Skype Crashes and Burns In Worldwide Outage

Stoobalou writes "VoIP and instant messaging service Skype has disappeared from the Internet, nary a fortnight after Microsoft snaffled up the outfit in a $8.5 billion deal."

Comments

Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Who wants to bet that Microsoft tried to replace the OS of the Skype servers with Windows? They did it for Hotmail, it caused a lot of problems, in the end they had to nearly double the number of servers because Windows wasn't good enough compared to the old Unix servers.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mewshi_nya]

Or, you know, it could just be a server issue. If you look, and ask Skype users, the outage is already over.

I know, not as fun as MS-bashing, but the best bashing is based on fact.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Tsingi]

Or, you know, it could just be a server issue. If you look, and ask Skype users, the outage is already over.

I know, not as fun as MS-bashing, but the best bashing is based on fact.

And the fact is that Skype has run flawlessly for at least seven years (according to the article) without a hiccup and as soon as M$ gets it, they break it.

There you go, an off the cuff, fact based, M$ bash.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

there was a huge outage a couple months ago...

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Who wants to bet that Microsoft tried to replace the OS of the Skype servers with Windows? They did it for Hotmail, it caused a lot of problems, in the end they had to nearly double the number of servers because Windows wasn't good enough compared to the old Unix servers.

Given that the deal hasn't happened yet (Microsoft hasn't bought Skype, they have proposed to buy Skype and both are waiting for regulatory approval before actually going through with it, which probably will take months and months) I'm willing to put money against that bet if you are.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

As Skype is peer to peer, 90% of the service has always been running on Windows anyway.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Lumpy]

Yeah but now all skype calls start with the windows 95 startup sound.....

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the following scenario is, of course, impossible:
1. Microsoft tries to switch the current Skype servers with Microsoft servers
2. The whole thing bursts into flames
3. They put the previous Skype servers back online

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, not remotely fact based, Skype has had shitload of outages over the past 7 years, several longer than this one. And the suggestion that this was because MS wanted to replace the servers with Windows is just retarded. MS bought Skype less than a month ago, they haven't even taken over operations yet. To replace the server OS on a system that large would take 6 months to a year from planning to implementation at an absolute minimum. This has nothing to do with MS, and is basically a non story. Yes, Skype had a relatively brief outage, just like all there other outages that were not covered here. RingCentral is down now too, do we need a story about that? How about the 30 minute outage on Wikipedia yesterday? Oh wait, this wasn't a story about an outage, and the summary might as well have been [insert M$ bashing below].

Re:Hotmail all over again

[SimonTheSoundMan]

Anyone remember when Microsoft back in 2007 released an update to Windows that took out Skype's servers? Flooded Skype's servers for several days.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[JackieBrown]

Skype was down for a while last December for millions of users

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/12/22/skype-down-for-millions-of-users

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Except it's not fact-based. Skype had some pretty nasty problems 6 months ago -

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20026408-17.html

Re:Hotmail all over again

[hjf]

OK, I'm going to play the "CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION" card, that Slashdot fans like to use all the time.

If I get modded down, you will see how hypocrite slashdotters are.

And, also, here is a link for you, memory-challenged fanboy (gee, it wasn't even 6 months ago and we already forgot about it?)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/23/0415203/Skype-Outage-Hits-Users-Worldwide

I'm not in the mood to google more "skype outages" for you. Do your own homework.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mewshi_nya]

Skype has central servers, which is what they are referring to. In fact, does anyone know if Skype even is peer-to-peer, rather than a peerserverpeer model?

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

there was a huge outage a couple months ago...

All Skype users know they've had outages (and MS haven't even bought Skype yet!), this is just FUD and falsehoods to a shameful degree just to bash MS (but are we confirming that we need to completely invent reasons to do that?)

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Lunix Nutcase]

And the fact is that Skype has run flawlessly for at least seven years (according to the article) without a hiccup

Well if that's what the article is saying it's lying:

On 16 August 2007, Skype became unavailable to a majority of its users. Millions of users were requesting to log-in at the same time following a routine Windows update and this flooded the peer-to-peer system. The event lasted for about two days.

On 22 December 2010, it was reported that Skype experienced an outage estimated to represent 8 million foregone calls.

and as soon as M$ gets it, they break it.

Except for the fact that Microsoft hasn't even acquired it yet? It takes far more than 16 days for an acquisition to go through.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Lunix Nutcase]

It is impossible since the acquisition hasn't even happened yet. They haven't even gotten regulatory approval yet. If you truly think that such a huge acquisition like this happens in 16 days then you're an idiot.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

"not fact-based"? Is this some kind of newspeak? Here on slashdot we prefer the terms: "bullshit", "lies", "FUD", "misinformation" and "the editors are idiots for accepting news posts like this one".

Re:Hotmail all over again

[DrgnDancer]

Pretty much, yes. There's no way Microsoft tried to switch Skype to Windows servers right now. They don't even have possession of the company yet. The Hotmail switch was planned for months before the attempt was even made, no one is stupid enough to try a massive OS switch on an infrastructure network, with less than a month of planning time, before the deal is even final. MS has done dumb things in it's history, but they're no where near that stupid.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[DaveV1.0]

Except the article is wrong. Maybe you should read the comments where a someone calls the author of the article wrong. And, it isn't really an article, but rather an Microsoft bashing screed.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Ksevio]

The only central servers are for authentication. All the communication traffic is peer-to-peer, though sometimes it will go through a third peer to overcome networking issues.

There are also supernodes (sometimes skype owned) where many users connect to send and retrieve connection data (who's on, search, etc). A simple network traffic analyzer can confirm much of this.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[luis_a_espinal]

Or, you know, it could just be a server issue. If you look, and ask Skype users, the outage is already over.

I know, not as fun as MS-bashing, but the best bashing is based on fact.

And the fact is that Skype has run flawlessly for at least seven years (according to the article) without a hiccup and as soon as M$ gets it, they break it.

There you go, an off the cuff, fact based, M$ bash.

No, it isn't (as there have been several outages in the past). Facts are a bitch for the fools who talk about them without checking them out, don't you think? The thing that gets me the most is this thing you said:

as soon as M$ gets it, they break it.

Correlation does not mean causation. Turn in your geek card at the door if you please.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[postbigbang]

Skype uses some nodes as super-nodes, but it's otherwise mostly peer-to-peer. There are landline gateways across the planet, but they're not easily termed as servers.

The Microsoft haters in TFA need some education. Skype hasn't yet been officially acquired by Microsoft, and has had many kinds of outages. A global carrier can't help but to have them occasionally for many different reasons, but Skype wasn't out across the planet. Somebody couldn't connect and thought that Skype was down when some others couldn't logon. Hardly scientific.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[hjf]

I was modded down, so here is my comment again:

OK, I'm going to play the "CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION" card, that Slashdot fans like to use all the time.

If I get modded down, you will see how hypocrite slashdotters are.

And, also, here is a link for you, memory-challenged fanboy (gee, it wasn't even 6 months ago and we already forgot about it?)
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/23/0415203/Skype-Outage-Hits-Users-Worldwide [slashdot.org]

I'm not in the mood to google more "skype outages" for you. Do your own homework.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[countertrolling]

...Microsoft bashing screed...

Marketing 101, buddy.. could just as easily be a ploy by Microsoft for sympathy. Weirder things have happened

Re:Hotmail all over again

[j00r0m4nc3r]

Why do you defend MS? You think MS would defend you? All MS wants from you is your money, and they will do anything to get it including illegal things, which I find disrespectful. I do not respect anyone or anything that does not respect me. Bashing MS is shameful? What I find shameful is your willingness to tolerate MS's behavior.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you defend MS? You think MS would defend you? All MS wants from you is your money, and they will do anything to get it including illegal things, which I find disrespectful. I do not respect anyone or anything that does not respect me. Bashing MS is shameful? What I find shameful is your willingness to tolerate MS's behavior.

I don't defend MS and don't expect them to defend me. I do defend relating to facts over bullshit FUD, which the claims in this story clearly is. I don't respect anyone that stoops to pure falsehoods just to support "a cause" they think are just. I think it is shameful.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Who wants to bet that Microsoft tried to replace the OS of the Skype servers with Windows?

Look at me, I read Slashdot's headlines, I'm well informed on anything Microsoft!

Re:Hotmail all over again

[luis_a_espinal]

Because the following scenario is, of course, impossible: 1. Microsoft tries to switch the current Skype servers with Microsoft servers 2. The whole thing bursts into flames 3. They put the previous Skype servers back online

possible =/= probable. And certainly this: (possible -> likely) is not a tautology.

What do you think is more likely? That Skype suffered another (yes, another) blow out that just happened to occur after its recent acquision by MS? Or that MS immediately engaged in the IT-OPs nightmare of changing the OS and infrastructure and rolled it out into production with only a mere weeks of acquiring Skype?

Seriously, Occam's razor bitches. Pls turn your geek card at the door and thanks for playing.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Locutus]

come on mod'ers, that was funny.

LoB

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Locutus]

and they've not planted any of their executives on the board or in high places within Skype like the Nokia deal neither. Unless we see there's cause or reason for the Microsoft-ification of Skype should start before the ink is dry, we'll have to accept that it's only fun blaming Microsoft for stuff like this.

And here's another theory based on nothing, a mass exodus of geeks from Skype who don't want to work for Microsoft either left or decided key parts of an update weren't in their best interest in bothering with. ala "oops, just kidding" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBkf0nAGqi0

LoB

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Tsingi]

I'm not in the mood to google more "skype outages" for you. Do your own homework.

I'm good with you doing it. While you're at it, do the research on M$ services in general, and how reliable they are compared to their peers in the industry. Post it as an article and link it here at slashdot. If the article gets picked up and some troll doesn't tell you to "Do your homework", you get 100%.

Or not.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Applekid]

Clearly Microsoft used a variation on their trans-warp technology to go back into the past and cause those outages in order to lower the asking price.

Wake up, sheeple.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[HermMunster]

This is payback for them dropping support for the open source project "Asterisk"? Probably not, but it does give those people and businesses involved in Asterisk some sense of revenge.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, as part of the agreement, Microsoft likely told Skype that they had to drop support for Asterisk, an Open Source PBX project, so that they can favor their own project. There's word from Skype that they wanted to focus on SIP but that's silly as Asterisk has full support for SIP.

Who really knows what happened, but Microsoft does have a habit of dropping support for projects like this once they take it over. This is the same concern that everyone had when Microsoft was thinking about buying Yahoo regarding the open source Zimbra project, as it was felt that if the deal went through Microsoft would axe it too.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[HermMunster]

If I purchased a product, and the papers were signed, I'd have no problem setting down directives, even if I hadn't taken over operations yet.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[HermMunster]

I'm sure fruitful discussions had been taking place either with the new consortium of Skype members, or prior when E-Bay was reading it for sale, with conditional clauses indicating Y would occur within X period of time, and that since there's really no reason for dis-approval both parties would feel confident in initiating their plans. Otherwise, it's a lot of lost time. Since it would be the Skype people doing it, what would it matter when they started?

Re:Hotmail all over again

[hjf]

Dude, I don't manage any Windows servers. I run Linux and Solaris.

Fuck you.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Tsingi]

Dude, I don't manage any Windows servers. I run Linux and Solaris.

Fuck you.

And I'm sure that your charm is surpassed only by your good looks.

Have a nice day!

Re:Hotmail all over again

[DrgnDancer]

Even if we accept that Microsoft is exercising some level of control over Skype (an event I'd consider highly unlikely this early into the process, but believe what you want), there's still no way they'd be performing a major infrastructure change like a full OS changeover this quickly. I doubt you could get the code ported this quickly, let alone get it tested, a deployment plan written, everyone read into the plan, etc, etc. This isn't like replacing the OS on your home PC. We're talking hundreds or thousands of servers, running custom code, deployed internationally. If Microsoft decides to switch them over to Windows (and they may), it won't be a rush job done a few weeks after the announcement of intent to purchase. It'll happen after months of work and planning, and after the sale is final.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mcgrew]

Not just dropping support, but ruining the product. I started not liking MS when they bough FoxPro. AFAIK it may still be on the market, but version 8 was completely unusable.

I started liking them even less when I installed XP and half of my old programs would no linger run.

If I were a Skype user, MS buying them out would make me NOT a Skype user.

