Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Buying Skype for $8.5B
Approximately one trillion readers wrote in to tell us that there is a big rumor that Microsoft is buying Skype. This follows an earlier rumor that the
suitor was Facebook. Unsurprisingly many people are already wondering what it would mean for Linux users of the popular VoIP platform. Many major publications are running versions of the story.
So what's a good alternative to Skype that works cross-platform? I use Skype with Linux and Android connecting to Mac and Windows users. Is Jitsi a reasonable solution?
[Insert pithy quote here]
According to the Beeb.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13343600
Gnu phone anyone ?
"wondering what it would mean for Linux users" - It means you're fucked! Sadly.
Jonathanjk.com
that they could loose a piece of closed source software? That must have some comic value.
And here I was thinking I had submitted a great story! Anyways, I use Linux primarily, and skype often with family members. I hope I don't have to re-setup everything as a result of discontinued compatibility. It's doubtful that they would continue to support versions of linux. I can see them supporting apple software as they do for Office, but I'd be willing to bet linux users will be hung out to dry.
Does it uninstall cleanly?
Turning the Living Room into a video conference room is what will get the grandparents to buy an Xbox, similar to the way photo-sharing through e-mail got The Folks online to begin with.
Come for the remote grandkid interaction, stay for the streaming music and video...
Not just linux users either. Mobile users except for those with Windows phones are probably fucked too, the android skype users almost certainly.
Microsoft already has the technology necessary in their own audio/video/text Windows Live Messenger platform. So I don't think it's about that. And yes, I feel sorry for the Skype staff today -- I don't think this move bodes well for them at all. Their competence may not be what Microsoft is looking for here.
And as for other reasons, the paying customer base (compared to the non-paying WLM user base) of Skype could perhaps be attractive to Microsoft. Keep in mind that Skype is running with losses despite all these users, though.
In the end, taking all these thoughts together, I can only imagine that this is a risky move by Microsoft. I think they are hoping for awesome synergy effects from some forthcoming integration with their products. I assume something big, and no minor idea, since it needs to pay these $8.5 billion and more.
My first idea was integrating this with Windows Phone 7 (8? 9?) to get phone calls at data rates, but I have no idea how they'll going to get the providers to accept that. That would be a feat as grand as Steve Jobs getting the music companies to sign on to iTunes back in the days, if not greater.
Otherwise... Hmm, someone mentioned Xbox or Kinect integration to communicate with others with these devices... Well that's a thought but why shouldn't they be able to just implement that feature with their Live network? Write a WLM client for these - done. No $8.5 billion wasted.
Not sure if there are other ideas about where MS may be going with this?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
I always found Skype to be an annoying piece of shit. I get far too much spam from Skype. MSFT deserves them.
Sig?! Sig?! We don't need no stinking sig!!
The last thing we need is for facebook to get any bigger. I'd rather see Microsoft at the top than a MS/google/FB split.
Wow - all the Linux people spreading the FUD this time around. Ever stop to think that maybe, JUST MAYBE, MS is buying it for the tech, looking to expand on what's already there, being able to use their existing infrastructure to better the service, while adding it to the Xbox 360 (and future consoles), all the while, continuing development of all the versions already existing?
Or are all you Linux fanbois just gonna dump Skype because it's owned by MS now, and you're leaving due to "principle" - i.e. being retarded?
Just look at their past record. Maybe that strange guy in the park with the prison tattoos really has a puppy in his van.
A convicted monopolist buys out an effective monopoly in a related market? There is pretty much *no* reason for them to be buying Skype other than to abuse the monopoly they have. Coming so soon after the Nokia fiasco it is clear that Microsoft is still as shady as it has ever been and needs to be reigned in.
Or are all you Linux fanbois just gonna dump Skype because it's owned by MS now
They won't have to: Microsoft will likely dump the Linux version anyway.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Finally, the last company who resisted in opening their encryption protocol falls into US hands.
Skype made many governments around the world very unhappy.
Now, Skype being US based joins gmail. yahoo, facebook and other intelligence gathering tools.
Basically skype seems to have a *whole* lot of traction/brand recognition. MS wants to control that to prop up their struggling mobile phone play (read: screw over iOS/Android/etc users). Torpedoing Linux support will probably be just side-effect.
My hope is that MS has the causative relationship reversed. Skype is ubiquitous because they endeavour to work on all devices. If Skype becomes an Xbox/Windows/Windows Phone play, I expect their subscriber base to evaporate.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Contact your senators and congressmen and ask them to stop this
Remains to be seen what they do with the cross platform versions. Microsoft don't have a history of playing nice, ever. I don't even use voice/video chat apps, but this would be enough to make me at least look for a backup option to be on the safe side.
Disclaimer: I don't like Windows, and I don't particularly like MS, but my levels of pettiness have dropped to where I have bought an Xbox (but with the intention of mostly renting the games, or buying at budget prices).
which is totally what she said
all the while, continuing development of all the versions already existing?
If it doesn't make them money MS would be unlikely to continue development of a Linux version. I would not be surprised if the Linux version is not all that profitable for the work that would have to go into it vs. the revenue realised by it (Skype Out etc).
Supporting the competition is something that MS doesn't do lightly. Begrudgingly they have Office for Mac and really that's about as far as it goes these days.
I would say that the Android Skype is reasonably safe for now, since inter-operability there is important to keep market share for Skype (if Android uses changed,to something else a lot of OTHER Skype users would follow I could guess).
Losing a few linux users, unlikely to be much of a problem to MS honchos.
NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
According to the press release itself: "Microsoft will continue to invest in and support Skype clients on non-Microsoft platforms." However, this is Microsoft, and we know how they operate. This is unlikely to be anything but a ploy to avoid objections from the authorities to the purchase. Once it is too late to stop it, I predict not a single update will go into the Linux and Android versions, and the Mac and iPhone versions will lag behind in features. So the question is what alternatives there are now.
Another question is what Google, Facebook and Cisco will do now. If I were on the board of any of them, I'd certainly be pushing for pooling resources to create a joint venture to compete with Skype on all fronts. Could set up quite the consortium for the money they intended to spend buying Skype themselves.
Interesting times.
How? It's not an antitrust case. MS doesn't have any presence in the VoIP arena (at least as far as I know.) There's not much to do about it.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Well, continued development of an own product for Linux* would be something completely new for MS. They haven't done that before and there may even be considerable legal concerns about patent-related language in some open source licenses for libs that Skype on Linux ultimately depends on. If they happen to be very unlucky they may lose the ability to threaten with patents againt Linux. They certainly do not want that.
Plus, there are not that many customers on Linux, relatively speaking. So they'll certainly do the math. What does it cost to maintain and support the Linux client? How many of them are paying customers? How many Linux users would migrate to Windows and pay additional license fees to MS when that client is discontinued? I'd like to think that the last number is the most significant, so the client will be abandoned for sane business reasons. Business is the part where they are least stupid and most ruthless, remember?
* Okay, there is this kernel module to support the Windows Server hypervisor, but that lives inside the kernel, which has a much simpler licensing structure than the user space.
http://www.moonlight3d.eu/
Previous history teaches us to be wary. Fool me once, and all that.
The point is that if you've been reliant on an awful lot of things that MS has bought out in the past, you've come unstuck - usually not long after they bought it out. I put a list on The Register already and I can't be bothered to go find it and paste it back in.
And even if true, then the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Watch what MS do. Based on past personal history, I predict that a lot of people who *aren't* complaining and currently *using* Skype won't be using it in the future. You can prove me wrong (for the first time ever, when it comes to MS) in a year's time if that's not the case.
You honestly think that MS are going to continue the Android version of Skype, for instance? That they won't fight tooth-and-nail to stop third-party clients using the Skype network without be "authorised" by MS? That somehow they'll be nice as pie to all those MacOS and Linux users they have currently? You seem to be suggesting that they could even enhance the service.
And, like everyone who's worked in IT for a while and seen how MS has behaved historically, I don't believe it and even if they turn it into the most wonderful, open service in the world, they STILL have a lot of making up until I start to trust their intentions by default.
Retards for having a principle and not wanting to *risk* getting stung? I'm a retard then. A professional one in fact. Strangely, I'm not even using Linux on the desktop either. You don't have to be a fanboi to worry about getting stung, and you don't have to be one to not trust someone's intentions based on past behaviour.
I still have Skype installed. But every update from now will be installed retrospectively once other guinea pigs have a chance to tell me what they changed. And I'm actually researching current alternatives - I'm hoping this might be the impetus needed to forge a decent, ubiquitous, cross-platform and open-source alternative. While Skype was doing what people wanted, there was no need for an alternative - now I, and many others, are looking for one - just in case.
I suspect this is a preemptive strike by MS to stop Facebook snagging Skype, for which it would be an excellent fit. Facebook and its tasty, tasty advertising
------
beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
My experience is that almost everything Microsoft touches is unpleasant for everyone else. My guess is that Skype will become the Zune, the Vista, and the Windows ME of voice communication. Microsoft is run by a CEO with little or no interest in technical things, so even if the company wanted to do something good for users, it wouldn't know what that is.
We need an open-source alternative.
This comment deserves better than the negative moderation points it's received. It's a valid point. The idea of adding Skype to Xbox 360 is interesting.
Now I plead guilty to the charge of disliking anything with the Microsoft brand on it, I'm not sure that makes me 'retarded', just prejudiced. This is why we ignored the Ford Fusion Hybrid when we were looking for a new car last year.
If Skype is longer supported on linux and mac based platforms... then it would create a void which others would gladly fill. Already it has competitors commercially (mostly in the conferencing space). Also it seems that Skype has a proprietary protocol.. so others messengers cannot be used to communicate with Skype users. Of course this means, some Skype users on windows might also make a shift.. if all their buddies are on other platforms and can't get on Skype.. So it would be wise for them to continue to provide Skype for all platform even if not the latest version..
