Newest Skype For Linux Enables SMS Text Messages From The Desktop (betanews.com)

Why, does it work properly now? by drinkypoo · 2016-11-28 00:32 · Score: 5, Informative

There is convenience and elegance in using the Skype for Linux client.

The Skype for Linux client has never been convenient or elegant. Have they made massive improvements of late?

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Re:Why, does it work properly now? by JoeMerchant · 2016-11-28 00:41 · Score: 4, Funny

F'ing amazing - integrating 1996 internet communication tech into a Linux app in 2016... how long do you think it will take them to make their own OS shut down and start up reliably?
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 00:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

Pretty much my thoughts.

but needing to use a web browser can be a chore.
Oh, yeah. Because needing to use a closed-source proprietary skype client can totally not be a chore. It's literally one of the few things I consider even worse than web browsers.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:00 · Score: 0

IOS has let me do this for years now. But nice work on getting up to 2012 or so, M$
Re: Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:06 · Score: 0

What do you mean "work properly"?
They aren't in rocket science business, nor in user satisfaction.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:20 · Score: 0

NO version of skype since microsoft took over has matched that description. Anyone who has tried to use it across multiple devices will attest to that.
Re: Why, does it work properly now? by Yvan256 · 2016-11-28 01:22 · Score: 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:35 · Score: 0

iOS on the desktop?
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2016-11-28 01:36 · Score: 1

The Skype for Linux client has never been convenient or elegant. Have they made massive improvements of late?
It's M$ they'd put broken glass on a Bouncy Castle and bill it as an improvement

--
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by h33t+l4x0r · 2016-11-28 01:56 · Score: 1

Do I have the option of paying extra to not get the broken glass? Because that's a feature I'm interested in.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by MachineShedFred · 2016-11-28 01:57 · Score: 1

Exactly. At least if the web client is written properly, a simple REST API command could send your message and open this thing up to a whole new class of functionality - automated notifications from 3rd party applications.

--
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:04 · Score: 0

You can't shut Windows down properly? I've seen 4 year olds do it. Sounds like someone's got a case of the PEBKAC.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2016-11-28 02:20 · Score: 1

IOS has let me do this for years now. But nice work on getting up to 2012 or so, M$
Ah but does it offer the same features of scanning your messages to sort you into various advertising bins?
Ah who am I kidding? Of course it does!

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Big+Hairy+Ian · 2016-11-28 02:24 · Score: 1

If you don't want broken glass simply do not upgrade from Bouncy Castle 1.0 either way you'll still have to inflate via the exhaust port

--
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Re: Why, does it work properly now? by Billly+Gates · 2016-11-28 02:25 · Score: 1, Insightful

Actually Skype Inc abandoned Linux. Microsoft is the one updating again oddly.
I realized though on slashdot Microsoft could cure cancer and world hunger and of course someone will still bash them.
This isn't 1998 anymore. I use Freebsd and Windows together. I downloaded SQL server for Linux and will play with it in a vm next week. Windows 10 has Ubuntu and FreeBSD runs great in Hyper-V thanks to MS contributing from Azure.
It's not like they are subverting standards or anything they once did

--
http://saveie6.com/
Re: Why, does it work properly now? by dbIII · 2016-11-28 03:03 · Score: 2

I downloaded SQL server for Linux
That's like putting nerf rounds in a Desert Eagle and taking it to the range. Why use a toy on something built to run the top end stuff when the top end stuff is cheaper?
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Plus1Entropy · 2016-11-28 03:15 · Score: 1

Judging by how much Skype for Windows sucks, I wouldn't hold my breath.

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by whoever57 · 2016-11-28 03:28 · Score: 1

Have they fixed the screen sharing? Instead of including features that are no longer necessary, how about making existing features work?

--
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-11-28 04:09 · Score: 1

It's M$ they'd put broken glass on a Bouncy Castle and bill it as an improvement
The day Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck is the day they make a vacuum.

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by swillden · 2016-11-28 04:24 · Score: 1

Pretty much my thoughts.

but needing to use a web browser can be a chore.
Oh, yeah. Because needing to use a closed-source proprietary skype client can totally not be a chore. It's literally one of the few things I consider even worse than web browsers.
No doubt. The quality or convenience of the skype client aside, how is using a web browser a chore? A web browser is the one app that is always running on any computer that I'm using. Having to start another app rather than another browser tab is almost always less convenient. There are a few things that just can't be done well in a browser (so far), and I don't mind running a separate app for them. But sending text message is not in that category. Neither is video conferencing, frankly.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by bluegutang · 2016-11-28 04:27 · Score: 1

Web browsers are actually the best platform for a lot of software. They need no installation, they update with no user effort, and they have limited security vulnerabilities.
Web browsers have two inherent weaknesses. 1) They require internet connection - but this is irrelevant for apps like Skype whose purpose is entirely network-based. 2) They are slower - but this factor becomes less significant by the year.
As for the interface, there is no barrier these days to making a webpage as functional as a native application. (Though many designers who COULD make a functional website choose not to)
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 04:31 · Score: 0

oh thank you!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Neuronwelder · 2016-11-28 04:41 · Score: 1

Amen!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by tripleevenfall · 2016-11-28 04:54 · Score: 1

I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 05:19 · Score: 0

They need to spy on all the new linux desktops, Its CLEARLY a TRAP. Your Welcome.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 05:33 · Score: 0

What if someone wants to send more than just a test message though? (I know, it's unpopular to actually read the summary before posting....)
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Lord+Apathy · 2016-11-28 05:45 · Score: 1

Or the day they make windows 7, 10, visual studio, office 2013, and 2016. Seems that Microsoft makes a bunch of products that don't 'suck.' But that is just my option and the business worlds.

--
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 06:16 · Score: 1

how is using a web browser a chore?
Dunno. Slow? Huge? Invasive? Broken (by design, because it has to cope with broken websites)? Then, apart from the browser proper, the chore that is using most websites in the first place? Whoops, you can no longer set xpinstall.signatures.required to false in order to install an unsigned addon? The tunable is still there, mind you, it's just that it has become a no-op? Crash reporter, telemetry, 50MB distfile, share location? Unstable addon interface, rounded tabs, out of swapspace? Rapid release, dev snapshot, segfault, RIP. 500 MB core dump, two screens worth of call stack in gdb. Oops, SIGILL.

..are some keywords that come to mind.

A web browser is the one app that is always running on any computer that I'm using.
Let me guess, you're not a fan of silent computers :-). I would *always* quit the browser when i'm done using it, however since it takes like 15 seconds to load and another 15 seconds to restore the windows and tabs (yes, lazy-loading, and still...), and then another 15 seconds to actually become responsive (as in, can be tricked into responding, not actually being "responsive" with the "fast"-connotation), that's not really feasible.
I've resorted to a keyboard shortcut that alternates between sending my browser SIGSTOP and SIGCONT so I can pretend it's not there (apart from the memory it ate) while i'm not using the www. Having to resort to such a filthy un-solution clearly shows that something is pretty damn wrong.

