Skype Makes U.S. Retail Debut

JamesAlfaro wrote to mention a C|Net article discussing the U.S. retail debut of Skype. From the article: "More than 3,000 RadioShack locations nationwide on Monday [the 21st] will begin offering the Skype Starter Kit, which includes the software that enables a customer to use Skype's free computer-to-computer telephone service, a headset and 30 minutes of Skype's premium service, with which a user can call a landline or cell phone, company executives said. The move is an attempt by Skype, the world's largest provider of voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP, to introduce its service to mainstream America."

Comments

What's the difference?

[Army of 1 in 10]

Pardon my ignorance, but what's the difference between Skype and Vonage? Is one better than the other, or are they just both crap?

Re:What's the difference?

[glomph]

Skype and Vonage are both crap in my perspective, because they are closed systems that insist on controlling all ends of the transaction. Vonage is OK for clueless Aunt Sadie, but any added functionality or interoperability is completely in their hands. If these guys would allow any SIP or IAX connection in, or out, then they'd be useful.

Re:What's the difference?

[aussie_a]

Skype and Vonage are both crap in my perspective, because they are closed systems that insist on controlling all ends of the transaction.

Guess you think Slashdot is crap merely because it is a closed system that insists on controlling all ends of the transaction.

Re:What's the difference?

[mgjames]

Skype uses a proprietary protocol to call other Skype users and provides SkypeOut to access PSTN services.

Vonage on the other hand is a service provider that provides VoIP capability by using open standards such as SIP and IAX.

That said though, Vonage is still a walled garden in that they do not allow inbound access from other SIP providers. This in my opinion makes them no different to Skype.

I have found that the best solution to VoIP is to sign up to any SIP provider that allows other network inbounds and use a service like SIP Broker http://www.sipbroker.com/ to bridge these networks via peering and ENUM.

Re:What's the difference?

[glomph]

Guess you think Slashdot is crap merely because it is a closed system that insists on controlling all ends of the transaction.

Bullshit, ozzie.
I can use any browser, on any OS I choose, on any hardware I choose, via the internet service of my choice, to get to Slashdot to read your inane statement.

Re:What's the difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Heres a big difference between skype and another competitor, VOIPBuster (http://www.voipbuster.com/en/index.html): Skype charges for calls to landlines, but not to PC's. On the otherhand, VOIPBuster gives free landline rates to Austria Denmark Finland Germany Greece Ireland Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Spain Sweden Switzerland and of course the United States. The other rates are comparable (sometimes much better) and the GUI is streamlined compared to Skype. Skype is starting to bulk out into something remniscient of xp...it'll be a 5GB install before we know it.

Re:What's the difference?

[generic-man]

If Vonage is like a telephone line, think of Skype like a phone card. You can buy a few dollars' worth of time and spend it calling people over a period of up to 6 months. (Every time you buy time, all your existing time gains another 6 months of useful life.) I like Skype better than Vonage because I make very few long-distance calls; on those rare occasions when I'm about to run out of cell phone minutes, I can use Skype instead.

Re:What's the difference?

[aussie_a]

Bullshit glomph. I can use any OS I choose, on any hardware I choose, via the internet service of my choice to get to slashdot to read your inane statement.

My comment on Slashdot being a closed system stands I think. You have to connect to their servers, use their account system. A truly open system would allow registration from any website and allow the comments to be displayed on any website.

Re:What's the difference?

[usmcnavgeek]

I agree with your sentiment. I am a US military member, stationed overseas. Phone cards here run about 11 cents per minute to the US, while Skype calls are the roughly-two-cents per minute rate. You can see the obvious savings.

In addition, I am aircrew on C-130s, so I travel throughout the Pacific. With Skype I don't need to deal with the hassle of local access numbers or phone cards that don't work in certain countries. Since I bring my laptop with me everywhere and high-speed internet access is prevalent in virtually every major metropolitan area, Skype works for me.

What I'm getting at here is that Skype, while probably not the best system from a purely technological perspective, is still a very good solution for some specific purposes, like mine. And let's face it. Joe Schmoe will not care about interoperability. He will care about cheap.

Re:What's the difference?

[jrp2]

"Skype and Vonage are both crap in my perspective, because they are closed systems that insist on controlling all ends of the transaction. Vonage is OK for clueless Aunt Sadie, but any added functionality or interoperability is completely in their hands. If these guys would allow any SIP or IAX connection in, or out, then they'd be useful."

Vonage is smart to do that. It keeps their support costs down. Trying to walk even a somewhat competent geek through all the nuances of NAT negotiation, dialplans and other voip gook would be overwhelming for their tech support. The market for people not capable of understanding all that is much larger than the market for those who do (or have the tolerance to figure it all out). Their canned package is actually quite easy to install and get running.

IAX is interesting though, as it makes at least the NAT part less complicated. If there is one thing that disappoints me about SIP is it does not address the NAT issue. They did not learn this lesson from H.323. IAX is brilliant in that regard, using a single udp port for everything, initiated outbound. As opposed to SIP that uses a signaling port, and a boatload of RTP ports, which can be painful to figure out how to open a firewall and/or NAT for.

Dialplan issues (mainly, in what format to send the number to call) is still an issue, but much more easily solved.

