Version 2.0 Released For Open Skype Alternative Jitsi

New submitter emilcho writes with news for anyone looking for a Free alternative to Skype "Among the most prominent new features people will find quality multi-party video conferences for XMPP, audio device hot-plugging, support for Outlook presence and calls, an overhauled user interface and support for the Opus and VP8 audio/video codec. Jitsi has lately shaped into one of the more viable open Skype Alternatives with features such as end-to-end ZRTP encryption for audio and video calls. The 2.0 version has been in the works for almost a year now, so this is an important step for the project." There are prebuilt packages for Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Fedora, Windows, and OS X.

Comments

Great

[ArcadeMan]

http://xkcd.com/927/

Re:Great

[buchner.johannes]

Skype is not a standard. What are the competing standards here?

Re:Great

[Hatta]

What competing standards? Skype does not provide end to end encryption, it's no competition for Jitsi. And Jitsi itself is using established standards, ZRTP was created by Philip Zimmerman of PGP fame and is RFC6189.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because we would have been better still using tin cans with string between them rather than the internet. Sometimes improving on older ideas is necessary to get cool stuff in the future.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

The script seems to need some tweaking...

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

"http://xkcd.com/927/"

Jitsi is LGPL, Skype is proprietary software.
Jitsi uses the available standards/protocols, XMPP, SIP, and so on.
More information here.

In other words, your xkcd does not apply.
Please hand in your geek card at the door.

Re:Great

[Khyber]

And yet again someone quotes XKCD without having a clue what they're talking about.

Re:Great

[ArcadeMan]

It seems people can only read into small details and aren't able to look at the big picture.

Skype, Facetime and all others are all incompatible with each other. Even basic text messaging services are not compatible with each others, unlike email and websites.

That's why I quoted xkcd. Not because of the standards used by other programs, but because we seriously need to force Microsoft, Apple and others to unite and support a single standard. All this fragmentation reminds me of the MS-DOS/Mac OS 9/AmigaOS/TOS days.

Re:Great

[ilsaloving]

I agree. However everyone *knows* skype. They have a huge user base. That base will be even bigger when MS finishes forcing all MSN users onto it. There are standards, and then there are defacto standards because everyone uses the same product.

I *really* like the idea of Jitsi. Unfortunately I'm also likely to never use it because I don't know a single other person that uses it, or uses other tools that share the same protocols, despite the fact that said protocols are open standards. Skype is now just another IM system I have to have an account on, which requires me to use Trillian so I don't have 50 different IM clients. Why would I want yet *another* one?

Re:Great

[ilsaloving]

If only I could delete my post...

I got Jitsi confused with something else entirely. I'll just shut up now and sit in a corner.

Re:Great

[MrHanky]

To be fair to XKCD, most people on Slashdot (and elsewhere on the internet) who don't quote them are equally clueless.

Re:Great

[SourceFrog]

Come on, just admit you got this one wrong. Jitsi is software utilizes exactly those 'central standards' you refer to - XMPP may be the primary contender for messaging/voice (via Jingle over XMPP) etc. standard at the moment. The whole point is that different software can talk to one another as e.g. Jitsi supports XMPP, and other XMPP clients also do e.g. Adium. Think of Jitsi end-user software as the equivalent of a web browser and of XMPP as the equivalent of HTTP.

More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_instant_messaging_clients#XMPP-related_features

Re:Great

[interval1066]

This is a very interesting protocol from a security standpoint, here's a short blurb from the article on ZRTP:

This protocol does not require prior shared secrets or rely on a Public key infrastructure (PKI) or on certification authorities, in fact ephemeral Diffie-Hellman keys are generated on each session establishment: this allows the complexity of creating and maintaining a trusted third-party to be bypassed.

Pretty snazzy. Seems like it could have a lock on the convienence factor. Also could have a lot of exploit vectors.

Re:Great

[Technician]

The competing standards are SIP, standard audio codecs, and H.264 video confrencing.

Skype is propritory. SIP is standards based. Skype is for Skype only with payments required to make (Skype out) and/or receive (skype in) calls to normal telephone. Skype out and Skype in can be only purchased from one vendor.

Unlike Skype, a SIP provider can provide any and/or all of the components. Depending on provider (many) you can mix and match as you like.