But sending text message is not in that category.

Yes, it is. They keyword here is *text*. HTML (of course js-enhanced) textfields are the *worst* input element I can think of. The fuck.
My sms "workflow" to send an sms to you is:
Winkey+Return to launch a terminal (practically instant) $ sms swillden By the time you receive this message, my web browser isn't even halfway started up. ^D sms: sent successfully. $ ^D Terminal gone.
The total overhead is less than a second, plus whatever the sms script interfaces takes to dispatch the message. What's the overhead in a browser-sms setup?

Neither is video conferencing
Yes, with respect to video conferencing or video anything (except editing), I'd agree that a browser is a good fit.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 06:21 · Score: 1

Web browsers are actually the best platform for a lot of users
FTFY.
(See also sibling comment)

They are slower - but this factor becomes less significant by the year.
To me it feels that it becomes more significant by the year. I guess I'm the problem here, should more frequently buy new hardware to be able to enjoy the full web 4.0 experience.

a webpage as functional as a native application.
I keep hearing that, but I've never seen it. Care to provide an example?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by bluegutang · 2016-11-28 07:04 · Score: 1

I keep hearing that, but I've never seen it. Care to provide an example?
Gmail is as good as any native mail program I've used (better actually).
In general: Most applications consist of menus, buttons, windows, display of text/pictures/video, and playing sound. (These are what come to mind for me, maybe you can think of a few more.) Web pages can do all these things pretty well these days.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 07:54 · Score: 1

Gmail is as good as any native mail program
Gmail is as good as any crappy native MUA mainly because crappy MUAs are bloated and webbrowserized themselves.
What if I don't want to run a crappy one, web-based or not?
E.g. Gmail comes nowhere near mutt (not even close) with respect to responsiveness, flexibility, speed, usability, power(fulness?), resource usage, ....
On top of that, it has the subtle advantage that it can actually be used for mailhosters other than Gmail.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Obfuscant · 2016-11-28 08:03 · Score: 1

I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
I think you mean every email client in existence, which has had the ability to send SMS messages through the carrier's email to SMS gateways for as long as those gateways have been in existence.
What's this crap about claiming the OS has this functionality when all the hype is about a Skype CLIENT being able to do it?
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by Trax3001BBS · 2016-11-28 08:22 · Score: 1

I think he means OSX, which has in fact had this functionality for a number of years now.
I think you mean every email client in existence, which has had the ability to send SMS messages through the carrier's email to SMS gateways for as long as those gateways have been in existence.
I've used Forte Agent 1.93 (windows) to do this all the time. A few years back they blocked this ability (at least the the IP's I was using).
SMS Gateways: http://www.email-unlimited.com...
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by swillden · 2016-11-28 08:58 · Score: 1

Meh. My SMS communication client (Google Hangouts) is always loaded in my email tab, which is always open in my always-running browser. My workflow is: Alt-1 (to jump to the first tab, which is my pinned email tab), click on "fisted" in the list, type a message, hit enter. There's a big flaw with your workflow, too... supposing I reply, how do you see it? On your phone, I suppose... but then since you sent the message from your command-line SMS client, the conversation log on the phone is one-sided, which is unfortunate if you want to look at it later.
And my machine is completely silent except when I run a build. The fans have to kick up then to push heat out -- with 40 Xeon cores running at full bore there's quite a bit. But a browser? That's no load.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by thegarbz · 2016-11-28 09:12 · Score: 1

how long do you think it will take them to make their own OS shut down and start up reliably?
They solved this recently. The OS now reliably shuts down even when you don't want it to, and it's incredibly robust in its timing too.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by bluegutang · 2016-11-28 10:21 · Score: 1

Gmail's responsiveness, flexibility, speed, and usability are perfectly good by my standards. If Mutt does an operation in 0.01 seconds and Gmail in 0.1 seconds, that's not actually a significant advantage for mutt, since the end user does not notice the difference.
Meanwhile, Gmail handles attachments, threaded conversations, and search much better than Mutt. All key features.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 10:32 · Score: 1

supposing I reply, how do you see it? On your phone, I suppose... but then since you sent the message from your command-line SMS client, the conversation log on the phone is one-sided, which is unfortunate if you want to look at it later.
That's actually not a problem for me because i regularly pull the data on my phone to my computer, making the log two-sided again. (alternatively i could just use my phone as the sms gateway when there's no free to use on on the interweb around at a time). That said, I don't see how this (non-)problem wouldn't equally apply to your workflow.
And then there's the big advantage of my conversation logs being on my hard disks, while yours are being data-mined at google's...

with 40 Xeon cores [...] a browser? That's no load.
Okay, I certainly see how having 40 xeon cores helps with browser performance... I somewhat doubt it's very representative for browser users, though.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re: Why, does it work properly now? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 10:39 · Score: 0

No jungles in India, but they do shit in the streets there.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 10:41 · Score: 1

Meanwhile, Gmail handles attachments, threaded conversations, and search much better than Mutt. All key features.
Search, maybe, google is good at that. You're paying for it with your privacy, but ok.
Attachments and threading? You mean the kind of "threads" that are effectively flat lists in gmail?
Are you sure you know mutt well enough to make such claims?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by swillden · 2016-11-28 11:17 · Score: 1

That said, I don't see how this (non-)problem wouldn't equally apply to your workflow.
Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.

And then there's the big advantage of my conversation logs being on my hard disks, while yours are being data-mined at google's...
And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history. As for data mining... meh. If it means the ads I see are more useful to me, that's a benefit, not a disadvantage.

Okay, I certainly see how having 40 xeon cores helps with browser performance... I somewhat doubt it's very representative for browser users, though.
The browser puts no appreciable load on any other computer I use, either. If your PC can't run a browser and still be silent, there's something wrong with the PC.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 11:29 · Score: 1

Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.
How convenient. What about deletions, are they also synced to all devices?

And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history
Ah, here's the problem. I had the false impression that I was talking to someone vaguely computer-literate. My bad, I'll adjust my expectations.

. As for data mining... meh. If it means the ads I see are more useful to me, that's a benefit, not a disadvantage.
Meh indeed.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by swillden · 2016-11-28 13:28 · Score: 1

Hangouts syncs all of the messages to all devices.
How convenient. What about deletions, are they also synced to all devices?
I don't delete.

And the disadvantage that a drive failure loses your history
Ah, here's the problem. I had the false impression that I was talking to someone vaguely computer-literate. My bad, I'll adjust my expectations.
Ah, and I thought I was talking to someone who wasn't an asshole. I'll adjust mine as well.
I no longer bother with any sort of manual backups. Everything of importance is synced to the cloud and from there to multiple devices. Any solution that requires me to go back to managing backups is a non-starter. I don't have time for that crap.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by fisted · 2016-11-28 20:27 · Score: 1

I don't delete.
Except when you do, which might well be accidental. But i guess, you don't do accidental. Sure.