It will be interesting to see if IAX catches on. It is starting to get noticed, that's for sure.

The other issue Vonage has to deal with is their product offering and fraud. If you had full control of your end you could resell your "unlimited" vonage access using something like Asterisk. Vonage does have a service that gives you full control of your end (they give your ID and PW, with SIP access info), but it is a per-minute charge, not an unlimited plan. For this reason, you may never see an unlimited plan like Vonage with full control of your end.

Re:What's the difference?

[JPriest]

If you could get calls to your vonage adapter from any SIP device (rather than just their switches), what would prevent spammers from abusing the system?

Re:What's the difference?

[glomph]

I often used Broadvoice (unlimited plan) with Asterisk. They have always been open. If it were not for their business/operational mess which effectively shut them down for a month, I'd still be a customer.

Re:What's the difference?

[jrp2]

Interesting. I'll be interested to see if they survive. They could easily get taken to the cleaners. There are a lot of very unscrupulous people in the VoIP termination business that will gladly take advantage of them if they can.

I see they have all kinds of fines for abuses in their terms of service, maybe that will save them if they watch it like a hawk and are successful in enforcing them. They also have to be careful as they might piss off legit customers if they get too hawkish.

As you say they already had business issues, it seems like they are at risk.

Again, I don't blame Vonage for taking the safe road, and primarily going after the mass market.

Skype is cool

[HugePedlar]

Let's just hope it's not crippled with over-regulation before it, or any other VoIP service, becomes mainstream. Telephone calls need to do some serious catch-up with free email & IM.

I'm not holding my breath though.

Re:Skype is cool

[cnmsales]

Voipbuster is better anyway. I paid 1 dollar and can call some 8 odd countries.

SIP & Standard VoIP compatible?

[Falcon040]

Is Skype compatible with other VoIP software and the International Standard SIP?

Re:SIP & Standard VoIP compatible?

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Re:SIP & Standard VoIP compatible?

[Anonymous Coward]

In a word, No.

Skype belongs to eBay

[NoSuchGuy]

Dear ./ editors,

in upcomming articles about Skype tell us (=the readers) that Skype was aquired by eBay.

It's important to know that Skype has the multi billion dollar backing of eBay. Whatever Skype tries out, they never will run out of money for the next years.

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't really see how this is relevant. The /. editors are enganging an, on the whole, intelligent and informed community, which is, as you yourself show, aware that Skype was recently acquired by eBay. Is it really neccessary to bog down submissions with extraneous information?

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[SMS_Design]

Most people either already know or don't care. I don't want a brief history of Skype and it's CEO's housekeeper's neice. It's a story about Skype going to market. All I need to know is that.

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[arivanov]

The case here is slightly different. It is a question of money, but quite a different one.

If you look at the people who founded Skype their previous P2P ventures were started and sold when the number of freeloaders exceeded the network capacity. They waited for that moment every single time. Same with Skype, as the proportion of people with NAT and firewalls increased the quality of the network decreased. In fact some of the analysts noted this. So did many of the users. And that was the moment when Skype was sold.

Now Ebay is "saving" its venture by the only means possible - by recruiting an enormous amount of hypernodes from population that is too clueless to use a router or a firewall. An ebay is footing the bill for this seeding. Quite smart actually. And not entirely unexpected.

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[TheRaven64]

I started using Skype on Friday. I usually use iChat for the rare occasions I want to talk to someone remotely, but my PowerBook is in for repairs (again) and so I was stuck on my Thinkpad. On the plus side, installation on FreeBSD was trivial (sudo portinstall skype). On the down side, the audio quality is dire. It seems to be half-duplex. If I start talking, the person on the other end can't start until after I've stopped (and it isn't very good at noticing when I've stopped). The NAT-avoidance may be partly to blame (although the person at the other end wasn't behind a NAT, so it shouldn't have been used). I am looking forward to the day when we have IPv6, and anyone can connect a SIP 'phone to their network and have it usable.

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[mh101]

I've had no problems with full-duplex communication using Skype on my Mac, and others at work have used it on their Windows PCs with no problem. I would suspect your half-duplex issue is related to your specific setup.

Re:Skype belongs to eBay

[Pilot_Mike]

I've had no problems with full-duplex communication using Skype on my Mac, and others at work have used it on their Windows PCs with no problem. I would suspect your half-duplex issue is related to your specific setup.

There IS a problem with Skype not being "full-duplex." I think that Skype has to switch transit and receive in the system, sorta like a very fast push-to-talk. There's also the inevitable latency lag for each side of the conversation. This is a problem for me personally because I tend to even have real world conversations in "full-duplex." I might jump in a bit as we talk but it's partly "signifying."

We recorded 3 remote partipants in a Skype conference call - one on a cell phone called using Skype out - for episode #14 of The Pilotcast. If you listen you'll hear about midway through when I'm rudely interrupting, but we found that Ron on his phone couldn't hear me. I edited out a handful of other times that happened. We often have "Sorry. No, you go first." during sessions like this.

This Skype conference call was hosted on a single 1.4MHz 1GB Mac Mini which had 2 recordings - local mic and Skype - being made at the same time with Audio Hijack. I did open up a port for Skype on my firewall. The recordings we used for the show were done on Dan's PowerMac G5, where I'm one of the three remote on Skype to him. He's the only one recorded locally. You can hardly tell the difference.

