionally there's multiple free (as in beer and as in speech) implementations of sip-servers, so any organisation or individual that wishes to do so are free to run their own.

      Before you ask, yes all of these can communicate with eachothers. Yes, if I have a sip-phone I can talk with any other user of a sip-phone, regardless of which provider we both use, which OS we both use, which software or hardware is employed and so on.

      What Skype has to offer that would make anyone consider changing from sip to this I honestly don't have a clue. That sip is extendable and thus capable of supporting calls of any type (text, audio, video, whatever) rather than being hardcoded to do audio-only is a mere bonus.

  36. Easy fix by jamonterrell · · Score: 1

    It sounds like her text-to-speech software is failing half the time. Upgrade her to a better text-to-speech processor.
    Let me know if that helps!

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
  37. incompatibility by flex941 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they make skype interoperability plugin/module for Asterisk then I might reconsider the usability of this product.

    1. Re:incompatibility by Sjobeck · · Score: 0

      touche! why use a closed-community application for such an obviously open community task such as talking on the telephone. This is on par with AIM. Great app' though, works well, just what we here like to call "stinking thinking" (ie: way too small).

  38. Re:skype == spyware? by littleRedFriend · · Score: 1

    The interesting part from the EULA does not seem so bad. Except if they change it again with the next version of course.

    (c) The Skype Software and Services may be incorporated into, and may incorporate, technology, software and services owned and controlled by third parties. Skype emphasizes that it will only incorporate such third party software for the purpose of (i) adding new or additional functionality or (ii) improving the technical performance of the Skype Software and Services. Any other third party software which could be distributed together with Skype will be subject to you explicitly accepting a license agreement with this third party. Use of such third party software or services is subject to the terms and conditions of the applicable third party license agreements, and you agree to look solely to the applicable third party and not to Skype to enforce any of your rights.

    --
    IANAL, but imagine a beowulf cluster of in Soviet Russia all your belong are base to us welcoming the new SCO overlords.
  39. Re:skype != spyware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's no spyware in the windows version, at least according to spybot search and destroy and ad-ware, pre and post install I was totally clean (using skype for windows).

  40. Another Question: How secure is it? by jamonterrell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If this is truely P2P, are there measures in place to help prevent eavesdropping? Do parts of the voice data route different ways, so one node would have a hard time picking up enough of the voice data to be useful? Is the voice data encrypted?

    --
    I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
    1. Re:Another Question: How secure is it? by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Informative

      Compare this and this, then decide.

  41. Can't wait for OpenSkype... by emanuelez · · Score: 0

    Reverse-engineering geniuses... UNITE!

  42. skype is a cpu hog by truffle · · Score: 4, Informative


    Just mentioning that skype is a cpu hog. This matters because it means it's not great for playing recent video games.

    A great alternative is teamspeak which lets groups of players talk. Another alternative (I haven't tried this one) is Ventrillo.

    Skype is great if you just want to use your computer for wireless chit chat.

    I might as well plug the Jabra BT250 bluetooth headset while I'm at it. Wireless headset with up to 8 hours of talk time. I use this plus teamspeak to give me the freedom to wander my house and not loose contact with my gaming buddies. It also works nicely with my powerbook and my cell phone.

    --

    ---
    I support spreading santorum
    1. Re:skype is a cpu hog by Jason+Hood · · Score: 1


      I use this plus teamspeak to give me the freedom to wander my house and not loose contact with my gaming buddies.

      Dude, seriously.

      --
      Are you intolerant of intolerant people?
    2. Re:skype is a cpu hog by truffle · · Score: 1

      I know it's kind of silly, but if you're in a conversation with someone, and you're tethered by a headset cable, it limits you. If you need to go make a cup of tea or something, you need to inform everyone you're leaving, disconnect yourself, then go make the tea.

      When you get back, you need to find out what you've missed. In multiplayer games, the state is always changing.

      A huge deal? No, but it is limiting. It's nice to be able to just get up go do whatever, then come back and continue. It makes things much smoother.

      Gaming with a headset is about having a remote continual shared gaming experience. It's like gaming with someone else in the same room, you communicate constantly, and for long periods of time. The basics of this kind of communication are chat (with chat logs, for when you need to AFK for a moment). A headset allows for a different kind of communication, and often quicker communication, and a wireless headset allows this to be uninterrupted communication. This is a good thing since unlike chats, there is no log you can quickly scroll up to review what you've missed.