Free SIP accounts can be obtined from Ekiga, Iptel, ippi, and others. Many provide free voicemail, and other features such as a gateway to Google Voice and Skype. Call your SIP friends, your Google Talk Friends, and Skype friends all with the same provider.. (personal plug.. ippi.com provides a free skype and google talk gateways) Google it.

Free softphones compatible with SIP are numerous, some of which enable encryption, including the one featured in this slashdot article. Free softphones can be obtained from Ekiga, Twinkle, iptel, ippi, and others.

Hardware phones compatibe with SIP are numberous including offerings from Cisco;/Linksis, Grandstream, Panasonic, and others. No need to keep your computer on to use it. Some even include a vidoe phone.

There are many providers of DID numbers that do the same as Skype in. You can have multiple numbers including 800, local, overseas, etc. Some providers even offer a DID number for free. IPkall is a good source for a free USA phone number. Think Skype-in but free.

You can buy a calling plan to permit placing calls. This is generaly not free, but quite cost effective.

You can tie them together in your own free open source PBX.. such as Asterisk.

If you want to buy an all in one package plan, providers such as Century Link, Comcast, Magic Jack, Ooma, Net2Phone, Vonage etc all offer complete packages for plug and play operation with less flexibility than mix and match.

Combining SIP and Google Talk allows me to place calls from Google, and receive my calls on a VOIP phone, even whtn the computer is off. After moving to SIP, I hardly use Skype at all.

Re:Great

[Technician]

Jitsi is a SIP client.. It works with ippi and iptel as mentiioned above. Add this to a list of SIP clients listed above, some which support encryption and video.

Re:Great

[thestuckmud]

ZRTP looks solid to me. If the short authentication strings (SAS) check out, there is minimal likelihood of a successful attack on the protocol*. If you still don't trust it, jitsi can run peer to peer behind a vpn. If that's not good enough for you, you should be holding your conversations in a noisy location, away from all electronic devices, and out of sight of lip readers with telescopes.

*Jiti uses a 4 character SAS, which works out to around 24 bits for a 0.000006% chance of successful attack. Attack opportunities are strictly limited by the nature of the protocol (e.g. early commitment to an SAS; the use of cached secrets from previous conversations for authentication). Technically, this may not meet modern cryptographic standards for non-negligibility, but with a 0.999994% chance of an attack being made obvious, you will almost certainly know something is up and can take measures should it happen.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

Summary mentioned XMPP. It's good to finally see this protocol start to enter into adoption, if that's what this is. It's used by Google Talk and Facebook, which are major services. I run my own XMPP server in the "cloud" as well.

So, it's out there. It's just the classic problem of how do you get your two friends who use Skype because all their friends except you use Skype to switch over to Google Talk so you can just use XMPP to chat with them? Not saying it's impossible. I had a friend who really only talked to me over AIM switch to Google Talk, but that's not usually how it goes.

Now if this thing has an open, distributed way to reliably to voice chat, that's great. afaik the voice chat part of Google Talk is not standard but I could be wrong, haven't looked at it for more than just basic XMPP IM much.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

From a user point of view, Skype and Facetime are standards.
No, they don't use public, open standardized protocols - but that's only your narrow definition of the word Standard and it has no connection whatsoever to the public's perception.

When it comes to a user's choice of products for video calling, the de-facto standards are Skype and Facetime.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

0.999994% chance of an attack being made obvious, you will almost certainly know something is up and can take measures should it happen.

Huh? You mean with a probability of 0.999994!

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi Technician, you seem to know what you're talking about, although half of it goes over my head (PBX? Asterisk? softphone?), so can I ask you to recommend a SIP replacement for my setup. This is what I have:

I have the Skype client running on my Ubuntu and Windows laptops, I also have a (paid) Skype Out account for unlimited calls to any phone in North America. I'm in Canada so sadly can't get Skype In. Basically whenever I want to make a call, I fire up the Skype client, plugin my headset and dial the number, most of the time the other party doesn't even realize I'm calling from Skype, and I can do this from anywhere with an internet connection. Any SIP service that offers the same type of product? I don't want to use any extra hardware beyond a regular headset. Thanks.

Re:Great

[thestuckmud]

Oops thanks for catching my typo. The probability is 99.999994% = 0.99999994.