Today I only interact with MS at work; no MS products in my house. I'm looking forward to retirement, when I won't have to deal with MS at all.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mcgrew]

Holy crap, who's moderating today? I only saw one comment with a mod greater than 1, and most of the comments here are at -1, even from logged in users with interesting or factual comments. Meanwhile, a "fuck you" results in no downmod at all.

Mod points are like cops -- they're never there when you need them.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[MagusSlurpy]

I've got 8 left, but I decided I'd rather just comment than get involved in this trainwreck.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mcgrew]

Correlation doesn't imply causation, but where there's correlation you can't automaticall rule out causation without further study. I'd be willing to bet that MS will screw up Skype considering their history.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Kelbear]

Posting to undo moderation.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[ScrewMaster]

Correlation doesn't imply causation, but where there's correlation you can't automaticall rule out causation without further study. I'd be willing to bet that MS will screw up Skype considering their history.

Microsoft probably shouldn't be allowed to buy other companies for that reason alone. Although, Hotmail is still around and is one of the biggest Webmail services in the world outside of the U.S.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[ScrewMaster]

If Microsoft decides to switch them over to Windows (and they may), it won't be a rush job done a few weeks after the announcement of intent to purchase. It'll happen after months of work and planning, and after the sale is final.

Very true ... this is a substantial project and it won't go over well if they screw it up. This isn't just about people talking to their grandmothers in another country, business use of Skype is enormous and growing (another reason I'd like Microsoft to stay the hell out of it.) Matter of fact, Skype has shown just exactly how well VoIP can work on a massive scale, and if Microsoft fumbles the ball (which is also likely) it will leave room for a competitor to move in and take over. Google Voice, maybe. The tough part for such a service is all the deals with local telcos that Skype worked out for POTS access around the world, but it can obviously be done.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[sr180]

Despite having "excellent" karma, I haven't been given mod points in over a couple of years. So its not me...

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Deliveranc3]

Are you serious? If it's MS they've been planning this for months. They probably have written a bunch of code for the "SDK" (read: reverse engineered). Don't think companies can't move fast, if they were willing to spend $X then they're willing to spend $X + $Y where Y is preparation.

This is a very bad thing for consumers.While Skype isn't the monopoly in the desktop VOIP space that it used to be. This means Microsoft controls a growing percentage of phone calls and Google controls a growing percentage of information and phone architecture.

It's a war over a technology (SIP VOIP) 20 years old. I'm not sure that Skype or any of the remaining VOIP providers have the guts to stand up to Microsoft and the ethics to turn down bribes, especially from governments. Embrace, extend (which is the scary part, extinguish there's no reason Skype couldn't achieve total dominance in the U.S. they now have unlimited marketing money.

SIP of course ties into the phone lines and puts the user in control. I recommend some products on my website.

For a freebie if you're thinking of replacing Skype try Nimbuzz it has all the functionality of Skype, better pricing and it's based in the Netherlands, it's also a multiclient IM and comes for all the phone platforms (except probably linux.). Nimbuzz is also better because they were allowing Skype users in their network till Skype pulled the plug. I just get the feeling they want to get along with other providers and Skype, well, doesn't.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Anonymous Coward]

I read this comment using a silly Japanese accent. It made it so much better.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[mcgrew]

I discovered that if you post prolifically you don't get mod points. I went without mod points for years as well, when they changed the interface I couldn't post from work (IE6) and I had mod points almost every day for a while.

I discovered a workaround to not being able to post in IE6 so it's been a week or two since I've had mod points.

Re:Hotmail all over again

[Kalriath]

Only if it's Microsoft lying about other people. If it's other people lying about Microsoft, it's "not fact based".

microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

ha ha

Whoops

[jijacob]

I feel sorry for the people that rely on Skype for all of their calling needs. At least they can pretty easily use Google Voice until Skype comes back up.

Re:Whoops

[olehenning]

If you're lucky enough to live in North America that is. Google Voice isn't internationally available as far as I know.

Re:Whoops

[obergfellja]

It (skype) has been great when talking internationally to family and relationships.

now if I can get them on Google Voice.

Re:Whoops

[Hatta]

This is why internet telephony should be peer to peer instead of client server. If we both have a presence on the internet, there's no reason to involve a third party for us to communicate.

Skype is just badly designed.

Re:Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

Skype is peer to peer. You still need a server to setup the call tho. Once the setup is complete the call is handed off to the clients and the server is no longer involved.

Re:Whoops

[Chrisq]

Mod parent up. All a service should provide is a directory for a peer to peer service, and gateways to landlines etc.

Re:Whoops

[hjf]

Why is this modded down? Google, is that you?

Re:Whoops

[Lunix Nutcase]

Mod parent up.

For what? Being completely wrong? Skype is peer-to-peer.

Unlike other VoIP services, Skype is a peer-to-peer system rather than a client–server system, and makes use of background processing on computers running Skype software; the original name proposed – Sky peer-to-peer – reflects this.

Re:Whoops

[sosume]

Explain how to efficiently handle conference calls without a central hub, please.

Re:Whoops

[petermgreen]

If we both have a presence on the internet, there's no reason to involve a third party for us to communicate.

If you have medium term stable IPs and your own domain (though you could argue that relying on DNS is relying on a third party) then I would agree with you.

Most client machines don't have that. Many are behind NATs and even those that aren't may not have stable IPs. P2P should be used for the actual call data where possible but servers are needed to keep track of users locations and (if you want to provide a reliable service to those behind NAT*) to provide a fallback path for call data in the event that P2P transmission is not acheivable.

What we should really be doing is a system similar to email. With email you can either rely on a third party or host it yourself if you have an appropriate connection and there is no reason the same can't be done for VOIP.

* SIP doesn't really get on very well with NAT and worse the provider I used liked to pin the blame on NAT for half-calls despite the fact they had worked fine in the past with the same NAT.

Re:Whoops

[daneubauer]

Explain how to efficiently handle conference calls without a central hub, please.

Skype uses a hybrid p2p architecture consisting nodes and supernodes. The supernodes are semi-central hubs which are regenerated when one goes offline. From what I understand anyone can chosen to be a supernode, it just depends on a lot of factors including bandwidth, jitter, ping, and processing power available. This allows conference calls to be handled efficiently. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol

Re:Whoops

[Hatta]

If that were the case, why does the network go down?

Re:Whoops

[Archangel Michael]

So, exactly who does your computer contact to find the address (IP) of the person you're trying to call? Some random other person until you find the person you're looking for? Not to mention the idea of directory poisoning in a distributed environment (think poisoned torrents). While your idea is essentially a good one on paper, it lacks a "phonebook" capability (Directory Service), and security. Skype isn't badly designed from that standpoint.

Chances are this was a configuration problem, not an infrastructure problem.

Re:Whoops

[AJH16]

They explained this after the last outage if you read their blog. Basically they have a defensive measure in their P2P system to prevent client machines from getting overworked and burning through bandwidth, so after a supernode hits a certain level of use, it shuts down for a period. This increases the load on other super nodes which then shut down, etc, etc until it results in a waterfall collapse of the network because there are too many clients and not enough coordinators. Since new clients can't reach a supernode (coordinator in my terms), they can not connect to the network and once enough super nodes go down, the network fractures and collapses. That's always been the problem with decentralized systems, they can only deal with so much change before they break. Some break more gracefully in to sub-networks to isolate themselves, but in the case of Skype, that doesn't really make sense. Instead they designed it to all work or all break. To some extent it will break gracefully by not allowing new connections, but some situations still will break it regardless.

Re:Whoops

[Lunix Nutcase]

Because the authentication is done via a central server. Once you authenticate it's all peer-to-peer.

Re:Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

It always amuses me how the opinion other people have of the countries of North America is one of the set defined exactly by "a bunch of culturally and technologically backwards neanderthals who I hate and are being ruled by an evil despot who I hate dedicated to keeping them behind because they're so stupid and don't get any of the basic creature comforts we here in $superior_country get and I hate them", or "a bunch of people who get cool technology entirely by luck, which I hate, and do things which are cool, which I also hate because they get to use it and I hate them and they're stupid and they're not here in $superior_country and I hate them".

Re:Whoops

[pr100]

"lucky enough to live in North America" ... how we laughed :)

Re:Whoops

[creat3d]

If you don't like it, tell it to your fellow countrymen that justify this perception.

Re:Whoops

[Sique]

Every mobile phone knows a "conference call", where the phone is connected to two other phones at the same time and all three are talking to each other. This can be expanded at both ends to add more phones to the same conference.

Re:Whoops

[ProfessionalCookie]

Probably just an issue at the top of the peermid.

Re:Whoops

[marcosdumay]

Yes, you need the DNS server for that.

Re:Whoops

[marcosdumay]

"That's always been the problem with centralized systems, they can only deal with so much change before they break."

There, fixed it for you. The reason people use decentralized systems is because they scale. That failure is proof that Skype is centralized. It is not centralized at Skype's server, but at the super nodes.

Re:Whoops

[AJH16]

No, because the supernodes can be anywhere and can not be centrally managed, it is P2P. Think of it like a bit torrent network with too many leachers and not enough seeders. Are you going to claim that torrents are not P2P because they require people to run seeds? Any P2P system needs some type of command and control or it can not function. When a new node joins the network, it must be able to discover the rest of the network. Any user could be a supernode if they wanted to be, Skype just allows you to behave as a leach in a lite mode where you will never be a supernode. Perhaps you should learn what P2P is and how it actually operates before you incorrectly critique an industry professional trying to give you a simplified explanation. Skype is just about as P2P as it gets. P2P systems are more prone to failure than centralized if they are designed to require full network awareness since problems spread with no central means to fix it. (The last time it went down, the only way to get it back up was running a bunch of modified supernodes that would break the normal supernode rules so as to get other users back up and running and in supernode mode without getting overloaded.) A supernode is simply a client that has good awareness of the network by having been around long enough to have an up to date view of the topolology that hasn't already been over utilized by the configuration built in to the local Skype client.

Re:Whoops

[Daniel Phillips]

Yes, you need the DNS server for that.

A DNS server could do the job only by running nonstandard software, therefore a standard DNS server will not do. If both clients are behind NAT (usual case these days) then a globally reachable server (not behind NAT) running nonstandard software must establish the peer to peer connection via hole punching. That is far from the end of the story, because hole punching relies on NAT router behavior that is not governed by any standard. If hole punching fails then the global server would have to relay the traffic itself, again running nonstandard application-specific software.

Re:Whoops

[marcosdumay]

A bit torrent network can work quite well with any number of seeders bigger than (and including) one, with any number of leachers. In fact, depending on the data available to the leachers, it can work with no seeder at all. That is because the bit torrent protocol doesn't concentrate any kind of resource on any node.

Now, compare that to the Skype network. On that you need a minimum number of super nodes for each end node. Go below that minimum rate and the entire network fails. That happens because the connections are concentrated (that means, centralized) on those super nodes.

Re:Whoops

[AJH16]

Sorry, I screwed up my bit torrent terminology by some definitions. Yes, you could have no seeds (full file), but if you don't have people sharing fragments and truly leaching by only grabbing fragments, then bit torrent would not work either. I would agree with your assessment of clients that access supernodes and don't act as super nodes, they are light clients and not behaving in a P2P manner, but those super nodes are behaving in a P2P manner and the network will build itself out again if the supernodes don't shutdown (and actually the network would stay minimally available if the supernodes didn't have limits either). This is why the network rebuild approach had been to deploy a bunch of altered supernodes that don't have the resource consumptions caps in place.

You can draw fault at the light clients or the resource consumption management putting faults in to the system, but it is still a P2P system.

Re:Whoops

[marcosdumay]

No, it is not a pure P2P system. When it goes through a super node it is not P2P at all.

Re:Whoops

[AJH16]

The super nodes are themselves P2P. Yes, it is possible for someone to connect and leach off the P2P network by refusing to be a supernode (bit torrent equivalent would be refusing to share any fragments or any locations of those fragments), however any client could also behave as a true P2P node participating in a distributed network topology. I'm really not sure how better to describe it as I do not think you have a solid understanding of what a "supernode" really is in Skype's network or how it is the network actually operates, but the fact is the network is mesh growing and any client can, if they want to, participate in the network, it just isn't mandatory as part of the Skype protocol and normally will limit itself. This limitation causes the ability of the network to collapse, but it does not make it not P2P, it simply makes it a P2P protocol that is susceptible to being overloaded. You can debate the merits or demerits of the protocol design all you want, but it is irrefutably a P2P network in every sense of the term. At best you can only argue that not all clients participate in the P2P network. You could argue that non-participatory clients are accessing a P2P backbone as centralized clients, but that argument really fails when any of those nodes could be tapped to be supernodes (baring specific technical measures on their local network to prevent the function) This can be seen by the fact the only way to actually alter the network is to deploy new client software so that client nodes will update their behavior.