The last person to mod me down is a rotten egg..... there.. that should do it..
But, I just don't see it....
What are they going to do, integrate it with Windows? Use it as a protocol as part of Office Communicator? Office Communicator uses SIP though (Funnily enough for MS an external standard), so unless they are going to gateway it.... At this point, it just makes more sense to buy a license to the protocol, and not the whole company. Flip the coin to the other side of the fence (To the customer side) and do you think they want to have their bandwidth used as part of the P2P network which is Skype?
I could SORTA see Google using it to expand their reach of Google Voice, but still, given the amount of money that they have, why not go for organic growth, just advertise it and and wait?
Unfortunately, I just don't see the point in Skype when talking about alll this. I see them as basically the ICQ or AIM of voice platforms, sure loads of people use / used it, but at the end of the day the protocol for communication is proprietry. Nearly everyone is embracing XMPP in same shape or form, whether using it internally or externally or both. Hell, Cisco BOUGHT Jabber. This allows people to easily create federations, to automatically connect to users from other domains etc etc.
Someone want to tell me where the synergy is here? Why this is a great idea?
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
I characterized this as a choice between the "old evil" and the "new evil" (fully acknowledging my bias against both companies...) Would the /. community be more comfortable with Skype as a Facebook product?
This is good news if it means Facebook and Google not buying it. I'd much rather have Microsoft own them than risk my privacy with Facebook and Google.
Maybe it won't be so bad. Hotmail isn't half bad since Microsoft bought them (was a Hotmailer before it was Microsoftized).
My hat is off to them
First they sucker eBay into buying them for a lot of money. Then eBay eventually figures out that it was a mistake and sells it back for chump change.
Now they've sold it M$ for even more money. The folks in Redmond will phase the management team out in a year or so (but they're happy and rich so they won't care.) Then they'll let the product drift for a bit and eventually it will be assimilated into their portfolio of OK-to-mediocre products and become part of the load of crap software that comes pre-installed on PCs. That will insure that they have a lot of users. How they will monetize it remains to be seen.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Has Microsoft's reputation with the public sunk to such a low point where they are now forced to acquire other Internet companies in a desperate attempt to expand Microsoft's internet/Live customer base by proxy?
How? It's not an antitrust case. MS doesn't have any presence in the VoIP arena (at least as far as I know.) There's not much to do about it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)
"The basic idea is that consumers are harmed by being forced to buy an undesired good (the tied good) in order to purchase a good they actually want (the tying good), and so would prefer that the goods be sold separately"
Basically, once skype is carefully accidentally closed to all but win7, and MS is the monopoly provider of win7, skype will be tied to it.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Could it be an issue if they were to stop making a linux client?
Then they could be using Skype (and it's lack of availability for a competing platform) to strengthen their operating system base and weaken a competing OS.
Oracle buys sun and then slowly shuts down OpenOffice. MS buys Skype and will slowly (probably rapidly more like) shutdown Linux support. What other useful apps are there that offer cross platform support for Linux and can be wiped out by simply buying the company? Dropbox next?
With the Microsoft/Ford collaboration, what if Microsoft built Skype into the next version of their car software?
Could Microsoft be looking for a 'great convergence' of voice between cell phones, computers, cars, TVs/consoles (Xbox), etc? They have the smarts, but do they have the business vision to pull this off? And if they do, how open/closed would the resulting system be?
Right. So now is not the time to complain - wait for the bad deed to actually occur before screaming about said bad deed.
Patent Portfolio.
This looks like a move to BLOCK Facebook and/or Google expansion into this area. And when either of these companies move in anyhow, out come the lawsuits.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Hey, don't forget that many, if not most of Microsoft's most successful products started out as acquisitions. That includes Office and IE. So buying a product and Microsoftizing it is nothing new for Redmond.
Skype is but one of many-- albeit one with more sunken capital and assets-- and its functionality can be replicated easily. Microsoft could exclude Linux or even Apple users. That would be silly of them.
There are dozens of decent VoIP apps out there, and some of them are browser-based rather than P2P. So there is no monopoly-- not that this reason makes Microsoft any more holy. It's more added value for Microsoft. Others can add similar value and reap those benefits, too.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
...instead of AT&T buying T-Mo to monopolize the GSM market in the US.
If MS is so bent on being a big player in the smartphone world, it would've made sense for them to own their own wireless carrier network too.
Quick, if all of us put in our 0.01 cents on this we can still outbid Microsoft!
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
But then maybe this will spur the development of better FOSS alternatives.
That said, I still threw up in my mouth a little bit. This is awful news. Mark my words: Skype will be integrated into Internet Explorer 12 and thus rendered unusable by anyone running Mac / Linux / anything other than Windows. And it won't work well on Windows.
The horror.
Great warrior...hrmph! Wars not make one great.
"wondering what it would mean for Linux users" - It means you're fucked! Sadly.
MS is probably not very interested in the Linux users as a market. They recently stepped into the phone market with Nokia... phone business might be the thing on their minds, not those few Linux desktop users. Especially on the shorter term, they may actually keep up linux compatibility because of the phone business.
Only if they think they have a chance to sell windows to linux users will they try to deliberately screw them with their other products.
I think that it's far more likely that MS is trying to screw everybody, not just linux users. I think we'll be seeing a lot more paid services on Skype soon.
Microsoft could still drop Linux support and still say they have cross platform support. (just not all platforms). it is likely they they would be praised for doing this by their business peers. The move being seen as making the company more profitable by cutting away some of those less efficient parts of the company. a new Linux VOIP provides will show up eventually. we will just have to wait another few years. :(
First of all - it is the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission who enforce antitrust laws. Doesn't anybody know how our government works? You know - three branches of government - legislative, judicial, and executive. What did they teach you in school?
Second, there is nothing wrong or unusual with Microsoft buying Skype. If Oracle can get away with all the mergers they've done over the years then I don't see how they could go after Microsoft for this.
Finally, I highly doubt Microsoft will do anything to interfere with the Linux version.
Ballmer: "Can you hear me now?"
Microsoftie linux tester: "Yes, Master."
Ballmer: "Keep working. Skype ain't done until Linux won't run!"
Or they could just not bother updating the Linux client at all, and it will fall by the wayside.
Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
Even MSN has a mac client. So does Office.
If Microsoft is trying to get into de VoiP business, they might as well keep aiming at the largest number of platforms possible.
I do believe MS is not trying to get Skype per-se, but their architecture. The common mortal wouldn't know, but Skype has proprietary encryption that still has not been beaten (Russia even wanted to ban Skype), distributed supernodes that make their network really cheap to run (compared to other kinds of architectures) while still working flawlessly over cascading NAT's, for example and a really good VoiP codec (revolutionary, really, it was the first real contender for a PC phone).
With buying skype they'd be getting a whole lot more than business.
I think this is a dagger aimed at the heart of cisco.
With Skype / MS integration MS can now sell business phones to companies for internal / call center use and if I run my own "MSkype" infrastructure I don't need to worry about skype not working well over RFC1918 space. And heck, MS can sell or run their own for-profit MSkype POTS gateways and drive revenue that way too.
Cisco's getting pressure from cheap switch vendors (junky unmanaged switches from newegg), inexpensive switch vendors (HP/3com), the high end network vendors (juniper), and now they've got a strong competitor in the unified communications space.
And this gives MS a foot in the "internet / social / bah" space as well. But the money's in enterprise voice.
This is a much better fit than google / facebook / yahoo / ebay / etc owning skype. I wouldn't trust a box from any of those vendors in my network, while I already have to have MS boxes to run my systems. And AD integration is also a huge win for skype.
So bravo microsoft. Well played.
I heard Microsoft is buying Canonical for $6 billion!
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
MS owns tellme - a once successful voip host/IVR browser. not surprisingly, the company stopped being very successful shortly after MS bought them. coincidence? just maybe, but not likely. i would put money on this ruining skype.
IE certainly did but they give that away for free and its still losing marketshare every day.
But Office? I think they wrote most of that themselves, though no doubt they used some libraries and contributions from various places they took over, I think we have to say that Office is "theirs".
From what I see, most of their acquisitions turn out to be dumb ideas, either for MS or the people getting taken over. I made a list on the The Register of some of the software they got via takeovers and most of it was stuff that I abandoned at almost exactly the same time, even if I didn't know it was an MS product by then.
Good god, for people who complain about FUD all the time, you're doing one heck of a job by doing the exact same thing.
Go on, mod me "troll" or whatever.
So why would Facebook or Google be allowed to buy Skype, but not Microsoft? You are just spreading FUD. Larry, is that you?
Basically, once skype is carefully accidentally closed to all but win7, and MS is the monopoly provider of win7, skype will be tied to it.
I don't think the problem would be that they would make it Windows 7 only, but the could reimplement the client using Silverlight which would add OS restrictions.
But I don't see the point for Microsoft in buying Skype just to then disconnect a percentage of the people who you might want to call. If they wanted to make a system that was restricted to Windows users only then they might as well save their money and implement their own solution.
Microsoft won't shut off Mac and Linux on day 1, of course. They'll simply let those clients go unmaintained, and then one day there will be a message "Your version of the Microsoft(R) Skype(TM) Client is too old; please upgrade to the latest version to enjoy all of our Innovative(TM) new features!" but the new version will only be available for Windows. Bye bye Skype; it's been fun, but you suck now. Google Chat will be my new videoconferencing program.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Wikipedia says:
The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is an IETF-defined signaling protocol, widely used for controlling multimedia communication sessions such as voice and video calls over Internet Protocol (IP). The protocol can be used for creating, modifying and terminating two-party (unicast) or multiparty (multicast) sessions consisting of one or several media streams. The modification can involve changing addresses or ports, inviting more participants, and adding or deleting media streams. Other feasible application examples include video conferencing, streaming multimedia distribution, instant messaging, presence information, file transfer and online games.