Although we have had crashes, Skype has held up for us really well during show recordings. Let's hope it gets better and not worse as eBay takes over and these Radio Shack customers join in.

Cost?

[Bob Finklestein]

How much are they selling this for? First of all, paying money for a boxed version of software I can get for free online seems rather silly. They are offering up a headset though, though I suspect it's probably not of the highest quality. What exactly are you paying for, and how much is it going to cost? While this might raise awareness about the service, I fail to see how it's anything more than a money grab by eBay.

Re:Cost?

[jacksonj04]

It's cheap and cheerful software on a CD, a few minutes of outgoing call time, and a headset. You're paying for convenience more than anything else - this is an ideal pack to get people started with who may not have a headset, or not fully understand if you tell them to "Go to skype.com, download it and register". The pack (In the UK at least) comes with a nice clear instruction leaflet for the whole procedure.

Re:Cost?

[Netscryer]

If the headsets are the same as those being given out at my student union, they're just this. I don't know about the quality.

Re:Cost?

[bburdette]

I think its a good move by Skype to establish a presence in brick-and-mortar stores. A few weeks ago I was shopping for VOIP, and if you walk into circuit city all you see is Vonage, no skype handsets or anything. Having skype merchandise out there in the real world brings in new customers that missed it on the internet, and it also gives credability to the service. If someone sees it at best buy or circuit city they'll know its more than another fly-by-night internet venture.

All this is fuss so...

[Anonymous Coward]

eB can phone home...

best to get a standard complient VoIP application

[Falcon040]

I generally use Gizmo http://www.gizmoproject.com/ as it is Internation Standard SIP compliant, whereas Skype is not compatible with any other service.

But there are also lots of other Applications out there which are standard compliant and work on a large number of different platforms.

Skype are just going for a service lock-in.

I tried it and switched to SIP.

[joey_knisch]

I initially had planned on using skype for my long distance. However I soon grew tired of being tied to the computer with a headset. While there are some ways to get a regular cordless phone to work with skype, all involve having a computer running. You can also purchase stand alone voip phones that are skype compatable for the small price of $200+.

I finally settled on buying a Sipura voip adapter and service from SIPphone. Setup was pretty easy and now instead of my $60 phone bill I have a $10 - $15 bill. After two months it paid for itself.

Re:I tried it and switched to SIP.

[Dot.Com.CEO]

SIPPhone is very expensive as voip services go. Check out voiptalk.co.uk or gradwell.net. Don't be put off that they're in the UK, latency is really a non-issue nowadays with the proper codec.

Re:I tried it and switched to SIP.

[joey_knisch]

I wouldn't be put off except I don't want to make my friends dial a UK number to call me in the US and neither of those companies offer US incoming call numbers.

Re:I tried it and switched to SIP.

[elgaard]

But SIP is an open standard so it does not have to be the same company that offer the US phone numbers.

And you can have severel phone number in different countries on the same SIP-account.

ipkall.com gives you a Washington phone number for free

catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[Falcon040]

VoIP not only needs to catch up but also be open like email, and unlike the divided IM space.
Unfortunately Skype is not the application which connects to an open network.

Only applications like Gizmo http://www.gizmoproject.com/ and many other ones (which I don't use) connect to the International Standard-compliant Protocol known as SIP.

If you want voice chat (VoIP) on Linux then you have a good selection too (I don't know which are SIP compliant and which are not though):

http://www.phonegaim.com/
http://cockatoo.mozdev.org/
http://www.gizmoproject.com/
http://www.linphone.org/
http://www.wirlab.net/kphone/
http://www.minisip.org/
http://www.sflphone.org/
http://www.sipfoundry.org/
http://www.twinklephone.com/
http://www.openwengo.com/
http://yate.null.ro/
http://www.divmod.org/projects/shtoom

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[FireFury03]

Only applications like Gizmo http://www.gizmoproject.com/ and many other ones (which I don't use) connect to the International Standard-compliant Protocol known as SIP.

Indeed - I'm using sjPhone (closed source unfortunately) under Linux with Asterisk.

However, in the UK at least I think the protocol choice isn't the main issue holding back the adoption of VoIP. In order to get an internet connection you need to either get a cable modem (NTL or Telewest) or a DSL connection (any number of ISPs running over BT lines). The problem is that if you get a DSL connection you _have_ to pay for a POTS service too - for most people there's no point in using a VoIP service because they're already being forced to pay a subscription for a POTS line in order to get their internet connection and VoIP to PSTN gateways aren't really any cheaper per minute for domestic calls (i.e. not international) than BT.

Until everyone can get a decent internet connection from any ISP without being required to hand over a wadge of cash to BT for a POTS line as well then I don't see VoIP taking off.

(For the record, I won't get an internet connection from NTL because then I'm stuck with their ISP who's quality of service is absolutely abysmal).

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[golgotha007]

I wish gizmo would get their act together and get the linux client packaged in something other than an ancient .deb file. I can't switch from skype until they do that.

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[bbtom]

Of course, if you're shopping around for DSL in Britain, I'd avoid the company being advertised in your sig (PlusNet). I used them for about a week, and I got nothing but bad service and FUD Newspeak from the customer services.