Re:Great

[hobarrera]

Additionally, Jitsi doesn't represent a new standard, it's a new implementation of an already existing standard.

Re:Great

[tricorn]

I suppose I should look more to see why they selected that, but I'd have preferred to see SRP used. SRP with a zero key (or any other pre-defined key) is essentially DH anyway, and the authentication is built in to the key exchange. It also has the nice feature that one side can't find out the other side's authentication credentials (and hence can't impersonate them).

SRP is typically used in a client-server relationship, but it can be used in a symmetric way as well.

Re:Great

[trawg]

You can tie them together in your own free open source PBX.. such as Asterisk.

We do this. My sysadmins gave me Jitsi when I asked about getting a phone at home. It was dead easy to set up; I just run my VPN client, fire up Jitsi and I can make calls using my headset painlessly and easily. In fact I prefer making calls from home now because I can use my awesome gaming headset instead of the crappy handset I have on my desk phone; it's easier to hear people and I can type/take notes while I talk.

Re:Great

[Anonymous Coward]

Google voice + Gmail webpage. Make and receive (to/from a US number) calls all day long on your headset. Nothing to buy.

Re:Great

[Technician]

For even more freedom of movement, use a trucker's noise canceling bluetooth headset.

Slashdotted!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not link to some official torrents uploaded to some major torrent site.

The Coral Content Distribution Network seems down too
http://www.coralcdn.org/
http://redirect.nyud.net/?url=https://jitsi.org/index.php/Main/Download

Jabber

[Anonymous Coward]

Why hasn't this been merged yet?

Re:Jabber

[SourceFrog]

Jabber's a server, Jitsi's a client. That would be a bit like trying to merge Apache and Webkit.

I tried the previous major release of Jitsi and all it did was crash a lot, hopefully this new one's a bit better.

Skype power

[Anonymous Coward]

The power of Skype is in its network and support. Skype is not open source, nor subject to standards. "Alternatives", such as OoVoo, already exist. Besides, if an "alternative" software tried using the Skype network then Microsoft could block it. This is a waste of time.

Re:Skype power

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's not. But your comment is.

Re:Skype power

[SourceFrog]

They aren't trying to 'use the Skype network', they're using XMPP. XMPP is a protocol for a server that anyone can implement (e.g. Jabber is to XMPP as Apache is to HTTP, and Jitsi is to XMPP as e.g. Firefox is to HTTP). XMPP supports standard extensions for things like voice. Microsoft can't "block it" any more than they can block me from running or accessing an Apache server.

Re:Skype power

[xiando]

XMPP supports standard extensions for things like voice

Perhaps in theory, but XMPP voice isn't supported by even 5% of the XMPP clients out there. Jingle is supposedly supported in kopete and pidgin but good luck getting that to work or using it for any real-lift purpose

Re:Skype power

[jonadab]

You missed the point of the parent post. What he was saying was that if it doesn't use the Skype network (or, in more phenomenological terms, if you can't use it to make calls to and receive calls from people who use Skype), its chances of ever being a practical replacement for Skype are zero.

I'm not sure if I entirely agree, but I'm pretty sure that's what he was trying to say.

Working download URL

[1nt3lx]

https://download.jitsi.org/jitsi/

Re:Working download URL

[Khyber]

Nope, slashdotted.

Re:Working download URL

[Anonymous Coward]

A pity that they only make deb's for i386 and amd64. Some of us are running on arm.

Re:Working download URL

[Weezul]

I've used Jitsi for over a year, but this new version has fucked me up. It now puts my facebook friends group at the top.

WTF?!? Why the hell would anyone want their facebook friend's list at the top of their IM groups. Just fucking asinine. Also the piece of shit opens the facebook friend's lists whenever anyone logs into it. What stupid behavior.

Cool

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

> "features such as end-to-end ZRTP encryption
> for audio and video calls"

"Sweet. Show me!"

"What's that guy doing? Oh gross! GROSS!!!"

Mumble

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I just run a Mumble server. KISS.

Features

[kelemvor4]

I'm interested. Currently paying for Skype premium to do multiuser video chat. Does anyone know if this product does 1080p streams in multiuser? Skype only does it when one on one, but drops down to SD in multiuser mode. I can't check the features list because it appears the jitsi site has been slashdotted.

