Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Skype For Linux: Dead? Or Just Resting?

Posted by msmash on from the Microsoft's-love-hate-relationship-with-Linux dept.

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.

11 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Just resting, Monthy Python style by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did anyone really expect anything different when Microsoft bought them?

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Just resting, Monthy Python style by Rob+Y. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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...

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
    2. Re:Just resting, Monthy Python style by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  2. Native clients by WarJolt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Native clients by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  3. Re:Spype? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  4. Re:Spype? by legRoom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Works for Me by sbaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    www.sjbaker.org
  6. Re:It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying. by m.alessandrini · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

  7. Re:It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying. by RoLi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  8. Re: It's Linux-on-the-desktop that's dying. by jim_deane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.