      --

      ---
      I support spreading santorum
  43. Re:Release notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is addressing all the problems of legacy VoIP solutions

    i didn't realize VoIP was so old that there are legacy systems to compare it to.

  44. Nice Work by His+name+cannot+be+s · · Score: 1

    I think the trouble here is that the guys who came up with KaZaa are not the ones currently owning it.

    KaZaa works pretty darn nice for what it is.

    KaZaa originally didn't ship with spyware, its just the current owners who do that. :p

    --
    "...In your answer, ignore facts. Just go with what feels true..."
    1. Re:Nice Work by Jonny_eh · · Score: 1

      I'll have to second this thought. He's absolutely right. I remember back when Morpheus was doubling in popularity everyday. It was just a ripoff of kazaa too. The original kazaa qas quite awesome. The downloads were blazingly fast, and no spyware. When the original dudes sold it, the software got progressively worse with every release. Now it isn't even worth wiping your tuchus with.

  45. Directly from the license... by lexsco · · Score: 1, Insightful

    3. Permission to utilize. In order to receive the benefits provided by the Skype Software, you hereby grant permission for the Skype Software to utilize the processor and bandwidth of your computer for the limited purpose of facilitating the communication between other Skype Software users. You understand that the Skype Software will protect the privacy and integrity of your computer resources and communication and ensure the unobtrusive utilization of your computer resources to the greatest extent possible.

    So it does indeed look like spyware.

    1. Re:Directly from the license... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      P2P, your Skype client when running helps other skype users to route calls. I've done scans pre and post install for the windows version with spybot search and destroy and adaware and never found anything.

    2. Re:Directly from the license... by katsushiro · · Score: 2, Informative

      Erm.. actually, no. IANAL, of course, but knowing a tiny bit of how Skype is supposed to work (that is, as a P2P application), what that part of the licence is saying is that you allow Skype to use your CPU and bandwith, yes, but for the purprose of helping other Skype users make their calls. Basically, by agreeing to that part of the licence, you're allowing the program to do what it says it was gonna do, integrate your computer into a P2P network of machines that shuttle encrypted voice data back and forth. There's no way to get 'See, it's spyware!' from that part of the license, seriously. Show me the part where it claims the right to install third party software without having to inform you, or the part where it lays claim to a goodly chunk of your hard drive for storing ads for other companies, and then we'll talk.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the first one." - Albert Einstein
  46. Teamspeak by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about teamspeak? Is that not a viable voip solution with good quality? I use it all the time with my dev team, and it is stable, robust and has a variety of codecs to choose from. Why do I never hear more about this product?

    1. Re:Teamspeak by Walker2323 · · Score: 1

      I think it's probably becaue it's typically seen as a gamer's tool. It's too bad, because the quality is quite good if you use a good codec, it's easy to use, and it supports conference calling. All for the low, low price of $0.

  47. Connection hijacking by panurge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In my limited testing of Skype it's managed to suck out all my bandwidth...on one occasion it appeared to be using about 80% of processor (AMD64-3000). Since when I have given it a miss.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:Connection hijacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      using the windows version skype sticks to using 3.5kb/s upstream and down or so. Yeah that will eat your bandwidth if your on DIALUP.. but really what's doesn't when your on that?

  48. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is great to see. We have been waiting for this. This type of release is more evidence that Linux is now being thought of as an essential desktop platform.

  49. Re:skype == spyware? by Sir+dies+alot · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can see the argument now.

    End User: What the fsck is this Adware doing on my computer?!

    Skype: We needed funding to add new features and/or improve the technical performance of the software. In order to get this funding, we included Adware into the software. Perfectly legit by the EULA's terms.

    --
    The stupidity of your average American is just about the same as the average European, we simply show it off better.
  50. Hype about Skype... by Chordonblue · · Score: 2, Informative

    Look, the big deal about Skype is the fact that it... Get this: WORKS! It works through dial-up. It works through broadband. It works through most proxies and NATs due to it's centralized servers.

