Slashdot Mirror
Facebook To Launch In-Browser Video Chat With Skype
tekgoblin writes "Facebook will be launching a new in-browser video chat application. 'The product has been built on Skype and will include a desktop component. It’s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has Skype already installed on the computer, or if additional software will need to be downloaded even if the user already uses Skype. But it’s clear that there’s very deep integration between the products, and from the user’s perspective, the product will be an in-browser experience.'"
Now everyone I Skype is going to automatically know who my friends are, where I went to school, and how many Farmville credits I have.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Not that I am happy about the whole Microsoft buying skype ordeal, but what about people using Linux?
So we have Skype with Facebook integration and Facebook with Skype integration. WTF?
Anyway, g+ hasn't Mafia Wars SPAM yet.
Will it be like Omegle or Chatroulette, where 9/10 videos are of penises?
This is the Hangouts feature in Google+. I expect FB to roll out a "circles" feature any day now.
People seem to use Skype with family and close friends.
People seem to use Facebook with acquaintances.
Their uses are mostly incompatible.
Something tells me that this is going to be a nice feature to have, but that it isn't going to beef up Skype's or Facebook's userbase (as TFA suggests).
Do they archive all video content for datamining purposes?
Facebook will be launching a new in-browser toilet application. 'The product has been built on a toilet and will include a desktop component. Itâ(TM)s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has a toilet already, or if additional work will need to be done in the house even if the user already uses a toilet. But itâ(TM)s clear that thereâ(TM)s very deep integration between the products, and from the userâ(TM)s perspective, the product will be an in-browser experience.
You can't handle the truth.
Looks like Facebook is heading into what MySpace wanted to be. Just hope they make the UI looks read-able, and we all know what they're going to do with *your* (cough: their) information.
inb4 Microsoft merges with Facebook and Microsoft v2 emerges.
Google isn't really a competitor to Facebook. However, Facebook is a competitor to Google, as now people spend lots of time on Facebook and find all kinds of interesting links and stuff there, and maybe even use Facebook's search instead of Google. (yes, I know we techies don't do that, but we're a minority)
What comes to Google+, it's quite far from competitor to Facebook. It just misses so much stuff. There isn't any of those games, apps, fan pages, events.. Maybe some of them will be added to Google+, but on their basic idea of circles I don't think they will do games, apps and (fan) pages. Events and calendar, sure. But don't underestimate those apps on pages on Facebook. Normal people love them. So Facebook and Google+ will probably run side to side, serving slightly different purposes for different people. Just like Facebook and LinkedIn are doing now.
There isn't any of those games, apps, fan pages
Shut up and take my money!
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
I hope this was a troll. This could be one of the greatest tech battles in recent history. Google is going to do everything they can for this one.
So Skype allows group of text-only for their free accounts. Group video chat requires that everyone be a Skype subscriber to get access. Will this limitation continue?
Google+ allows group video chat (Hangouts) up to 10 people for free, though there is no mobile support yet.
Also, I'm uncertain of what Google's back-end architecture is (looks like it's P2P also, using XMPP Jingle, but I don't know the details of this tech). Skype uses supernodes to connect people together, which is really a P2P technology. Since any person running a skype client that is not behind NAT can act as a supernode, connection quality on skype calls can easily vary.
Its not what it is, its something else.
Maybe people will realize they can get retarded flash games all over the internet, and that they don't really need a social network tying their identity to the games they play.
I vote based on politicians' actions, unless contrary to my preconceptions. Often wrong, never uncertain. #iamthe99%
Google is going to do everything they can for this one.
Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta. Especially so if they still are thinking of adding major features to get users to move from Facebook. And they wouldn't have capacity problems to handle those even those few early users. Come on, they run Google and YouTube and several other huge sites after all.
But you know, we have seen this route before. Orkut was supposed to be this too - it didn't work out. Even started with the same kind of limited invites. Google Talk was supposed to be replace existing IM networks.. That didn't really work out. The software was extremely limited. I don't know how it is now, but why should I or anyone else care. I've seen it and noticed the existing ones are better. It's hard to change that image later on. Google Wave was supposed to be it too... failed.
Seriously, if you're going to compete against one of the biggest sites of the internet, you just don't bring your version out unfinished and missing major features. This is marketing basics. The image a person gets first will stick forever.
Google+ already has it, way to play catch-up Facebook!
They already have a large user base, they already have fb chat, if they create a new product maybe they could kill skype and take their business(e.g. call to landlines for pay subscribers). And if they allow people to connect with XMPP we have a multiplatform video chat.
You mean like they will realize they can use Usenet for grouped discussions, IRC for real-time discussions, email for sending pictures of their holiday or latest party and install Exchange server for scheduling and calendar services? Both Facebook and Google+ are doomed!
Well, now Facebook is face-to-face. So Facebook has evolved into Facebook. It's also getting awfully bloated with needless this and that. There must be a point where a centralized social networking service collapses under the weight of features that must eventually be spread out across the web. Mid 90's everybody on AOL jumped ship when the realized the same stuff was on the web, only spread out across a better and wide open landscape. It seems like Facebook is running headlong into it's own demise. It is inevitable the we will eventually be able to manager social networking features across the vast, open playing field that is the web. Google+ is showing a small taste of this.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
I get your point, hyperbolic as it is, but it's not like people don't realize that there are other websites outside of Facebook.
The things you mention? That's what social networks are for. Connecting with people, all in one place. How do games fit in to that picture? Surely you're not arguing that people enjoy automated and impersonal Farmville spam from friends.