*That's* the alternative.
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/04/department-of-justices-long-oversight-of-microsoft-to-end.ars
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
wait for the bad deed to actually occur before screaming about said bad deed.
Ordinarily, yes. However, in Microsoft's case, they have a demonstrable history of leveraging their "monopoly" to prop up their offerings in other markets ultimately dominating those markets, reducing consumer choice, then leaving the product to stagnate with no other real alternative. IE6 is the premier example of this. They tried to do it with Java but Sun managed to stop them. Personally, I like real competition. The mobile device industry is on fire right now with newer and better products coming out seemingly everyday. Of course there is a fly in the ointment. MS, not content to compete on merit, has made it obvious that they will do anything possible to destroy competition through any means necessary. Skype is an important application for all devices. The last thing we need is to just sit and wait hoping for MS' good will.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Word seems they got Charles Simonyi, the primary developer of Bravo, the first GUI word processor which was developed at Xerox PARC. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplan seems to be in house
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
is the migration from PostgreSQL to MSSQL! It's gonna be fun to watch with some popcorn!
There are dozens of decent VoIP apps out there
But your grandma only has one one of them: Skype. Due to the network effect, Skype has an effective monopoly on free phone service. While the barrier to entry in this market is technically low, in the real world filled with real users it's probably insurmountable. It looks like Microsoft thinks that the barrier would take at least $8.5B to overcome; otherwise they'd go with their normal instinct to just copy other vendors' technologies.
Grandma isn't going to want to unlearn Skype and learn how to use a sluggish Flash-based solution, either.
Microsoft remains on the bleeding edge of innovation with its completely new-from-the-ground-up Windows Bing Voice(tm) Internet phone platform, formerly known as Skype.
Windows Bing Voice(tm) was developed entirely in-house at an acquisition cost of only $8.5 billion. "Our developer teams know the meaning of confidentiality," said Steve Ballmer. "Heck, even they didn't know it was Skype until today. That's how, uh, stealth we are."
The new Windows Bing Voice(tm) client will be included with Windows Phone 7, Office 365, Kin and Zune. "Microsoft will continue to invest in and support Skype clients on non-Microsoft platforms! On a case by case time and availability basis, of course. We'll give our Mac Business Unit developer details for Windows Bing Voice(tm) 2011 Ultimate Edition by 2013, for sure."
Service is expected to remain "at 100%" as the server infrastructure is moved from Linux to Windows, though Microsoft has not specified what that will be 100% of. The peer-to-peer functionality of Skype will also be harnessed to distribute Windows Updates(tm) and Windows Genuine Advantage(tm) serial number blacklists.
Google said that the Google Voice servers were "holding up well" under the influx of new users.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Yes. Microsoft has been buying business for a long time. This is also helps with microsoft's patent trolling business.
But Office? I think they wrote most of that themselves, though no doubt they used some libraries and contributions from various places they took over, I think we have to say that Office is "theirs".
I believe a lot of the Office devs were originally IBM devs.
-- Linux user #369862
Basically, once skype is carefully accidentally closed to all but win7...
...everyone else will most likely find that Skype is suddenly irredeemably broken, and will stop using it. I know Skype has its detractors (and Dog knows, it is hardly perfect), but it is still a useful product to many of us, and it would be a real shame if MS took it over.
They have huge marketshare, but a monopoly is a different thing. By their presence, they don't have a barrier to market. This is an important distinction. There are great apps (I like ooVoo) that do the same thing. There's a larger user network, and it's become the de facto VoIP app-- not one that was awarded through monopolistic behavior. It's good. But not unkillable/unstoppable by any stretch of the imagination.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
How many loss-leaders can MS sustain? They must be pretty low in the water by this stage.
Now Microsoft needs to buy Apple (and later Ebay) and that's it, the quest for domination will be complete.
You can't handle the truth.
I doubt that M$ have "a master plan" in this.
I suspect it is simply another reaction to the idea of Google ( and Facebook) eclipsing their dominance.
They are getting pretty desperate.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
I hope this bad idea of a piece of software dies off as a consequence.
Skype is an intentionally obfuscated and actively 3rd party inaccessible (by means of frequent protocol changes) communications software that really wrecked things in a market that just had agreed on standards and interoperability with SIP and co.
They could have made their arguably "superior" software GUI client primarily for the standardized protocol - but did not. If this now dies and someone else does it right instead, that's for the better.
Skype also is one of the few pieces of software that is really annoying to control on a network, worse than a lot of malware is. Too much by-passing and obfuscating trickery. You cannot just block or traffic shape it specifically, no you have to really block / traffic shape almost everything. This isn't right.
And then the constant history of software bugs. Be it in the client itself or in browser toolbars - it was a mess, so far. And it also doesn't help that updates to its own protocol as well as changes that happened in the Linux ecosystem specifically were horribly slow.
1. I'm reading a lot of people saying that the Skype client for other platforms is doomed. I think this depends on how MS plans to monetize Skype, if they go for ads, they will need audience, so neglecting Android would be a bad idea (The Linux client is crap anyway)
2. Am I the only one here who thinks that Skype is grossly overpriced? EBay must be banging his head against the wall by now.
Open Source Network Inventory for the masses! Kuwaiba
So, basically, because you don't like them?
You don't understand how the software markets work in the real world, and from the bias you show focusing on technical rather than user-related factors, it looks like you're not going to figure it out.
There are dozens of decent VoIP apps out there
It is long possible to clone skype using p2p and open source. In fact even the financial incentives of several voip providers are there. Maybe this is the catalyst for them to do it. Yes there are similar apps already, but clearly something is missing, or skype wouldn't be what it is.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Is it just me or is Microsoft wildly overpaying for Skype? Seems like another in a long line of decisions by Microsoft to destroy shareholder value. If they took half of the money they spent to grow their business and just doled it out to shareholders, everyone would have been better off.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
I live in a country with pronouns
We'll have to disagree on that one, and the fact that you won't ever realize I'm right.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Basically, once skype is carefully accidentally closed to all but win7, and MS is the monopoly provider of win7, skype will be tied to it.
Yup. It sucks now that you can't run Microsoft Word on OS X because they made it Win 7 only.
Here is the problem with Ekiga: it is completely unreliable on Windows, and still very much "Beta" on GNU/Linux. When it works, it works...but more often than not, I feel like I fighting against the tide to keep Ekiga operational. Now, for a bunch of neckbeards like myself, that is OK -- perhaps when I have time, I will even submit a patch -- but when my mother sees Ekiga exploding like that, she just says, "Why aren't we using Skype?"
Palm trees and 8
Right. So now is not the time to complain - wait for the bad deed to actually occur before screaming about said bad deed.
I love the "You can sue after you've been harmed" mantra. Die of food poisoning? Just sue!
Adult Role Playing Forum
..goes the neighborhood.
My prediction: M$ will slip and fall in the greasy vomit of its bastard offspring, and by 2017 will only exist as a genre of humor. Right on schedule*.
* In 1997, I gave them 20 years to live.
So, what are currently the best SIP free (as in beer) SIP clients for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X? It's been a long time since I looked into this. On Linux, these projects look promising: http://icanblink.com/ http://sflphone.org/
Is it a coincidence that federal antitrust oversight of Microsoft expires May 12, 2011?
http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2011/04/28/doj-will-let-microsoft-antitrust-oversight-expire-in-may/
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/04/department-of-justices-long-oversight-of-microsoft-to-end.ars
And both are not as good as the real thing. Try to use Office for Mac and excel services for instance. Instant headaches. Once again the Mac client will be second rate and the linux client will disappear. Microsoft will sacrifice everything at the alter of maintaining their desktop monopoly.
whooshhhh......
You might be interested in the concept of hyperbole
That's actually a surprisingly short and a rather weak list of examples of EEE by Microsoft. How would that compare to other companies large companies?
yet another piece of great software that will get the seal of death placed on it that some call the windows logo.
within 6 months it'll be called "Windows Live Chat" and no one will use it because Microsoft will have managed to break it somehow not to mention I'm sure your call will be interrupted every 30 seconds to play an advertisement ...
QUIT RUINING THINGS MICROSOFT! ... just go away
Finally, I highly doubt Microsoft will do anything to interfere with the Linux version.
Yeah, it's not like they don't have a track record for doing such things:
http://www.google.com/webhp?rls=ig#q=microsoft+buys+kills+linux+version
SIP can integrate to a PABX, run a whole PABX server, it's set into hardware phones grandma can use, make voice and video calls, get better calling rates than Skype, even get free calls to more numbers than Skype. enum, inum, peering, etc, are moving towards integrating all the voip networks into a single numbering system. Poof, both skype and the phone system will become obsolete, phone calls will cost no more than email.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
No one seems to comment on the fact that Microsoft could finally do what Android and iOS have so far been unable to: provide a large, widely adopted VOIP platform on mobile phones. Microsoft has enough clout to strike deals with carriers to finally allow this to happen, so it may not be all bad, this deal..
There are dozens of decent VoIP apps out there
Due to the network effect, Skype has an effective monopoly on free phone service. While the barrier to entry in this market is technically low, in the real world filled with real users it's probably insurmountable.
Yeah. It's lilke MySpace. I sure wish something would come along to improve on MySpace. But hey, what ya gonna do? They're entrenched.
Sorry I am a cat person and I don't believe in Dog.