Ah, and I thought I was talking to someone who wasn't calling me out for the obvious flaws in what i'm saying

FTFY. Nice direct insult, btw. I at least had a good reason to say what i said, and given what comes next, I still mean it.

I no longer bother with any sort of manual backups.
Yeah, me neither. Your point being? Why do you add a "manual" there? Oh wait, rhetorical question. Your argument is a failure and I suspect you realize it yourself, otherwise you wouldn't have to resort to straw men. Worrying that you still do.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Why, does it work properly now? by RockDoctor · 2016-12-01 01:36 · Score: 1

It's M$ they'd put broken glass on a Bouncy Castle and bill it as an improvement
Broken glass in a bouncy castle would be an improvement. Particularly if the glass is covered in nice infectious shit, and the castle is erected over a pit of hungry alligators. Or landmines.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"

The 1990s called by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:34 · Score: 0

They want their cutting-edge technology!

And while you're at it, watch this -- Reversi!!

Except in Nebraska!!!

Too little... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:34 · Score: 0

... too late

This has always been possible. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:36 · Score: 0

This has always been possible.

Re:This has always been possible. by spune · 2016-11-28 05:18 · Score: 1

i've been using ~email~ to send SMS messages from the desktop for 15 years

With one hand he giveth; with the other he taketh by bain · 2016-11-28 00:37 · Score: 4, Insightful

I would much rather the devs at skype/microsoft take the time to fix the features that used to work, which has since the new "alpha" been broken like video calling, which was one of the MAIN features of skype and on of the few applications that allowed cross platform video calling.

This is much more desirable than sending messages via SMS.

--
Sanity is a majority vote.

what the hell? by serviscope_minor · 2016-11-28 00:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

I've got a paid up Skype account and I've been able to send text messages from the desktop client for years.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.

Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:09 · Score: 0

Asshole, you've betrayed the FOSS movement! Stallman will be pissed! You should be using Ekiga (not to be confused with Ikea).
Re:what the hell? by tepples · 2016-11-28 03:19 · Score: 1

So how do I get all my regular Skype contacts to likewise switch to Ekiga?
Re:what the hell? by Plus1Entropy · 2016-11-28 03:28 · Score: 1

Yeah, but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message. Although, honestly I'm not sure what the difference is, use-case wise...
If you have someone on Skype, why not just use the normal text message feature?
If you have someone's phone number (but they're not on Skype) why not just text them from your phone?

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Re:what the hell? by TopSpin · 2016-11-28 05:24 · Score: 1

but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message
Yes you could. I've texted my wife's phone and others many times over the years using Skype on Linux. I've been using Skype on Windows for the last 18 months, but the last version of Skype I used on Linux (skype-4.3.0.37-suse121.i586 by the RPM name) sent text messages to phones just fine. You needed a account with a balance and you had to setup your Skype account with your phone's number (such that caller ID identifies the caller/sender,) but I know for a fact that it worked.
So yeah, this huge Break Through! technology isn't all that amazing to me.

--
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
Re:what the hell? by serviscope_minor · 2016-11-28 22:09 · Score: 1

Yeah, but you couldn't send a message to someone's phone number that they receive as an SMS message.,
No, I really can/could. I got it because it was way cheaper for international calls than my mobile phone (fucking ripoff merchants), and texts came with it. It's cheap enough and pretty convenient. After a few years of that I went and paid for an attached phone number so that when I make calls and send texts, it appears to come from an actual phone. That way people can call back. My number is in the US because I do quite a lot of business there and as with the texts it's much cheaper calling international with skype than my phone. And skype is cheap enough that I don't care about the cost enough to try and reduce it further.
If you have someone on Skype, why not just use the normal text message feature?
I do.
If you have someone's phone number (but they're not on Skype) why not just text them from your phone?
Vastly more expensive to text the US from the UK. Plus now if they text/call me back, they can do it to a US number so they don't incur an international call cost either. Now the international costs aren't really high enough to matter to a business, but they're clearly a massive rip-off. And you don't want to do business with someone when they're feeling ripped off before you even begin.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:what the hell? by vandamme · 2016-11-29 11:29 · Score: 1

So how do I get all my regular Skype contacts to likewise switch to Ekiga?
Switch them to Linux first. Win-win.
Re:what the hell? by tepples · 2016-11-29 15:25 · Score: 1

So how can I afford to replace their hardware that has no working Linux drivers with hardware that has working Linux drivers? I remember reading in replies to my comments in another recent discussion that Linux users deserve to pay extra for convenience. And how do I get all of their contacts to switch to applications compatible with Linux at least to the extent of not meeting the criteria for a Garbage rating in Wine AppDB?
tl;dr: Far easier said than done. Or perhaps this was your point.
Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-30 01:34 · Score: 0

So how can I afford to replace their hardware that has no working Linux drivers
Don't replace the hardware. Write the drivers and make them work. Roll up your sleeves and get it done. Stop being so negative.
Re:what the hell? by tepples · 2016-11-30 03:41 · Score: 1

Don't replace the hardware. Write the drivers and make them work.
Writing drivers needs two things: specs and time. Specs are easier said than done because several manufacturers have proven unwilling to disclose information required to build a driver to free software volunteers. Time is easier said than done because once I've finished the drivers, the user has already replaced one piece of incompatible hardware with another piece of incompatible hardware.
Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-30 09:42 · Score: 0

Writing drivers needs two things: specs
The nouveau project demonstrates that isn't the case. Your claim is flatly false. What you want learn about is reverse engineering. That's how to get it done in the real world.

Time is easier said than done
Only if you waste it having a whinge on Slashdot instead of doing your driver development work. Harden up, son.
Re:what the hell? by tepples · 2016-11-30 16:24 · Score: 1

I'd still need to buy one of each device in order to reverse engineer it. Where should I find the money for that?
Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-30 17:53 · Score: 0

Where should I find the money for that?
I told you to roll up your sleeves and to harden up. The answer is obvious: sell blood and be a sperm donor.
Re:what the hell? by vandamme · 2016-12-01 11:57 · Score: 1

Such as? I find that Linux is more compatible with hardware than Windows. Especially the old stuff, which I gladly accept from disgusted Windows users and put back to work. I have a scanner and TV capture card right here I'm using...
Re:what the hell? by tepples · 2016-12-01 17:11 · Score: 1

Such as mostly newer laptops. Bay Trail stuff in particular, such as the ASUS T100TA and X205TA, took a while for basic functionality to be supported in Debian and other distressed. Bluetooth and screen brightness are still broken on the T100TA.
Re:what the hell? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-12-01 22:03 · Score: 0

Bluetooth and screen brightness are still broken on the T100TA

Seems like that stuff was fixed a while ago.

marketing speak? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:38 · Score: 0

That reminds me, I really need to take a couple courses in marketing. I would have never thought to phrase things that way when discussing skype's linux client. Pure genius.