Is everybody really that stupid?

[Aquitaine]

Microsoft is not running Skype yet. It takes months for these deals to go through. And TFA suggests that Skype has never gone down before, which is BS. 'Disappeared from the Internet'? Seriously?

The only useful thing in this submission is that I learned the word 'snaffled.'

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[twidarkling]

Even worse, the article says www.skype.com is unavailable. I just went there and it loaded up instantly and completely. Pretty sure the whole thing's bullshit, just someone with an axe to grind.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but they even got that wrong. Surely 'snaffled' stands alone? 'Snaffled up' seems a mite tautologous to me.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Whorhay]

"The only useful thing in this submission is that I learned the word 'snaffled.'"

Damnit, and on the one day in the month that I don't have mod points!

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah - snaffled - knicked or stolen

Snaffled up - eaten

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it was down for me a few minutes ago. Now a maintenance screen is displayed.

My Skype doesn't connect either -> fail

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Tsingi]

Microsoft is not running Skype yet. It takes months for these deals to go through. And TFA suggests that Skype has never gone down before, which is BS. 'Disappeared from the Internet'? Seriously?

The only useful thing in this submission is that I learned the word 'snaffled.'

It's a safe assumption that the word snaffled derives from the early Latin acronym, snafu, which translates: Situation Normal All Fucked Up.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Technically a Snaffle is a type of bit for a horse bridle. Snaffling something implies catching and putting it into a harness. Snapping up means acquisition.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[WuphonsReach]

Even worse, the article says www.skype.com is unavailable. I just went there and it loaded up instantly and completely. Pretty sure the whole thing's bullshit, just someone with an axe to grind.

Or a routing issue that only affects some customers. Or a geographic load-balance issue where people from a certain area are seeing a broken site.

(It's working for me from NYC area at the moment.)

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree this post was completely overblown, my boyfriend and I, who live on different continents, did experience these same problems with Skype earlier today with both of our systems crashing and unable to access the Skype website as well. The problem appears to have resolved itself now.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[ygslash]

The web site was down for a short time. First down completely, then 505 and redirect to a static backup page. Now it's working again.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

>Microsoft is not running Skype yet. It takes months for these deals to go through

that's funny since they've been running nokia for a while and they haven't bought them yet either.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[poetmatt]

then who made the decision regarding asterisk? Hint: Microsoft. It doesn't take months or years for them to make heavy-handed management decisions that impact the company negatively.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[phorm]

On the other hand, if I had just spent several billion to buy a company and their primary service went down hard, I'd probably be a little unhappy about it.

Microsoft bashing is pretty lame though. It's like the idiots that blame [political party X] for every small problem in the world.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is not running Skype yet.

You've dashed my hopes quite remarkably. I look forward to the day (if it ever comes) that people I meet online will stop asking me "Do you have Skype?" just so I can see their face and hear their voice to talk in a fully encompassing manner like some half-wit who doesn't understand the English language well enough to compose a fucking email.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[jshackney]

(It's working for me from NYC area at the moment.)

Michigan, Florida, and Kentucky here. No problems.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[lekker biltong]

s/running/ruining/

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Blakey Rat]

There's also the whole "Skype is working just fine" angle we can use to call this article crap.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit, it's hotmail all over again: MS tried overnight to shove Windows Server instead of *nix on every piece of hardware in the Skype facilities :)

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Snaffled = stolen. Not entirely sure even the writer of the summary knew that tbh.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Doctor Memory]

I learned the word 'snaffled.'

I'm not even sure that they used it correctly. The common term over here is "snarfed". I think "snaffled" is a Brit thing.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

It crashed and burned man! There's carnage everywhere. It's total chaos. OMG it IS the end of the world. The sky is falling and it's the pieces of skype! AHHHHHHH

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Lunix Nutcase]

then who made the decision regarding asterisk? Hint: Microsoft.

Wrong. Skype made that decision months ago, but that was conveniently left out of that other article.

It doesn't take months or years for them to make heavy-handed management decisions that impact the company negatively.

Sure, if you ignore the fact that Microsoft doesn't even own Skype yet since it hasn't even gotten FTC approval.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[garyebickford]

I know you're making funny, but the real thing is interesting as well. :) According to Merriam-Webster, first use was in 1724, origin unknown; definition: "to obtain especially by devious or irregular means". So it's misused in the original comment. SNAFU is from WWII. ;)

Some folks think it is derived (somehow) from the noun 'snaffle' which is a type of bit used for training horses. I'm not sure how that works, but perhaps because with a snaffle bit you can lead a horse away from its owner more easily?

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Lawrence_Bird]

From the original presser:

The acquisition is subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions. The parties hope to obtain all required regulatory clearances during the course of this calendar year.

So yes, people really are that stupid (or hateful of Microsoft).

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Tsingi]

I know you're making funny, but the real thing is interesting as well. :) According to Merriam-Webster, first use was in 1724, origin unknown; definition: "to obtain especially by devious or irregular means". So it's misused in the original comment. SNAFU is from WWII. ;)

I knew that SNAFU was from WWII, but I didn't know what a snaffle was, I assumed it was a derivation, I stand corrected. thanks.

Some folks think it is derived (somehow) from the noun 'snaffle' which is a type of bit used for training horses. I'm not sure how that works, but perhaps because with a snaffle bit you can lead a horse away from its owner more easily?

But can you make it drink?

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[geminidomino]

Either you're logging in remotely, or you're putting in WAY too much fucking effort into checking for skype.com's heartbeat

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is not running Skype yet. It takes months for these deals to go through. And TFA suggests that Skype has never gone down before, which is BS. 'Disappeared from the Internet'? Seriously?

The only useful thing in this submission is that I learned the word 'snaffled.'

It's a safe assumption that the word snaffled derives from the early Latin acronym, snafu, which translates: Situation Normal All Fucked Up.

Actually snafu was a military acronym used in the late 50's by the usaf.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, SNAFU is French, not Latin. Latin is a dignified language. It doesn't do FU...

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Snaffled in British English means stolen, usually: "Someone's snaffled my breakfast"

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[garyebickford]

haha! :)

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[scdeimos]

And TFA suggests that Skype has never gone down before, which is BS. 'Disappeared from the Internet'? Seriously?

Yeah, I had to laugh when I read this in TFA...

I confess to having run Internet publications using Skype as an instant messaging service for over seven years now.

In all that time the service has never once failed - until today.

It's not like there were world-wide outages in 2004, 2007 and 2010, now were there? Those are just three examples - I guess Mr. Hales has a short memory.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Walt Disney coined that phrase making cartoons for training the US army during world war 2.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[cavebison]

I'm having this interesting experience with Slashdot, where before I click the link to TFA, I have a look at the +5 comments to see if it's a complete waste of time or not. I've adopted this behaviour over time as very often the quality of comments are a good judge of the article and just as, if not more, interesting.

I'm one of those who comment without reading TFA, but almost 50% of the time now I never click through to it based on the comments. So the higher the quality of comments, the less likely I'm going to read TFA. If I'm not the only one doing that, then surely Slashdot's audience has the inherent tendency to destroy its business model. Which is about as Faustian as a brain in a jar.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[nagnamer]

MeeGoo will crash though.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[nagnamer]

s/MeeGoo/MeeGo/

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[jsvendsen]

Or he's, you know, actually calling people in those places.

Re:Is everybody really that stupid?

[poetmatt]

what, you think they need FTC approval (even if they don't get it) to influence a corporate business decision? are you daft?

That's so Microsoft!

[Skatox]

That's so Microsoft! Next step: malware trough skype.

haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

I confess to having run Internet publications using Skype as an instant messaging service for over seven years now.
In all that time the service has never once failed - until today.

So you don't remember December's outage, do you? Haters gonna hate.

Re:haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

I confess to having run Internet publications using Skype as an instant messaging service for over seven years now.
In all that time the service has never once failed - until today.

So you don't remember December's outage, do you? Haters gonna hate.

"haters gonna hate" -> childish name-calling that demonstrates an utter inability to engage in logical discourse.

Otherwise known as ad hominem , a logical fallacy.

So instead of making a point, you demonstrated your inability to think.

Re:haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

So instead of making a point, you demonstrated your inability to think.

Just like you just did.

Re:haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, you all are pathetic. By the way, I heard that Skype users have an unusually large incidence rate of herpes. It is probably not true but better safe than sorry!

Re:haters gonna hate

[DaveV1.0]

Here, how is this. The author of the article in question has out-right lied in this article. That fact alone invalidates any point the author was trying to make and calls into question every past and future article from this author.

oh, and "haters gonna hate" is a slang phrase indicating people with biased positions will promote those biased positions and this article and author are clearly anti-Microsoft. While childish, it is not name calling. Rather it is a statement of fact.

Re:haters gonna hate

[SanityInAnarchy]

No, ad-hom only applies when you're doing that as a point -- for example, "You're a hater, therefore you're wrong."

If you break this down into a syllogism, it's, "You claim the service never failed until today. It failed in December. Therefore, you are wrong." Childish? Maybe, but it's logical, regardless of adding a "haters" comment afterwards.

Re:haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a fucking idiot. Your post added literally nothing to the dialog, it's some bullshit a college freshman or precocious high school nerd would post.

His post, on the other hand, pointed out that Skype has indeed had outages in the past.

Re:haters gonna hate

[Anonymous Coward]

I confess to having run Internet publications using Skype as an instant messaging service for over seven years now.
In all that time the service has never once failed - until today.

So you don't remember December's outage, do you? Haters gonna hate.

The service is free, the software is free. Get over yourself FFS!

works in NYC

[alen]

maybe this is a european thing?

Re:works in NYC

[nomisholman]

no problem in germany

Re:works in NYC

[Anonymous Coward]

works in Germany, maybe it is a "OMG let's make something up, QUICK!!" thing?

Re:works in NYC

[geegel]

It was an XML glitch, corrupting the config.xml and/or shared.xml files, which are locally stored. They need to be removed manually, since a reinstall won't touch them. Anyway, this led to a surge of traffic to skype.com, the predictable /. effect and a lot of FUD.

Re:works in NYC

[Tarmas]

I'm in Europe, Poland to be exact, and Skype works fine, so no, it's not an OMG W0RdLWiDE OuTaGE (!!!!!!1!!!one!!!), as the title suggests.

Re:works in NYC

[pandrijeczko]

Also fine over here across the pond in Blighty, me ole mucka!

Re:works in NYC

[punkin]

Yep. Resolved by deleting the shared.xml file in %appdata%\Skype. Then restart skype and the shared.xml file is recreated.

Re:works in NYC

[dave420]

I had issues in Germany, but I deleted the "shares.xml" file in my Skype directory, and it worked again instantly.

Top notch reporting

[Anonymous Coward]

Overpriced, really? When did we become specialists in business and finance?

Re:Top notch reporting

[Anonymous Coward]

This is slashdot, we are in fact masters of all realms of human knowledge!

Duh!

Re:Top notch reporting

[pandrijeczko]

Yes, but we don't do perms.

A bit short on factual information.

[Arkaic]

I call bullshit. From the article - "In all that time the service has never once failed - until today." Perhaps it never failed for the author previously, but Skype has had several notable outages in its history. I'm not huge fan of M$, but the article shows nothing to justify blaming this on M$.

Re:A bit short on factual information.

[Virtucon]

I agree Skype has failed many times in the past. This is just a temporary problem or has Sony's IT admins now joined Skype?

Re:A bit short on factual information.

[Lunix Nutcase]

And it's even more ridiculous when Microsoft hasn't even acquired Skype yet since they are still awaiting FTC approval. The article writer is a FUDster.

Re:A bit short on factual information.

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. IIRC, their last major outage was so serious that when it was all over they actually credited a few dollars' worth of international calling credits to my account as a goodwill gesture since they were down for several days.

Re:A bit short on factual information.

[Anonymous Psychopath]

But... but some executives shook hands, and some lawyers wrote a contract, and some PR folks even wrote a press release! Surely they are to blame for this technical problem, somehow.

Or maybe the author just has an axe to grind and doesn't care how stupid his argument is.

