Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Skype 2.0 Adds Video

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the i-see-you dept.

Golygydd Max writes "Skype is showing that there's life after the eBay purchase. Techworld reports that the company has just launched the beta of Skype 2.0, having added video to its telecommunication software. The company is already lagging behind the likes of AOL and MSN in offering this, but Skype must be hoping that the size of its user base will help it - its store is to start selling videocams almost immediately." The LA Times has a review from a 2.0 beta tester, if you're interested in a hands-on look.

5 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wow.. this is so like.. 1997 by ady1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    actually its not. skype is one of its kind which uses p2p and has encrypted communication

  2. its too much generalization by ady1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As I Live in an underdeveloped county and have relatives abroad so I know that a very good portion of the video conferencing is used by parted families

  3. Re:Demand for the video phone? by JPriest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Plenty of IM clients have supported audio too but until Skype nobody ever really used it.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  4. Re:Demand for the video phone? by sbryant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't have kids, do you? If you don't live so close to your parents, you'll find yourself the "videophone" so they can see their grandchildren. Then, once you have it anyway, it's nice to be able to see friends and relatives. Usage depends on how good (smooth) the implementation is. It's not a must-have, but it does grow on you.

    I've been using the free video plugin for Skype for quite a while now. It wasn't bad, but it did go a little weird every now and then (lost the camera etc). I'm hoping that the integrated version will be better.

    -- Steve

  5. Re:Wow.. this is so like.. 1997 by sammy+baby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow. You have a very different memory of 1997 than I do.

    In my world, current video communication systems that work over the public internet are superior by orders of magnitude to their ancestors in terms of signal quality. That's in large measure due to the better availability of bandwidth across the board (and yes: contrary to your assertion, even upstream connectivity is faster than it was back then, unless you want to compare an upstream speed of, say, 385 kbps to your old 56K. modem.)

    I'm not a video expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I was peripherally involved in testing and evaluating video-via-network between 1997 and June of this year. In '97 we were swearing at CUSeeMe; in 2000, we were experimenting with video over ATM; by 2005 we were using everything from NetMeeting to dedicated Polycom systems with auto tracking cameras. Trust me, it's better now.