(PS - not true. I have the cutest little Maltese puppy and no, she has never been harmed.)
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
What did they teach you in school?
Useful stuff, like math, physics and chemistry.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
It makes no sense for MS to not support Skype on Linux and Mac moving forward. This is not MS Office where they can leverage it to force people onto their OS. As much as it may pain some people to hear, Skype & consumer VOIP is a VERY small revenue stream. The real money is in the enterprise side of the fence. CAL's and Server licenses. the best example is the MS AV offering. They give the consumer part away for free and charge for Business CAL's and servers.
What makes more sense is to bundle Skpye access and federation into their LYNC offerings, similar to how they federate their IM client to MSN. Millions of people already use Skype. By putting an enterprise level Skype connectivity ability onto the LYNC servers, they give medium to large sized companies the ability to do customer service and sales over Microsoft's VOIP system, and gives them an install base of consumers to feed the need and justify the cost on the Enterprise side.
Frankly I think it is a brilliant move on their part. If they combione Lync and Skype and keep all platforms up to dat eon the client side, it will get them good will from the governments of the EU and US, and give them something to point at when they say they are multiplatform. The beautiful part (from a business standpoint I mean) is they can then force companies to have to have CAL's to integrate with their internal VOIP systems for users who want to use mobile skype at the enterprise level (versus using skype for business like they have to do today), aand sell the federation to public and peer to peer skype as a server offering with the license cost to boot.
How is buying a voice over IP product and tying it to windows using their monopoly to bolster offerings in other markets? It seems the other way around unless Skype is a monopoly in your opinion. I think you're a ltitle out of line here. Sometimes businesses do things you don't like, but that doesn't make it illegal or abusive.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Ok. If Skype were bought out by an Internet genius like Rupert Murdoch, maybe it could lose its market share. Who knows, maybe Ballmer will achieve a similar feat. But left on its own, Skype would be unlikely to be knocked out any time soon. As I pointed out, Microsoft has $8.5B that says it wouldn't.
Now let's watch Microsoft drive it into oblivion.
Any ideas what this means for Skype's future involvement in the development of the Opus codec? I think the SILK patents are already irrevocably taken care of, but will Skype still be developing and promoting an open-source codec under its new overlords?
That is all
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
Or are all you Linux fanbois just gonna dump Skype because it's owned by MS now, and you're leaving due to "principle" - i.e. being retarded?
Having principles is the same as being retarded? Really? I don't even know if it is possible to live without principles - unless you are a psychopath, that is.
And I'm not even a "linux fanboi" (more of a solaris/BeOS "fanboi").
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Through informal social networks, inside of and outside of the cloud, the crowd has taken a proactive idea shower and are migrating away from 'Game Changer'. The crowed is opting to drill down to the actual meaning they want to express, and conveying it with standard corpus. :)
MS Kinect can expand the market for the Xbox
I'm calling the police to have them write you a ticket for speeding, because you own a car, and I feel like you might speed, in fact, you've probably gotten a ticket of some sort relating to vehicles in the past demonstrating a history of illegal vehicle use, so waiting until you actually speed to write you a ticket it a waste of time. All police should do this. Just imagine how great it would be when police are able to actually ticket people BEFORE the offense. Next, we should just throw people in jail before they commit crimes, that would be awesome.
No.
"A lot of the open-source stuff ... simply doesn't work correctly, unless you're doing simple stuff ... Hence the need to have MS Office on your machine."
And ... this is why twenty years later we can't wholesale ditch Windows. There are a hundred thousand little cases of this one act play in existence. It's so bad you can make a grid of it.
A. Proprietary Windows copy of something is very good. People do work on it.
B. Desire to use something other than Windows arises, aka a flavor of Linux.
C. Try to switch out all the proprietary programs for their OSS alternatives.
D. Encounter enough that are half baked because OSS Devs have a fatal weakness in the Fit & Finish department.
E. Declare "Not Ready" and return to Windows.
So yes, I WILL use a Half Baked copy of something if that is the last link in the chain preventing me from ditching Windows.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Woosh yourself. Ever heard of ADD and/or Aspergers?
Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
...Skype has proprietary encryption that still has not been beaten...
I would wager that there are rules that limit the effectiveness of that.. in addition to the fact that the government would love to have you believe the encryption is still good.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Worth noting that Microsoft has been selling a calling feature via MSN for years now.
Its possible they'd just integrate Skype into MSN (ugh).
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
How is buying a voice over IP product and tying it to windows using their monopoly to bolster offerings in other markets?
The succinctness with which you answered your own question is almost Koan-worthy.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
I can imagine some people at Google have a smile on their face. As Microsoft tries to get people to move to MS platforms by making Skype MS only, the competitors in that arena will be able to move in and grab the market. I think Google is well positioned to take on that business.
I'm wondering how much of that $8.5 billion price is simply the customer base and not the technology? Does Skype even have any technology (or patents maybe) that couldn't be quickly replicated? Customers can be lost practically overnight, and Microsoft is notorious for dropping support to 'focus' on the Microsoft only components.
Perhaps the long game by MS is to bring down the revenue of the major phone companies with calls routed over the internet rather than their networks. In that way they could no longer afford to subsidize iPhones and so they could not compete with 'value' phones from MS/Nokia.
How many grandmas are running linux? Your whole argument is completely empty and driven by a hate for microsoft. "Oh no, grandmas won't be able to learn anything else and they'll tie it to windows!" Come on, did you type that with a straight face?
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Facebook and it's tasty lack of privacy.
The implication was that Windows (the monopoly) is being forced upon people by tying Skype to it. That is using Skype to bolster their monopoly, not using their monopoly to bolster Skype. Using their monopoly to bolster Skype would be if they didn't allow other VoIP applications on windows or possibly if they bundled it with windows. Saying Skype only works on Windows now is neither of those things and only serves to lessen the appeal of Skype while potentially raising the appeal of Windows. Since Skype is not the monopoly in question, this is not using a monopoly abusively. Am I wrong here?
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
And yes, there is Ekiga for Windows. I'm really shocked this isn't brought up more. Even if there turn out to be issues, slashdot seems to be overlooking this obvious alternative to skype.
While it goes against the whole anti-Microsoft bent here, better them than Facebook. Microsoft buying Skype means I have to watch for changing terms of service, functionality and quality. Facebook buying Skype, on the other hand, would mean I have to clear my contact lists, replace my personal information with gibberish, uninstall Skype, burn my computer, and conduct ritual cleansing over the ashes.
The common mortal wouldn't know, but Skype has proprietary encryption that still has not been beaten (Russia even wanted to ban Skype)
Proprietary encryption is worthless, and even in the implausible event that their code does what they think it does, there are still plenty of perfectly good free encryption algorithms out there (AES anyone?)
a really good VoiP codec (revolutionary, really, it was the first real contender for a PC phone).
The codec had nothing to do with that; we all have enough bandwidth to use pretty much anything.
The network and the NAT traversal are what made Skype. Nothing else matters.
I am trolling
So this means we say goodbye to the Linux and OS X version.
What in the fuck are you two blathering on about?
People buy Macs because they've got hands-down the best GUI in existence today.
And Office for Mac is a far superior product to the Windoze garbage that M$ puts out. Don't forget, it was a Macintosh program first.
Am I wrong here?
You're not wrong Walter. You're just an asshole.
[Not really, but I love that movie.]
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
...it's the only real alternative.
Just find some provider who has the combo or roll your own.
Am I wrong here?
Absolutely, 100%.
"How is buying a voice over IP product and tying it to windows using their monopoly to bolster offerings in other markets?"
Ask yourself the same question about Internet Explorer and Windows. Go read the entirety of United States vs Microsoft.
Maybe then you'll understand.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Until we get a client that can pierce almost any firewall (like Skype does), we are not going anywhere. Any VoIP implementation that requires you to configure router/firewall/access point will fail. I do hate Skype sometimes for using every dirty trick to get around firewall restrictions, but it gets the job done. I'm not certain but I think Skype will run even if only port 80 is open and tunnel everything via HTTP if that's what needed. It will even work if DNS is broken.
--Coder
"I'm right."
Except you're not and a thorough reading of the entirety of United States vs Microsoft will prove your ignorance.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
The implication was that Windows (the monopoly) is being forced upon people by tying Internet Explorer 6 to it. That is using Internet Explorer 6 to bolster their monopoly, not using their monopoly to bolster Internet Explorer 6. Using their monopoly to bolster Internet Explorer 6 would be if they didn't allow other browsers on windows or possibly when they bundled it with windows. Saying Internet Explorer 6 only works on Windows now is neither of those things and only serves to lessen the appeal of Internet Explorer 6 while potentially raising the appeal of Windows. Since Internet Explorer 6 is not the monopoly in question, this is not using a monopoly abusively. Am I wrong here?
You were. I FTFY.
It's pretty sad if you think those are more useful than understanding the government who takes 30%+ of your paycheck to do pretty much whatever the hell it wants.
I don't have a Mac, the CEO does.
I have only Linux boxes. The headaches seem to be using Microsoft software from where I stand.
The Skype Linux client punches holes through firewalls, allows inbound connections, and has been known to go an entire year with known security holes unpatched. Why on earth would Microsoft want to kill it?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
>>>Even MSN has a mac client. So does Office.
Where's the Internet Explorer for Mac?
Hmmm.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
But why would anyone use MS office in the first place?
Fixed that for you! Now there's your source of headache.
"Oh no, grandmas won't be able to learn anything else and they'll tie it to windows!"
Are you claiming that that statement is somehow false?
It might sound like an obvious alternative it isn't really very useful. For example at my university network all UDP traffic to internet is blocked and so are incoming TCP connections. If people want to use ekiga here they need to get some party to proxy all their traffic over TCP.