Like father like son

[Progman3K]

So Skype is already adopting MS's reliability

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Man, I'm so tired of hearing this. I have shops with Solairis, Linux and Windows and you know what uptimes are damn close. Solaris still wins out over Linux and Windows in the uptime department but this lame MS beating is just getting too old.

Maybe you should go beat on Google for the holes in Android app security?

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he does on stories about Android security. That isn't the topic here. Microsoft products (which number more than just windows) have along colourful history of being unreliable (which means more than just long up time) and even apologists like you have to conceed that. Skype has just been purchased by Microsoft so noting the good fit is amusingly appropriate, given Skype's current problems.

Also for some one who has so many "shops" you type a lot like a indignant teenager. I guess that those two things are not mutally exclusive but still.

Re:Like father like son

[hjf]

http://slashdot.org/story/07/08/20/150258/Skype-Blames-Microsoft-Patch-Tuesday-for-Outage

cunt.

Re:Like father like son

[poetmatt]

in a server environment every server OS should be able to handle an easy 2+ weeks of uptime without even the slightest issues.

However, in a desktop environment windows OS (in comparison to linux) can barely handle 2 weeks of uptime without a guarantee that a driver will have an issue when waking from sleep, or that a driver will become unresponsive spontaneously and corrupt itself until said service related to the driver is restarted.

In short, microsoft's problem is not MS, but how they interface with third parties. Who is to blame? MS for allowing this to continue. They started to try to enforce better policies with Win7 but didn't go anywhere near what it takes to fix any of that shit. So I'd blame them for not forcing the 3rd parties to stop being lazy fucks.

Re:Like father like son

[Progman3K]

I was originally going to go with a bit about how Skype's management held a meeting to figure out how to let MS know they were ready to join MS's products and felt they needed to do something to illustrate that but the setup on that joke was too long, as you can tell.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude you act like anyone gives a $&/; about windows...are they gonna pay you for defending them?...EXACTLY!!!

Re:Like father like son

[Progman3K]

Good point.
I think the only way to fix the quality issues you describe would be by opening the code.
When will MS figure that out?
Often, companies like MS have too much on their plate and if you let your clients participate in fixing problems, you make them feel they belong. MS is still trying to do that but their approach is hamstrings them.

Re:Like father like son

[Progman3K]

There's an extra 'is' there, sorry

Re:Like father like son

[Ecuador]

Exactly. And this is not limited to servers. At home I had for years an XP box, a Linux box and a Mac. Guess which one needed to restart more often? The Mac. My windows and linux machines have uptimes measured in months (well, I would do the reboot suggested by XP update once every 2 months or so - so Linux went on much longer), while my Mac would require a reboot on average once a week. Sometimes it was some problem, and sometimes it was a reboot requiring (and not simply recommending) OS update that I HAD to do if I wanted to use the latest SDK...

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

I am guessing that you are comparing:

-A copy of Windows super deluxe pro that cost $, with a dedicated admin.
-A Solaris box which cost premium $ compared to equivalent software, that someone looks at occasionally.
-A PC with Ubuntu or Fedora downloaded for free.

My challenge to you would be to try an equivalent comparison.

Spend the same amount of resources (time/money) on all three (for purchase, administration or tweeking).

Then compare.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Bragging about uptime is like bragging about how bad you manage your systems. Whooo, I've got a 400 day uptime. Oh, I guess you're running that old kernel with 100+ vulnerability and lord knows what other issues like a possible power supply that won't work when you reboot. And the fact that you have a system than needs such a huge uptime probably implies you don't have the ability to bring it offline without breaking things.

I'd rather brag about my uptimes that are small because my systems are always patched and the 100% uptime our services have.

Re:Like father like son

[AmiMoJo]

Nice to hear someone saying this. People here keep trotting out ancient bugs from the 98 days or outright untruths. A few weeks back someone posted about how an x64 OS crashes because it tried to install an x86 driver... Right, yeah, Windows is that stupid. Not sure how the driver was signed with the x64 certificate needed before it will install at all, let alone passed the simple version checks, but those are a minor details when we are talking about the evil borg hive mind that is Microsoft and its leader Bill Gates.

Windows isn't perfect but 7 is actually pretty good, and as MacOS has demonstrated recently no platform is safe from malware that uses social engineering to get a foothold.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you, you worthless negrada shitstain.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the problem is that they have a track record that makes them such an easy target.

Their history of reliability (the operating system that MUST be reset every 46 days so that it won't crash on the 47th. Oh, wait, that was reliable, after all. You could rely on it to fail after 47 days.) and buying out competitive companies and letting those products either languish or plain discontinuing them is plain and open (the only thing about them that is) and easy to see.

No, there's nothing good to look forward to in the pending take over of Skype by Microsoft. Except for the true Microsoft Fanboy, I expect there are even some Microsoft users that are not looking forward to this takeover.

Re:Like father like son

[Locutus]

some of us have been around the block for too many years to not have fun with this. Microsoft may have finally got a version of their OS uptimes high enough to not require redundant servers(hardware) with failover but it's taken them decades to finally do it. Not to mention the huge increase in man hours it's taken to support Windows systems. They are a joke because they earned it.

Many of us lived through the hardships of a conversion from UNIX to Windows and it has not been pretty. I'm reminded of how Microsoft themselves has quite the difficulty converting Hotmail from UNIX to Windows. It's been said it took about 2x the hardware to finally get Hotmail running on Windows instead of UNIX. You don't shake that off unless you're either a newbie, a fanboi, or both.

LoB

Re:Like father like son

[Archangel Michael]

Sorry, I call BS on uptimes. While a barebones MS File/Print Server can run for MONTHS without a glitch, adding any number of other Microsoft Server products (SQL) will require frequent reboots.We have one server that requires, yes requires, reboots at least twice a week because of SQL memory leaks. Giving it more RAM (from 4 to 8 GB) only delays the problem, from daily to twice a week.

On the otherhand, we have Linux box that has never needed a reboot except when we updated the kernel. It is running LAMP and just keeps chugging.

And I like Win2k8 and the new Powershell is very unix like, and makes running Windows Servers very nice. But still, they are not even in the same class. Getting better, no doubt, but still not there.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

2+ weeks? Outside of patching I have servers that see up-times measured in months and years depending on application. Insofar as the desktop is concerned I have shops with Linux and Windows Desktops. In the XP environment, yes, it's still a BSOD world but with the Windows 7 Desktops they are substantially better. I wasn't trying to get into a "MS is better than Linux" discussion, I was trying to point out that this old MS bashing is just that, old news.

I don't see mainstream businesses rushing out to buy into Ubuntu or other Linux as a desktop solution but I see a lot of shops upgrading to Windows 7 now and yes, thousands of PCs running XP.

Now if I could only get these folks go get off of Windows Server 2003 it would be a much better world.

Re:Like father like son

[Lunix Nutcase]

However, in a desktop environment windows OS (in comparison to linux) can barely handle 2 weeks of uptime without a guarantee that a driver will have an issue when waking from sleep, or that a driver will become unresponsive spontaneously and corrupt itself until said service related to the driver is restarted.

And yet somehow I have magic desktops/laptops that have had months and months of uptime on both XP and Win7 without any such issues.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Well for every positive there's a negative I guess. I have about 200 systems running SQL Server 2008, no memory leaks however has anybody done any tuning on the memory configuration? By default SQL Server will consume as much memory as it's configured for and that's AFAIK about 2TB. But we don't have memory leaks and have up-times of many months. Our biggest issue is just managing the size of the databases and transaction logs and all of the maintenance associated with it.

Is SQL Server better than Oracle? No, but it's not what it was 10 years ago either and I have a lot of business critical systems running on it. 4GB is nothing for SQL Server, just like Oracle. It sounds like you need a good SQL DBA to do some tuning and to make sure you're up to rev's with your fixpacks and cumulative releases.

Re:Like father like son

[poetmatt]

well, I was trying to be generous with two weeks :) Linux servers usually have an uptime of years, if it's run well. Considering most servers are now set up for patching without reboot, even moreso.

I see lots of shops running the hell away from windows 7, mostly because from a best practices perspective single vendor lock-in is not a good long term strategy, along with the lack of flexibility.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Oh hell, I agree and have the scars in my back to prove it. The bigger argument for windows was the reduction in software and hardware costs and yes iteratively and with a lot of pain we're finally getting there.

I could run multiples of the workloads on a per-box basis vs the older Sun gear but you know something? Sun (Oracle) isn't making those strides in SPARC iron anymore. The last time the Oracle salesman was through it was all about their now X86-64 iron and "No, nothing on the SPARC roadmap."

So you're left with Wintel boxes and I think Itanium will be a dead horse soon. So, X86-64 here we come and then it will be what is the less costly product? I don't see Oracle coming off of their horse in terms of Per-CPU licensing so maybe MSFT will win the low end and middle tier segments? Who knows, I guess that's what IDC and Gartner are for.

Re:Like father like son

[dave420]

And Germany has a colourful history of invading France - what bearing does that have on what's happening today? Windows has, for the last 3 years, been stable as a fucking rock. Stop living in the past, or at least update your jokes. Either way, your little tirade brought nothing to the discussion but even more FUD. Nicely done.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

I don't think there's been an honest study of the "uptime in years" statement. Every system requires maintenance and when considering appliances or other embedded O/S implementations, years can be obtained. But Servers? Yes, there are certain patches that can be applied without a reboot but every once in awhile, regardless of architecture or O/S, you have to reboot the system. Solaris is still the king there but I also think that has more to do with philosophy from the start. If I have a cluster of 20 Windows boxes, I can roll upgrades and still have 100% availability to the application. If I have one or two Solaris boxes doing that rolling upgrade may be a problem so things like major patch releases get put off to downtime windows.

Also, I think you're a little mixed up. Vendor diversity costs in organizations, it's a proven fact. Most organizations I've dealt with over the past 10 years are trying to eliminate all of the outliers and are focusing on centralized standards. This one customer I have has over 8,000 PCs on XP, they're going to 7 this year and aren't even looking at Desktop Virtualization or Linux. It's less costly to just upgrade to the next release at this point for them. So, YMMV.

What really gets fun to watch is to see their Desktop Support Vendor downgrading from Windows 7 and putting old XP on there and then trying to get the drivers to work right. They have horrible reliability problems around newer hardware running on XP and they figure they'll save hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just in upgrading to 7 because of all of the compatibility problems with new hardware and the old XP OS.

Funny how that works out.

Re:Like father like son

[dave420]

So you have shitty drivers. Excellent. Damn you, Microsoft, for someone else writing shitty drivers! DAMN YOU!!! My Windows machines are up until I want to restart them, not when I'm forced to by either Microsoft or any driver manufacturer. I guess you're having bad luck.

Re:Like father like son

[Archangel Michael]

You're right about RAM tuning, however it shouldn't cause server crashes because all the RAM is used up. And we probably do need DBA, that does nothing but SQL stuff, but the reality is we're a school district. MySQL doesn't get flakey like MSSQL does. Just sayin.

Re:Like father like son

[Billly Gates]

Where I worked we had to reboot our Windows 2003 small bussiness edition server boxen once a week to prevent GP faults. The systems turned into glue even though ram was free. Unless the memory routines and algorithms were replaced with Windows 2008 I do not think it is ready as a real server os yet. Thr fact that bussinesses bought $35000 switches just to run Windows was hysterical.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

And the astroturfing M$ fanbois are at it again... See 4 digits Locutus' answer for a start.

Then now please how please explain me how you can get "darn close" uptime when there are critical patches coming from Redmond all too often? Oh, I see... You're part of the problem by running unpatched Windows servers?

As an example, if my Debian GNU/Linux workstation cannot reach 6 months of uptime (critical security patches and especially the ones that would affect my system as a workstation are exceedingly rare) I don't consider it worthy of me spending my time on it.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Well, if it consumes everything leaving nothing for the O/S, then yes that can be a problem. Typically it's not a good practice to leave the default memory or much of the settings for the SQL Server Instance to factory defaults. I think that's where a lot of these reliability problems start to begin with, then there's the other argument that "if the vendor recommends this leave it alone." To which I say "blah."