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[prattle]

I wish gizmo would get their act together and get the linux client packaged in something other than an ancient .deb file.

Their deb file is up to date (released Nov 7/05), so you must be saying that you think deb itself is ancient, right? Perhaps you could try using alien (http://freshmeat.net/projects/alien/) to convert the deb into some non-ancient format.

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[badfish99]

What's more, Skype is not competitive with the deals you can get for international calls here in the UK.

I looked into Skype because we make a lot of calls to Thailand (to people who don't have broadband - it's not common there). It's about 3 or 4 times more expensive than the rate we've paying at the moment.

I would guess that the Skype phenomenon is a purely US one - are long-distance calls very expensive there?

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[FireFury03]

Of course, if you're shopping around for DSL in Britain, I'd avoid the company being advertised in your sig (PlusNet). I used them for about a week, and I got nothing but bad service and FUD Newspeak from the customer services.

I did shop around - PlusNet have provided me with an excellent service for the past 3 years. Very little downtime and whilest I've never had to phone their tech support they have responded to my tech support tickets that I've entered via their website in quite a fast and very technically knowledgable way.

Re:catch up and be open (SIP standard compliant)

[Flypaper42]

I call the Phillipines often from the US with Skype. The rate is about half of what a traditional phone carrier charges.

Groundbreaking move?

[teewurstmann]

I think this is an interesting move, although not new. Offering a starter kit to an online service definetely opens the possibility to reach customers that you might not reach otherwise: They see a box on the shelf that they can touch and actually buy. You know, with cash. That has a certain appeal to some people. And the manual comes with it, too. A real printed one. The Xbox Live starter kit is a similar approach. Of course both starter kits still include a "real" product: A headset. I wonder what other online products will show up on shelfes in the months and years to come (besides iTunes and Napster gift cards...)

Re:Groundbreaking move?

[MikeFM]

Funny, I've been seeing these kits for at least a month at Fry's though. What makes Radio Shack special?

News for Nerds

[DrSkwid]

m'kay

30 minutes! OMG!

[Hobbex]

The kit includes "30 minutes of Skype's premium service"! One has to wonder how they can throw in something so valuable. I mean, SkypeOut currently charges, umm, 1.7 euro cent per minute for calls. So 30 minutes is a stunning 51 euro cents of value (~$0.65)!

Deals like this don't come along every day! // oskar

Skype at Radio Shack

[pipingguy]

Where can I find a Radio Shack in Canada?

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[cryptoz]

You can't, I believe. We're now The Source by Circut City. (Yes, I work there.)

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[pipingguy]

Can I still buy electronic parts there or is it all now consumer electronics only?

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[Anonymous Coward]

In a lot of place, try http://www.radioshack.ca/ (if the web site is not down again)

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[Barkley44]

Yep, they are now know as The Source. They are for the most part, the exact same, just backed by Circuit City. I went into my local one, still the same, still the parts they used to have.

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[hysma]

A suit was filed that forced InterTAN Canada to change the branding after they broke some agreements with Radio Shack.

There's a new site at RadioShackIsBack.com that explains some things in their FAQ section.

Re:Skype at Radio Shack

[warren.oates]

No, they don't have the same parts they used to have. Radio Shack is gone in Canada. Those whole walls full of parts that you needed to get your ZX81 running again have been replaced by displays of cheap Chinese digital watches and dancing Santas.

I live in a small town, and the Radio Shack was one of the best stores here. Combined with the free-shipping online service, everything in the RS catalogue was available almost instantly.

I can't believe that "The Source" is going to last very long. Future Shop and Best Buy both have better deals, more stock, and (frequently) free shipping. Radio Shack was a unique source of obscure electronic parts; "The Source" is just a flea market.

Why Skype is Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

I've said it before and I'll say it again until more people know. Here are some concrete reasons why Skype is kind of a bad thing.

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[jrockway]

I didn't read your link, because I don't really care. Yes, skype should be open source. However, a few months ago I trashed my shitty cell phone (and am not buying one until American ones all stop sucking hard... or until I move back to Japan) and replaced it with Skype. Now instead of $40 a month, I pay like $5. That's good, not bad. The real phone compainies (heh) fuck you so hard that any alternative is great. For that reason, I love Skype.

So the next time you think, "skype is really bad" remember that the real phone companies are 5,000 times worse. Closed source, proprietary, and out to get you with their ridiculous pricing, phone crippling, etc. Fuck them.

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Of all the reasons not to use Skype, this university has the lamest I've heard:

OIT Security discourages the use of Skype on the University network...The Skype User Agreement makes the user agree to provide services to Skype for resources owned by the University. Individual users are not empowered to give such consent. Obviously they haven't heard The Internet, or simply the Net, is the publicly accessible worldwide system of interconnected computer networks...

Of COURSE individual users are empowered to provide University services to other networks. That's how the Internet works.

This is the same university who provides you with geocities-style "personal web space" and then bills you if you want shell access or, god forbid, if you actually want to use a script in your web page. The terms are so commercial it makes me think they are just reselling the hosting services from some other provider.

