Microsoft Is Bringing WebRTC To Explorer, Eyes Plugin-Free Skype Calls

An anonymous reader writes Microsoft today announced it is backing the Web Real-Time Communication (WebRTC) technology and will be supporting the ORTC API in Internet Explorer. Put another way, the company is finally throwing its weight behind the broader industry trend of bringing voice and video calling to the browser without the need for plugins. Both Google and Mozilla are way ahead of Microsoft in this area, both in terms of adding WebRTC features to their respective browsers and in terms of building plugin-free calling services that rely on the technology. In short, Skype is under threat, and Microsoft has finally decided to opt for an "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" strategy.

Comments

If you can't beat 'em, troll them

[NotInHere]

ORTC can be seen as a microsoft troll of google, which has invested a lot of money into webrtc: http://bloggeek.me/ortc-webrtc...
With WebRTC, google has a head start. With ORTC, the bias isn't as great.

Re:If you can't beat 'em, troll them

[binarylarry]

To be fair, when Google started on Chrome Microsoft didn't really have a browser either.

Re:If you can't beat 'em, troll them

[ozmanjusri]

ORTC can be seen as a microsoft troll of google,

Not really.

Google is one of the ORTC group members and strongly supports it. If fact, ORTC doesn't erase the work done on WebRTC, it extends it, meaning developers won’t have to rewrite their RTC applications. The expectation is they will gradually transition towards using the ORTC API.

It's possible, though unlikely, that Microsoft's embracing of ORTC now presages their traditional extend/extinguish effort. It's far harder for them to get away with that these days.

About bloody time...

[__aaclcg7560]

The corporate world can finally move away IE6 for their intranet websites.

Wrong strategy

[GameboyRMH]

Microsoft hasn't done "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" in the past. This is more likely another attempt at "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish." So let's wait for the next E to drop.

Re:Wrong strategy

[Technician]

They have a way to go. Google Voice to PTSN works great which is a feature Skype lacks. Skype requires fees to use a call in number, and minutes to call out of Skype. These three features leaves it way behind Google Voice. The only thing going for Skype is the size of the user base and you can have it in many countries.

If I need to call phones in the US and Canada and not use an expensive cell plan, Google Voice works great for free unlike Skype. I use Google Voice as a second line to filter salesmen.

Re:Wrong strategy

[phoenix_rizzen]

Except that Google Voice only works for Americans. If you don't live in the US, it's extremely difficult to get a GV number, or to use GV.

Skype works on any Windows/MacOS computer, virtually any iOS, Android, or MS phone device, some consoles, and probably other devices. Even if you can't phone a landline using it, you can still connect with people using it.

A better comparison would be Google Hangouts which can be used to:
    - send/receive SMS messages on cell phones
    - send/receive instant messages on cell phones, tablets, chromebooks, laptops, PCs, etc
    - make voice or video calls between Hangouts users
    - make voice calls to landlines within North America for free (and other countries for pennies)

Google Hangouts is quickly overtaking Microsoft Skype in features, although it's still building it's userbase.

Re:Wrong strategy

[Technician]

Thanks for the info. I haven't switched to Hangouts yet because it only works on Chrome so It requires a browser switch.

For worldwide users another competitor is the open standard SIP. Many manufactures have SIP (VOIP) phones and adapters, and many with free SIP service. Unlike Skype many of the SIP registars permit multiple resistrations (extensions) at the same time, so I can have a phone at home and at work. A call rings both just like Google Voice. Inexpensive calling plans can be added if needed from Free US DID through IPKall or Callcentric, or other providers + trunk lines for outgoing calls. SIP to SIP is always free world wide. Some SIP providers provide video too like Skype if desired.

Re:Wrong strategy

[aztracker1]

I like Hangouts a lot, and the kinks in the Google Voice integration on my phone are finally mostly worked out. I do think that RTC is important, MS being late to the game was able to look at the problems, and both Google and Mozilla agree, which is why ORTC is coming into play... similar to how IndexedDB came out after other implementations. The crappy part is I'm still stuck supporting IE8 and IE9... so it will be close to a decade before I can really use this for certain things.

Other issues with WebRTC not withstanding, there are some compelling ideas in there.

it's a web browser

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't we just settle for it rendering web pages properly instead of bolting on all sorts of shit ?

Re:it's a web browser

[westlake]

Can't we just settle for it rendering web pages properly instead of bolting on all sorts of shit ?

It seems like only yesterday that the geek was on a crusade to eliminate any and all plug-is. The problem is that the web page has evolved far beyond the one-way-street, the silent, static, display of text and low-res graphics, typical of the early nineties.

The web browser is in serious danger of being eclipsed by the walled garden and the app --- which are in no way burdened by the geek's sense of propriety, his belief that he owns the web and the web browser and can dictate what it can and cannot do.

"Plugin-Free"

[sexconker]

I'd rather have to deal with plugins than deal with the feature creep, bloat, and widened attack surface you get from shoehorning all this shit into the browser.
With plugins, you get the best, fastest, and most secure experience. (By not installing the plugins.)

I DON'T want my browser to support fucking Skype calls on the web, encourage shitty web-design trends that sacrifice usability in favor of a hip image, support shitty DRM over HTML, etc.
The merits of any individual feature, as well as the shitty design choices of any give site, are beside the point. Baking all this shit into the browser removes my choice, shifts development focus away from performance, security, and enhancement of core features, steals my megahertz and megabytes, etc.

Anyone know a browser that's just a WEB browser?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's becoming annoying to have to disable so many features I don't want, never knowing if I got them all. Just a web browser, please. HTML, CSS, maybe Javascript. Doesn't need persistent anything (history, cookies, storage, etc.).