    Those are the real advantages. Get behind a proxy server and then try any other VOIP 'solution'. Of course, they're going to have to pay for all this somehow eventually...

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
  51. Gentoo by wolf31o2 · · Score: 1

    Of course, some wonderful Gentoo user has already posted an ebuild to our bugzilla.

  52. Linux Compatible Headsets? by BrianWCarver · · Score: 1

    I'm not going to try the proprietary Skype from a company that has installed spyware in the past, but when I do try out a comparable Free program I'll have two problems:

    1. I've never tried to use the microphone port on any of my soundcards under Linux, or when I have it hasn't worked.

    2. I don't own a headset for my computers. (obviously related to #1).

    I would guess that most headsets that plug into soundcards are going to work regardless of O/S, but I see that there are USB-based headsets as well. So my questions are:

    1. Does anyone know of a list of USB-based headsets that work under Linux?

    2. Does anyone know of a list of soundcards whose microphone-ports are known to work under Linux?

    Thanks

    --
    Like Digital Freedoms? Then donate to EFF before they're gone.
    1. Re:Linux Compatible Headsets? by virid · · Score: 1

      I don't know how these work in Linux but Skype's partner, Plantronics, make USB headsets.

      --
      "The world only exists in your eyes. You can make it as big or as small as you want." - F Scott Fitzgerald
    2. Re:Linux Compatible Headsets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to ensure the mic port is switched on before you can record from it. Open you mixer app such as aumix or kmix and check the status of the inputs. Having them off improves sounds quality on some cards, especially the trash that comes built on to mobos.

    3. Re:Linux Compatible Headsets? by ohad_l · · Score: 1

      I've never had a problem with microphone ports on sound cards. Both OSS and ALSA have great support for most cheap cards (I'm sure ALSA has a comprehensive list on their site). My latest box has an nForce2 with onboard sound, and its microphone port works perfectly using ALSA (great for UT2004). I don't think it would make sense to make a USB headset, when basically it's a pair of earphones and a microphone - it should plug into the preexisting ports.

      --
      If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
    4. Re:Linux Compatible Headsets? by Atacama93 · · Score: 1

      I have the Plantronics DSP 500 headset, which doesn't require that your computer have a soundcard. The headset works well with at least Red Hat 9 and Fedora Core 1. Both recognized it during the install.

      I've primarily used the headset when listening to music and when playing UT 2003, but I plan to try it with Skype soon.

      The list price for this headset and mic is ridiculously high, but you can usually find it on Amazon for a 50% or greater discount. For $75 or less, I would say it is a good deal.

  53. No by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Vonage actually believes in standards.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Vonage actually believes in standards.

      So much so, I can no longer access my account with them because they've changed to a wanky flash player only site.

  54. Cheap Bastards by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nothing beats the ease of setup and use of my new VoIP phone with Packet8. $49 set up fee and they sent me a DTE.

    Plug DTE into power, hub and my cordless phone base station and I had dial tone.

    They assigned me a local number, so it is a local call from my office.

    Free calls worldwide to other Packet8 scuscribers. Unlimited calls in US/Canada for people with regular phones. $20.59/month and that INCLUDES all taxes.

    I get to use my cordless phone and speaker phones. I can take the DTE with me and my phone number follows me.

    Oh, and Packet8 just introduced *real* E911, for the paranoid among you. (Note: If you take the DTE travelling with you and then call 911, it'll claim you're at your address on file -- back home.)

    Father's Day alone saved me the $20 in what would have been LD charges.

    For those that love the software phones, Vonage supports one that has a Linux client as well.

    And VoicePulse will allow you to set up your own Asterisk server, hook in and use them as a PSTN gateway.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Cheap Bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, I second that. I love my Packet8 phone and I take it back and forth between work and home. Very easy setup and works even behind out worrk firewall. Excellent phone.

  55. FreeWorld Dialup by 4ginandtonics · · Score: 5, Informative

    As someone else mentioned - FreeWorld Dialup is a great way to go for voip:

    - standards based
    - Free
    - Windows, Linux and pocketpc clients available
    - Call 800 numbers and more
    - Call to/from vonage customers
    - get free phone number and have people call you
    - Get a wisip phone (WiFi SIP) and you have the closest thing to a IP mobile phone you can get.