And spammers will ruin it. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:39 · Score: 0

Another tool for spammers to use. SMS spam increase on the horizon. News at 11.

Always good to remember with Microsoft / Skype by sasparillascott · 2016-11-28 00:39 · Score: 1

Don't believe Microsoft ever swore off this:

https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

With the new administration getting appointments with folks who support mass surveillance and a CIC who stated he wanted to be able to spy on his political enemies, you have to wonder who will be in his crosshairs over the next 4 years. Things in this area are probably not going to get better. Best to assume any Skype communication will be stored by government forever, for future use and decide if you want to use this product from this company - whatever the "features" are.

Re:Always good to remember with Microsoft / Skype by drinkypoo · 2016-11-28 01:57 · Score: 2

On one hand you're right, and I wouldn't use Skype to discuss my secret plans to rule the world. It would make more sense to go through my backup CDs again and see if I can find my copy of pgpfone than to do that. (Probably it would make a lot more sense to do something else. Like IPSEC. But anyway.) On the other hand, this story is about SMS. One has to assume those are all logged anyway.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Always good to remember with Microsoft / Skype by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:25 · Score: 0

Don't use Skype to discuss political business either. It might be an election cycle and DNC might be entitled to secure comms, but this is Trumps Americasky now and all rights are null and void.
"On the other hand, this story is about SMS. One has to assume those are all logged anyway."
This is skype, tap-tap-tap and the microphone and camera can be turned on. It's not a joke, be careful what you say on Skype messenger.

Great by tigersha · 2016-11-28 00:40 · Score: 0

So Linux finally arrived at the point where the rest of us was 5 years ago?

--
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism

Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:08 · Score: 0

No, this only updates Skype on Linux. It doesn't add anything to Linux itself.
Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:52 · Score: 0

Fucking moron
Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 04:41 · Score: 0

This is a Skype thing.
You could do SMS from the command line, or mail client of your choice, forever. (Or, at least since telco providers made it possible by emailing the phone number, eg 1235551234@vtext.com for Verizon, similar but different domain name for other carriers. Use @vzwpix.com, etc for MMS messages.)
I've been using it for Nagios to send alerts to my phone for years. Before that I was sending them to my pager, same idea.

Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THIS! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

Why does this summary read like sophomore year marketing homework?

Do not touch this by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:42 · Score: 1

Don't touch this, Trumpskys backers will have access to it soon.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/newly-published-nsa-documents-show-agency-could-grab-all-skype-traffic/

"A National Security Agency document published this week by the German news magazine Der Spiegel from the trove provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden shows that the agency had full access to voice, video, text messaging, and file sharing from targeted individuals over Microsoft’s Skype service.....The document details how to “task” the capture of voice communications from Skype by NSA’s NUCLEON system, which allows for text searches against captured voice communications. It also discusses how to find text chat and other data sent between clients in NSA’s PINWALE “digital network intelligence” database."

Convenience of a client? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:42 · Score: 0

The new Skype application is just chromium, so you are just using a webpage.

sure there are a couple of additional benefits (you don't accidentally close the app when you close your browser, systray integration ... ) but thats it

Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:46 · Score: 0

So Skype seems elegant to Linux users?

Shudder.

Re:Elegant? by fisted · 2016-11-28 01:01 · Score: 2

Well systemd does, and pulseaudio, and avahi, and dbus, and iproute2, and udev, and wayland, and rust, and gnome, and the new kernel versioning scheme (are we at 5.0 yet in the 2.6 series?)
Seems like as a general rule, Linux users have poor taste in software.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-28 01:23 · Score: 1

I already know that you hate systemd, so pulseaudio, dbus and udev gets thrown in as guilt by association but why on earth complain about Wayland?
Re:Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:14 · Score: 0

I believe wayland has some dependencies that lead to systemd
Re:Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:26 · Score: 0

It does not. You can schedule systemd to start it when the computer boots, but that's the case for pretty much everything.
Re:Elegant? by fisted · 2016-11-28 03:00 · Score: 1

guilt by association
Do you always jump to conclusions this fast? It has little to do with association. What makes it hard to believe that I might actually have individual reasons to dislike the mentioned projects? And how on earth would you omit avahi vom the "guilt by association" claim? Are you out of your depth here, again? :-)

why on earth complain about Wayland?
Because it perfectly matches the pattern?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Elegant? by dbIII · 2016-11-28 03:08 · Score: 2

why on earth complain about Wayland
Maybe because it has systemd level hype with the same rabid attack by fanboys on alternatives but without the project maturity.
I wish they would hold off the hype until the thing is ready to use and the "X sux" misinformation stuff was beyond childish.
Re:Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:10 · Score: 0

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH did you just seriously try to imply systemd had 'maturity'? good grief.
Re:Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 04:30 · Score: 0

If "guilt by association" means being a steamy turd, then pulseaudo is right in there.
Re: Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 06:01 · Score: 0

Lrn2read uNoob
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-28 08:15 · Score: 1

However the "X sux" is said by the X developers who is also the people who develop Wayland so one would think that they know what they talk about.
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-28 08:27 · Score: 1

So what are your individual reasons to dislike these projects then? Because it still does look like the common denominator is LP considering that 56% of the items on your list are part of the systemd project repository. The Linux numbering scheme you can skip because that complaint is so silly I don't even fathom how you bothered to put it in there. However I'm mostly (still) interested in your dislikes of Wayland, a question that you have avoided so far.
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-28 08:30 · Score: 1

The first stable release of systemd was 6 years ago. How long must it go before software reaches maturity in your world?
Re:Elegant? by fisted · 2016-11-28 09:09 · Score: 1

56% of the items on your list are part of the systemd project repository.
Funny, huh? I used to dislike the items even when systemd was the only item on that list that's part of the systemd repository. Not my fault systemd keeps absorbing software like that. That'd be ONE of the reasons I dislike systemd, since you were asking. If I want the integrated do-everything approach, I might just as well switch to Windows.
So there goes your guilt by association hypothesis. Now, since you asked so nicely:
pulseaudio: significant CPU usage, overly complex, written by the systemd guy (that's guilt by precedent (postcedent?), not by association)
avahi: thinks it owns the network stack. creates a pseudo interface even when it's not needed, assigns a link-local address and potentially brings it up. have seen it confuse the boot process on debian in nasty ways. Also written by our special friend, par for the course.
dbus: grown, not designed. used to connect desktop crap together, now abused as a general purpose IPC. doing IPC in userland is a shitty idea, mainly because of the possibility that the ipc userland daemon might not be running. even the systemd special experts have realized this and thus are pushing for kdbus.
iproute2: reason for existance: Linux's ifconfig is ill-designed and grew over the years to be pretty 802.3 specific. Instead of designing ifconfig and the driver interface cleanly, additional programs were thrown into the mix. iwconfig, iw, you name it. Meet iproute2 and command lines like "ip link set up dev tap0". In case you're missing the irony here, they redesigned it, but apparently intentionally chose the one actually annoying artifact from ifconfig - the nonstandard (non-getopt) invocation syntax. So cool. then there's the exit code issue that i've talked about in our other conversation.
udev: actually i don't know udev very much, it's just unnecessary stuff i tend to dispose of on linux systems. i get that it's useful for people who don't know how to load a driver into the kernel. or what drivers they need, for that matter.
wayland: i'm mostly meh about it. seems to me like its main selling point is that it's something new, and X11 is old. so far i see no reason why i could possibly want it. maybe when i feel like using something less flexible for a change.
rust: is actually a nice language and prevents programmer error and world will be safe. C's days are counted. provides universal basic income too.
gnome: huge, complicated beast. also i hate it for making me migrate my parents from gnome 2 to KDE.
happy now?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 09:16 · Score: 0