Balmer needs to prove he's at last as inferior of a CEO as Meg Whitman
Oh, I forgot, after that case they stopped making IE and distributing it. The whole thing was about BUNDLING. Which I specifically mentioned in my post. We are not in any position to punish people for things they haven't done yet or given any indication that they will. These objections are laughable.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
I'm calling the police to have them write you a ticket for speeding, because you own a car, and I feel like you might speed,
MS has been convicted of leveraging their monopoly on desktop operating systems to undermine the competitive market in an illegal way, i.e. tying internet explorer.
in fact, you've probably gotten a ticket of some sort relating to vehicles in the past demonstrating a history of illegal vehicle use, so waiting until you actually speed to write you a ticket it a waste of time. All police should do this. Just imagine how great it would be when police are able to actually ticket people BEFORE the offense. Next, we should just throw people in jail before they commit crimes, that would be awesome.
If you want an equivalent analogy that is actually apt, think about a repetitive drunk driver losing his license for life. MS should always be under intense scrutiny based on their recurring and willful abuses of the market and consumer choice.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
no no, it makes perfect sense, and it's the same thing that concerns me. I'm a Linux user who lives overseas and Skype is important to me because many of my non-technical friends have and use it. they won't use Linux, but if Skype goes Windows-only, then *I* might have to reboot to Windows just to talk to them. and I generally cringe at doing anything internet-related on Windows. I don't know how many people I could convince to switch to Google Voice but i bet you they won't leave an extra VOIP app on all the time just to talk to me. This is why it's really nice that the most common VOIP app is also one that runs on all 3 of the major desktop platforms.
What in the fuck are you two blathering on about?
People buy Macs because they've got hands-down the best GUI in existence today.
And Office for Mac is a far superior product to the Windoze garbage that M$ puts out. Don't forget, it was a Macintosh program first.
Do you honestly think there's a shred of the original mac code left?
There's no place like
It makes sense, if they want to bolster Windows OS sales. Integrate Skype into the OS, then drop the other platforms. Business folk will whine because everything else is incompatible with the easy to use integrated Skype, more OS sales.
Well at least that's MS logic there.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
I'm claiming that Grandmas only use Windows so while your statement is true it gets in the way of the ultimate conclusion. Grandmas can't unlearn Skype, but they all use Windows anyway (right? Since Windows is a monopoly), so the claim that tying it to windows in some way would hurt them from being able to migrate away from Windows isn't very convincing.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
and a really good VoiP codec
Speaking of, I wonder how this would affect the Opus codec effort... It is a merge of Skype's SILK and Xiph.org's CELT codecs.
I'm afraid it would be shut down real quick. Contributing patents and code to open source projects is not exactly Microsoft's modus operandi.
I can't help your understanding of the US vs. MS. I was there during that era, and long before. Microsoft was a skunk. They've been sued successfully in jurisdictions across the world.
If you believe that I'm validating Microsoft by its purchase, I think you've misread what I've been saying. Microsoft isn't holier by its purchase. It does, however, realistically increase its asset value and gives them a chance to make a better attempt at Google, Apple, and potentially, the FOSS community.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
The only thing laughable is your absurd argument that really boils down to your opinion that a company (MS) that has been convicted of using their monopoly (Windows) to prop up a product (Internet Explorer) in the past to kill a competitor (Netscape) shouldn't be held to a higher level of scrutiny when the potential for that kind of abuse exists again. And the Internet Explorer situation is just one example of many. How about using their windows leverage to force every computer shipped by a manufacturer to have a paid Windows license whether it has the software on it or not? I'm sorry, but some people actually like competition.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Well it was a good program.... Guess apple will have to make facetime for windows and linux now. it's better video quality anyway. Just cant call landlines, which is a bummer... Damn microsoft. Always messing up a good thing.
Ok, that does make sense. I was under the impression you could Skype to other VOIP services. If that isn't the case then I can see the point being made here.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
If your proprietary encryption is good, I see no problem with using it.
Yes, the codec is one of the parts that made it work. Enough quality without requiring a lot of bandwidth, skype even worked with 56k modems. The codec is extremely resistant to jitter and network delays.
quite sure of it
To be fair, I didn't want to talk to my Grandma anyway. I don't need any more conversations about carbuncles and hemorrhoids.
...a sluggish Flash-based solution...
ahh the fond memories of dialpad.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
Problem lies in the fact that trying someone for "potential crime" opens a HUGE can of worms. Where do you plan to stop? Pre-emptive fines on speeders? Pre-emptive jail sentences for people with history of domestic violence going to a martial arts course?
We have no punishments for thought crime, which is what you describe is about. They can think about crime all they want, but it's the ACT itself that's criminal. Not the thought. Even if precedence of such behaviour exists.
What we do have is harsher punishment for REPEAT OFFENDERS. That is the main consequence of repeating the same crime twice.
Assuming you have at least one speeding ticket and a history of recently purchasing a car capable of going past the speed limit, clearly, the same conditions you describe applying to MS apply to you as well.
http://www.voipbuster.com/
It has been working perfectly for me for quite some years. You don't have to use their voip client either, they provide all the details for use with your favorite voip client.
One thing voip always sucked was at NAT transversal, but with I had success at some random wifi networks by just using STUN and the voipbuster provided proxy.
"Skype has proprietary encryption that still has not been beaten"
Not beaten? Hate to break it to you (punne) but you can buy, if you are a government/military entity, off the shelf kits that do a wonderful man in the middle attack on Skype.
So get off your common people high horse and learn more.
Just let me get this straight. Are you saying Skype will prop up windows, or windows will prop up Skype? Because I'm pretty sure Skype is not a monopoly nor does it need to be propped up. That is the crux of my argument. I don't think its the same thing as IE. It may have its potential for abuse if Skype doesn't interoperate with other VOIP applications, but that is completely different than bundling a browser with windows so there is no need for another browser, and hinges on Skype reaching the point of a monopoly, not Windows.
I think the difference between the way I'm looking at it and the way you are looking at it is I see Skype going windows only as a ploy to raise Windows sales (if they do this). If Windows is the monopoly, then using something else to boost sales of something you allegedly have a monopoly on is a different beast than using a monopoly to push another product. I don't bleieve there is anything wrong with using one product to encourage others to purchase another unless the company has a monopoly on the first product. Skype is not a monopoly, therefore this is fine. It may be unpleasant, but I don't like not being able to get a McRib right now either.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Drunk driver gets caught too many times, he loses his license forever. Market abuser gets caught too many times, he gets more intense scrutiny. Forever. That's just how it is in the real world and Microsoft does not get a pass from this despite the many outcries from their apologists. In the markets that actually matter to Microsoft, i.e. Windows and Office, they are still essentially unassailable and they have an enormous amount of money. That influence and money needs to stay there. Using those monopolies to prop up other otherwise less competitive products is how you end up with the fiasco that was (is?) IE6. Some people actually like competitive markets. Obviously, some people don't. Do you work in telecommunications by any chance?
Google Voice/Talk/Gmail Chat/ works excellently and is built on open protocols. XMPP, ulaw, etc. There are some proprietary extensions but they are documented or at least have been reverse-engineered. It works with Asterisk. It could be made to work with other Open Source clients easily enough. I have it set up to ring normal phones here.
Bruce Perens.
Abandoned years ago.
But "Where's the Internet Explorer for Mac?" is akin to "Where's the dung for my sandwich?"
Your post is about things that occurred over 10 years ago, which doesn't refute the point about actually needing a bad deed to complain about. Companies buy other companies all the time, including Slashdot's favorite company, Google.
The likely response from Apple will be to shut it out of their iOS devices right? Anyone tried Messenger on iOS? It stinks. It's buggy. I'm not looking forward to Skype getting raped by MS.
Good thing this has nothing to with that court case. Should they be view with suspicion? Sure. Should the sale be stopped because of a past transgression? No. Your earlier repeated DUI analogy was flawed, the one you shot down was much, much more apt, as Microsoft is only a 1 time offender. Alot of people seem to forget that.
microsoft hopes that integrating a popular voip plugin with office will add more users to the group that say things like, "we need to have an exchange server?".
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Correct. All above are in the scope of INCREASED PUNISHMENT FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS. They do not happen pro-actively but retroactively.
The problem is that what you're advocating is akin to drunk driver losing his license forever after the first time someone caught him buying alcohol after conviction, with no car involved.
Your post is about things that occurred over 10 years ago,
Only because it is an example that most people will be familiar with. There are many more that would satisfy your desire for contemporaneity.
refute the point about actually needing a bad deed to complain about.
Repeat and egregious offenders require more scrutiny.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
"The basic idea is that consumers are harmed by being forced to buy an undesired good (the tied good) in order to purchase a good they actually want (the tying good), and so would prefer that the goods be sold separately"
That's awful. They've got it all wrong. That is _not_ why consumers would be harmed by illegal tying.
Any company is free to offer whatever they want at whatever the price. They can make offers that customers like, or offers that customers don't like. And customers are free to choose whether they buy or not. Tying one less desirable product to another more desirable product means that the offer for the more desirable product is now less good, so fewer people will buy it.
Where illegal tying harms is when it harms competition: If Product B at $50 is tied with Product A at $100, that actually benefits everyone who competes with Product A, because if I sell a product X that is as good as Product A, then you would be buying my product even if it costs a bit more than $100 (as long as it is less than $150 minus what B is worth to you). But it harms everyone who competes with Product B, because many potential customers of Product Y that competes with B have already bought B together with A, so they have no use for a competitor's product, even if it is cheaper than B.
The entire antitrust argument is based on one assumption:
That Microsoft will limit Skype to only run on Microsoft products.
