Skype Reverses Decision To Drop OS X 10.5 Support, Retires Windows Phone 7 App
An anonymous reader writes Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard users recently found that Skype no longer works on their system: despite upgrading to the latest version they still can't sign in. We got in touch with the Microsoft-owned company and after two days, we got confirmation that a solution was in the works. "We have a Skype version for Mac OS X 10.5 users which will soon be available for download," a Skype spokesperson told TNW. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for Windows Phone 7. In a support page titled "Is Skype for Windows Phone 7 being discontinued?," the Microsoft-owned company answers the question with a "yes" and elaborates that it is "permanently retiring all Skype apps for Windows Phone 7." Again, this isn't just old versions going away, or support being removed, but the apps themselves have disappeared.
I'm sure somebody at Microsoft is annoyed at this, but the Skype devs are probably relieved to stop supporting it. It's easy to forget that WP7 was essentially a 1.0 product. It was a restart from Windows Mobile 6.5, and very limited versus concurrent Android and iOS. With WP8 and 8.1 they've been getting up to speed nicely. I still want to see better third party Bluetooth support for devs, though.
See what happens when you whine enough? Even Microsoft provides longer term support for obsolete, unsupported operating systems than Apple does.
Suck it up fanbois: Apple sucks farts off dead chickens. Their only game is to keep you on the re-purchase treadmill.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
For me to bite the bullet and get an android phone.
No way am I going to get a windows phone again and risk it going out of support within a year or two.
So with this latest announcement, Microsoft is saying they'll support Windows more and Mac less. What a strange world.
Strike that, reverse it.
Haha wow good point!!
You seem to be confusing two totally different things. Mac users had a perfectly working version of Skype. Microsoft broke what had already been working, by changing the network protocol and turning off the existing servers. Skype worked fine on Mac, then one day Microsoft starting rejecting EXISTING clients, and it's still broken today.
You seem to be confusing that vs writing NEW versions of applications for unpatched operating systems. Apple is saying "if you want the new features in new versions of the application software, download the OS update." What Microsoft did was cut off existing versions that worked just fine.
Another point that may be confusing if you're unfamiliar of anything outside of Microsoft's ass crack - updating OSX means downloading a free update, not paying hundreds of dollars and completely wiping the machine like you tend to do in Windows. My 2008 Mac Pro has the latest version of OSX and the Apple applications. I didn't pay them a thousand dollars to update the OS, the Office suite, the mail client, etc. I just click "yes" to install the free update. It's not that hard.
FYI it's me that has that Win 7 phone.
CrazyOldMan
I know it's an old platform, but making the existing, functional apps unavailable serves only one purpose.
I guess my fingers didn't believe it could be true and autocorrected what I told them to type.
It's interesting that the Microsoft announcement is MORE support for Mac and LESS support for Windows.
I would hate to have to upgrade my system just to use Skype.
Everybody drop Skype, use Pidgin. Solved.
I don't think any software vendor should be required to support software forever, but there is a difference between withdrawing support and disabling a product without ample prior warning. They blew the rollout, but it looks like they're going to make amends, at least for the Leopard crowd. Hopefully, they'll learn a thing or two about the value of good corporate communication as well.
I'm sure the mac crowd is happy too.
I don't think Pidgin is available for game consoles. If the person with whom you're trying to communicate uses an Xbox One console, you have to use Skype because to my knowledge, Microsoft hasn't digitally signed the client for any competing service. And how well does Pidgin work when both sides are behind NAT?
Is there a reason it can't work on this platform?
Yes.
What's the reason?
We don't want it to.
Is there a TECHNICAL reason that it can't work on this platform?
Yes.
What's the reason.
Technically, we don't want it to.
Is there any reason, BESIDES your not wanting it to, that it can't work on these platform?
Yes.
What's the reason?
Because if we don't want it to, remove the apps, and strip out support, it simply can't!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I am surprised the Skype app on my Nokia N900 continues to work after all this time (and after the phone has long been discontinued by Nokia)
More importantly, why is Skype *still* unable to support IPv6 addressing? Any device with IPv6 only can't run Skype, and no amount of NAT can fix it. Phone carriers fix it by giving IPv6 to the phone, and IPv4 to Skype that's natted within the phone to the IPv6, but that's impossible for people trying to run Skype on a desktop.
Microsoft is obviously done extracting the "value" of Skype for Lync. So why not just sell it off and let someone else support it? Or just close it now. Why force it into a painful decline?
Learn to love Alaska
Why are you still saying Skype makes these desitions.
MS has it's own plans.
I wonder if this is related to the Metro version of Skype being difficult to perform surveillance on.
http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...
That's completely false. You just made that up out of thin air.
Customers can, as I did, upgrade from Leopard (2007) to the newest version at a cost of $0.
Upgrading from Vista to Windows 8.1 would cost $120 - $320. (Plus the cost of upgrades to Outlook, etc.)
Customers could also choose to upgrade at each step, paying $30, $20, and $0 for Mac - a total of $50.
With Windows, the analogous path would be Vista - Win7 - Win8 - Win8, which could cost over $800, depending on which edition of Windows. In what world is $50 more than $800?
Oh, so you're saying Apple's upgrade prices, which range from free to $30, are more than the $1,299 / year that Red Hat charges?
https://www.redhat.com/wapps/s...
Please return to first grade.