when it is primarily being maintained instead of being in the process of being developed and eating other software.
The high version number is meant to trick people like you into believing it must be outstandingly mature, because higher is better as you certainly do know.
Re: Elegant? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 21:14 · Score: 0

lol so true
Re:Elegant? by dbIII · 2016-11-29 00:15 · Score: 1

That lie again?
Cut and pasting X code does not suddenly make the X developers who wrote the original copied code Wayland developers.
The only person who comes remotely close to what you are suggesting is Daniel Stone and he's been called out as being less than honest with his examples (eg. he suggested X is slow because gedit based on gtk3 is slow - yet the older version of gedit has not speed problems at all on X). He ported X to the Nokia N900 and did a bit of a code cleanup on a tiny part of X but he's not exactly an X guru.

Here's a thing - if X sucks so badly then why did the Wayland folks use the X video drivers instead of writing new ones?
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-29 08:36 · Score: 1

The initial developer of Wayland was Kristian Høgsberg who has been a X.Org developer (he made AIGLX and DRI2 among other things). To this day I have not seen a single X.Org developer say anything but that Wayland is the future of X.
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-29 09:35 · Score: 1

Funny, huh? I used to dislike the items even when systemd was the only item on that list that's part of the systemd repository. Not my fault systemd keeps absorbing software like that. That'd be ONE of the reasons I dislike systemd, since you were asking. If I want the integrated do-everything approach, I might just as well switch to Windows.
Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository and putting common code into shared libraries is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".

pulseaudio: significant CPU usage, overly complex, written by the systemd guy (that's guilt by precedent (postcedent?), not by association)
I've heard about the high CPU usage before but have not experienced it myself, have never seen it go above 0,x% on any of my systems. Compiz, X.Org or Firefox on the other hand (and that on idle!). Don't know if you remember the old days prior to pulse when every single project had their own incompatible sound server and how painful it was to get two programs to work together (oh so you use Amarok to play music, well then of course any flash-content from now on until you reboot will be completely silent).

avahi: thinks it owns the network stack. creates a pseudo interface even when it's not needed, assigns a link-local address and potentially brings it up. have seen it confuse the boot process on debian in nasty ways. Also written by our special friend, par for the course.
All those issues sounds like the zero conf functionality have been enabled on your system for some reason, since they are handled by a separate deamon (avahi-autoipd) it's probably started by something else like NetworkManager, avahi by itself should not bring this up afaik.

dbus: grown, not designed. used to connect desktop crap together, now abused as a general purpose IPC. doing IPC in userland is a shitty idea, mainly because of the possibility that the ipc userland daemon might not be running. even the systemd special experts have realized this and thus are pushing for kdbus.
Yes dbus is not something that I have ever liked, even though the main idea was somewhat good (reminds me about the Rexx interface we have on the Amiga) but the implementation does look way to overly complicated.

iproute2: reason for existance: Linux's ifconfig is ill-designed and grew over the years to be pretty 802.3 specific. Instead of designing ifconfig and the driver interface cleanly, additional programs were thrown into the mix. iwconfig, iw, you name it. Meet iproute2 and command lines like "ip link set up dev tap0". In case you're missing the irony here, they redesigned it, but apparently intentionally chose the one actually annoying artifact from ifconfig - the nonstandard (non-getopt) invocation syntax. So cool. then there's the exit code issue that i've talked about in our other conversation.
Yes and there are lot's of other linux-specific commands that use the same strange syntax, like mdadm. Have not really been that bothered by it though, possibly by having been put into how these commands work by both mdadm and svn so I always do the Cisco recursive command lookup style with "ip" and then "ip route help". Having worked with Ciscos IOS for years also probably have conditioned my into accepting this syntax.

udev: actually i don't know udev very much, it's just unnecessary stuff i tend to dispose of on linux systems. i get that it's useful for people who don't know how to load a driver into the kernel. or what drivers they need, for that matter.
Well I for one would not like to go back to the old days of the static /dev/, being able to put in all kinds of strange new hardware, let the children and wife plug in all kind of strange USB devices and not having to manually run mknod is a benefit in my book.
Re:Elegant? by fisted · 2016-11-29 10:04 · Score: 1

Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository [...] is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".
Then what is?

and putting common code into shared libraries
You won't see me complaining about this.

All those [avahi] issues sounds like the zero conf functionality have been enabled on your system for some reason, since they are handled by a separate deamon (avahi-autoipd) it's probably started by something else like NetworkManager, avahi by itself should not bring this up afaik.
Oh, right! I totally forgot NetworkManager on my list :-).

modern desktops
Don't get me started on "modern desktops"..
(And yes, I too have heard about some former X11 developers being among the wayland crowd. Do you know what's their proportion wrt. to the total amount of X11 developers? (I don't).

rust: [sarcasm]
[missing the sarcasm]
The part about rust was sarcasm.

Well I would say that KDE is a far more complicated beast
Yes, that's why I'm mad at gnome in the first place. If KDE was lightweight and simple, I wouldn't have made them use gnome in the first place.
On my own systems it's either headless or i3, that way I can avoid the pain that is the "modern desktop" with all its brokenness and dependencies and ... damn it didn't I ask you to *not* get me started on that?!

happy now?
Yes, thank you!
You're welcome.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-11-30 06:24 · Score: 1

Well to be honest, putting different projects into a single code repository [...] is not really my definition of "absorbing software" or an "integrated do-everythig approach".
Then what is?
That would be if they really absorbed all that software, i.e deprecate each individual project and merge their code with systemd, but that is not what they have done, they have simply put all the different projects into the same git repository so that they (among other things) more easily can make simultaneous releases.
Well we can all think what we want about the modern desktop but there is where the majority of the users will be, tyranny of the majority so to speak. And since that will be the new playing field we better have a display server that can fill that space well.
Re:Elegant? by fisted · 2016-11-30 07:43 · Score: 1

among other things
See, my concern are those "other things", which would boil down to de-facto interweaving the formerly separate projects, adding dependencies from project A to project B, and project B to project A, which means, as you certainly know, that it's really more one project AB. I'll admit I'm not tracking changes to the systemd source repository, so maybe my concern has not become reality yet, but I think it's not very far fetched that this will happen, if it didn't already.
I mean what would you do, if you want to implement a fancy feature in your $pet_project, but unfortunately it requires $pet_project specific support in $dependent_project, and $dependent_project happens to be inside your own repository. Don't tell me that the reasoning would be "oh yeah, we better hold on and think of a implementation-agnostic approach to this particular issue rather than just committing this little patch". Not for most programmers, and especially not for special expert L.P.