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[LordLucless]

Erm, your concrete reasons are:

• It uses too much bandwidth, which the university FUP doesn't allow.
• It may use resources you are not permitted to give access to if you're using a university computer

Neither of which makes one iota of difference to someone who is running their own computer off their own network connection.

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a drawback. To deliver phonecalls you need to exchange information anyway. It only shows the bottlneck of how the bandwidth of direct connection from some places is slower than it is necessary to deliver phonecalls. If direct connection was enough, the Supernodes wouldn't be used up so much.

So, direct connection will still be used only by those who have fast direct connections, and you won't be able to talk with many of those users who don't have fast DIRECT connections.

Am I wrong here?

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[gjokkel]

Come on, man... Skype allocates far less net resources even when used with Spontania (video link using Skype API) than any other stuff, like MSN Messenger, etc. Just test it out. Actually this cannot be attributed to Skype developers, because Skype is using a VoIP engine developed by a Norwegian company. Funnily enough so does Google Talk, too.

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[CrankyOG]

Also, be aware that Skype, (developed by those who brought you Kazaa) is, like Kazaa, a p2p app and rather rudely uses your resources. In addition to that, it's proprietary and conflicts/is incompatible with the emerging SIP standard. More info:

Beware Skype's Hype http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1517548,00.as p

Skype: Hazardous to network health? http://www.networkworld.com/columnists/2005/092605 tolly.html

Re:Why Skype is Bad

[Ilgaz]

IMHO it is just another Google phenomenon.

Skype, built on closed source , non standard protocols acquired by a huge company gets Slashdot community support.

It won't change anytime soon.

not good for international calls

[ne0n]

I had the displeasure of talking with my sister on Skype this week. Apparently Skype connections are made from some form of solid lag. I've heard better audio fidelity using tin cans and string.
I'd rather pay 3 cents a minute on a phone card than suffer another fscking skype call.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, eBay.

Re:not good for international calls

[asavage]

I often use regular skype to South Korea and the quality has been great. It is more clear then a local call. Skypeout though has varied from unusable to poor. I have never had a clear domestic or foreign call using skypeout.

Re:not good for international calls

[d99-sbr]

I use Skype pretty extensively, and generally the sound quality is at least as good as ordinary land lines, but sometimes you get a "bad connection" and have to redial. Also, the Windows client seems to function poorly when other programs access your sound card at the same time.

It's not perfect, but for 0,017 it is a pretty good deal.

Re:not good for international calls

[golgotha007]

I call from Russia to the US frequently with Skype. The sound quality and latency is about as good as regular international calls were about 10 years ago.

Also, that's not just the windows client that doesn't like to share audio, the linux client is the same. Sometimes it plays well with other audio programs, sometimes it doesn't. A simple restart fixes the problem.

Re:not good for international calls

[geomark]

The contrary seem to be the norm. Skype calls are quite good for most users from what I've heard and read and experienced myself. I use it frequently to call from Thailand to the U.S., both PC-to-PC and PC-to-land line. PC-to-PC with broadband on each end is very good, good sound quality and latency is noticable but not annoying. To land lines my calls are usually quite good - sometimes the call gets dropped and I have to call again. But quality and latency are pretty good.

Re:not good for international calls

[Spirckle]

The sound quality of Skype seems to vary with the equipment you use. When I use skype from my home built desktop that uses all the cheapest parts, I find that quality is bad with a terrible echo even if using a good headset. On a kind of cheap Toshiba it's acceptable with a good headphone. With my Dell Inspiron 8200 laptop which has a built in microphone and good sound system, the quality is fantastic using NO headset. No echo, no tinny "speakerphone" sound on the other end. And Skype is cheap, cheap, cheap. I can't wait for the day of city wide WiFi, I'll ditch ALL phone companies, landline and cell.

Re:not good for international calls

[WegianWarrior]

Thats odd.

My father in law called us from the states last week to test the connection. He reported he got a better connection calling us in Norway, than he did calling a friend in Texas (my inlaws are in WV). My guess is that it all depends on 'the last mile' of copper, from the remote server to the receiver of the call.

That, and I guess the amouth ot traffic on the network would also affect the call quality. We off course have the benifit of six hours time difference, so when he call us in the afternoon here, it's still morning in the states and less people on.

We're totaly getting Skype as soon as we get our paws on a decent headset - dialing PC-toPC is a lot cheaper than calling the US from Norway :)

Re:not good for international calls

[huwnet]

I have used skype many time to ring the US from the UK. It is alot cheaper and it actually better quality than our landline. And as freephone numbers are now free on skype I can ring freephone US number for free when they arent free on a landline.

Re:not good for international calls

[Dimensio]

I haven't had any problems with Skype even on cheap hardware. My Xbox, running Debian, has only half of the "required" RAM yet I can run it with a USB headset with no problems.

Skip the starter kit...

[Ythan]

...go with the CIT200 instead. I don't usually plug commercial products like this, but in my opinion it's the first device which provides a legitimate VoIP landline alternative for home users.

Re:Skip the starter kit...

[huwnet]

Does hardware like this have driver support for Windows XP x64? Does it ever output on the wrong soundcard causing problems?

Re:Skip the starter kit...

