Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SIP vs. Skype, Making the "Open" Choice

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the answer-seemed-clear dept.

techie34290 writes "If you were to make the choice between SIP and Skype for Linux, which one would you go for? Matt Hartley from MadPenguin.org says to opt for SIP. Why? "One tidbit of information that most people are not likely aware of is that when you install the Skype client, it will drain system resources by running as a supernode from time to time. Granted, this is not always the case; however, the very idea of my PC having its resources tied up for someone else's phone call is frankly maddening to me."

3 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Isn't that the point? by dizzoug · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The sacrifice you make to have a 'free' phone service is your system resources. Without donating your clock cyles, you would have to pay skype to use servers that they would otherwise have to provide. And yes, if your system can handle it, it will act as a supernode from time to time. It is your choice, but very few things are truly free.

    1. Re:Isn't that the point? by Vihai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it isn't. No wonder there is no "SIP" server, managed by a "SIP" company.

      SIP is a technology while Skype is a service, provided by a single company with a proprietary technology.

      The difference is absolute.

      You could provide the same exact service Skype is providing with SIP. Did you ask to yourself why there is no such service? Because it would be much harder to lock your customers in with SIP. SIP is already peer-to-peer for what concerns audio streams.

  2. the very idea by thrillseeker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    of my PC having its resources tied up for someone else's phone call is frankly maddening to me

    ... but I have no problem with tying up someone else's resources when it's for my convenience ... ?