Well we can all think what we want about the modern desktop but there is where the majority of the users will be, tyranny of the majority so to speak.
Yes. But is this what we actually want? I for one don't, and this isn't meant to sound elitist, but simply realist. Experience shows that if you let "the masses" in, things tend to become shitty and commerialized. Yes, I also thought, at some point, that it would be very cool if everybody used Linux. Unfortunately "using Linux" is pretty much pointless if you don't use the shell, and for that you need to be actually interested in the matter. Most people want to use their computer as an appliance, and this is what Linux (or real unix) has always sucked at.
If Linux is being made ready for the masses, and, looking at the current process of windowsification, it certainly is headed in that direction, it will become just that, another windows. yay. This is sadly why I don't try to "convert" people to BSD as I used to do when i was a fanboyish linux-advocating PFY. Demonstrate that you're actually interested in operating systems, that you don't mind sticking your nose in C source and that you don't wet yourself over lack of support for $latest_hype, and I'll happily show you the way (and walk it a bit) towards (what I consider) reasonable OS, is how I currently hold it.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Elegant? by F.Ultra · 2016-12-01 09:47 · Score: 1

See, my concern are those "other things", which would boil down to de-facto interweaving the formerly separate projects, adding dependencies from project A to project B, and project B to project A, which means, as you certainly know, that it's really more one project AB. I'll admit I'm not tracking changes to the systemd source repository, so maybe my concern has not become reality yet, but I think it's not very far fetched that this will happen, if it didn't already.
I mean what would you do, if you want to implement a fancy feature in your $pet_project, but unfortunately it requires $pet_project specific support in $dependent_project, and $dependent_project happens to be inside your own repository. Don't tell me that the reasoning would be "oh yeah, we better hold on and think of a implementation-agnostic approach to this particular issue rather than just committing this little patch". Not for most programmers, and especially not for special expert L.P.
Well that is what they have done so far (i.e going the implementation-agnostic approach), you might not like DBUS but for all the warts it does make for a implementation-agnostic approach so as long as the competition support the same DBUS messages then everything should work. You might not like that the different projects use interprocess communication like this but that would happen regardless of them sharing a code repository or not (just look at how i.e gnome depends on some DBUS messages from systemd-logind)

If Linux is being made ready for the masses, and, looking at the current process of windowsification, it certainly is headed in that direction, it will become just that, another windows. yay.
I don't see the windosification, in fact the "new" interface that Microsoft has put into Windows was first seen in Gnome3 and I have yet to see anything new in Linux resemble how things work in Windows. I know that a lot of trolls have claimed that systemd mad init work like it does in Windows, but those people have obviously never used the Windows System Services or programmed one (or the shitfest that is the EventViewer for that matter). If anything I think that GUI wise both Linux and Windows are looking more at Apple and Android than each other.

Wait! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:57 · Score: 0

A State Actor might have hacked it!

Closed source? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:57 · Score: 1

Thanks. I don't trust you. Not interested.

For SMS I just use my dumbphone.

Re:Closed source? by fisted · 2016-11-28 04:03 · Score: 1

Well how open source is your dumbphone?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:Closed source? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 07:31 · Score: 0

> Well how open source is your dumbphone?
Not at all. You know it. I know it. But that's a strawman. You know it. I know it.
Re:Closed source? by fisted · 2016-11-28 08:03 · Score: 1

How is it a straw man? Did you badly misspell "rhetorical question" there? I'm only pointing out a flaw in your reasoning. And since you're talking about trust, how much do you trust your GSM carrier to "negotiate" (quotes because it's unilateral) encryption with your phone?

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!

But a bloated web browser is under the hood by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 00:59 · Score: 2, Informative

The Skype client for Linux is built on Electron, so while you do not see a web browser, a slow and bloated browser engine is running under the hood.

How any developer can be satisfied with using Electron is beyond me.

Re: But a bloated web browser is under the hood by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:50 · Score: 1

Maybe we prefer electron based tool because we don't find neutrons attractive, and proton's are kind of fat.
Re:But a bloated web browser is under the hood by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:57 · Score: 1

Web technologies runs circles against native apps on looks, usability and even performance these days. 99% of frontend R&D is on the web.

And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by LordHighExecutioner · 2016-11-28 01:02 · Score: 3, Funny

something like say:
rm -fr /

Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by zwarte+piet · 2016-11-28 01:19 · Score: 1

I'm sure that produces an evil smiley.
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by fisted · 2016-11-28 03:11 · Score: 2

I'm sure it remakes the french language pack. Try it.

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:14 · Score: 0

I'm fairly certain it would say something along the lines of "Error deleting '/': Permission denied"
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by hcs_$reboot · 2016-11-28 03:51 · Score: 1

something like say: rm -fr /
I tried but it says
# rm -rf / Patched rm warning: caught an attempt to perform 'rm -rf /' and aborted the command. Blame the stupid person that suggested you to do this command.

What does that mean?

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by fisted · 2016-11-28 04:05 · Score: 1

It means you pointlessly patched your rm to provide that warning when it already does so unpatchedly. That is assuming you're talking about GNU rm, of course. Can't wait for GNU Clippy to appear and offer helpful advice on not trying to remove your /...

--
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by behrooz0az · 2016-11-28 06:25 · Score: 1

In root, I would go with /usr to avoid conflicts
rm -fr /usr

--
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by antdude · 2016-11-28 19:17 · Score: 1

Who runs as root? :P

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by TeknoHog · 2016-11-29 03:37 · Score: 1

You need root to run anything from Microsoft. They must have all possible permissions to make your user experience super easy and smooth.

--
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Re:And what if somebody sends a SMS *to* Linux ? by antdude · 2016-11-29 05:00 · Score: 1

Wow. That's awful! I am never touching it then!

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).

With Trump in power by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:11 · Score: 0

If DNC cannot protect their emails from Trumps men, nobody can protect their Skype communications.

Is it still overpriced? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:19 · Score: 0

I've been doing this for years with international numbers. Are they still charging ~$0.10/Text message in the US? It was cheeper for years to send messages to 3rd world countries then to the US.

Re:Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THI by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:20 · Score: 0

Why does this summary read like sophomore year marketing homework?