[Ythan]

Unfortunately, at the moment there are no 64-bit drivers for this device. This also caused me to reconsider, but I'm willing to run it on a secondary PC if there isn't support when I eventually upgrade. The cit200.exe application only takes about 5MB of RAM so you can run it on a fairly low-end machine if need be.

It did initially conflict with my primary sound device, a problem I've experienced with other Skype handsets as well. There is a very simple solution but it isn't widely publicised. In the Sound control panel, select your primary sound device for input and output but uncheck the "use only default devices" option. Then in Skype, make sure it's configured to use your Skype phone as the sound device and also "let skype adjust my sound device settings". That should be all there is to it, normal sound is routed to your normal speakers and Skype sound goes to the phone. You can even listen to music and talk on Skype at the same time without them interfering, or set it so Skype rings on your computer for incoming calls but uses the phone once you answer.

Anyway I hope this answers your question!

Best regards,
-Y

Hey, thats charging rate.

[Falcon040]

I think you overestimated how much it is costing them.
That is at the rate they charge to make a profit - it comes to 65 cents (US Dollars).
Really may we expect about $0.40 (40 cents (USD)) or thereabouts for Skype's Premium Service?

Saying that, thats a kind $0.40 or so, thanks n all. But, I'd rather stick with a SIP standard-compliant phone.

Ah yes RadioShack

[OverlordQ]

Because we all know how well they handled the :CueCat ;)

Re:Ah yes RadioShack

[fermion]

I wonder how any real hardware geek can have bad feeling about radio shack. Sure the prices are high, sales people are only slightly more clueful than the customers. OTOH, they are the electronics chain, and when one is a kid, it is hard to go to or be taken seriously at the real electronics shop, and circuit city would not know wire markers if one were shoved up thier butt. It is the thing top make fun of them now, but how many people got thier first computer, or thier first laptop, from Radio Shack. Radio Shack sells, or at least makes accesible, products that would not otherwise be accesible.

I see this as a good thing. Radio Shack does a much better job of walking the customer through unfamiliar technology than any of the big box stores. Of course doing this costs more. The thing with the cuecat is that almost anyone who needs a handheld barcode scanner has the resources to locate one. The cuecat was toy, and as such it was ok.

Re:Ah yes RadioShack

[RobertLTux]

Speaking of the kit mentioned
1 your better selling RadioShacks have had them since wednsday
2 what you get is a ten dollar earpiece, the cd and the skype code card
3 its oddly enough $9.99
4 the usb headset or skype Phone would be better quality

Speaking of that Foul Funky Feline
its hard to sell something that comes in @ disco pricing

Re:Ground Br.. 7,000 RatShacks and 7,000 Starbucks

[icecow]

Because throughout the United States there are just as many Radio Shacks as there are Starbucks: about 7,000 of each.

Other VoIP providers

[Anonymous Coward]

So, is Skype able to interact with other VoIP providers yet?
Oh, what's that ... it's not?
Oh well, get back to us when Skype is something other than an insignificant closed network.

My headset

[nighty5]

Skype is great.

I bought a powerbook about 5 months ago, and whilst overseas working (I'm Australian) I bought a headset from an Apple store in NYC in Soho.

It was around $60 USD or something like that.

Plantronics .Audio 85 Headphone:
http://www.macaudiopro.com/articles/viewarticle.js p?id=33411

Highly recommended.

Comes with a DSP, and is USB. A LONG cable with a comfortable headset thats foldable a big bonus for frequently travellers like myself.

I was totally impressed on the mac, no drivers to install, and it Just Worked. Skype detects it as a Plantronics in Skype config.

Totally cool..

Re:My headset

[shokk]

Plantronics is only marketing this as Mac compatible, but it has a USB adapter. Has anyone used this with Windows? It looks a lot like their $80 DSP-400. Plantronics' "Find my headset" page doesn't list the .Audio 85 for either OS but it was released in June.
http://www.plantronics.com/north_america/en_US/pre ss/releases/index.jhtml?id=pr_20050606_1910_en_US

Re:My headset

[nighty5]

Yep, it works in Windows XP with no drivers required.

I just inserted the interface into the USB socket and it detected it as a Plantronics headset - no dramas.

NO & Skype is dead once Google Talk offers SIP

[pflodo]

Once Google Talk offers their service via SIP and most importantly allows federation with others, they will become the glue that binds together all the currently fragmented voip offerings. Providers that don't want to open up and federate with Google will slowly dissappear. After all it won't be long and most the people that you talk to will not be on landlines, but IP only, and you therefore don't want a provider that is not connected.

If I was an incumbent telco in any part of the world, I would be scared, I would probably try dirty games such as providing restricted internet access with SIP traffic filtered out.

Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[Newer Guy]

Literally all VOIP providers have statdardized on SIP for their protocol. This means that a Sipura VOIP box can work with any of them - EXCEPT Skype! Skype uses their own protocol that's incompatble. This is why you CAN't use them with a VOIP box such as the Sipura or Linksys. Skype only works with a computer. This relegates it to 'toy' or hobbyist status. Until they come out with an inexpensive (around 50 dollar) VOIP box that's easy to configure and works with a standard telephone, the masses will NOT use Skype except as a novelty.

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[Anonymous Coward]

From reading your post, it would seem you're not aware that Skype is popular and VOIP boxes are a niche item for nerdy folk.

