Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Fixes Bugs in Skype for Linux (softpedia.com)
After neglecting Linux's Skype client for years, Microsoft released a new app of Skype for Linux in July, giving comfort to millions of users. The app, however, had a fair share of bugs. Microsoft today has updated the app to iron out those bugs, and introduced a handful of interesting options. An anonymous reader writes: There were plenty of users who complained that Skype for Linux was reconnecting automatically when not using the app for a certain amount of time and Microsoft has already acknowledged the bug. This new version fixes the problem, so everything should work correctly after updating. Additionally, Skype for Linux 1.7 introduces a new grid layout of the group calls, but also fixes the standard behavior of unread messages. According to Microsoft, this means that "when opening chat with unread messages, the view will focus on the first unread message and as you scroll, messages will be marked as read."
Ok, what's the catch? Why would MS spend even one man-hour working on this thing? MS working on software for Android makes sense because it has a huge marketshare, and same with stuff like MS Office for Mac (not huge marketshare, but enough to make it worth the investment for them). But Linux has a minuscule market share, which I admit as a Linux proponent, so what's MS's real plan here? They never do anything on non-MS platforms without a really good (and likely nefarious) reason.
Couldn't Microsoft just send an e-mail to their last Skype user on Linux?
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Because MS want's to attract developers to it's Azure cloud services.
Many such "cloud" developers are using Mac or Linux. After all they need to be developing stuff that will run on Linux cloud servers. Be it from AWS, Google, MS, whoever.
So it makes sense to make such developers happy by providing things like Skype for the platforms they use.
It's the same reason MS created the open source and cross platform MS Visual Studio Code IDE. The same reason they are making sure node.js works with their open source Chakra Javascript engine.
It's all very cunning.
Mind you Visual Studio Code is a wonderful thing. It's the first software from MS I have been using on a regular basis for real work ever.
Mind y
I mean, why not? Don't just collect information about Windows users. Collect information about Linux too!
Keylogger, videologger, audiologger, auto installer for Win10?
Good comment. I have moved on to using WebRTC in Firefox or Chromium. It's easier for relatives and me, and it works just as well.
Lack of a Linux client prevents deployment of the Office communication platform in business, since a Linux client is a significant requirement. In most moderately sized organisations, there will be Linux machines. Unless Microsoft can develop the competence to deliver a Linux client, it rules out deployment of their offering. While I'd hardly call Skype for Business a good piece of software, many of the alternatives are equally bad, usually worse. If Microsoft could sort out making their client cross platform, and consolidate the bizarre user interface into something more traditional, Skype for Business would be a decent option for large corporate deployments. I speak from experience, having been on a team evaluating these clients. Ultimately, we selected a Chrome based WebRTC option, with substantially the same functionality (multi way desktop sharing, presenting, video, audio, group calling, ...) The killer for Skype was the obviously poor state of Microsoft's code, that is restricting portability. It's probably above average when it comes to audio/video quality, but the reliability (dropped calls) seemed below average. I'd actually have recommended - probably as first choice - AND over the likes of Team Viewer, if Microsoft could sort out their portability issues. We are expanding the use of Linux/Open Source, and this will not be changed by the poor performance of one vendor. If Microsoft doesn't get with the game, then they will not be part of it at all.
I expect Microsoft will continue to support Skype on Linux until they terminate the product or.... for a month... whichever comes first.
meh this is a local version of the web.skype.com website
you're as good going to the website directly.. err you're better off going to the website - its always up to date.
Well at least I found out why it was so damned cold this morning.
Because of the reports filed by their most important customer: the NSA. The bugs were interfering with their warrantless surveillance work.
Could never get the package installed on my Debian box no matter how much crowbaring I did.
4.3 is the ancient, abandoned Skype for Linux which I'm still running. 1.7 is the new experimental version based on their webrtc client. Because 1.7 > 4.3, obviously.
This space intentionally left blank
Oh my god! What a beautiful day! Let us celebrate this!
Version 4.3 of Skype for Linux (pre MS buyout) at least supports video and audio. MS has no sense of shame pushing an "updated" version of Skype for Linux with less functionality than the ancient version 4.3.0.37. "The more things change, the more things _____________________". You fill in the blanks.
For you maybe. Totally unusable in my case.
What an uninformative way to completely dismiss anything, equally applicable to whatever it is you use. Firstly "totally unusable" is likely hyperbole and given that it is multiplatform (Windows, OS X, Linux - with deb and rpm packages) open source and also has an interface for extensions I'm wondering what exactly the problem is here. What is your use case in which it is "totally unusable"? Or is it just because it's made by Microsoft?
If I'm doing quick edits I most often use vi (was never an emacs fan) but I've found for more extensive editing VSCode is great, maybe you prefer something like Notepad++ (which is also open source) but it seems more a matter of preference than capability.
Because MS want's to attract developers to it's Azure cloud services.
Impressive that you managed to go through school without understanding and learning something that basic.
The problem I have with a lot of these IDEs and fancy editors is they try to do too much for you, while simultaneously having a terrible editing interface. Key bindings are crap compared to the modal beauty of vim. It's super-annoying to have a fuzzy selector via Shift+arrow or Shift+Ctrl+Arrow. Deleting an entire line might be possible through some weird binding, but in vim it's simply dd (or in my case kk, but that's irrelevant). I can edit everything inside quotations with ci". I'm sure that, with some twisting and struggling, I could get an IDE maaaayyybe close to what I have with vim and a few extra bells and whistles, but for me it's not worth the time or the effort. The benefits are, frankly, trivial and dubious. The setbacks -- while mostly of the "I don't know this software and I'm trying to do a thing" nature -- are still worth considering.
I say we all use the tool that works best for each individual. We don't all learn the same ways, speak the same way, or think the same way, so there's little reason for everyone to use the same tool.
So your theory is that no useful software can exists if not done with Visual Studio ?
Seriously, I doubt that your router or your TV will ever boot in that case...
I do mostly Linux embedded software and I like to develop directly on the remote targets that don't have a screen. In this context Visual Code Studio is unusable as virtually any graphic IDE.
Just use Skype for business, it's a standard SIP interface. It's been the same since before Microsoft.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I do mostly Linux embedded software and I like to develop directly on the remote targets that don't have a screen. In this context Visual Code Studio is unusable as virtually any graphic IDE.
Well yes, so that's a pretty massive caveat that you failed to mention. It's blindingly obvious that any graphical IDE is going to be totally unusable if you don't have a GUI.