The entire body of Slashdot submissions by Mr. Fagioli seems to be all about marketing. From what I can see he never writes comments, but he sure does a lot of Slashvertising. I'm not sure about your 'sophomore year' assessment though - it must take a lot of special training to pack so much 'gee whiz golly gosh' fanboi gushing into such a short summary.

Dead by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:23 · Score: 0

Microsoft's failure to secure .net/windows live passwords and their insistence to associating them with skype accounts makes the platform dead. Their repeated failure to fix this problem just shows how little they care.

yeah right by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:24 · Score: 0

and also helps to update infected android devices anonimously!

talk by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:30 · Score: 0

talk

Cheaper solution by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:37 · Score: 0, Funny

Or you could just buy the right hardware for the job...

Re:Cheaper solution by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 04:58 · Score: 0

Not funny, I opened that at work. Jerk
Re: Cheaper solution by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 05:52 · Score: 0

LOLOLOLOLOL got emmmmmmm.

Old tech, new news. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:45 · Score: 0

Using pidgin and my AIM account, sending SMS from my Desktop has been very easy for many years. This article is stupid.

It *is* a web browser by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:47 · Score: 0

...with sundae shit bolted on. It goes to 11! Yay!

Re:Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THI by orzetto · 2016-11-28 01:50 · Score: 1

It is an incredible feature. It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016. It does, however, reflect Microsoft's grasp of the latest trends in mobile technology.

--
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y

Meh by alantus · 2016-11-28 01:51 · Score: 1

Wake me up when they make a JSON API available.

WAT? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 01:53 · Score: 0

What moron wrote the summary and/or the article?

1) SMS sending was possible with previous versions 2) Skype for Linux embeds Google Chrome, so it in fact uses a web browser.

Re:WAT? by Desler · 2016-11-28 02:08 · Score: 1

The moron's name is Brian Fagioli.
Re:WAT? by 110010001000 · 2016-11-28 02:33 · Score: 1

If you Google the morons name you can see his picture. Yes, he looks like you would expect.
Re: WAT? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 06:03 · Score: 0

Like a fag?
Re:WAT? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 06:13 · Score: 0

Funniest thing I've seen today. Thanks.
Re:WAT? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 09:01 · Score: 0

Not really. I was expecting less fat and more faggot.

There is convenience and elegance..... by Danathar · 2016-11-28 01:53 · Score: 1

"There is convenience and elegance in using the Skype for Linux client." The same could also be said about NOT having to use a fat client, but via a web browser.

needing to use a web browser can be a chore by crowne · 2016-11-28 01:54 · Score: 1

That's why I'm really looking forward to the thick-client version of slashdot. This web browser nonsense is rubbish, I really want to install a separate app for each website that I use, and I hope all of these thick clients implement the same features in a consistent manner such as back button browser tabs etc.

--
RTFM is not a radio station.

MS's propaganda by OneHundredAndTen · 2016-11-28 01:57 · Score: 1

And not very good one, either. Dr. Goebbels would not have been proud. Once again, consider yourself middle-fingered, Microsoft.

web browser can be a chore? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:07 · Score: 0

but needing to use a web browser can be a chore

The only reason I use a computer is to open a web browser. If it's a 'chore' maybe it's because it's a Windows web browser.

Is it fake news by MrKaos · 2016-11-28 02:08 · Score: 1

are they faking it?

--
My ism, it's full of beliefs.

wow by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:08 · Score: 0

they have duplicated google hangouts, which, btw, is free.

Skype for linux 1.13? by m.alessandrini · 2016-11-28 02:09 · Score: 1

It's strange because I'm using Skype 4.3.0.37 on linux right now.

Old News by NeoGeo64 · 2016-11-28 02:11 · Score: 0

I've been able to send SMS from Pidgin with my AIM account for over 10 years. How is this a new feature? By the way, Skype for Linux sucks. I use it, but it really needs to be on par with the Windows version. Microsoft is still as bad as they were in the 90's. Nothing has changed, they're in it to make money. That is all they care about.

Garbage by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:18 · Score: 0

It still requires pulseaudio

Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:20 · Score: 0

> on[e] of the few applications that allowed cross platform video calling.

try Jitsi Meet, https://meet.jit.si/

Zero-install WebRTC is the future, here today. Cross platform, open source, only requirement is a modern web browser. For privacy you can set up and control your own multiplexing relay, if you want to, instead of having to trust a third party.

10 years-old news by clausen · 2016-11-28 02:20 · Score: 2

Skype for Linux has been able to send SMS messages for 10 years or so. What's new about this?

Just use the browser for everything by Kludge · 2016-11-28 02:40 · Score: 2

With webrtc now well supported in Firefox, Chromium, Chrome, Opera, I have completely ditched Skype, and I just send my relatives a simple web link to click on when I want to chat with them.
I think it is more reliable than Skype too.

It's a bait! by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:42 · Score: 0

They just want Linux users to upgrade for whatever sinister purposes that M$ is after... If not ads, then something else.

Re:Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THI by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 02:44 · Score: 0

It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016

Since you sound serious, I'm wondering what you recommend instead? I mean, when talking to your friends or family directly, are you actually using some software controlled by a specific company, and if so, how are you ensuring it is available to everyone you'd want to talk to?

For example, if you mean Slack or something, I seriously have no idea if any of my friends are on there anywhere (and I know that my Mom isn't). If you meant whatever is installed on iOS (I genuinely don't know) that isn't SMS, then surely you realize most other people are using android?

What are you suggesting you would do instead of SMS if you just met me and wanted to send me a message?

because mail is hard by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:15 · Score: 0

echo "I'm uh fucktard"|mail -s "ZED OH MUH GAWD TWEETERZ" phonenumber@cellcompany

Voila. SMS sent.

NSA/CIA/FBI Approved... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:16 · Score: 0

It automatically sends all communications to the alphabet agencies as well. Doesn't require a court order, warrant or even a wire tap anymore.

Re:Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THI by tepples · 2016-11-28 03:21 · Score: 1

It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016.

Some cellular carriers still offer plans that include talk and text without data, particularly for people who use a cell phone in addition to a landline as opposed to a replacement for a landline. In order to converse with someone on such a plan, you need to be sending SMS.

Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take by Plus1Entropy · 2016-11-28 03:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm actually trying to think of the use-case for SMS in Skype. As opposed to using the normal instant messaging feature I mean.

You want to SMS someone that doesn't have their phone number linked to Skype, but not using your phone? Am I missing something?

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.

Re:Phone Carriers Don't Want You to Know about THI by Plus1Entropy · 2016-11-28 03:30 · Score: 1

It is incredible that anyone is still sending SMS in 2016.

I dunno what you mean, I receive spam/scam messages all the time!

--
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.

Send SMS from Linux using only "wget" by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 03:31 · Score: 0

Personally I use one of these prepaid VoIP providers.
Most of them have an API that allows sending SMS just by fetching a URL containing your data (user/pass/recipient/text) as parameters.