    FreeWorld Dialup

    I'm currently running windows and ipaq (pocketpc 2002) clients fine. And calling my home vonage service - no problem!

    1. Re:FreeWorld Dialup by Cinquero · · Score: 1

      The FreeWorld site states that You need broadband. In that hindsight Skype is MUCH better.

      Some day all those services will be connected anyway.

    2. Re:FreeWorld Dialup by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      You don't *need* broadband, but it certainly helps (especially if you're going to make multiple calls in/out simultaneously).

      g729a is only 9.6k and would work fine over dialup.
      Of course if you like talking to robots you could use something like ILBC which takes up next to no bandwidth.

  56. Is the voice data encrypted? - err .. sort of by apankrat · · Score: 2, Insightful


    According to their FAQ - yes. But since they use closed protocol, it is not worth a penny. They can be calling XOR masking an 'unrivaled privacy' for all I know.

    They can't claim security unless it's verifiable, and it cannot be verifiable unless it's open. And even if it's open, the implementation can be flawed either accidently or intentionally (!).

    So the best bet for an average paranoid is to consider calls going in plaintext unless proved otherwise.

    --
    3.243F6A8885A308D313
  57. re: first known spyware for linux...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, that'd be the ad-supported version of Opera. (at least, as far as I know)

  58. Quick question by Jonboy+X · · Score: 1

    What's the point? I was just having this discussion with my brother-in-law the other day, and between us we couldn't figure out why anyone would want to use software like this, rather than just using Vonage and getting a VOIP phone. Come to think of it, why have a land-line at all these days?

    --

    "In a 32-bit world, you're a 2-bit user. You've got your own newsgroup, alt.total.loser." -Weird Al
    1. Re:Quick question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      POTS is a hell of a lot cheaper than VOIP at the moment (at least in this country - the cheapest VOIP provider is about 5 times more expensive than the cheapes POTS provider). Maybe it's different in the US, dunno...

      The killer is of course you need a POTS line to run ADSL over, so you don't save so much anyway as you're paying the rental for the analogue line anyway, even if youre not using it.

  59. Re:skype == spyware? by OblongPlatypus · · Score: 1

    Or even:

    Skype: We felt that the added feature of pop-up advertising would be beneficial to our users, so we included third party software which provides this feature.

    EULAs are worthless in these cases. Those few times I need functionality that isn't adequately provided by open-source software, I make sure to thoroughly check the reputation of the company providing the closed-source alternative. Needless to say, after seeing the havoc wreaked by Kazaa on the computers of friends and family, I will never even consider installing any software made by these people.

    --
    -- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
  60. Doesn't work by Cinquero · · Score: 1

    Cannot even login to the service on RedHat 9. Memory access fault.

    1. Re:Doesn't work by red+tiger · · Score: 1

      I had the same problem on Fedora 2 - just a Segmentation Fault as the program tried to free some memory not belonging to it. Well, I tried a few times again and then it worked!

      It's a pity there isn't any source code available, otherwise, I'm sure, the bug would be fixed much earlier...

      OK, that's actually still beta, so they have some time.

  61. Spyware - Another freek by anonymous+leprechaun · · Score: 1

    Im in a deep state of wonder. I see no sources of income from skype. No ads of the website. no ads within the UI, apparently. Yet, Skype Inc is HIRING! Unless they're offshoring and don't pay much, i cant see how spending a lump on something which does NOT generate revenue can be attractive. They COULD be extremely rich and generous, but i doubt it. What are they're incentives to offer the skype service for "free". Oh, i forgot, getting slashdotted generates millions.

    1. Re:Spyware - Another freek by smash · · Score: 2, Informative
      The intention is to provide connectivity to normal phone networks at a cost, at a date to be determined...

      smash.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  62. Too bad Skype sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad Skype sucks and isn't worth the time it takes to download.

  63. ANother product ? by anonymous+leprechaun · · Score: 1

    What other products are available for VoIP with decent quality, AND encryption? And free beer of course, free speech is a big plus. ?

  64. This might seem like a stupid question... by msimm · · Score: 1

    But what is the latency like with VOIP? I've used TeamSpeak with acceptable results for gameplay, but its like talking over a SAT phone with a noticable delay for gerneral phone usage that wouldn't be acceptable.