Re:Features

[spasm]

Google hangouts offer free video chat for up to 9 people at a time. My experience using it within the US and between the US and Australia is the sound quality is better than with skype too. Downside is everyone on the call has to have a g+ account.

Re:Features

[isorox]

Google hangouts offer free video chat for up to 9 people at a time. My experience using it within the US and between the US and Australia is the sound quality is better than with skype too. Downside is everyone on the call has to have a g+ account.

Never managed to get google angouts, or webrtc, working through a proxy.

Re:Features

[Jane Q. Public]

"Currently paying for Skype premium to do multiuser video chat."

You wouldn't need Jitsi or Skype to do that if you were on a Mac.

Re:Features

[kelemvor4]

"Currently paying for Skype premium to do multiuser video chat."

You wouldn't need Jitsi or Skype to do that if you were on a Mac.

Facetime only workie on mac. Jitsi and Skype work on pretty much everything, PC (macos/linux/osx), mobile (android/ios)... If I were on mac I'd still have the same dilemma. I gave up on proprietary software about 10 years ago, and now only use it when there is no other choice.

Re:Features

[kelemvor4]

(macos/linux/osx) lol.. windows/linux/osx

Re:Features

[hobarrera]

Downside is everyone on the call has to have a g+ account.

That sound like the same requirements as Skype: you need to register with the service provider.

Re:Features

[Anonymous Coward]

Back when I was looking for a free Skype alternative with multiuser video chat, I found VSee (vsee.com), and it has worked really well for me. Might be close to what you're looking for.

Re:Features

[Jane Q. Public]

"Facetime only workie on mac."

Yes, that's true. Good point.

Now, if only I could find good instructions on how to use Jitsi to call PSTN numbers via Google Voice.

It's supposed to be possible to call out with Jitsi, with only a Google Voice telephone number. But I haven't figured out how. Apparently I did make one call, but I did not hear any ringing or the voicemail message.

Re:Features

[Sigg3.net]

If you only call 1 person you don't need G+ (I don't have it). But get the Google video plugin from Google.com/chat/video and sign into chat at the left pane in Gmail under the folders.

Have made/received 10+ calls, and though getting through may be an issue (the gf gets script errors in Firefox on Ubuntu) you'll find it works once its going.

But now we'll try jitsi!

Re:Features

[spasm]

I just googled (hah!) the ports it uses - your proxy setup may be screwing with it, although apparently it should eventually get to trying port 80:

"The connection methods are attempted in this preferenced order:

A UDP connection from the participant to Google on ports 19305 through 19309
A TCP connection from the participant to Google on ports 19305 through 19309
A TCP connection from the participant to Google on port 80
A TCP connection from the participant to Google on port 443 (SSL)"

Re:Features

[spasm]

True; I just mentioned it so people know they need to have all the call participants set up with G+ accounts in advance - you can't just email everyone five minutes before a scheduled call and suggest using hangouts instead of skype. Just as you can't email everyone 5 minutes before a traditional conference call and suggest using skype unless you know everyone has installed it and set up an account.

Free alternative?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Skype already a free alternative? I've been using Skype for free for years from all over the world. Is there a "free-er" alternative? I don't get the point of this article.

Re:Free alternative?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm so glad you asked, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software

Re:Free alternative?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an alternative to Skype that happens to be free as in freedom.

You can use it with many different services that may or may not cost money. For example you could setup a SIP account with a voip provider for international calls (costs $) and use jitsi as the client interface. Or you could set up a jabber account (free) and have a video conferences with your friends and family.

No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dirty, overweight OSS programmers, that's who.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[OzPeter]

Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

Their FAQ says that and Android client is in the works and will be demoed very soon. As for Apple they claim that Apple's restrictions shuts them out of iOS - but if you have Apple you already have access to FaceTime for all your Apple devices, not that FT can do multi person calls though.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[FireFury03]

So use a different SIP client on your phone... all this is standardised...

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[hedwards]

People who don't have a good cellular connection. I regularly use a laptop to do my video conferencing as my cell phone doesn't have a forward facing camera and the internet connection has a tight cap.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

https://download.jitsi.org/jitsi/nightly/android/

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[tobiasly]

Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

Their FAQ says that and Android client is in the works and will be demoed very soon. As for Apple they claim that Apple's restrictions shuts them out of iOS - but if you have Apple you already have access to FaceTime for all your Apple devices, not that FT can do multi person calls though.