It all depends on what you're setting things up for and why MySQL is a good system, it's not Oracle RDBMS nor SQLServer, not yet. With Oracle now "owning" MySQL I don't think it will ever be to the same level of capabilities or close. If you're looking for a FOSS database, MySQL is fine but then again it depends on what you're trying to do and who you're trying to do it for. I've been in places where the mere mention of FOSS opens the floodgates of FUD. People start screaming and yelling about support. Yes, all FUD, but then again I would try to house a 20TB data warehouse on MySQL either.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

The myriad UNIXes (there were literally hundreds) were buggy pieces of incompatible shit for years. They became popular because they were cheap and good enough. Sound familiar? Some of us lived through the rise of UNIX and it wasn't pretty, but if I spent time on Slashdot now laughing at Solaris's uptime I would rightly be thought a loon.

The Windows bashing is very stale.

Re:Like father like son

[jawtheshark]

Okay, I find my wifes iMac to want to reboot quite often too. However on Windows XP, unless you turn off Windows Update, you can find your computer rebooted whenever it liked to, cheerfully announcing you with a systray notification that it did so because of a security update. It may now do that much less, but it did a lot a few years ago. I rarely to never boot into Windows, and if I do, I have so many updates that invariably I end up having to reboot anyway. The problem with XP is that it reboots without really asking you. Well, it asks you, but when you're not at your keyboard you're screwed.

Re:Like father like son

[R_Harrold]

You're only having to worry about getting folks off of Windows Server 2003? I'm currently on a consulting gig where they are working to get some of their users off of Windows NT 4.0.... :) Yes, the MS Bashing gets a bit old after a while, but in this case the blatent inaccuracy of the article is grating even before you add the MS Bashing.

Re:Like father like son

[poetmatt]

Lack of vendor lock in doesn't mean you have to have vendor diversity. This is a complete and total focus on the wrong thing.
You could go with redhat (single vendor), but you're not locked in from making changes to the OS. If Microsoft doesnt' want to patch a critical windows vulnerability then tough shit. If redhat doesnt' want to do something that you wish to do, then you can do it yourself, program it in with no limitations. GPLv3? Only matters if you're going to release your change. Nothing at all is preventing you from making changes internally. Vendor lock in refers to legal lock-in from being able to make changes to the software, not choice *of* vendors.

Meanwhile, if you think people don't have vendor diversity in organizations, I'd like to ask you again who exactly provides the backup software considered to be a best practice on windows server? Oh right, microsoft said "go to a third party" . In fact, they suggest/bar REQUIRE vendor diversity. Good luck storing things to DVD's that are over a DVD's size. Great! Might want to look into reality if you think vendor diversity is always a bad thing. Vendor diversity exists because one vendor has a gap in their solution. That's pretty natural considering that software is always being developed and changing over time. Trying to fight vendor diversity is an exercise in futility.

People going to XP from 7 is because they were doing things wrong originally on XP and are paying for it now. That's not exactly the fault of anything other than vista being complete shit for enterprise support. Nothing to do with server 08, or 08 R2 for that matter.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Well I never bought into the "edition" concept. it was like Windows NT vs. Windows NT Server, what *really* were the differences unless you considered artificial constraints that any good person with RegEdit could get around.

Look, I'm not saying Windows OS has been perfect, far from it but it's come a long way, a very long way and the days of claiming that MS is "unreliable" doesn't hold the same water it did 10 years ago. I still have Windows 2003 Servers in productions with all of their quirks. Most have been virtualized into one platform or another but in general they still keep on ticking. Do my clients want them upgraded? If they're working fine and don't represent any risks, then no they stay in place.

Is 2008 better? Yes, it is but is it better than Solaris 10? No. Linux? In some ways yes, other ways no. It just depends on who the customer is and what are their driving business goals. If they want as few boxes as possible with as reliable footprint I still roll out with SPARC iron running Solaris. Some applications however dictate that you run Windows, it's just the nature of the game so that means Windows Servers and Windows Desktops.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Oh I still have a few of those.. "You can't change that, it's been running since the 90s... " when it comes to Windows NT. I have two customers running Novell and won't change at least for the next year or two. Yes, obsolete technology abounds, still!

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Amen. I'm so sick of people rushing to Microsoft's defense because they think bashing MS is a trendy thing to do and they're too cool or forward thinking to follow the trend. MS has deserved that bashing for years and just because the rest of the industry took so many years to figure it out, when it did become common knowledge, the tech hipsters now think they need to buck the trend just to be unique.

Re:Like father like son

[Virtucon]

Okay, Stop. Now you're mixing arguments. My point was the constant MS bashing like it was 1999...

But what you also introduce here by your arguments is the supportability issue. Businesses nowadays want one neck to wring when things go wrong. More over they want as best a monoculture as they can come to because "IT costs money." I quoted that because lots of businesses (all of them actually) bitch about the costs and want to drive as much of that cost out the door. Oh but they still want their Outlook, they still want Word and Excel..

yes, there are FOSS alternatives and companies like RedHat that provide supported products but as soon as you open the door to "I can just go get something from this website and patch my systems" then where does that official "RedHat blanket" end? You're supporting those systems yourself much like any other vendor. While the Open Source movement gives us choice and a lot of good ones, I can't go to most CIOs and say "I just got this latest patch from the fiji apt repository and deployed it into production. You're good to go."

That gets you a quick exit in most organizations. Love it or hate it MS is around, it's in the enterprise and it will be there for a very long time.

Re:Like father like son

[Yunzil]

I think the only way to fix the quality issues you describe would be by opening the code.
When will MS figure that out?

Just as soon as you figure out that most people don't want/don't know how/don't care/don't get paid to fix someone else's code.

Re:Like father like son

[Ecuador]

Well, it is annoying, since that is the default behavior, however there are at least a couple of ways to change it without disabling automatic updates. The simplest is to find the No auto-restart option under Windows updates on the Group Policy Editor.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft may have finally got a version of their OS uptimes high enough to not require redundant servers(hardware) with failove

Really? You don't have failover setup for all server OS installs? Hardware also dies....

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Maybe you should go beat on Google for the holes in Android app security?

And wasn't this latest wave of anti-Google sentiment proven to be started by Facebook's covert, high-schoolish media campaign? So you're not only a MS fanboy but a FB fb too?

Re:Like father like son

[chemosh6969]

A comment as completely out of place as that, having nothing to do with the article and filled with inaccurate/misleading info as the poster of this story, looks like something you keep saved on your computer just to paste when someone posts a comment defending Microsoft in some way.

Re:Like father like son

[Draknor]

Not sure what your problem is -- my Windows 7 workstation (and Windows XP before that) are typically up for at least a month at a time, at least until I decided to institute a monthly reboot (just because). And my home PCs would have even longer uptimes, except for Windows 7 deciding to automatically reboot to install patches when I'm not looking.

My ubuntu box, however, seems to like to give me trouble - losing network connectivity, random errors, stopped talking to our ActiveDirectory server, etc. And it seems like I every time I log in, it's telling me a restart is required, probably due to some security update being auto-loaded. (I run it headless as a playground box and rarely use it, so I'm sure it would have better reliability if I was more proficient with it.)

But the point is -- both Windows and Linux are more than capable of providing good uptime, given proper administration. Linux (at least Ubuntu) can be just as flakey as Windows used to be, if you don't know what you are doing. And Windows can be very stable.

Re:Like father like son

[kiwimate]

Yep, just like we know Linux doesn't deserve any credit for having finally made it to the point where installation isn't a monumental headache of editing config files by hand.

I have been operating MS servers since NT 3.1 and I always found the biggest problem was not bad code - it was that the pretty graphics made everyone think configuring a server was easy and they didn't need to read a manual or know what they were doing. Hence the customers who ran SQL Server 6.5 and called me in when their database ground to a halt because they didn't know they had to run update statistics. That's not Microsoft's fault - that's someone who needs a consultant to configure their systems properly because they don't know enough to do it themselves, but they're too cheap to call someone in until their server degrades.

I've told the story before, but it bears repeating. I know a senior admin who doesn't know how to configure permissions - he thinks that if someone can't write a file it's because they're in a READ ONLY group as well as the READ WRITE group and the fix is to remove them from the R-O group.

That's a joke - that's someone who shouldn't be allowed near a server, Windows or UNIX. But because everything is pretty with buttons and stuff, he can barely find his way around and if he bashes at it long enough it'll eventually sort of look like it's working. Of course, underneath it's a steaming pile of dung, but the pretty graphics make non-admins think they can be a server guru, and they can't!

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

Virtucon has a point. Yet you freely admit to holding a company's past against them, no matter how much they have improved or will improve. Nice. Bitter much, BOFH? You had to "live thorough the hardships"; what BS. Like you had to lose an arm or take a 50% paycut.

Please let me bow down to your grey beardedness, or rather your low slashdot#. You may be one of the first, you may be one of the best, but your not always going to be the dominate. Just ask the dinosaurs and the free market about that.

Re:Like father like son

[thegarbz]

However, in a desktop environment windows OS (in comparison to linux) can barely handle 2 weeks of uptime without a guarantee that a driver will have an issue when waking from sleep, or that a driver will become unresponsive spontaneously and corrupt itself until said service related to the driver is restarted.

This too is getting very old. You start by talking about windows uptime and the first thing you mention is a driver? How about all the linux issues then? There's a kernel driver which doesn't work with my raid card which kernel panics every distro on boot. In comparison my windows box has an uptime of more than 2 months now, which is .... orders of magnitude better and I have never had a driver related issue. It's not an isolated case either. I've had a Maxtrox driver kernel panic the system on startX too.

Analogies are great aren't they. Everyone likes to think their precious little linux is oh so reliable, yet the hard truth is it's just as bad, and in many cases worse then windows due to lack of proper testing of drivers. Heck coming out of sleep successfully is the exception rather than the norm in the Linux world. Yeah sure it may be because of dodgy BIOS or dodgy hardware, but that's my point, I never have to google to see if hardware is supported under Windows, it just is.

Re:Like father like son

[Mortimer82]

Running Windows 7 64bit and I restart my computer only once a month, for Windows updates. Same with my Vista 32bit laptop, I never shut it down, I merely have it sleep, but never need to restart it except for the once a month windows updates.

If your Windows computer is having stability issues, you either have poor quality hardware or badly written drivers.

Re:Like father like son

[Douglas Goodall]

This sounds really similar to my experiences with Windows Server 2003R2. I got out the install media, got the system formatted and installed, and chose a reasonable sounding set of default services to run. I tested what I had running and things seemed good, for about an hour. Then the SMTP mail stopped working. I go to bed, but by morning the system logs have become immense with all sorts of inscrutable error messages about sub-services that are not starting or responding as expected and reduced functionality modes that are becoming active as the system basically goes to pieces within 24 hours. The bizarre part of this story is that just after the install everything was working and tested good. But within an hour, things started unraveling. My hopes that Windows 2003R2 might be better started fading at that point.

Re:Like father like son

[Douglas Goodall]

Old unix users know that you shouldn't actually have to reboot a unix system unless it is the core of the kernel itself that is being updated. Otherwise you can reduce your run-level and bring it back up in order to restart updated services. Just calling reboot is the lazy way, and is no better at verifying startup sequences than varying the run-level as I said before.

Re:Like father like son

[jawtheshark]

And the group policy editor is available for Windows XP Home out of the box, right? I'm not even sure it's included with XP Pro.

Re:Like father like son

[Kalriath]

This, this, a thousand times this. The only thing more dangerous to Windows servers is the typical UNIX sysadmin convert who thinks that just because it's Windows it requires constant babysitting and twiddling. Get this folks: it doesn't. Like UNIX, you just set it up, optimize it, and leave it the fuck alone. It can run on its own, it doesn't require you to hold its hand. Just check in once a month to see if you need to install any of the patches (and news flash: you don't need to install them all. Half of them will be shit like "Improves performance of right click when used with a left handed mouse on a computer with an Adaptec S23454325 RAID controller")

Re:Like father like son

[Drugmath]

According to my anecdata, that's not even particularly true anymore since Win7. The work laptop I'm typing this on right now gets rebooted once a month (on Patch Tuesday) and otherwise is up for a full month at a time between patches.

Additionally, I have a Win7 home theatre box with a current uptime well over 100 days - I don't patch this one often due to its lack of net connectivity.

Re:Like father like son

[Anonymous Coward]

The group policy editor is included in XP pro. For XP home, you can follow the MS knowledge base instructions for this: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555444

Re:Like father like son

[jawtheshark]

Nice, but in my opinion, this should have been disabled by design. You don't reboot when users are logged in and have potential programs running whether the are AFK or not.

Only Microsoft

[taktoa]

Could screw up that badly.

Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

Anti-microsoft garbage. Written by a 12 year-old, and sparse on facts.