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[at_slashdot]

the masses will NOT use Skype except as a novelty.

3,626,876 Users online -- I think that masses have decided otherwise...

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[Ilgaz]

Yes, those masses also decided to use Windows.

Keep with the masses, I stay on open protocols.

I am not a big open source advocate but for communications, there SHOULD be open protocols not controlled by some company.

I think Gizmo project does deserve the support. http://www.gizmoproject.com/ . It is built on open, tested protocols such as REAL SIP. Skype has nothing to do with SIP as parent reminds,

This time, I won't comment about Kazaa :)

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[at_slashdot]

I am all for open standards, actually I'm for open source too. I was just stating a fact..

I just downloaded Gizmo and I give up to install it, what stopped me was Gizmo User Agreement: it says that it doesn't guarantee that it doesn't contain viruses or other malicious code.. blah blah, I'm not going to install anything like that, if it were GPL code at least I would have known that somebody can take a look at it (if not myself). I'm sure others will not be bothered by that, but I am. It's one thing to get open source software that comes without any guarantee and it's totally different thing to get closed source software that comes without guarantee.

Isn't there any open source that does the same stuff just as well?

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[Ilgaz]

Skype does have such a guarantee?

That will be one first on IT World.

Nothing comes with such a guarantee in a World people sueing restaurants for making them fat!

Re:Skype is hobbled, non standard VOIP

[at_slashdot]

In short: no. Take a look:

"Skype emphasizes that it will only incorporate such third party software or technology for the purpose of (a) adding new or additional functionality or (b) improving the technical performance of the Skype Software. Any such third party software or technology that is incorporated in the Skype Software falls under the scope of this Agreement. Any and all other third party software or technology that may be distributed together with the Skype Software will be subject to you explicitly accepting a license agreement with that third party."

That's totaly different from what the Gizmo User License says.

Also in my comment I was asking about GPL-ed software or free in general, which neither Skype or Gizmo are -- for what I know both might contain spyware.

Guillemot and Skype did offer such bundles in 2004

[Bill Cube]

Guillemot has a bundle with a headset and Skype, with 30 minutes of SkypeOut included. http://www.skype.com/company/news/2004/guillemotla unch.html/
Wasn't this available in the USA ?

Skype tools

[povvell]

I've just done a round-up of some cool products which let you use Skype away from the computer which may be of use to Skype fans. You can find it here.

I got the same thing for free

[pr1000]

Well, not the same exact thing, but Skype reps here in London were handing out little packages with a mini CD with Windows software (Mac, Linux, and Pocket PC users had to go to the website), the 30 minute card, and a little earbud with mic. Of course, I would recommend getting a real headset.

Oh, and those that say that Skype will never be big until it uses SIP: the fact of the matter is, it already is huge in Europe and some other parts of the world (3,402,086 users are currently online, according to my client). Also, Skype calls to other Skype users have excellent sound quality and are far better than SkypeOut calls (ie to a standard phone number). So, like any service that seeks to become the standard, they're giving you incentive to join their orbit (think Aol Instant Messenger not working with other IM clients). But yes, it doesn't use SIP. However, if someone made a Skype-enabled box (like the Linksys Vonage ones), I'm sure they're clean up.

Re:It's why Skype is good.

[Anonymous Coward]

...For those, who have no fast direct connections.

Let me be the first to ask...

[RealBeanDip]

"More than 3,000 RadioShack locations nationwide on Monday [the 21st] will begin offering the Skype Starter Kit,

Would you like batteries with that?

Radio Shack Stock

[Ashley Bowers]

This should increase the shares on Radio Shack stock by a couple of points but when the bigger fish get to selling the stock will dip back down.Even still congrats on Skype making it on the shelves of a national retailer stores.

Skype is dead once Google Talk offers SIP

[shokk]

All depends on what Google Talk's pay scheme will be for calling landlines. You can't get rid of them 100% and you'll still have to call some business down the street for some services. A per minute rate for that just won't do. SIPphone charges $.02 per minute for calls around the US, which is pretty crazy for local calls, and having a real phone number is more on top of that.

I imagine they'll make some sort of free call offer for listening to commercials vs a $19.99/month unlimited call plan. Come to think of it, I WOULD pay that to avoid listening to commercials. Too bad my cable company doesn't work that way for all the cash I give them.

I'm really looking for something that gives unlimited calls per month, good quality, won't charge me per minute for calls in the US, and possibly lets me use Asterisk.

Does anyone still shop at Radio Shack?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean really. It used to be a decent place to pick up parts. Now, its like a crappy Toys 'R Us meets an even crappier Best Buy. And, of course, all of their stuff is made in China.

Done already...

[BrokenHalo]

I fail to see how this is very much different from what some others are offering. For instance, Logitech offers quite good USB headsets with the equivalent of 2 hours of Skype calls to landline phones in many countries. (Incidentally, if anybody's interested, they work very nicely with Linux too.)

Voipbuster

[Life700MB]

You really should check voipbuster, wich allow free calls to land lines in these countries: Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United States.

--
Superb hosting 2400MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, ssh, $7.95

Re:Ground Br.. 7,000 RatShacks and 7,000 Starbucks

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

Hmmmm........ I'm just thinking out loud here, but... perhaps they should merge and become:

STAR-SHACKS!

no? well, maybe:

RADIO-BUCKS!