The release page also indicates that it can already make video calls to Google Talk users on Android. Guess that's the whole point of using a standard like XMPP...

https://jitsi.org/index.php/Main/News

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Meanwhile Linphone already has an Android client, along with a Windows, Mac, Linux -and- iOS client. I'd highly recommend it.

Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with either project, I just happened to notice that Linphone was available in Google Play on my Galaxy Tab 2 yesterday :)

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

>Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

Me and my family. Not everyone have a smartphone or free internet in phone (many people are using pay-as-go topup) etc. You need to learn that whole world is NOT that rich like USA.

If you are poor its very silly to spend 100$ on smart-phone and another 30$ for monthly contract. What if you would loose your work in next week/month? - u will be unable to pay for such contract...

But rich people doesn't understand that.
Also often its a false economy: many people have "free" smart-phones and 3 years contracts for 20$ per month, so in the end they end up paying more then smart-phone value.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone at my company because Skype is the IM / video call client everyone uses.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, me? Every single call I make is through my PC, to the point that I ditched my cellphone and now use Skype exclusively.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[stenvar]

If you are poor its very silly to spend 100$ on smart-phone and another 30$ for monthly contract.

You can use your smartphone, Android media player, or tablet over WiFi, saving you the monthly contract, your home Internet subscription, and the cost of a whole PC. For a while, I was using voice/texting only on my Android phone (effectively, a few dollars per month) and just used all the other services over WiFi.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[rocket rancher]

Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

Their FAQ says that and Android client is in the works and will be demoed very soon. As for Apple they claim that Apple's restrictions shuts them out of iOS - but if you have Apple you already have access to FaceTime for all your Apple devices, not that FT can do multi person calls though.

That real-soon-now claim was made for the FOSDEM 2013 conference which occurred over a month ago. There was no jitsi android client at FOSDEM 2013. For what its worth, they've made several real-soon-now claims about an android client for the past couple of years. While there *is* a jitsi android client, it still lacks a committed user interface, so it definitely is still just a work in progress -- I suspect the devs are waiting for android's platform fragmentation problem to go away. :)

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[loufoque]

Most people who make video calls.
The rest uses special clients tailored for video chat which are usually tied to a manufacturer and extremely expensive.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Tom]

And sometimes I want to talk to non-Apple users, you know?

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[epyT-R]

productive and clueful people who do more with the internet than twaddle their thumbs with angry birds.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[fa2k]

Pass. Who uses a full PC to make calls?

I hate it when there's trouble with the PC and I have to use my phone for Skype. First of all, there's a latency of 1-4 seconds, but that's partly my fault for having an old Android phone. More importantly, I don't like to sit and hold my phone for tens of minutes to point the camera at myself (In fact, I've tried to stick the phone sideways into a roll of kitchen paper just to avoid this, but it wasn't a great success, as it fell over)

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

they claim that Apple's restrictions shuts them out of iOS

It's actually a feature, that Java doesn't run on iOS... They should make an HTML5 port.

Re:No Android or IOS client?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, there's many ways to run Java apps on iOS. Just because it doesn't come with a JVM doesn't mean you can't run a JVM or recompile your Java code so you don't need a JVM.

WebRTC?

[Anonymous Coward]

Will it be able to connect to a browser in the future? Because I don't see myself getting everybody I know to install yet another client.

Re:WebRTC?

[SpzToid]

Here's code that will, along with an asterisk server implementation: http://nerdvittles.com/?p=5321

Java? How about no.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's written in Java, and everyone knows Java sucks not only with applets, but also with desktop apps.

Re:Java? How about no.

[Anonymous Coward]

...And it's not safe. ...And it's ridiculously bloated. ... And the jitsi website makes no mention that it's required. Why can't anyone make even a small program under 100 MB anymore?

Re:Java? How about no.

[Anonymous Coward]

> And the jitsi website makes no mention that it's required.

Because it's not. At least not from the user. Jitsi ships with its own JRE for Windows, it uses the default one on OS X, and has the right dependencies on Debian/Ubuntu.