Re:Useless

[maxwell demon]

Anti-microsoft garbage. Written by a 12 year-old, and sparse on facts.

Who needs facts? Everyone knows that crashing software can only be Microsoft's fault.

fixed

[Anonymous Coward]

Technical instructions to fix the current Skype issue affecting a small number of users – easier solution coming soon! http://bit.ly/iLbgpy

See https://twitter.com/#!/Skype

Peat. And repeat.

[cpu6502]

Isn't this the second time Skype went down? Wonder if it's the same cause: blogs.skype.com/en/2010/12/cio_update.html (CIO update: Post-mortem on the Skype outage)

Like Sony, I thought they would have fixed this problem by now, but guess not.

Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[courteaudotbiz]

Even though most Slashdotters will laugh about it, I don't think it is linked to the acquisition of Skype by Microsoft... The acquisition is so recent, I don't think anybody other than high ranked executives could have put their nose in Skype business, so I don't think Microsoft developpers could have caused such a mess.

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[gbjbaanb]

you never know, the guy responsible for watching the blinking light on the server might have read all the news of the takeover, exclaimed "I'm never working for Microsoft" and walked out. And right now, everyone's looking at the servers, scratching their heads and saying "where's the guy who usually resets this thing?".

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[Lunix Nutcase]

The acquisition is so recent, I don't think anybody other than high ranked executives could have put their nose in Skype business, so I don't think Microsoft developpers could have caused such a mess.

What acquisition? Microsoft is still awaiting FTC approval before anything can actually happen. Microsoft only AGREED to acquire Skype at this point.

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[courteaudotbiz]

So this further confirms that it not about Microsoft at all...

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

This is libel. I did NOT "walk out".

It's just that I'm taking a lot longer lunches, now. Much longer lunches.

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[tgd]

The acquisition *hasn't happened yet*.

Just to be crystal clear. Buying a company is a LONG process. A company that size, it could *easily* be a year or more.

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[epine]

I don't think Microsoft developers could have caused such a mess

Another possibility is that some skype sysadmin was teetering on the brink of hysterical depression at the looming prospect of answering to The Beast. It's not as if religious sentiment is unheard of in matters technological. Consider the Pope of Cupertino or emacs/vi.

It must be a sweet mental shortcut to filter the world through condign causation. There's a fairly active brain center for doling out the blue juice which rarely considers second order effects. That's for other brain regions to consider, if they get any glucose at all. I suffer from the condition known as lateral thinking, where all my brain centers get glucose at the same time, whether I want this or not. I try not to get into small-pie pissing matches against the more singularly motivated, since I tend to lose these battles due to my congenital mental profligacy. Never more than half my brain mans the cannons.

If it weren't for the upside of "be elsewhere" when the shit hits the fan, lateral thinkers such as myself would have become Darwin's fish food long ago. The constrictive mental model of all effects through condign causation isn't much use in beating a prudent retreat.

Re:Don't think it's because of Microsoft

[garyebickford]

Maybe they're just practicing for the new operational paradigm! :)

Say again?

[Mascot]

Been connected to Skype, and chatting, all day. No issues. www.skype.com working just fine.

With statements like "has disappeared from the Internet" and "worldwide outage", I would expect to have... you know.. have noticed something?

So, let's rephrase TFS to something more like: "Some users/areas experiencing issues reaching Skype servers and services"

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same here. Me and 2 friends are on skyping and watching one of them stream a game and chatting about issues with the recent Minecraft update causing issues with our server downtime. (CPU bug that should be fixed and soon released)

Guess I will just have to make sure I don't go offline if it is down...

Re:Say again?

[fezzzz]

My skype just keeps on crashing and my colleague working on Linux experiences the same problem. I've checked with five other colleagues and their skype is working fine, so the problem is clearly intermittend

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Try this fix:

http://heartbeat.skype.com/2011/05/problems_signing_into_skype_an.html

Worked for me on Linux, and for a few friends on Windows.

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditto, I was shocked to find out that despite TALKING ON SKYPE RIGHT NOW it's totally not working. I'm going to send this article to my buddies ON SKYPE RIGHT NOW so they can all be informed of skype's outage.

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, let's rephrase TFS to something more like: "Some guy with a blog that hates Microsoft is experiencing issues reaching Skype servers and services and then submitted a link to Slashdot because Slashdot hates Microsoft. And Apple. And has issues with Linux. Y'know what, slashdot hates everything to do with computers."

Re:Say again?

[Dunega]

That would prevent the needed Microsoft bashing that is seemingly required on Slashdot.

Re:Say again?

[countertrolling]

He might not even hate Microsoft, could just be trolling Slashdot.. Mission Accomplished!! Bravo!

*golf clap*

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Macs are not computers. Computers are supposed to be fully programmable (i.e. you can do what you want with it). Macs are just big and shiny calculators.

Re:Say again?

[Anonymous Coward]

DAMN right, we all hate those computer thingies. Im glad I stuck with my tv glued to a typewriter, otherwise I couldn't write a comment here.

Re:Say again?

[Manfre]

Your rephrase doesn't properly convey the overly anti-Microsoft sentiment that is immune to facts!

Re:Say again?

[maxwell demon]

Macs are not computers. Computers are supposed to be fully programmable (i.e. you can do what you want with it). Macs are just big and shiny calculators.

I'm pretty sure Macs are fully programmable. You can even run Linux on them. Maybe you are confusing them with iPads?

Re:Say again?

[ari_j]

Your comment makes me think we need a Slashdot song, akin to The Toronto Song by Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie. (Never mind the third-grader's homemade music video, this is just the best way I could find on short notice to share the song.)

Re:Say again?

[nogginthenog]

There are quite a few people in my organisation having Skype problems today.

Re:Say again?

[Mascot]

You missed the point. "Quite a few people" does not equal "crashes and burns" or "has disappeared from the Internet" or "worldwide outage".

Seems to be

[Anonymous Coward]

working just fine in London.

Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's working find for me, both skype to skype and skype to POTS.

Maybe I just got lucky, but then again both the article and skype's twitter response seem to indicate this isn'tthe wholesale outage that the /. headline would suggest

(website) Works on my machine.

[Barryke]

It redirects to http://www.skype.com/intl/nl/home

Featuring the "Works on My Machine" certificate. http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/03/the-works-on-my-machine-certification-program.html

I'd really want to use Skype, but its no use as nobody i knows does so. Vendor lockout!?
Luckely here, the Dutch government has ruled that Dutch telecom companies may NOT charge extra for using instant messaging (or similar) apps on their network.

Its a mess right now, but its likely a free (possibly opensource) alternative will either launch or stand out of the crowd in the years to come.

Stop whining...

[geegel]

Step 1: Uninstall Skype

Step 2: Go to %AppData%\Skype\YourUsername rename config.xml to config.bak

Step 3: Go to %AppData%\Skype rename shared.xml to shared.bak

Step 4: Reinstall Skype

Step 5: Profit!

Re:Stop whining...

[monkeyhybrid]

No need to uninstall Skype or touch the config.xml file. Just rename shared.xml to shared.xml.bak (or simply delete it as will be recreated next time Skype runs). Job done.

Re:Stop whining...

[SilentTristero]

Don't need to uninstall/reinstall. Just stop skype (well, it's probably already crashed if this is happening to you), delete the shared.xml, and restart it.

Re:Stop whining...

[geegel]

Oh well, this is how I've done it and since it works... I figured I shouldn't skip any steps.

Re:Stop whining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Works the same on Linux. Go to ~/.Skype, do "mv shared.xml shared.bak", start Skype. Works...

Re:Stop whining...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't need to uninstall/reinstall. Just stop skype (well, it's probably already crashed if this is happening to you), delete the shared.xml, and restart it.

Deleting shared.xml did the trick ;)

Re:Stop whining...

[Rob the Bold]

Step 1: Uninstall Skype

Step 2: Go to %AppData%\Skype\YourUsername rename config.xml to config.bak

Step 3: Go to %AppData%\Skype rename shared.xml to shared.bak

Step 4: Reinstall Skype

Step 5: Profit!

If I gotta do a complete reinstall* to fix a problem I didn't cause, I think I'd reserve the right to whine while doing it. That's like saying: "Quitjer bitchin' and just re-install windows!"

*And now it looks like maybe I don't need to.

Its just an XML glitch

[Anonymous Coward]

In Vista/W7 delete the shared.xml from C:\Users\%username%\AppData\Roaming\Skype

Bam.. its working again.

This post is tabloid-fodder

[matt_king]

Skype is not down at all, not the service nor the website....this should not be on the front news page as it is sending out FUD.

Re:This post is tabloid-fodder

[RichM]

The outage* was over by the time Slashdot posted it.

* except that there never was any outage, just some clients that crashed when they updated their XML config from Skype servers.
Where I worked we speculated that they were updating the master IP/hostnames for the login servers when beta testing Azure or some other Microsoft datacenter and some clients received corrupted data.

window dressing

[Sunshinerat]

I strongly believe that the investment firm running Skype has kept it alive and looking healthy for as long as necessary.
Now the deal with Microsoft is made, there is no reason to keep the extra staff on board to keep it running without issues.
This also explains the sudden pull out from Astrix support.

This is the world we live in when money driven firms keep the windows clean, until it is no longer necessary.
The correct term is window dressing.

Microsoft, good luck with your recent purchase.

Re:window dressing

[Rob the Bold]

I strongly believe that the investment firm running Skype has kept it alive and looking healthy for as long as necessary. Now the deal with Microsoft is made, there is no reason to keep the extra staff on board to keep it running without issues. This also explains the sudden pull out from Astrix support.

This is the world we live in when money driven firms keep the windows clean, until it is no longer necessary. The correct term is window dressing.

Microsoft, good luck with your recent purchase.

I would hope (correctly or incorrectly) that Microsoft would insist, in writing, that the current owners properly maintain the systems throughout the acquisition process. Dammit, Jim, I'm an engineer not an MBA, but that still seems like a reasonable course of action -- you know, like specifying that the current owners don't trash the house you've contracted to buy from them in between inspection and closing.

It works in Taiwan right now

[Anonymous Coward]

Im on it and OP doesnt obviously know WTF hes talking about.

I know this is /. but damn the FUD from /. is getting out of hand.

Hotmail flashbacks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is anyone getting them?

Works in Australia too

[gtch]

No problem here — both Skype website and calls working fine.

Skype to Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'd rather die than be owned by you!"

One idiot user is a worldwide outage?

[nedlohs]

And I'm certain I've seen a skype outage story at slashdot in the past.

That explains something...

[damn_registrars]

I haven't been seeing nearly as many ads for Eastern European mail-order-bride services in my skype account lately. Now I know why.

They pushed an update yesterday

[unity100]

Heaven knows what the update pushed to people. It probably also caused the load.

What the Fuck Are You Talking About?

[WarpedCore]

Skype is working just fine. I just call tested in on my iPhone 4 moments ago and the polite British test call lady sounded as clear as ever. I think she's British. Never really stopped to play her accent. This is another Orson Welles caliber example of Internet reporting. Bravo.

confirmed on linux

[nevercome]

on linux, it just crashes after ~10sec after start . This happens on any client i have tested, from Ubuntu 10.04 to 11.04.

Re:confirmed on linux

[nevercome]

..fixed deleting .Skype directory into homedir.

Seriously...

[kvvbassboy]

I am really sick of this yellow journalism that's been popping up lately on Slashdot! Whoever is putting these articles on the front page, needs to do a better job.

It's supposed to be "News For Nerds", just report actual fucking facts related to science or tech, and not anti-MS bullshit or what color muffin Steve Jobs had for breakfast!

Re:Seriously...

[MarkGriz]

Agreed. And as much as people here like to rail against the idiots on Digg, at least their site has a mechanism to bury dumbass stories like this.

Re:Seriously...

[kurokaze]

QFT - this place is turning into the enquirier

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't digg take away the whole bury thing when they launched the latest version, and then everyone left because it was a farce?

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Brown

Re:Seriously...

[pinkushun]

/. needs a "vote spam" flag for articles.

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

But some of us want to know what color muffin Steve ate. That way we can update our charts on his morning bowel movement.

Re:Seriously...

[AmiMoJo]

I think the editors need to go on a basic journalism course because they clearly have no idea how to present a story with as little bias as possible, or even how to do the most basic of fact checking.

Seriously, do they do anything other than make up the stupid "department" tag and click "submit to front page"?

Re:Seriously...

[theBuddman]

I'm a Steve Jobs muffin color bookie, you insensitive clod!