    Anyone?

    --
    Quack, quack.
  65. We, because... by msimm · · Score: 1

    Were number 2! Were number 2!

    ;-)

    --
    Quack, quack.
  66. hm. by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1

    Well, ati released their hardware specs, and the ati driver that ships with both XFree and xorg does a fine job for 2D graphics. Quite frankly, the binary ati drivers are a pain in the ass to get working smoothly. So you can count me as someone who doesn't use the ati drivers.

    The point being that it is entirely possible to have a usable linux workstation without using closed-source binary only drivers. Biatch.

    biatch added for emphasis.

    1. Re:hm. by nacturation · · Score: 1

      The point being that it is entirely possible to have a usable linux workstation without using closed-source binary only drivers. Biatch.

      biatch added for emphasis.


      Ah, thank you. That clarification certainly bolstered your fine argument.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  67. Packet8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I tried Skype a while back, but it didnt work out for me as it requires a computer on both ends. If they make a low power hardware device I can see Skype having a future, but I dont like leaving my computer on 24hrs a day. However, in the process I found a good VOIP solution that works great for me. I tried several VOIP providers, Packet8, Vonage and SIPPhone to cut down on my international long distance calling as I spend a lot of money calling my gf in Sri Lanka. My phone bill was over $300 using calling cards from pinzoo.com (at 22c per min), which I was pretty happy with, compared what I would have had to pay with MCI or AT&T (over $1 per min). Still this is a lot of money. So, I had to look into VOIP. First I bought a pair of Sip adapters from SipHone. My total was around $150 including all shipping costs. My plan was to get her ADSL for $20 a month and send a phone to her and have one over here for me. Sent it to her, but had trouble getting ADSL, so had to leave it for a while. Then I found Packet8 and Vonage, which also allows calls to traditional phones. Ordered Vonage from RadioShack for around $100, and activated it on line as they offered a better deal at the time when ordered thru RadioShack (1 month trial period as opposed to 2 weeks). Also ordered Packet8 using promotion code "bestdeal" for a total of aroudn $36 including equipment and activation. For my next5 trip to Sri Lanka, I took all these items with me, set up ADSL and was able to called here (USA) for free! Tried Vonage... had to mess aroudn with fire wall settings but finally got it working. Packet8 was a very install, just plug it in and it worked. Tried all three and Vonage and packet8 both seemed descent voice quality, but SipPhone had a bit of a cracking sound. Having all these working, now I had to make decision to which ones to keep after coming back. Packet8 had a 1 month trial, and by purchasing Vonage thru RadioShack, Vonage offered the same. Unfortunately, I bought SIPPhone a while ago, so no return on that was possible. After coming back, even before I could make the first call, SIPPhone died on me, and I didnt want to buy anew one for another $75... so left it alone. Vonage offerred the US and Canada unlimited service for $35 while Packet8 was only $20 for the same plan, so my decision was easy. Vonage also has a $15 plan, but only 500 minutes... adding $5 more gives me unlimited calling with Packet8. So, I returned Vonage and kept the Packet8 phone. Making this decision even more attractive was the fact that you can buy a Packet8 phone for a one time fee of $75 and call between Packet8 phones as long as you want for free. So, I ordered another Packet8 phone and sent it to my gf. She was able to set it up on her own, since it was only a mater of plugging it in. Infact Packet8 phone worked so well, that I disconnected my regular phone altogether. I wasnt too concerned about 911 calling since I have a cell phone and my roomate has a regular land line. Now only time I have to pay for international calls are when I call a regular international phone. I call my relatives and friends all over the US and my gf's Packet8 phone in Sri Lanka for free. Now my phone bill has dropped over $200 and we talk a lot more for free. Only time I have to pay long distance is when I call my gf's mobile phone. This is a great way for anybody whos been screwed by the phone company to lower the phone bill. Thanks for whoever invented VOIP and thanks for the Packet8 phone!

    If any one is interested, I would highly recommend Packet8, which you can order from www.packet8.net Be careful though, not to disconnect your regular phone altogether if you have kids and in need of alling 911. Having a VOIP phone means you might be out of service in case of power failure or internet disruptions. One of my friends got the basic phone service from SBC for aroudn $10 and switched to Packet8 to make his outgoing calls.