As for the rest of the anti-Java comments ... well, if you've decided to hate it, we can't really do anything about it, can we :). Especially not here :)

Re:Java? How about no.

[Hal_Porter]

well, if you've decided to hate it, we can't really do anything about it, can we :). Especially not here :)

You could recant your heresy.

Re:Java? How about no.

[jonadab]

Java doesn't suck nearly as bad as it used to.

Not that I've become a huge fan, or anything. I'm just saying, I remember when it was excruciatingly horrible, and these days it's closer to mediocre. I suspect part of the reason is that today's hardware can handle a few more CPU cycles and a somewhat larger memory footprint than a typical 486 SX was really comfortably up to.

I'm speaking here from purely a user's perspective. What Java is like for programmers is a separate question.

nice change

[Anonymous Coward]

nice to see alternatives that don;t cost money... im assuming

Jitsi Licensing Problem?

[Hallow]

While Jitsi is nice and all, it looks to me like they have a licensing problem. Jitsi has a dependency on ZRTP4J, which is under the GPL, and Jitsi is under the LGPL. Can anyone explain how this is possible without a license exception? And if they have a license exception, where is it documented? and isn't transfered upstream? If so, why not just make ZRTP4J LGPL instead of GPL? And why are they releasing the whole application under the LGPL, and not the GPL anyway?

Re:Jitsi Licensing Problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

As I understand it, it is technically possible to have an LGPL program rely on a GPL library - because the LGPL is the less restrictive of the licenses, it requires no exception from the GPL. However, it is not possible to further use those LGPL terms on the combination to link it into a program that is not GPL compatible, so the use of the GPL library makes the choice of LGPL moot. The distinction between LGPL and GPL licenses will only matter once the GPL dependency is removed.

Re:Jitsi Licensing Problem?

[Anonymous Coward]

ZRTP4J is under GPL *with classpath exception* ... IANAL but this makes it very similar to LGPL for Java.

Screenshots

[Anonymous Coward]

When posting screenshots of your products, don't include ones with filenames of pirated television ;)

Extra feature - Telepresence

[spiritplumber]

I'm going to add support for the Propbridge telepresence rig to the Android version of this. All they need to do is literally add two lines of code, everything else is done by the embedded system. How can I get a hold of the dev team? There's no contact-us page.

Re:Extra feature - Telepresence

[Anonymous Coward]

> How can I get a hold of the dev team?

Just post on the dev list. Here's a page with more details: https://jitsi.org/mailinglists .

No documentation

[Anonymous Coward]

No documentation is available. i.e. this is still a pre-release version.

What's with the hoodies?

[funkboy]

n/t

No skype compatibility? And damn, you're ugly.

[Anonymous Coward]

The default skin would fit in Windows 8 - something more sober would have been better for those not in playskool OSes. Also, a Skype overlay to use the cryptography features would be awesome.

I just gave it a try

[menot]

We tried it with my team, the interface is incredibly slow, but it works without problems. I just can't understand how an IM application released in 2013 manages to be so slow on a pretty modern computer.... Oh, yeah, Java. /usr/bin/java -classpath /usr/share/jitsi/lib/jdic_stub.jar:/usr/share/jitsi/lib/jdic-all.jar:/usr/share/jitsi/lib/felix.jar:/usr/share/jitsi/lib/bcprovider.jar:/usr/share/jitsi/sc-bundles/sc-launcher.jar:/usr/share/jitsi/sc-bundles/util.jar -Djna.library.path=/usr/share/jitsi/lib/native -Dfelix.config.properties=file:/usr/share/jitsi/lib/felix.client.run.properties -Djava.util.logging.config.file=/usr/share/jitsi/lib/logging.properties -Dnet.java.sip.communicator.SC_HOME_DIR_NAME=.jitsi net.java.sip.communicator.launcher.SIPCommunicator

What is it with these Open Source projects...

[Anonymous Coward]

...with moronic tard-sounding names like "Jitsi" ?? Maybe we can call it JIZZME instead.

Other examples:

- Apache Hadoop, I mean come on.

- Or any of the other idiotically named products on the Apache Hadoop page: http://hadoop.apache.org/

- Any component of KDE that overemphasizes the K to show how KOOL ir is, and how Kompletely Kudo worthy it is. Fail fail fail fail fail fail!