Good example of "fake news", no verification by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 04:11 · Score: 0

This writer, Brian Ravioli, got hold of a 10-year old news piece and regurgitated it on Slashdot, and both the editors and readers took it for being new.

Weird by DivineKnight · 2016-11-28 04:26 · Score: 1

How did we go from Skype Version 4.3.0.37, which runs just fine on Linux, to Skype for Linux Alpha 1.13.0.3?

I'm looking at 4.3..... right now, and it has the option of sending SMS messages (probably for a pretty penny) to mobiles. And it does video.

Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take by ljw1004 · 2016-11-28 06:01 · Score: 1

I'm actually trying to think of the use-case for SMS in Skype. As opposed to using the normal instant messaging feature I mean. You want to SMS someone that doesn't have their phone number linked to Skype, but not using your phone? Am I missing something?

I think you must be missing something :) Loads of people don't use skype at all, or do use it but aren't currently on a skype-active device. But most of them carry an SMS-capable device at all times. While you're at your desk, you want some way to message these people.

Could you use a different messaging service like Facebook Messenger or Whatsapp or whatever? Maybe, if you already know they have that app installed on their phone and it's set up for notifications. But SMS is guaranteed to always work.

Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take by Mortimer82 · 2016-11-28 06:03 · Score: 1

I found it very useful about 8 years ago, before smartphones with messaging apps became so ubiquitous. I lived in France for a bit, then Ireland a little later and had a long distance relationship with a girl in Turkey. Using Skype to send the SMSes to her phone was considerably cheaper. Once I moved to Ireland, I got a cellphone contract which included "free skype to skype" and I could call her for free, just using my Skype credit. It was just a cheap feature phone, but the phone software somehow instructed the cellphone network to "call me" and then route the call over Skype from their network.

I haven't needed Skype credit in quite while now, I met a different girl ultimately who was local, but still have a little credit on my account.

These days I use iMessage and WhatsApp.

No fucks given here by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 06:12 · Score: 0

Use your phone next time asswipe

I prefer WhatsApp on my desktop by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 07:27 · Score: 0

https://web.whatsapp.com/ :-)

Also has popup messages for new messages, both with Safari (Mac) and Firefox (Windows).

Re:With one hand he giveth; with the other he take by thegarbz · 2016-11-28 09:14 · Score: 1

I'm actually trying to think of the use case for SMS.

No that's it, just SMS. Here in the Netherlands SMSes are used by the government for 2 factor authentication and ... yeah that's about it. Wake me when Skype can send a WhatsApp message.

BrianFag. Is a Micro$oft shill by Anonymous Coward · 2016-11-28 11:03 · Score: 0

Not hard to see the theme in Brians submissions.

Wayland is not X FFS! by dbIII · 2016-11-29 14:38 · Score: 1

say anything but that Wayland is the future of X

Seriously?
Wayland is not X.
It is very different.
It was never designed to be "the future of X".
It was designed to be something else to use instead of X.

So now you know a tiny bit about the topic. I suggest you learn a little bit more before you go around "correcting" people.

Re:Wayland is not X FFS! by F.Ultra · 2016-11-30 06:15 · Score: 1

And that else will be the future display server that will fill the role of what X11 did. Was that so completely difficult to understand or are you playing dense just because you don't like Wayland?

Something else to use instead of X by dbIII · 2016-11-30 12:38 · Score: 1

I have no problem with Wayland just with the "X sux" liars.
How about you take a look at the Wayland mailing list and actually get a clue about the topic to avoid any more ridiculous mistakes.

or are you playing dense

The guy who fucked up is calling me dense? How about learning about the topic instead of making me laugh at you.

Re:Something else to use instead of X by F.Ultra · 2016-12-01 09:35 · Score: 1

Fucked up how? X is the current display server used in (among other things) Linux. Wayland has been brought forward by the developers of X as the display server for the future, hence Wayland is the future of X regardless of their differences in protocol and inner workings. That you do not understand such a simply concept is what makes you dense, oh and btw I have never said that X sux either so you keep on laughing if that makes you feel good about yourself.
Re:Something else to use instead of X by dbIII · 2016-12-01 13:31 · Score: 1

Fucked up how?
You wrote that Wayland is the future of X.
That's as ridiculous as suggesting a bridge in Alaska is the future of Miami.

by the developers of X

No. One guy who worked on two X extensions and another guy that did a port to a Debian variant is a tiny drop in the bucket of the developers of X.

I have never said that X sux

You did worse than that, you wrote the following lie:

However the "X sux" is said by the X developers
Why are you trying to start a fight over a topic you know absolutely nothing about? Wayland is not X.
Re:Something else to use instead of X by F.Ultra · 2016-12-02 10:11 · Score: 1

You wrote that Wayland is the future of X. That's as ridiculous as suggesting a bridge in Alaska is the future of Miami.
So you still don't understand that X is the future of Y does not mean that they share anything other than once Y will be deprectated X will take over it's place and function even though I now have written that three times? Very great for some one who claims that others fuck up...

No. One guy who worked on two X extensions and another guy that did a port to a Debian variant is a tiny drop in the bucket of the developers of X.
I just did a quick look at the changelog from X.org at https://www.x.org/releases/X11... and cross checked names with people who contributed code to the Wayland project and stopped after finding these 7 names: Jesse Barnes, Kristian Høgsberg, Peter Hutterer, Daniel Stone, Gaetan Nadon, Jeremy Huddleston and Josh Triplett. The first three on this list also seams to be the major contributors to X.org in terms of code so hardly the "tiny bucket" that you describe. The most active X.org dev is Alan Coopersmith and he seams to be all in for X.org at the moment though.

You did worse than that, you wrote the following lie:

However the "X sux" is said by the X developers
Why are you trying to start a fight over a topic you know absolutely nothing about? Wayland is not X.
You do realise that the "X sux" part was a direct quote from your text and not my opinion? And nowhere have I claimed that Wayland is X in any way, shape or form
Re:Something else to use instead of X by dbIII · 2016-12-02 17:21 · Score: 1

So you still don't understand

Why are you still posting shit about a topic you know nothing about? Of course I understand. The only thing not understood here is in your own head.
Now you are doing all out fucking numerology with patch numbers without having a fucking clue about what is an X extension, what is part of the core of X and what is a removal of code (Daniel Stone removing xprint was a very large patch by these numbers despite it actually meaning a lot less code in X).
I suggest learning what a number actually represents before throwing it around.
Re:Something else to use instead of X by F.Ultra · 2016-12-11 06:19 · Score: 1

And really funny is that I have not written even a single sentence with a single number in them and yet you still play this "numerology" game. Incredible!

Slashdot Mirror

Newest Skype For Linux Enables SMS Text Messages From The Desktop (betanews.com)

177 comments