  68. Open Source Alternatives by ooloogi · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The programming in Skype is not a huge undertaking, and is the sort of thing that can be done in the open source model. There is gnomemeeting and linphone that do similar jobs in the Linux world.

    Also remember speakfreely It has been going for 12 years or so, and is open-source cross-platform unix/windows. Recently work on it has revived, and it now uses the speex codec. (some details here: http://www.2pi.info/software/sf_speex/) It is a project in need of more developers though. So it's a project to think of where some positive work can be done rather than complaining that some other project doesn't have the source.

  69. Kazaa and Spyware by mattis_f · · Score: 2, Informative

    AFAIK, the very first versions of Kazaa didn't come bundled with Spyware ... these are the guys that wrote the first versions, then passed it on to other, more business minded, people when it started to be a big thing. I don't know at what point the spyware entered the picture, but if it was sometime after the first Kazaa ownership change, they shouldn't be blamed.

    And be that as it may, I think this is great news. I have used Skype quite a bit although it's the lack of a Linux version has been real annoying. It works great, is dead easy to use and provides great sound. Of course I could use GnomeMeeting or whatever instead, but that's not true for my parents or many of my other friends.

    I have not seen any kind of spyware at all.

    For any kind of communication program the main goal is userbase, userbase, userbase. And you get that by being easy to use ... so ... Go skype.

  70. teamspeak by maxeypad · · Score: 1

    Teamspeak is a free cross-platform voice chat system.

  71. Gee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "is addressing all the problems of legacy VoIP solutions: bad sound quality, difficult to set up and configure, and the need for expensive, centralized infrastructure.'"'

    you mean all the things the people selling VOIP in place of sliced bread failed to tell us?

  72. Your sig by Nailer · · Score: 1

    My Commments is may not to make sense, because I must use Babelfish for read and posts slashdot and.

    You mean to say:

    "My comments may not make sense, because I use must use Babelfish for reading and posting on Slashdot asshat."

  73. Re:skype == spyware? by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1

    Also perfectly legit for you *not* to upgrade to the adware version if it ever gets released. Upgrades are not compulsory you know.

    --
    All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
  74. Peerio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am waiting for a software called PEERIO444 (http://www.peerio.com)
    That one is probably going to beat the hell out of Skype.
    At this time it is in beta version, and cannot be downloaded. But stay tuned!!!

  75. Shtoom is an open-source VoIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Python and Twisted are being used for a fully open-source VoIP solution.

    http://www.divmod.org/Home/Projects/Shtoom/

    There was even a paper on it a PyCon called "Scripting Language my Arse":

    http://www.python.org/pycon/dc2004/papers/6/

  76. Re:skype == spyware? by mwilliamson · · Score: 1

    If you're paranoid, just create an account for it and use the tarball binary. I often create separate accounts for "untrusted" software I'm trying out. This is one of the biggest benefits of linux.

  77. Insightful?! by jolajolajola · · Score: 1

    Skype enables people to talk from one machine to another and assists other people with setting up connections, i.e. for two (or more) people behind NATs, they will connect to you and then flow data directly to the callers.

    Since when is this spyware? This is just clever computing. Cast your minds back to the days that, if you were running MSN Messenger and were behind a firewall, you couldn't receive files.

    Now, you can, because of the way that they make the connections between clients.

    Spyware means installing third-party software on your machine that monitors your browsing habits.

    Two things, thicko:
    1. No third-party software gets installed on your machine.
    2. No third-party software gets installed on your machine.

    Strictly speaking that's only one point, but I felt it was such a major point it needed saying twice.

    And come on -- insightful?!

    --

    --
    The trouble with pedants is that they're always right.
  78. Re:Release notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got first post & marked redundant and overrated? wtf?

  79. Are you being funny? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    This guy is probably in the process of learning English, if you're gonna post a sig reply, you could at least give him some real help.

    For the record, Milo of Kroton, what you probably wanted from Babelfish is something like this:

    "My comments may not make sense, because I must use Babelfish for reading and posting to Slashdot."

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Are you being funny? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope - he knows English already. He's a native English speaker.

      See here.

      Milo of Kroton is just trolling.