- GNU/Linux says it all. I mean, holy $#@!. Just Linux is fine, thanks; dork-morons who call it GNU/Linux are just that, dork-morons.

- Gnome. Get out of here.

- Chandler calendar software. Not only is this software an utter pile of steaming shit, but the name makes it sound like something you'd never want to use.

In conclusion, Open Source groups need to work hard on giving the fruits of their labour better names.

Re:What is it with these Open Source projects...

[mabinogi]

That's right, they should all use sensible names like "Skype", "Yahoo" and "Google", otherwise they'll never catch on.

Nice review here...

[Bearhouse]

http://www.onsip.com/voip-phone-reviews/jitsi

Downloading it now...let's hope they get it out Android and iOS soon.

(For those saying, "we'll never see this on iOS, well, Apple has "let in" Skype & Viber, so why not?)

Re:Nice review here...

[metamatic]

(For those saying, "we'll never see this on iOS, well, Apple has "let in" Skype & Viber, so why not?)

Jitsi is GPL, and Apple's mandatory license terms are incompatible with GPL software.

Re:Nice review here...

[Fnord666]

Jitsi is GPL, and Apple's mandatory license terms are incompatible with GPL software.

Actually jitsi is LGPL.

Jitsi is Open Source / Free Software, and is available under the terms of the LGPL.

Re:Nice review here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Jitsi is Java. Jobs hated Java because of OMGFREEDOM. (As in: Once Java in installed, you would have a way to get out of the golden cage, and couldn't be ass-raped by Apple anymore.)

So: Never going to happen. Unless they somehow manage to native-compile *everything* in it, *and* the Nazi who decides on it doesn’t throw a hissy fit when he hears that its brother's mother's friend's car's previous owner's dog did once bite a bean of Java coffee because it's a particularly sunny day.

Fuck the iTards. They want to suffer in their cages? Well they can have that! No Jitsi for them! (And *none* of my games. EVER.)

Re:Nice review here...

[metamatic]

Thanks for the correction. Conclusion still applies though. App Store doesn't allow shared libraries and has mandatory license terms incompatible with the LGPL.

Jitsi is the most advanced VOIP program

[SD-Arcadia]

jitsi does automatic encryption if you wish and if both parties support it. jitsi can use the highest quality voip audio codec, opus. you can choose either the highest quality video codec, h.264 or the freedom-minded one, VP8. you can have jitsi on all non-mobile platforms. it supports all protocols, including the crappy proprietary ones like msn and aol. it does voice, video, text, remote desktop and screen sharing. use a SIP and jabber account for the best experience. the only quasi-downside seems to be it comes with its own jre. i wish more people would get on board with jitsi right away.

Re:Jitsi is the most advanced VOIP program

[epyT-R]

it's too bad jitsi wasnt written in decent c/c++. desktop java applications are clunky, slow and take way too much memory than they should.

Re:Jitsi is the most advanced VOIP program

[markdavis]

[desktop java program]
Thank you. I was wondering why the thing was so huge, took so long to start, and had broken looking fonts.

Jitsi also had all the Yahoo contacts statuses wrong, has a truly horrible default sound setup, and ugly conversation window.

Back to Pidgin :(

Re:Jitsi is the most advanced VOIP program

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly, i really really wanted to liked each one of times i have used but just cant stand the gui lagg of java apps

SIP and H323

[loufoque]

Why is there still no good SIP and H323 open-source client?

Not So "Free"

[Jane Q. Public]

Skype does for free what Jitsi does for free. So what's the big deal?

If you want SIP service to call PSTN (landline) numbers, OnSIP (for example) is a hell of a lot MORE expensive than Skype.

Jitsi? that Slow Heavy Ugly and Fat Non Sense

[Anonymous Coward]

and requires the 0 day vulterability fest called Java !

The new microsoft developed skype more than a dog its a pig... but jitsi its a %$&# hippo

SIP and XMPP are open standard

[DrYak]

Jitzi is not Skype. It doesn't use it's own proprietary protocol, it uses open standard.

Want to make call with your Andoird smart-phone ?
Get any XMPP or SIP client. (Although a Jitzi-on-Android might happen in the future).