While MS have been assholes in the past, the entire argument hinges on this. If the Linux/OSX/iOS/Android/etc versions all remain and are useable...seriously, who gives a fuck who is running the show.
Now, if they become assholes again & make Skype MS-only, then you have a case. But really...I doubt Microsoft is so fucking stupid to open themselves up to another piece of antitrust hell over Skype.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
by dave420 (699308) Right. So now is not the time to complain - wait for the bad deed to actually occur before screaming about said bad deed.
First of all, the "not the time to complain" part is absurd. Of course I can "complain" about the potential for monopoly abuse when MS makes an acquisition of a major piece of cross-platform software based on their history. It would be irrational not to make a point of what has happened in the past when conditions exist for a repetition. Should we just burn all of the civil war history books to? The Spanish inquisition? Come on.
And the second part "wait for the bad deed to actually occur before screaming about said bad deed" is just nonsense. Nobody is saying "Microsoft has killed the voip market" people are saying "let's keep an eye on this so abuses like what have happened in the past don't happen again" which make perfect sense.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Scrutiny...without a doubt.
But fucking really people? You're ready to go storming the Redmond campus with pitchforks because Microsoft was caught 10 years ago doing stupid monopolistic shit.
Yes, we need to watch this deal, and pay attention to with Microsoft does with Skype. We need to watch closeley. And if they be monopolistic douchebags again, we need the DOJ to beat the living fuck out of Microsoft.
But until they do something wrong, this IS exactly like getting a speeding ticket because you got a speeding ticket a year ago, without speeding again.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I'll take "Not Getting It" for 8.5 billion dollars.
Alex: This company recently decided to buy a competing product that is superior to theirs simply because they don't own it.
Who is Microsoft?
Alex: I would have also accepted "Who is Retarded?" What will be your next play?
Um.... I'll take "Heaping Money into a Shredder" for 8.5 billion dollars.
In all seriousness, the services Skype offers are not difficult to offer as well. And, Windows Messenger-esque programs have been around far longer than Skype. They had plenty of time to do what Skype does before Skype existed. They didn't. Why? They're Microsoft. Buying a successful product won't bring you success if you've demonstrated a total failure to understand your own potential before you lost to the competition. To this day Windows Live Messenger still can't compete with Skype in any way, so they STILL don't get it. Oh, I know it's Microsoft bashing, and I know if it were some other company, I wouldn't care. But that's because Microsoft is the anti-innovator, and they're buying an innovative product. It just won't last. The successor to Skype will come along shortly. Even if it's identical to Skype in every way, and even if Skype stays Skype and doesn't become Windows Live Skype-Messenger, I know half of all Skype users will jump to it just because hating Microsoft is cool.
I'll be waiting, ready to click/tap uninstall. Internet, do your thing.
Your paycheck. I understood your point so well that I moved to Costa Rica, where there is no tax on foreign income. So apart from sales tax and customs duty, I don't pay tax at all (and no, I'm not American, I was born in a country where you only pay income tax if you reside in that country). I guess I learned that in math class. Pura vida mae! By the way they're thinking of modifying the law here to try to grab a share of foreign income - so I could be moving soon to Panama, or back to the Bahamas...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
oh god.
was it beaten?
skype lets governments take a peak? Ok.
Why do you assume you only want to hide things from your government?
Assuming you have at least one speeding ticket and a history of recently purchasing a car capable of going past the speed limit, clearly, the same conditions you describe applying to MS apply to you as well.
It would not apply to me unless I had sped many times and in a certain way. If you speed recklessly enough and a certain number of times, you will lose your license. And, of course, that would apply to me and everyone else. MS has abused their market position many times in the past. They must submit to increased scrutiny like any repeat offender.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Not that I liked Skype a whole lot, with its bugs, and intermittent audio problems,
but it was available for Linux. Now that the product has changed hands,
and as others have pointed out... probably for the worse...
I want a refund on my unused money that they have on account for me.
Heck... for all we know, Microsoft bought them for the pre-paid 'cash on account'
rather than the technology!
Skype + .NET = Skynet?
Scrutiny...without a doubt.
I can't speak for anyone else but that's all I'm asking for. What were you thinking? Oh, and that 10 year ago thing is just the one most people are familiar with so it doesn't require a lot of explanation. There are many more and more recent examples of market abuse.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
When are we going to abandon the antique legacy structure known as a decimal addressed circuit switched telephone network and just start doing all voice communication purely over IP with IP addresses at each end point? We would not need Skype or anything else to communicate if we have this. Of course, for now, we won't have easy mobility (have to find an open wifi somewhere). But if we make this work on IP, and have enough people using it, it will get the attention of greedy people. And then, without them realizing what it all means, they will build services to provide mobile access to support it.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
In the real world, with an interoperable protocol then it would be surmountable.. Microsoft like Skype because it is not interoperable. Software already exists that can do VoIP, and more can be written, but their customer base is unassailable because Skype refuses to talk with it.
Don't forget though, that in Europe, Microsoft were battered by the justice system. They were told to be open and provide interoperability. I wonder if *this* deal means that Skype must now become open, or if Microsoft will do everything they can to keep the protocols private..
Taking this a step further since one must be alive to commit a crime why not outlaw life!?
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Here's my wild-ass conspiracy theory. I'm gonna link back to this post if/when it's proven true.
Skype discovered that Apple's Facetime violates their patent(s), and MS bought Skype so that they can sue Appple and cripple the iPhone. This improves Windows Phone's position in the marketplace (which, BTW, finally gets a skype client thanks to this deal).
Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
Taking this a step further since one must be alive to commit a crime why not outlaw life!?
Interestingly enough, the implications of that make about as much sense as the particular combination of words you've used here as a reply. Stated differently, your response is completely orthogonal to what you responded to.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
"My first idea was integrating this with Windows Phone 7 (8? 9?) to get phone calls at data rates, but I have no idea how they'll going to get the providers to accept that."
They accepted the Skype app for iPhone, the FaceTime app for iPhone, and Skype-based phones like the ZTE F102.
FFS, I just installed it last week! *facepalm*
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Useful stuff, like math, physics and chemistry.
Snce this IS a site populated by smart asses and your post is inflammatory. Don't forget another useful skill: English. You know that thing that's used every day to communicate ideas, like what you're doing in your post. Since you're referring to courses (Proper Nouns) everyone knows* you capitalize them. It's great you can argue that things don't fall to the ground because they love it and yet can't create a proper sentence. *Assuming you passed elementary English.
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
There was a funny saying on here recently: How can you tell if someone has an iPhone? Easy, they'll tell you in 5 seconds whether you ask or not.
I guess we could change it to this: How can you tell that someone has a hatred of all things Apple? Easy, they'll tell you in 5 seconds whether you ask or not.
Just imagine the thinking behind the parent: "Hmm, here's an article that MS is rumoured to be interested in buying Skype! It's the perfect place for me to engage in my self-righteous whining about Apple! Again."
Skype just locked in its place as the next Internet Explorer: Microsoft's attempt at locking-in users. Time to find a real standard for this sort of thing.
If you can't reconstruct Skype's architecture for less than $1bn, then you shouldn't be in the business.
The most relevant point here is that Skype is a p2p client. That means most of their network config and encryption logic is right there in the client waiting for someone who knows how to use IDAPro to reverse it. So you can start the task with a full design schematic, then spend the rest of your time implementing and improving.
While you're at it you can run a decent national marketing campaign (incl. Superbowl ads) for no more than another $300-400 million. That leaves you with a cool $7bn to defray operating costs, while you offer the service as a free feature built into Windows 8 and Windows Phone --- thus killing off Skype and any other competition.
(Yes, I know this was probably a stock+cash deal, so it's not 'real' money. But stock has value too. I'm sure MS has lots of good arguments for this decision, but none of them will ever lead to anyone turning a profit.)
I'm not sure how much more simply this can be broken down for you but I'll try. Microsoft has a history of market abuse stemming from their tying of otherwise unrelated products. Windows and IE are really good examples though there are many others. Based on this fact, MS' purchase of Skype requires heightened scrutiny to keep anything analogous to the fiasco that was IE6 (for example) from happening again. I'm sorry but MS does not get coddling despite the bleatings from their many apologists. You obviously have a dog in this hunt. How big of one, I neither know nor care but it's clear that you will only see things from a "certain" perspective. Party on, dude!
I was referring to the general subjects, not the specific courses. However if you wish to be pedantic, by all means continue. I also find your insinuation about my passing elementary English (yes, this time I mean the course) quite laughable, considering I am fluent in probably 3 more languages than you are. Also please note your spelling mistake in the very first word of your post; I say this with a certain degree of self-satisfaction: don't you proof-read what you write?
With love and equal pomp,
Dunbal
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
They taught me that it is the senators and congressmen that make the laws that the DOJ and the FTC enforce.
I also learned that the President is in charge of the DOJ and the FTC, and that, if up for re-election, he may change his policies and priorities when there is an outcry about some issue.
Even if they do re-construct everything, it has patents. It's not that easy.
Also, skype was thinking of licensing their tech. Maybe Microsoft wants exclusivity on it (by acquiring skype they get the tech for themselves). Maybe they simply want to compete with google voice with a well tested and proven piece of software.
No one will ever know their real motivations... I'd assume it would be "all of the above".
Well played =)
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Microsoft was only convicted ONCE of anti-monopolistic practices (per Country), so your defense is incorrect, and that was 10 years ago.
Secondly, unless you have some idea on how Microsoft could use their Windows monopoly to try and kill off competing VoIP products, this really doesn't involve the DOJ at all nor is it antitrust material. Microsoft is well within their right to stop making a skype linux client if they so choose. They could rebrand it Microsoft Voice. They could start charging for it. They could kill it. As long as they don't try to unfairly leverage the Desktop OS monopoly power they have to try and dictate what happens in the VoIP market they are free to do whatever they want.
