Skype For Linux: Dead? Or Just Resting?

New submitter somebearouthere writes: Skype for Linux was updated in 2014 to v4.3 and has since sat there without an update while its counterpart on other platforms has been receiving updates. Sometime in 2015, Microsoft quietly abandoned that version of the product, showing back to Linux users who had paid for subscriptions with the expectation that one day they too would be able to finally use group video chat, have a real 64-bit version available and get an improved UI. Skype developers have just thrown in the towel and it has left the user base frustrated. Last month many users reported that Microsoft had broken the app's ability to join calls. Two Linux enthusiasts penned the issue in a blog signed by "lots of angry Linux users." I have contacted Microsoft numerous times over the past few weeks but it remains tight-lipped on the matter. I have a feeling Microsoft isn't going to update Skype for Linux.

Comments

Just resting, Monthy Python style

[Kjella]

Did anyone really expect anything different when Microsoft bought them?

Re:Just resting, Monthy Python style

[Rob Y.]

The Skype client is not the product. They give it away on all platforms. So not supporting the Linux version is not about losing money in any direct sense. Presumably the Skype folks thought it was worth supporting Linux when they were independent, so I'm guessing this has something to do with Microsoft not wanting traditional desktop Linux to have decent Skype support. Android is supported, because it's the most popular mobile platform out there. Don't support Android, and you don't support mobile. Apple folks have their own facetime thingy.

Anyway, Skype is supposed to be an alternatove phone system. If it's not universal, it's not a phone system. So, even if the numbers aren't huge, desktop Linux makes sense. So, too, would Chromebooks. But yeah, they can't do everything. Still, they had Linux nailed down pretty well, so...

Re:Just resting, Monthy Python style

[Zontar The Mindless]

Skype lets me make free or nearly free audio and video calls to my relatives, who are scattered across 3 continents (and none of them the same as the one I live in).

I'm quite satisfied with version 4.3, and I'm actually glad they've not updated it.

People are clamouring for an update from Microsoft should be careful about what they wish for.

Native clients

[WarJolt]

Aren't we past the point of requiring native clients?

WebRTC has taken over and web standards are becoming more capable all the time. If Microsoft doesn't step up their game they will be replaced.

Re:Native clients

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, HATE my IM clients in web browsers. HATE. My company recently adopted Slack, and I use the IRC gateway to access it, because web UIs suck for messaging.

Re:Native clients

[angel'o'sphere]

Perhaps you are.
I'm not.
I don't want to search for a specific tab in my 200 open tabs just to do a call.
Perhaps when 'web based apps' are able to show in the dock and open their old browser tab. Otherwise: no.
Programs were invented 50 years ago for a reason. As far as I can tell: the browser will never replace true programs, it is simply not practicable.

Re:Spype?

[jellomizer]

So they can communicate with the people who are not clued in enough to use free software.

Works for Me

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing with software is that it doesn't degrade over time. Just because you don't have the 'new shiny', doesn't mean the older versions stop working. My copy of Skype v4.3.0.37 is running perfectly fine for me (on RHEL v6.7 64-bit).

Re:Works for Me

[sbaker]

I understand what you're saying - but it's really not true for network-based stuff like Skype. If the underlying server protocols change - then your "old and dusty" software eventually won't work anymore. Also, if security loopholes are discovered and exploits made, and your software didn't change - then it did "degrade" because now it's not as secure as it once was.

Re:Spype?

[legRoom]

I know it's hard to believe, but some of us Linux users do actually have friends, family, or business contacts who are members of the other 80+% of the population that uses Windows. My social life is a higher priority than tinfoil-hattery, even though I am not happy about the NSA spying on everything and everyone "just in case".

Re:Spype?

[legRoom]

How is it "unethical" or "immoral" for me to prioritize the other people in my life, over my own privacy?

The NSA are the peeping Toms, not me. You are blaming the victim.

It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to say it as a user of Linux for over 20 years, but it's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

Sure, Linux is seeing lots of use on servers, and it's on many mobile devices (even if it is hidden).

But on desktops and laptops? The situation is looking worse than ever before, and it has never been very good to begin with.

The number of home computers running Linux is almost non-existent. The number of non-server business computers running Linux is probably smaller than that.

Home and business users overwhelmingly use Windows or OS X. Many developers and designers have moved to OS X or FreeBSD.

It doesn't help that we've seen no real improvement, and in fact a lot of regression, when it comes to using Linux on desktops and laptops. GNOME 3 drove away a lot of former GNOME users. Systemd, PulseAudio, and NetworkManager have driven away others. X is showing its age. Wayland is going nowhere.

While desktop Linux has been stagnating or getting worse, we've seen both Windows and OS X getting better.

It's not the late 1990s and early 2000s, when Linux was way more stable than Windows 95/98/ME and Mac OS 7/8/9. In fact, many users have found Linux less stable, especially after the many teething problems with systemd, and the ongoing problems many still have with graphics drivers.

And of the few people who do use Linux on their desktop or laptop computers, many of them dual-boot with Windows, or only run Linux in a VM hosted on Windows or OS X.

So it's no wonder that Skype for Linux may be in limbo. Desktop Linux itself is in serious limbo! It makes no sense for a company, regardless of who they are, to invest time, money and effort into maintaining software that has almost no audience.

Re:It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

[Immerman]

Well said. It seemed Ubuntu was making valiant strides into the market, but then they abandoned the desktop as their primary target in favor of touchscreen devices. Maybe that will turn out well for them in the long term, but it sapped much of the momentum desktop Linux had accumulated, leaving the playing field if anything worse than before they arrived. Sure, there's plenty of spinoffs replacing the GUI with more desktop-friendly alternatives, but fragmentation is once again running free, and even collectively the alternatives lack the energy and momentum that Ubuntu had built.

A sad state of affairs, especially considering that 90% of Ubuntu's desktop shortcomings can be resolved simply by replacing their taskbar with a more desktop-friendly alternative. I'm currently running Ubuntu with the sidebar hidden in favor of an Xfce panel sporting Whisker Menu in the corner and vertical "bookshelf" application buttons (plus lots of shortcuts and custom menus), and am as happy as I've ever been with a desktop experience. Ubuntu's settings and infrastructure are as solid and polished as ever, and for a paltry few dozen megabytes the Xfce panel gives me a traditional, and highly configurable, desktop experience that I've fine tuned more easily and effectively than anything else I've ever used, including all the newfangled KDE, Gome, Windows 8/10 etc. interfaces that seem to be desperately rying to be the "next big thing" while failing to actually deliver on a simple, stable platform that lets me concentrate on getting work done. And before you ask, yes, I've tried Xfce-based distros. The panel is excellent, the rest... well there's a lot of room for improvement before it can compete with Ubuntu.

Re:It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

[m.alessandrini]

So I must be a rarity, I use linux exclusively on my desktops since a dozen years.

Re:It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

[RoLi]

That's nonsense.

Linux marketshare in web statistics has grown from about 1% ten years ago to about 2% now. That of course is still a small percentage, nevertheless it is twice as large as it was ten years ago and it now grows at a faster rate because of the privacy issues of Windows 10.

In just 3 years, Linux could breach 3%.

So yeah, Linux grows on the desktop, Linux succeeds on the desktop - it just happens at a glacial speed and will take many decades.

Re: It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying.

[jim_deane]

I switched to Linux as my main desktop and laptop os several years ago. In the past two years I've seen more of my students using some version of Linux (usually mint) on their personal computers. At one of my jobs Linux is used on most computers both personal and server.

It's anecdotal evidence, but it doesn't seem to me that the Linux desktop is suffering.