I vote based on politicians' actions, unless contrary to my preconceptions. Often wrong, never uncertain. #iamthe99%
Beta means nothing with Google. Everyone should know that by now. When they announce something going beta, it's pretty much same as going live and they will either improve it over time or forget it (and in some cases completely discontinue offering the service).
I seriously wonder the slashdot group think mentality about this. Usually in these Facebook stories people talk about how they lose their privacy and privacy settings on Facebook are hard to use and most are on by default. You guess what, when I signed up for Google+ today it was ever worse. You talk about Facebook leaking your data to advertisers on Google? Well, Google+ uses that data all over their advertising network and for other tracking. They state this in the very registration page. When you sign up, your profile is by default made public to the whole world, including search engines. There is no way to change that before it has already happened. And this being Google's product, it means the data is indexed in almost real time. Google+ privacy controls are MUCH worse than Facebook's. Only thing I miss in Facebook is the idea of different "circles". They kind of have that with friend groups, but it's not as defined. Otherwise Facebook lets you change any privacy setting as much as you like. I've done so.
G+ invites have been out for what, like a week? And already FB is playing the me too! feature creep game with Google. Could this actually finally be the beginning of the end of the reign of Zuck?
Our browsers will have permission to use all manner of tcp/ip ports then? So much for security!
and maybe even use Facebook's search instead of Google.
Stopped reading right there... Either troll or so painfully ignorant that logic would do little good.
MS buys Facebook?
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Enough world colliding already. How much time is there in a day to present your life to all individuals you know. All day.
I think the main issue with Facebook, or at least mine personally, is that when I started using Facebook a few years ago, I made myself completely private. I was invisible in searches, friend lists, everything. Unless I added you as a friend, you had no idea that I had a Facebook profile. The only reason I really had a Facebook profile was to keep in touch with close friends who've moved cross country or overseas, so this worked well for me.
Then what happened? Random privacy "update" from Facebook! Now all of my privacy settings are reset to default, and because I don't use the service as often as most, it goes unnoticed for a few days. Then the friend invites start rolling in. Then harassing messages from people I didn't want contact from (another reason I was private). So I set it all back to normal and went about my life.
Oh, but then another privacy "update" from Facebook! This time, not only do all of my settings go back to default, but they've also removed the ability to be invisible in searches and friends lists! Excellent!
Fuck Facebook. Seriously. I get why people like it, I get why people use it, but for people who really do value their privacy (me) and want to use the service, we'll forever be screwed by their ever changing garbage "updates" and changes without prior notice.
This is the main reason I'm excited about Google+. If they can solve those issues then I'll sign up in a heartbeat, convince the people I use Facebook to communicate with to make the switch as well (or at least get a Google+ profile).
I should have been a girl, with the way I can dance... my moves are amazing!
Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta.
People want what they can't have. :-)
A Skype browser plugin? I don't see any other way to really integrate a desktop app and also embed in a browser. Does Silverlight allow generic network access and access to webcams for apps?
As long as FB has those shitty clickfest "games' then Google is SOL. I have actually had folks come into the shop and buy a PC around those stupid games, folks are addicted to Mafia Wars and Farmville/Frontierville like someone on warcrack. I even had to keep a late model P4 at my apt just so when my GF comes over she can have her morning Farmville fix without waking me up.
So give it up Google if you don't get Zynga on board. Maybe Google ought to just buy them out? because while we geeks hate the things those Zynga games are hot shit to the average folks.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
for people who really do value their privacy (me) and want to use the service, we'll forever be screwed by their ever changing garbage "updates" and changes without prior notice.
Well, you could do what I did... sign up for Facebook using an alias. Yup, my Slashdot username is also the same as my Facebook ID. I just tell the 3 or 4 people that want to keep in touch with me on Facebook what my made-up name is. Now they know it's me.
I've never had to fiddle with any facebook privacy settings, I just leave them all on default.
Coincidence that Microsoft first partners with Facebook with Bing, then Microsoft goes on to buy Skype, and now Skype is being integrated into Facebook? I think not....
Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta. Especially so if they still are thinking of adding major features to get users to move from Facebook.
I've used google+ and it doesn't feel like a beta at all. Everything just worked as expected, the UI is great. And its the only out of the box working group video chat for Linux I know of. Plus some extra gimmicks like watching YouTube "together." It is correct that there isn't much you can do on google+ but does it need more "major features"? I've got no idea what they plan to do but what features could it need? Maybe some gardening game? Think of twitter, featurewise its near to nothing and still people spend hours on this site.
Google Talk was supposed to be replace existing IM networks.. That didn't really work out. The software was extremely limited. I don't know how it is now, but why should I or anyone else care.
To me - and luckily some of my friends - Google Talk is the best IM for *mobiles* out there. And so at least I do care.
... could now also ad "value advertising" to your phone calls. You ring a friend, talk about something and suddenly a commercial is played "Did you also know that 3509 of your friends also like that product?".
So, if you would... could I get an invite to Google Plus? I'd appreciate it. ;)
Stone
Before this I thought MSFT would feature creep Skype into a social network. You have friends listed. The next step is posting photos for your friends to look at, etc.
I guess it still could happen.
Let me try this again.... CLOSED beta is not a release moron.
I use Google Calendar for scheduling and calendar services, but other than that I do all of those things.
They're probably working on a way of automatically transcribing conversations and sending targeted ads based on the content of your conversations with relatives. Seriously, of all setups why use Skype? The most insecure protocol not only because of any lack of technical sophistication but because Skype is the only system built to allow Law Enforcement's wet dream of surveillance capabilities.
I normally don't find Facebook so invasive but this just makes me cringe a little. Not that I'll ever use it, but I hope a lot of people make sure to bang their drums about how Skype is built to enable conversation snooping and should be avoided whenever possible for just that reason.