Re:Seriously...

[tgd]

Unfortunately, /. has been the Fox News of the tech world for a decade now.

I think the real problem is that readers who weren't around even prior to having user accounts don't remember that it was just a site for collecting links by a bunch of friends on the Internet. Those same non-editors are still the ones tossing stories on there.

The issue is more that /. presents their employees as editors when, for 15 years, they have not been editors. While there is news to be had on /., you'll get more out of it realizing that its just a hub of a particular type of nerd group-think, and reading it with that in mind.

Re:Seriously...

[Just Some Guy]

"Lately". Heh.

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

What slashdot have you been reading that you think it dispassionately reports facts? WTF would be the interest in that?

Slashdot is a blog where the editors pass stories along like they were sitting with you over a beer. You should expect tired old jokes, and Microsoft stories are the Polack/blond jokes of the internet.

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

my thoughts exactly. and it gets worse if you look at the actual summaries that get to twitter. it's horrible. i've actually stopped reading slashdot altogether. then i read this article and I actually believed it.

I have to revert back to doing my own search before I click on a /. link.

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Where have you been for the last 5-8 years? This is par for the course at slashdot.

If you want something with some semblance of journalism, try Ars Technica. They have the occasional shit article every once in a while, but for the most part it's great.

Re:Seriously...

[Lunzo]

When an article is submitted without bias in the summary the editors add some flamebait biased lines to the end.

When TFA in the original submission is a serious news website or a link to a primary source then the editors change it to a link to a blog with the article split over 10 pages full of ads.

Re:Seriously...

[Anonymous Coward]

Now I really want to know.. What color muffin DID Steve have for breakfast?

Re:Seriously...

[AbominousSalad]

This. April Fools is only one day a year, any other day and it just makes Geeknet look shitty.

Really ?

[mbone]

It's working fine for me in Northern Virginia at 9:33 AM EDT - Cox Cable.

Skype works for me.

[C_Kode]

Skype is still functioning for me.

That was quick!

[Anonymous Coward]

I would have thought it would have taken a while for Microsofts culture to get through but they have obviously been getting much faster at this game.

M$ bashing fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone just wants hits on their blog and is all bitchy about having Skype issues. Nothing to see here.

"nary a fortnight after Microsoft snaffled up..."

[circletimessquare]

it's good to see shakespeare still employed and writing story summaries on the internet

but he could do with less colorful opinionated superlatives and just relate the facts

SlashDot is the Fox News of the tech sites

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's just find a story, write up some anti-MS wording, don't verify the contents, and post.

kdawson? Is that you?

[L4t3r4lu5]

1) Poorly researched, out of date information.
2) Inaccurate, inflammatory headline.
3) Short, information-free stub.

Sure seems like him.

Re:kdawson? Is that you?

[crossmr]

I'm beginning to think there are really only 1 or 2 people working at /. and they just user different names to try and keep the heat off them..
it might just be kdawson left at this point because there is no way there could be anyone else there and they let him anywhere near a keyboard unattended.

Re:kdawson? Is that you?

[westlake]

1) Poorly researched, out of date information.
2) Inaccurate, inflammatory headline.
) Short, information-free stub.

4) Which draws moths to the flames for the better part of day before being corrected. Got to get those page hits.

Re:kdawson? Is that you?

[Combatso]

or possibly CNN

Re:kdawson? Is that you?

[God_TM]

How much you wanna bet that stoobalou (the contributor of this 'article') is one of the editors of Thinq? http://www.thinq.co.uk/staff/ Gee... I wonder who's name there could be shortened to 'Stoo'?

Re:Another Option

[GargamelSpaceman]

I have an Ooma phone. Actually it's a device that plugs into my internet router, and into which you can plug regular landline phones.

It's like 15 bucks a *year* for taxes, and you get free calling in the US. No other charges. And you don't need to own a computer to use it. It's not like magic-jack where you need to have your computer running.

I also put 50 bucks in my pre-pay account, so I can use 411, and make international calls. The rates are competitive to skype rates for international calls. AND, you get a real landline phone number and can make calls to landline phone numbers. So instead of messing with a computer, when I want to make an international call, I just pick up the phone and dial. If someone calls me from another country, I tell them I'll call them back since it's cheaper for me than it would be for them.

Now the device is 200 bucks, but it's already paid for itself since I don't pay a telephone bill for a landline. And the call quality = that of any landline I've ever had.

No monthly fee. In a year, it pays for itself, and that's it. What a great deal! If you move, take your Ooma with you, and you KEEP THE SAME PHONE NUMBER no matter where you live, ( unless you want to change it ). Cell phones are nice, but they can be expensive. And if you are required to keep one for work, then having 2 in your pocket is annoying. Ooma is a way to have your OWN phone number forever for minimal money.

Why am I shilling? Because I want others to get a great deal. I don't want Ooma to go out of business because it gives customers such a good deal. ( I have no reason to suppose that it would.... ) For being such a good deal, I'll plug them once in a while.

Woah!

[Anonymous Coward]

Skype has crashed and burned in a worldwidge outage. Meanwhile, Amazon has utterly gone up in flames; Google has sunk into the muck of internet oblivion; Facebook doesn't seem to know where its towel is.

Oh, wait, what's this dangling ethernet cable go to? *clik* Ah. Never mind. It's all back. When will these big companies learn?

Headline is too soft

[Smigh]

Could you use a more sensationalist headline please? A worldwide outrage? Surely it must be worse than that if some users are experiencing connection issues. Put rebellion and pillages in there too... why not? And "crashes and burns"? That sounds like an accident, change that to "Microsoft murders, mutilates and disposes of Skype"!

Re:Headline is too soft

[amliebsch]

It's a global Skype genocide!

Re:Headline is too soft

[Anonymous Coward]

"Skype obliterated in supernova-like outage - world civilization crumbles; human extinction imminent"

It's the best I could do on short notice.

Instead of writing silly blogs...

[geogob]

... maybe take the time to check system status :

http://heartbeat.skype.com/

and/or read published solution:

https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA10874/I-m-having-problems-with-Skype-today?frompage=category

The real reason...

[Anonymous Coward]

They switched from BSD to NT.

Slashdot depresses me

[Anonymous Coward]

So every thing that MS touches (even if they don't control the entity yet in any way) instantly becomes flamebait? RATIONAL Microsoft hating is one thing, but this is just middle school name calling, jeez

overpriced?

[ravergonemad]

Overpriced? Sure, he can't afford 8.5 billion, but Mickey$oft can and Skype is a global phone company running on this thing called the internets... there is obvious potential. Linkedin/facebook are overvalued for sure, just a marketing departments wet dream.

Embrace, Extend... Crash-n-Burn?

[bl8n8r]

This would be a first for Microsoft. Anyway, some alternatives to Skype.
http://www.pamil-visions.net/skype-down/221825/

Global Internet Outage!

[Kamiza Ikioi]

The Internet crashed and burned today, for lady we spoke with. She has been unable to connect to anyone over her neighbor's wifi. Will the world markets be the next to crash with this unfortunate outage, which we can associate to Microsoft? Leo Laporte has the rest of this breaking story.

Seems like M$ bought another company...

[Anonymous Coward]

When did M$ buy Slashdot? Right now they are both equally "reliable".

Absolute rubbish

[Dunbal]

1) Skype is working fine for a lot of people except, apparently, the author.

2) Skype's web page loads fine

3) The author seems to have missed previous Skype outages

4) How the fuck does this FUD make the front page of slashdot? The article is pure libel.

Re:Absolute rubbish

[maxwell demon]

<conspiracytheory>Maybe it's Microsoft trying to get the price of Skype down.</conspiracytheory>

lets all comment...

[Anonymous Coward]

...on the same thing in different ways. There has to be 5000 ways to say this isnt what it was right? I mean afterall Skype really wasn't down and whomever posted the article is a real.......etc

penalize

[mutherhacker]

Shouldn't there be a way to penalize users for submitting stupid unchecked stories without facts or references? (even in the linked article)

Not a big MS fan here...

[Just Brew It!]

...but the mindless MS bashing really gets old.

Posting nonsense like this diminishes the credibility of /., especially when it comes to MS-related topics. If this site is to be taken seriously when it posts valid criticisms of MS -- and I agree that there are many! -- BS stories like this need to stop.

Re:Not a big MS fan here...

[pep939]

Quite right. Please /. people, give us quality... This sucks. :(

Some users experiencing issues?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Skype servers are currently taking a “short break” claims the official website for the worldwide video calling and chat service .. The Skype service began to cut out for users across the globe at around 12:15pm following an outage which the company are now looking into after pulling the active service" link

Skype Crashes and Burns In Worldwide Outage*

[amliebsch]

* Not Intended To Be A Factual Statement

Is Skype _really_ peer to peer?

[Sloppy]

The evidence for it being p2p is:

1. They say it is
2. It uses somebody else's "background processing"

The evidence against it being p2p is:

1. Users just happen to have simultaneous outages.
2. Skype user interface doesn't have any place where you enter/verify the key fingerprints of the person you're talking to. The other identity seems to have always been magically introduced to you, apparently by the one single universe-wide trusted authority, and coincidentally..
3. ..Skype has made deals with certain governments to allow them to monitor their citizens' phone calls.

(All being things which don't happen in a p2p system, unless at least some vital part of it isn't p2p.)

Look at the evidence and decide. I'd say look at the source, but Skype doesn't give you that. That's right folks, they don't allow security auditing for -- no, not a game .. no, not a 3d driver -- a communications tool. I am struggling to think of a class of applications (which aren't specialized for certain industries, like nuclear, medical, aviation, etc -- I mean stuff used by "regular people") where that's more necessary.

Re:Is Skype _really_ peer to peer?

[Lunix Nutcase]

No, the evidence for it being peer-to-peer is actually learning something about the technology instead or relying on some stupid article written by an idiotic FUDster. Now, authentication is done via a central server but all of the voice chat, etc is done via a peer-to-peer model using super nodes. A 3 second google search would have explained all this to you.

Re:Is Skype _really_ peer to peer?

[instagib]

The output of "lsof -i | grep skype" looks pretty P2Pish to me.

Re:Is Skype _really_ peer to peer?

[michelcolman]

Then how come the whole system went down? Did all the supernodes simultaneously fail?

Re:Is Skype _really_ peer to peer?

[shutdown -p now]

They didn't fail simultaneously. Rather, they cached faulty data (which triggered the exploit eventually), but before the node would crash, it would pass that data on to the other supernodes it knows about.

Can we change the headline of this article to

[Just Brew It!]

"Slashdot Crashes and Burns in Worldwide Brain Fart"? It would be about as accurate as the original headline.

Re:Can we change the headline of this article to

[maxwell demon]

"Slashdot Crashes and Burns in Worldwide Brain Fart"? It would be about as accurate as the original headline.

What, you mean Slashdot doesn't do that? :-)

correlation != causation

[calderra]

Correlation != causation. End non-story.

Re:Another Option

[UrbanaMan]

--- And you don't need to own a computer to use it. But you do need a internet service !!! Do you know people who have a broadband connection AND a router BUT NO computer ???

Works fine in Afghanistan

[Anonymous Coward]

Even when running it on my Commodore!

Best wishes,

Yunis.

Just get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot isn't going to straighten up and fly right. Get your tech news elsewhere. It's just not here anymore.

Humor...

[feranick]

Really, it must be humor http://media.thinq.co.uk/photos/skypefirked_big650.jpg : the net is down, but "good news" according to skype is that you can still download and USE skype. They don't say how I am going to be able to use it if the net is down. Are they making fun of us? Seems like.

No problem

[Araucano]

Working fine from Argentina

Re:Another Option

[GargamelSpaceman]

No, I don't, but then I wouldn't be surprised if it's common. People have all sorts of devices that require broadband internet that aren't 'computers'. Think of Playstations, and Wiis and Roku Netflix players etc. Ooma phones are just one more device like that that uses the internet and isn't a computer.

Re:Another Option

[jomcty]

I too have Ooma but their new Telo device is prone to failure. I'm working on my third box in the seven months I'm been with them. The first device was DOA, the second one died this past Sunday and I'm still haggling with customer support to get a replacement. I was lured in with the very, very low monthly cost but if I have to waste time and effort getting a replacement box it just isn't worth it.

I was on Vonage for six years prior to switching to Ooma and never had any equipment failure. I may just port my number to Google Voice and go back to Vonage.