I think most people assume since you are replying in a thread that you are commenting about what was said previously in that thread. Perhaps you need to reread the thread, then read the comments you made and make it clear your intent.
"all 3 of the major desktop platforms'? What 3? I see 2.
You can, if you have skypeOut, and the other VoIP application has a skypeIn type phone number, or for incoming calls, you need skypeIn, and they need something similiar to skypeOut (That can call regular phone lines).
They contribute to a good number of open source projects, and standards, so it's not out of the question either.
If enough people dislike monopolies and act together, there would be none. We should be organized enough. We have tools for debate, forming opinions, and implementing alternatives. What we dont have, is the actual serious debate.
I propose we all switch to standards, SIP, and extend it where necessary. XMPP perhaps.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
I don't see why putting 8.5 billion out there was required for that... I'm sure that Skype or Facebook would've gladly written XBL and WinPhone support for much much less.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Scrutiny...without a doubt.
Skype already is a closed standard with almost no interopability. Alternatives are already needed.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
When you're talking about a budget number with 9 zeros in it it, it really is that easy. Throw in a $500 million/year court-enforced judgement (which I imagine is more than Skype makes or MS could possibly charge) and you'd still be in the black for 14 years.
But in reality it would never come to that. Microsoft has one of the largest patent portfolios in the industry. I have to imagine that they could easily countersue for any number of things. It would get ugly, but it would still be cheaper than what MS just paid.
Insofar as Microsoft has reasons --- I'm sure they do. They had a number of reasons to start their currently-unprofitable businesses and to invest in a number of the .com dogs they now own. But those were bad reasons, and the stockholders should be very worried when they see this kind of money getting tossed around without a clear plan.
The key is in the abuse of a monopoly. Having a monopoly isn't a crime, abusing a monopoly is a crime.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
Yes but the anti-trust laws are already on the books. If he has said write the President and tell him then it would make sense.
Uggh am gonna be siiick... why can't their 3rd buyer be a company with good karma?
Or, if you prefer daleks, EXTERMINATE!!!!
I'm going to start tracking GNU Free Call. Open AND decentralized. The world needs something like this.
How? It's not an antitrust case. MS doesn't have any presence in the VoIP arena (at least as far as I know.) There's not much to do about it.
My previous suggestion (Contact your senators and congressmen and ask them to stop this), and the DOJ are not the only options although I think both should be pursued.
VoiP technology has become widespread enough that I think the FCC could step in, get some feedback, and say (regulate) a few things about standards. Having MS own Skype might not be so awful if every standard involved was available license-free (or free license?) for anyone to use in the name of interoperability. And along with that, any competitor should be able to duplicate and interact with any aspect of the supporting infrastructure.
Microsoft, through incompatible enhancements, essentially tried to own the internet by making the experience on other browsers a broken one. Let's not forget that in order for ISPs to hand out Explorer for free, they had to host pages using specific features that broke other browsers. There were many dirty tricks.
In this case, the interoperability situation is far worse. There's virtual lock-in if people wish to communicate through the net with Skype users. Forced opening of standards should be considered even if MS doesn't buy or doesn't bundle Skype. (Of course even if not bundled, co-promoting it might be an unfair competitive advantage)
We shouldn't need one vendors' product to surf the web, one companies' car to cruise the highways, one companies gas to drive the car, or one companies product to talk with people online and through POTS (plain old telephone service). We should be able to inter-operate freely using any sufficient device or platform we cook up.
Perhaps it is time that FOSS choices and products like Skype, Google Voice, iChat and others have a set of common protocols that support key features. The F.C.C. is probably the agency to deal with the technical debates and issues if others don't work this out first. The D.O.J. may just say that is has to happen for the deal to happen. And our representatives might help us be heard.
Don't wait until after the fact to do something! We should NOT be locked in.
a company (MS) that has been convicted of using their monopoly (Windows) to prop up a product (Internet Explorer) in the past to kill a competitor (Netscape)
Just a footnote, but Netscape was nobody's friend in the web browser market. They were introducing proprietary tags in their server products to extend the functionality of their 'free' browser and lock up and own the Web Client/Server market in the businessplace. They wanted to own the web-based business intranet. They wanted to be the new Microsoft in that sphere of computing.
We're kinda lucky that Microsoft squashed them. The free Mozilla code base was the result.
Only because it is an example that most people will be familiar with. There are many more that would satisfy your desire for contemporaneity.
Rather than dance around the issue, why not name a few.
But fucking really people? You're ready to go storming the Redmond campus with pitchforks because Microsoft was caught 10 years ago doing stupid monopolistic shit.
Welcome to Slashdot.
Further abuse of their illegally gained monopoly to subvert the free market.
Don't forget, it was a Macintosh program first.
I think you meant that it was a Mac product first. MS Office isn't really a program, it's a cluster of programs all integrated together.
And I was using Microsoft Word for DOS long before there was a version for Windows OR the Mac.
So long Linux support.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/microsoft-buys-skype-for-85-billion-creates-new-business-division/9406?tag=nl.e539
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NullPointerException at Sig.setCleverSig(Sig.java:42)
It got dropped when Apple started bundling Safari.
Depending on how much money MS could make on the tech, a settlement could easily go up to those 9 figures.
I don't think this was a bad investment at all. Lots of great lessons to learn from skype.
Ouch. Damn I wish I had some mod points.
CLASSIC post.
they're buying the brand and subscriber base....
I think alot of this has to do with building up a positive brand image of MSFT...making it less boring and better known to the upcoming generation...
they're already on that path with XBOX, Kinect, Ford Sync, Bing...and now Skype.
My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
On the video press conference - here at 1 hour 18 mins, Ballmer's asked about multi-platform. He mentions Office on Apple, and mentions Apple a couple of times - but didn't mention Linux or Android. He said it was important, but I'm not sure I'm sold. "I said it, and I mean it, we'll continue to support non-Microsoft"... followed by "Two, we're one of the few companies with a track record of actually doing this". So he kinda shot himself down a bit.
As long as there's a Mac client, I'm pretty sure it's still legally sound. Duopoly and so on, no?
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Just a footnote, but Netscape was nobody's friend in the web browser market. They were introducing proprietary tags in their server products to extend the functionality of their 'free' browser and lock up and own the Web Client/Server market ...
Hmmm ... Do you know of cases where Netscape really kept their extensions proprietary? Did they ever sue the maker of another browser for implementing one of their tags? Not saying they didn't; I just don't recall reading about it, and google's not much help.
It's not difficult to find tags that they introduced which everyone copied. My favorite is <center>. I periodically run across yet another warning that the center tag is deprecated in official HTML, and you should use CSS instead. So I try the suggested CSS, do a bit of testing, and find that it doesn't work in some browsers or for the thing I'm trying to center. I ask about this on some HTML forum, and get blown off with the "RTFM, n00b" sort of insults. If someone does actually explain why the CSS does what it does, I simply reply that it's no replacement for a center tag, as was claimed. In any case, I go back to using center tags, which are apparently implemented by all the browsers I've ever seen, and works in a way that I can understand. And we have Netscape to thank for this useful tool, silly as it might be, although assorted non-Netscape people are trying to deprecate it.
The other useful things that Netscape created and allowed everyone to implement don't seem to be quite as funny as this case, granted, and some of them might as well be forgotten. (Weren't they the ones who inflicted frames on us? ;-) So their record was definitely mixed.
Anyway, I'd be interested in an explanation of that "proprietary tags" claim, with references to how they harrassed other browser makers who tried to copy them.
(And I'd agree that we're better off now with Mozilla than we'd have been with Netscape. So, much as I hate to admit it, maybe Microsoft did us all a favor by killing them. ;-)
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Jitsi is by far the best alternative - open source / video / win / linux / mac
Lets all be tech about it.
Microsoft could jist be flaunting the world's largest privately corporate cash deposit and doing this to play chess with fb. So for atarters, they might not really care about the future of skype: therefore why delete your old client?
Because the resulting netwprk might end up being ms-style insecure as in who wants crabs and or blackmail insecure.
What should we do? We still want skype. Wahh
Omg for real? It's suddenly impossible to get together and code it how it should've been from the beginning? Namely: open source, community coded, dynamically distributable voice and video conferencing?
The only thing not distributable in the scheme is identity. Help me out why you identify through skype in the first Place. It doesn't eeven help, its just a convenience. Nobody should know your videoconferencing id who's not a friend in a distributed model. It'd be like having the credit card number to your face.
The rest is easy. What am i talking about, what's to distribute? Get online, find your current ip, set up other programs to send the client an ip argument from whatever, clicking an email, clicking a nude, who cares. Interface TO the client ( don't embed it ) and demand more flexibility from your apps. For the long haul translate ips into little character strigs since no average user seems able to tell their pal that morning's assigned IP but can tell all their pals and enemies their tinyurl.
Then voila you securely replace the proprietary model wee whoopty doo. It would take less thought or work than:
Open source community coded astronomy sim
Open source " " racing sim
" " " " golf sim
" " " " any other also by-the-book program that actually includes physics
Get real
I dont even use skype
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
Catch what he followed it with, though. I believe him.
"We love Windows and we love Windows Phone and the Xbox, and we are going to do all of the work together to optimize these ... but fundamental to the value proposition of communications is to reach everybody whether they are on your device or not. In fact it will be one of our competitive advantages," he said.
As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
Honestly, because .doc and .docx it is the unofficial standard for documents everywhere. Anything with a bit more formating will look crappy on google docs or openoffice.