Re:NO & Skype is dead once Google Talk offers

[pipingguy]

If I was an incumbent telco in any part of the world, I would be scared, I would probably try dirty games such as providing restricted internet access

What you really probably mean is, "If I was an incumbent telco middle manager..."

All those boomers with high-paid jobs need somewhere to go (see also music and movie industries) but they are addicted to the power of doing not much and getting paid handsomely for it. It's a social, not a business problem.

Review

[bitspotter]

After resisting a close-dsource proprietary app, I tried Skype last night.

After much frustration with firewalls with other apps (notably Wengophone), I was impressed by Skype's NAT traversal. It WAS configurationless.

Unfortunately, Skype's ALSA sound support on Linux is in the stone age. Who codes for OSS anymore? Using ALSA's OSS emulation, anywhere between 5 and ten minutes into a call, Skype would hang my entire sound system, requiring the ALSA modules be unloaded and reloaded.

And we are now left to the tender mercies of Skype's programmers to code ALSA support. *looks at his watch*.

Are there any Share-Alike SIP voip apps that do NAT traversal? I've been looking.

Skype experiences.

[Anonymous Coward]

SkypeOut is overpriced; I can get cheaper calling cards where I live.

The quality isn't so good when you use SkypeOut.

There is a noise gate system which completely cuts out the audio unless the total volume exceeds a certain threshold. It's like a primitive studio noisegate. A friend of mine tried to play something for me on her piano, and I hear only two notes of the whole thing. Sometimes if she speaks quietly, pieces of speech go missing.

The quality of the sounds that do get through is not as good as dialing direct through a phone line, either.

The latency, while not Skype's fault obviously, is also a big problem. You can't have a natural conversation with the long round-trip times.

If you are both on Skype, then, and only then, you get what you pay for, since it's free.

I gave up on it. Why should I pay about 3 cents per minute (Canadian), when I can find a calling card that gives me a better connection to an actual telephone line, at about the same rate as SkypeOut? There is much less lag, and quiet background sounds can be heard even when the other person isn't talking: no cheap-ass noisegate.

There are cards that go as low as 1c per minute, with no connection fees, but with some catches such as a daily charge that eventually drains the card to $0 even if you don't use it. But even if you get, say, 1/3rd the usage that the scummy little card theoretically promises, it's still beats Skype.

Re:Ground Br.. 7,000 RatShacks and 7,000 Starbucks

[MikeFM]

Does anyone actually shop at Radio Shack? I always found it to be sort of the slums of electronic stores and it's usually empty when you go there. I have no idea how they stay in business. I have a Radio Shack about a block from here and it's been more than two years since I bothered going there because they never have what I need or anything very interesting to look at.

In other words Skype is not bad

[SuperKendall]

So it's bad because it's a P2P client (summary of the article linked to)

Well people who run P2P clients do not seem to mind. And people who use Skype for free do not seem to mind they are giving up a little bit of system resources for something free. What's so bad about that? Skype doesn't really try to hide what they do.

How about a different question?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is Skype compatible with other VoIP software and the International Standard SIP?

No. Similarily, the answer to another question:

"Does Skype aound like ass?"

is also no.

Perhaps there is a reason that for now they do not use SIP.

What everyone fails to undertand is that when SIP has been reined and starts working well for other people, Skype can just change to use SIP as well.

SIP not such a big deal

[repetty]

I love open standards as much as the next guy, however, conformity to some open standard doesn't guarranty anything.

Apple built iChat AV around SIP years ago. Today, Gizmo and iChat cannot interoperate.

Another example: XML. Microsoft announced, proudly, that Word would utilize XML in Word's file specifications. Trust me, interoperability was NOT in their plans.

The SIP standard is very small and doesn't dictiate how things are to be accomplished -- merely that they are. Very nice.

However, until projects make interoperability a feature (none do) then SIP doesn't mean much.

Skype just works.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm so sick of hearing people marginalize a product because it fails to live up to some technical elegance. I mean really, do you think end users give a shit about standardization! The only important factor as to whether any voip solution will succeed is the user experience. And quite frankly the fact that skype requires little configuration and provides a straight forward api for 3rd parties to plug into makes a big difference.

Take this http://www.rapidvoip.com/products.html/ little box for 50$ (!). It both rings the phone when there is an incoming skype call and allows me to dial out. I can press * to toggle between the land line and skype and use the quick-dial assignments allow you to dial contacts. Inexpensive and it just works. And yes, it can be wired it to all phones is the house.

How is this a Debut?

[wraithgar]

At Staples, where I work, we've been selling Skype kits for over a month. I wonder, then, how this Radioshack deal constitutes a U.S. Retail debut.

No, you can't find the phones on the staples.com website, unfortunately. I found this out the hard way when a guy who had been buying quite a few for some out-of-country employees of his came in to buy more than we had in stock, and I had to get them from another store rather than just ship them to him from an online order.

Why waste money?

[Chadhulhu]

Skype and Vonage offer Interet based calling right? Well, why not just use google talk (which I have found to be seemless in p2p chat) or any of the other chat programs that offer voice? Paying for something like Vonage/Skype seems to be a waste of money.