Infamous Newspaper Headline

[UrbanaMan]

This jumping to conclusions "World-Wide Outage" reminds me of an infamous headline in a London paper. When thick fog caused the cancellations of ferries from the UK to France the story was headlined as "Fog in Channel : Continent Cut Off !!" It all depends on where you are looking at the problem from ... When my broadband has problems I had never seen it as a world-wide outage, although to me it is...

Re:Another Option

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that Ooma is a Ponzi scheme. They need to get a continuous influx of new users buying $200 hardware to pay for all the phone calls of everyone else.

It's just not sustainable. They're either going to have to start charging users for calls or go out of business.

Re:SIP alternatives abound.

[Technician]

SIP is a protocol and works world wide. There are multiple providers if you need connectivity to POTS. For SIP to SIP, many providers provide free accounts. Google SIP for more information.

A free soft SIP phone for Windows and Ubuntu is Ekiga. They will provide a free SIP address if you want one. They also provide free confrence rooms. They can be public with anyone dialing in is joined or private where the first to dial can set a PIN and then others need to use the PIN to join. The room is released when everyone disconnects. I've had no problems using a confrence room. Most of them are empty most of the time as most people simply call user to user.
http://ekiga.org/
Their phone is not tied to their service. You can use it on Microsoft communicator if you wish using the conference protocol instead of SIP.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Heh, do that? You get DOWN MODDED on /. ... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2148646&cid=36106332

"Maybe you should go beat on Google for the holes in Android app security?" - by Virtucon (127420) on Thursday May 26, @09:29AM (#36249938)

See my subject-line above, & the URL I posted in the very regard you note on ANDROID!

So, that "all said & aside" - Well, even if your source data's valid & from reputable sources & it shows problems in *NIX variants? You can ABSOLUTELY count on a "downmod", especially if/when you use documented, concrete, truthful & verifiable data the "/. 'Pro-*NIX' consortium" around here cannot dispute or handle validly (minus ad hominem attacks or mod-downs).

Been that way for YEARS here (almost a decade in fact, maybe more, because I've only been around here since early 2005 or so).

APK

P.S.=> You can bank on it that your post might be down-modded too... & probably with NO technical justifications on errors you may have made on "things computing", as mine was in the URL I posted in reply to you above, which is of course, some "FYI"/for your reference in regard to what I have just stated!

... apk

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Yea? Windows DOES MORE overall than *NIX does

[Anonymous Coward]

UNIX & its variants, blow by comparison, especially when it comes to a comparison of versatility in software (games is an easy prime example to come up with here vs. ANY kind of *NIX variation in fact) AND hardware compatibility for PC's &/or Servers (fact is, more hardware makers have drivers ready for Windows than ANY *NIX there is, consistently over time too, & solidly built).

There's a reason 95% or better of the worlds' PCs + Servers are on Windows OS. You're NOT the 'smartest man in the world' pal, especially vs. that statistic... that tell you anything?

LMAO - In fact, I've told YOU in particular this before: LoB must stand for "Loads of BULLSHIT".

So Thinq has an 'in' at Slashdot?

[God_TM]

It seems that every article that Stoobalou has written is basically a link to the article du-jour for Thinq. What's Slashdot's policy on pimping articles for sites that one might be affiliated with? Or can we at least get a disclaimer added to these postings (ie: "This is a non-paid advertisement to drive up Thinq's hits").

Skype Crashes and Burns In Worldwide Outage

[Anonymous Coward]

There actually seems to be something to this story, albeit, I'm not sure what...
My skype auto-crashed when I started my laptop today, auto-crashed again when I tried to manually start it.
Now, it seems to be OK...

Re:Another Option

[DavidTC]

It's less that it doesn't 'require' a computer, it's that it works even if the computer is off, or playing a game, or running Linux, or is flakey, or is running a Windows 8 beta, or whatever.

A telephone that is an independent piece of hardware is inherently less prone to issues than one that is a computer program.

Plus, with a small amount of work, you can disconnect existing phone wiring from the phone company, or use an extra secondary line of wiring, and get it all over a house, like with POTS.

I've never had an 'Ooma', but I did have Vonage. Which had a cheaper device, but higher monthly fees.

I don't actually understand how Ooma can work at the their current rates, and $200 is really expensive for a device like that.

Was "DDOS" anyone else's first thought?

[daboochmeister]

First thing that occurred to me ... I was kind of surprised to find out it was a more mundane software error. SOMEONE has to be planning something nefarious for our soon-to-be-self-proclaimed-VOIP-overlord.

Confirmed on Linux

[gabriolaLinuxUser]

There seems to be maybe something to this story. My Skype auto-chashed when my laptop running Knoppix started up this morning. Skype auto-crashed again when I tried to manually start it. It's seems to be OK now

Re:Another Option

[networkzombie]

I looked into Ooma when I was on Vonage. The device they give you is a total piece of shit that you have no access to AND it must be placed before your router so it runs NAT to your router. Double NAT causes problems for some protocols I use. I went with Voipo and they gave me a Grandstream HT502 and I have full admin access to the device. The service isn't free, but it is less than half what Vonage charges and it is a real service with fax support. Ooma also charges MORE than Voipo for services like Name Caller ID. Ooma is a scam. I swear I am not a shill, but I do use Hostgator, which is in bed with Voipo.

Re:Another Option

[c6gunner]

Plus, with a small amount of work, you can disconnect existing phone wiring from the phone company, or use an extra secondary line of wiring, and get it all over a house, like with POTS.

You can do the same with a "magic-jack". All you need is an old computer, or a cheap netbook, or one of those mini "bare bones" computers, and you're good to go.

Re:Another Option

[GargamelSpaceman]

I thought this at first too, but they do have other sources of revenue besides selling devices. They offer 'fancy' extras for a fee. Also I believe their operating costs are almost zero.

Re:Another Option

[GargamelSpaceman]

The instructions do recommend placing the Ooma before your router so that it can prioritize voice traffic over other traffic to ensure good quality, but I have DSL, and did not follow the instructions. I just connected it like any other device so that Ooma Phone traffic is not prioritized above other traffic. No double NAT for me. I have had no voice quality problems so far after more than a year so I saw no reason to change the way I hooked it up.

We were affected

[RichM]

It affected my company for a short time today from midday to around 14:00 when we became aware of the fix.
Not everyone was affected but we found it rather odd how this "shared.xml" file would become corrupted and crash Skype just because it was connected to the Internet - there's probably a serious bug waiting to be exploited by malware here.

As a further note, not all people use Skype for phone calls - we use it for secure IM between office workers.

Nokia is next

[Anonymous Coward]

Nokia is next

Re:Another Option

[Phreakiture]

This is true

It is also true that this computer must be as reliable as you would like your phone line to be while running Windows. This is not unheard of, but it is not a risk I was willing to take, hence, I, like the poster who started this branch, chose Ooma.

There is also the TCO matter. Running a general-purpose computer 24/7 will require more energy than the Ooma device.

Also, the "bare bones" computer will cost about the same as, if not more than, the Ooma device.

No, Magic jack is not that good of a choice, at least not for some of us.

I don't actually understand how ORe:Another Option

[GargamelSpaceman]

I don't actually understand how Ooma can work at the their current rates, and $200 is really expensive for a device like that.

Here in the US, Cellphones are free since they come with your plan, I hear in Europe the phones cost a mint, but the monthly fees are lower. I have no idea what the device ought to cost ( prolly cost them $1.95 in parts ).

Re:Another Option

[Phreakiture]

Don't know why you are having issues. I'm 15 months into my service with Ooma with no major problems.

Re:Another Option

[Phreakiture]

Not my problem. The incremental cost of the device paid for itself in six months vs. the Verizon land line it replaced. Any service I get past that is gravy. If they shut down tomorrow, I'd be a little agitated over the inconvenience, to be sure, but I would have no question that I got my money's worth.

Re:Another Option

[Phreakiture]

I actually am using the device as my router. Just put a switch on the inside port and you're good to go. It is serving up IP addresses and NATting just fine for my network of 9 physical devices plus the occasional VM that gets stood up.

Re:I don't actually understand how ORe:Another Opt

[Killerchronic]

I don't actually understand how Ooma can work at the their current rates, and $200 is really expensive for a device like that.

Here in the US, Cellphones are free since they come with your plan, I hear in Europe the phones cost a mint, but the monthly fees are lower. I have no idea what the device ought to cost ( prolly cost them $1.95 in parts ).

If you have a contract, at least in the UK most phones are free, top of the line smartphones are not but only require a nomial fee. If you are on pay'as'you'go though then its a different matter.

Re:Another Option

[Dremth]

Now if they could figure out how to let me take my phone anywhere, i.e. a cell phone, and keep the same service, features, and prices, we could finally have a cell phone carrier in the U.S. worth having.

Re:Another Option

[shutdown -p now]

Cell phones are nice, but they can be expensive. And if you are required to keep one for work, then having 2 in your pocket is annoying. Ooma is a way to have your OWN phone number forever for minimal money.

If the cell phone in question is Android - and you can get a cheap Chinese one for less than $150 - then Google Voice will give you the same integrated experience (you can tell the phone to use it for all calls), and you'll also have your own phone number that you can keep.

Richmond will not work for Redmond

[Torodung]

You mean this guy? He doesn't know what that thing is doing anyway.

Re:Another Option

[c6gunner]

It is also true that this computer must be as reliable as you would like your phone line to be while running Windows. This is not unheard of, but it is not a risk I was willing to take...

Be honest: you're just trolling with that comment.

There is also the TCO matter. Running a general-purpose computer 24/7 will require more energy than the Ooma device.

Quite true. It only makes sense if you've already got some kind of device running 24/7, as I do. I don't personally use the "Magic Jack" - I have a file/media server running Solaris which also acts as my router and VOIP gateway. But I did set it up for a friend, who has a media server running Windows Home Server. If you already have a device which runs 24/7 - or close to it - then the upfront cost for installing such a solution is far lower than the "Ooma".

Also, it's worth mentioning that there are plenty of VOIP routers on the market which cost less than the Ooma, conserve less power when you consider that they serve two functions, and are far more configurable.

Re:Another Option

[ScrewMaster]

I have an Ooma phone.

I bought a standalone cordless Skype phone. Supports both regular POTS calls and has Skype firmware in it. Works great.

Re:Another Option

[ScrewMaster]

Cell phones are nice, but they can be expensive. And if you are required to keep one for work, then having 2 in your pocket is annoying. Ooma is a way to have your OWN phone number forever for minimal money.

If the cell phone in question is Android - and you can get a cheap Chinese one for less than $150 - then Google Voice will give you the same integrated experience (you can tell the phone to use it for all calls), and you'll also have your own phone number that you can keep.

True, and you can also run something like CSipSimple and use pretty much any SIP provider. I use mine through pbxes.org and it works just fine (I configured it to use Google Voice for my outgoing trunk line.)

Re:Another Option

[Deliveranc3]

I don't know about that, I would think you'd want your number available from a bunch of physical phones.

Also for traveling overseas wi-fi is better than Ethernet in most places.

I figured if people were going to pay a bit for hardware it should be one with a future, an Android phone. Can be picked up for about $180 used and updated with newest rom (Cyanogen has > 500,000 users). You want something flexible if your phone # is going to be attached to it, and probably call forwarding if you're going to be outside Internet and into cell territory (Sigh, Wi-Max would make them the same, so could 802.11n/i). Anyway since those wireless techs aren't available on any quality devices (Nexus S [no keyboard] iPhone 4 which has a host of killer issues) you'll have to get two generations of it, having a cellphone that always has free calling is nicer long term.

Re:Another Option

[Deliveranc3]

I do this, if you're in Canada. Service called pay once phone forever. Nothing fancy just retail, jailbreaking, unlocking and rooting. I have also found some very cheap 4G data services.

I'd like to do research and produce a U.S. phone, info@phaistoscommunications.com if you want details and recommendations.

Gentlemen,please stop criticizing. It's NOT idiocy

[Provocateur]

He had noble intentions. He posts for a certain breed of slashdotters...the junkies...the ones that demand an update, a new item every 20 minutes, no matter how trivial or mundane, no matter if the connection to science or technology is only a thin line...

He posts for us...US! I tell you. So leave him alone, and let him stand proud, for what he has done is all for the greater good. So that we can move on, with the rest of our lives, our needs having been met. Until we re-unite with our beloved slashdot, in ...about 19:20, give or take.

Chicken Little

[NotPeteMcCabe]

The Skype is falling! The Skype is falling!