On the mac, using MS Office, it is better. I actually prefer the 2008 mac interface (with the photoshop-esque UI) than the ribbon crap they are trying to make us swallow.
Either way, I wish a free program was the standard. Too bad they got here too late.
Microsoft honed its skills (in "embrace, extend, extinguish") on Java. In fact, that was the catalyst for the concept. They knew very well that adding proprietary extensions, so that Java development would center on Windows, was the fastest way to kill a cross platform programming language that threatened their monopoly (development was very costly back then and tools for multi-platform development were thought to be a god-send). Hell, if you could program for everyone on any platform why would you need Windows?
You are just too naive to understand what was happening back then. It cost Microsoft something like $1.5 billion to get out from under that, plus the removal of their Java VM from Windows.
Microsoft's tactics were to kill everyone that had any hopes of producing a product that would compete and they didn't care how. The embrace, extend, extinguish worked like this. They embrace the product. They get the JAVA creators to get them on the inside track. After they have a license (or not) they attempt to extend the project (in the case of Java) to work best on Windows thus causing developers to rush to produce products for their implementation. Developers are working to strengthen Windows. They have extended it with proprietary functionality that can't be (or easily) duplicated on other platforms. Then, after they have it extended they extinguish it. Maybe it takes a few years, maybe not, but the goal is to kill the product thus killing the investment of the original company. They extinguish it by creating slow updates, by failing to produce anything worthwhile for a long time, and just when the interest is waning, they announce they are going to discontinue the product.
The Judge in the case ruled that Microsoft had to remove their JAVA virtual machine from every windows computer and that they could not incorporate it into future versions. Microsoft created a program that allowed the end user to remove the Java VM. Sun won $1.5 billion from Microsoft in damages.
So, please don't go on with your childish diatribe about how Google is doing this same thing, because no where on Earth is what Google did any where near what Microsoft did, nor to the same degree (and when you consider that the Judge ordered the vast majority of the claims by Oracle thrown out (I believe 3 remain) with the added instructions that they need to consider whether the 3 remaining claims are worth being pursued, you should think twice before claiming Google has done anything wrong). So, get real, grow up, and accept that Microsoft is a convicted predatory monopolist and people won't accept them at their word any longer. It's that simple. And it has nothing to do with whether someone's a Linux user or not (that's just your immature nature rearing its head). And you'll just have to pardon me and the others for not wanting anything to do with Microsoft.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Its recommended by the Guardian 'secure Android' project: https://guardianproject.info/apps/
Yeah but Skype isn't "hard" to duplicate. Seems like (as always) Microsoft is wasting their money.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
What MSFT tried to do with Java is EXACTLY what Google is trying to do now to Java
This is patently untrue. MS tried to pass off their vm as the real jvm. Google has never said that Dalvik is in any way shape or form a JVM. And furthermore, Dalvik bytecode will not run on the jvm and java bytecode will not run in Dalvik. Why do you miscreants insist on twisting the basic facts of this case to confirm your own anti-Google biases? If Google is guilty of anything at all, it is using patented technology that is owned by Oracle which a completely different ball of wax than what MS did. Please read up on the history of the two cases or just STFU. Your utter cluelessness has made it impossible for me to muster the energy to read the rest of your rant.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
So why would Facebook or Google be allowed to buy Skype, but not Microsoft? You are just spreading FUD. Larry, is that you?
Heh. We really should be reminding people that this is exactly the sort of "discussion" that attracts flocks of sock puppets. It might not be Larry (or Steve, or the other Steve) personally. But some unknown number of the posts in this discussion are PR posts from accounts that belong to the various interested companies.
Slashdot is a pretty well-known forum in the computer industry. It's hard to imagine that the marketing departments of the larger companies aren't very well aware of this, and consider this a very cheap advertising medium. We should always be assuming the presence of sock puppets in any discussion here. Especially one like this.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
I know this thread is dead meat by now.. but just a suggestion.
Maybe it's time to donate cash or skills to one of these projects.
Heck, I'm up for a challenge and technically literate, if not elite.
The biggest challenge is getting past the "brand". If M$ changes the
name, it'll be easy to create and fund an alternative that could give
them a run for their money.. I had a paid subscription to Skype
for years. The Linux client, although pretty hackish, worked
and was my primary means of long distance voice coms. I'd be
willing to pay someone other than M$ for that again.
Why can't we go back to using jumpers to configure slot adapter cards? Why? I say!
To be fair, Skype hasn't really done much to improve the Linux client in years. It exists but it really isn't that good compared to the Mac and Windows versions.
Dont understand why, It's common knowledge that enterprise license agreements are MS's bread and butter. The amount the get from OEM's is pocket money, that's why MS charge Asus less for a Win 7 pro OEM then they do for 1 years Win 7 Pro OL (Open License) in most cases.
This is probably a ideological decision rather then a business one.
:mac products MS produce. MS hate Linux so support will be dropped as soon as the regulatory agencies aren't looking. Skype on IOS and Android, forget about it. Unlike OSX v Windows, IOS and Android are real competitors to Windows Phone x and have significant market share. I expect Skype for Android to be depreciated immediately as it's not very far along in development and Skype for IOS to be gimped and then depreciated over time.
Skype on Mac, maybe. With about half as much support as other
Android will be fine, Google just needs to open up Google Voice to the rest of the world but IOS, facetime doesn't cut it as it's IOS to IOS only effectively cutting off access to 90% of the userbase (PC and Phone)
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Lots of great lessons to learn from skype.
This whole discussion is predicated on the notion that Skype is better than a standard VoIP/videoconferencing network (with centralized call setup and some routing) due to its low cost of operation. But Skype, for $8.5bn, is not low cost.
I am willing to bet an inflation-adjusted $100 that MS never makes up the difference.
Well, they thought up The Ribbon themselves.
You mention SIP or Ekiga to anyone, you get blank stares, but everyone knows Skype. They were first and are biggest, and better alternatives like ....oh, what's its name, started with an S, got bought out by Logitech....well, anyway, you get everyone crowding to a big "thing" and all the rest shrivel to a distant fanbase. Like Facebook vs. all the rest of the social sites. Like Windows vs. Linux. Google vs. Bing.
People need to be taught the meaning of open source and standardization.
And I'll then be demanding refund of the unused part of my subscription, as well as some explanation of how I'm going to use my advertised online number now that they've shut down access to it.
Of course, if they continue making it accessible through Linux, no real problem. I'll still distrust M$, but if they don't slam the door on this product, then I'm not rabid enough to leave on that basis.
Will be interesting to see what actually happens. And I'd better start to investigate alternatives.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Skype per se isn't so hard to duplicate ; it's user base is. And it's user base is precisely why I chose to go with Skype.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
But generally, there are solutions working better... GTalk most notably (as attested for example by one of my buddies who very much prefers it over Skype - on way over-shared, wireless-connected LAN inside of EU on one end; with his family on not-really-56k dial-up inside of CIS on the other)
Hm, similar with video conferencing...
One that hath name thou can not otter
What are you talking about? Your grandma doesn't have any of them.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
I bet you were saying the same thing about Hotmail and Geocities. Skype's a flash in the pan, and it's not even a very big flash.
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Yeah. It's like MySpace.
Surely you meant to say Geocities...
Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
Probably not quite "too late", not quite "everywhere" (WordPerfect also was very established at one point; and living in one of those "20+%" places, I can tell you this: hardly anybody has a problem with pirating software... and yet, it didn't keep MS Office in the position of absolute domination)
One that hath name thou can not otter
I have three platforms of interest: android, playstation3, and desktop linux. Add to that the next Wii that is probable for next year. Only two of those currently enjoy support, and they're both linux. Given a reasonable alternative which had a critical mass of users, then the answer is Yes.
I think your point about the XBox is underrated and I fear that Microsoft intention is not, as others say, really the customer base. I think it could very well be a defensive move as well as a technological grab. Primarily Microsoft wants to control the "living-room hub".
Microsoft's Skype acquisition is likely an attempt to position the Xbox 360 and other Microsoft platforms as a standard communication vehicle, in addition to its entertainment offerings
http://kyon.pl/img/19371,microsoft,Skynet,skype,.html really whole new meaning...
One that hath name thou can not otter
Sky + .net = SKYNET!
http://img.imgur.com/yvtdc.png
Welcome to Slashdot.
Wow. That's the most intelligent discourse you can come up with. A stupid fucking meme. You are pathetic.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
Here ya go, Skippy.
The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
But your note regarding the living room seems to me to be a pureplay to keep games alive. .002
M$ interests, reflected in Nokia/WinMo/GPS/Skype
all points to their continuing push to entrench themselves in the automotive market
my
resist propaganda
Great, just when I thought all was ok, with skype being my main comm app....now M$ buys them out, and will start chargin for us to use it.
Just great....here comes ventrilo!
The company that sells this kit only sells to governments/military, not joe public. I'm not making assumptions on who wants to listen in, just letting you know how it is done.
...possible future plans to make skype for business avail just to OCS?
I've just received this from Digium:
(..omissis..)
Skype for Asterisk will not be available for sale or activation after July 26, 2011.
Skype for Asterisk was developed by Digium in cooperation with Skype. It includes proprietary software from Skype that allows Asterisk to join the Skype network as a native client. Skype has decided not to renew the agreement that permits us to package this proprietary software. Therefore Skype for Asterisk sales and activations will cease on July 26, 2011.
This change should not affect any existing users of Skype for Asterisk. Representatives of Skype have assured us that they will continue to support and maintain the Skype for Asterisk software for a period of two years thereafter, as specified in the agreement with Digium. We expect that users of Skype for Asterisk will be able to continue using their Asterisk systems on the Skype network until at least July 26, 2013. Skype may extend this at their discretion.
(..omissis..)