Want to make secure calls?
Just make sure that both ends support ZRTP (for calls) and/or OTR (for messages).
(Jitzi, but also Twinkle(call), Pidgin/Adium (chat), and several others).

Don't want to create yet another account ?
Well use your existing Google (XMPP, works for chat and call) or Facebook (XMPP, chat only) accounts.

As XMPP is an open-standard, there are probably tons of other providers which support it and for which you probably already have an account.

(Didn't follow Jitzi's latest development: does it support MSN's XMPP-with-OAuth implementation ? If that's the case, MSN could be used for chat too)

(Whatsupp could be another future possibility as it is also partly based on a XMPP derivative, althrough much more remote from the actual standard)

WebRTC - API standard

[DrYak]

Will it be able to connect to a browser in the future?

WebRTC isn't a different video call procotol, it's an API enabling Javascript webapp to open streams (for call or whatever they want).

If you manage to find an implementation of XMPP or SIP writen in HTML5/Javscript + WebRTC, then yes you could contact people using a web browser.

(And Google is bound to write a WebRTC version of Google Talk. They are among the developers of WebRTC exactly for this reason).

Because I don't see myself getting everybody I know to install yet another client.

Jitzi is build around open standards. They don't need to specifically install Jitzi.

As long as they have a software supporting XMPP and/or SIP any software will do the job.
(And Google Talk is an example of web app running on XMPP - though for now calls require a plug-in)

And as long as both ends support ZRTP (for calls) or OTR (for chat), you will also get end-to-end encryption.
(Though that is very unlikely to get implemented on a web app)

ZRTP for Pidgin

[DrYak]

Back to Pidgin :(

I'm just hoping that someone develops ZRTP support for pidgin....

Well at least we have OTR support for chat encryption.
(So you can securely chat with your pidgin to someone running pidgin)

Re:ZRTP for Pidgin

[markdavis]

Pidgin has a plugin for encryption, but when I tested it a few years ago it caused problems with long messages and pastes and such and so I stopped using it.

The killer features in Jitsi is the desktop sharing, encryption, and file transfer.

Of those, Pidgin supports file transfer yet it doesn't every work in Yahoo :( And encryption I addressed above. I would love to see both fixed and add that desktop sharing thing.... especially if that also worked on Android too.

OTR is the standard encryption

[DrYak]

Pidgin has a plugin for encryption, but when I tested it a few years ago it caused problems with long messages and pastes and such and so I stopped using it.

GAIM-encryption wasn't good, indeed. Including regarding security (problems with deniability).
It's not maintained anymore.

The killer features in Jitsi is the desktop sharing, encryption, and file transfer.
{...} And encryption I addressed above.

The current standard in chat encryption is Off-The-Record OTR. This one is the encryption standard that is available out-of-the-box for chat messages in Jitzi. But also in Adium and other modern clients.
OTR sits as a layer above the chat messages (it's agnostic to the protocol used to exchange message. As long as the messages are exchanged and both ends use OTR, the transmission will be encrypted).

As of Pidgin: There is a plugin for supporting OTR. (In fact, it's technically the same as Adium, except Pidgin doesn't include it by default). Its either in your distro's repository (if you're running Linux) or there an installer for it (if you're running Windows).
It works very nicely (it's widely deployed and used. Thus it's better tested and debugged)

What Pidgin (and Ekiga too, another pet peeves of mine, although its a bit out of scope) lacks on the encryption front is call (Video and Audio) encryption. Pidgin only does pure RTP, Jitzi does ZRTP encryption over the RTP channel.
(ZRTP functions the same way as OTR: it sits above a FTP channel. No matter which protocol opened the RTP channel, once the channel is open, ZRTP can encrypt it, as long as both ends have it).

Regarding Desktop:

Desktop streaming:
- in Pidgin, it's just a matter of selecting the correct video source. Just tell GStreamer to use the desktop as the source, instead of the webcam or whatever complicated Gstreamer-powered plumbing you use to bring a video source to Pidgin.
The problem here is more user-friendliness. Pidgin doesn't have its own settings to choose video source. You have to select the default GStreamer source using 3rd party software.

Desktop sharing:
- I don't know. There are a couple of Pidgin/VNC plugins around... But I don't have any idea what Jitsi is actually using and if its implementation is standardised or not.