Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases Skype As a Snap For Linux (betanews.com)
BrianFagioli writes: While Microsoft has long been viewed as an enemy of the Linux community -- and it still is by some -- the company has actually transformed into an open source champion. One of Microsoft's biggest Linux contributions, however, is Skype -- the wildly popular communication software. By offering that program to desktop Linux users, Microsoft enables them to easily communicate with friends and family that aren't on Linux, thanks to its cross-platform support. Today, Microsoft further embraces Linux by releasing Skype as a Snap. This comes after two other very popular apps became available in Snap form -- Spotify and Slack.
"Skype is used by millions of users globally to make free video and voice calls, send files, video and instant messages and to share both special occasions and everyday moments with the people who matter most. Skype has turned to snaps to ensure its users on Linux, are automatically delivered to its latest versionupon release. And with snaps' roll-back feature, whereby applications can revert back to the previous working version in the event of a bug, Skype's developers can ensure a seamless user experience," says Canonical.
"Skype is used by millions of users globally to make free video and voice calls, send files, video and instant messages and to share both special occasions and everyday moments with the people who matter most. Skype has turned to snaps to ensure its users on Linux, are automatically delivered to its latest versionupon release. And with snaps' roll-back feature, whereby applications can revert back to the previous working version in the event of a bug, Skype's developers can ensure a seamless user experience," says Canonical.
Don't install that snap!
What is a "snap"? Has the distro-packaging problem finally been solved?
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Is it a real application, or is it a slimmed down web browser with the sucky HTML version of Skype?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
LUDDITE Linux can now run snappy app Skype snap! Appy snap apps! Skypes! Snaps!
Snaps are containerised software packages that are simple to create and install. They auto-update and are safe to run. And because they bundle their dependencies, they work on all major Linux systems without modification.
https://snapcraft.io/
Skype is a "wildly popular communication software" in the same way that chlamydia is a "wildly popular" STI. Sometimes numbers alone don't tell the whole story ...
---
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." -- George Carlin
Now when a security update comes for a core library, now I get to update every single snap instead of just updating the system library...
Yay for static linking, I mean containers....
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"While Microsoft has long been viewed as an enemy of the Linux community -- and it still is by some -- the company has actually transformed into an open source champion."
Wow! Is that straight from the MS marketing slime?
It's like flatpak, except just works on ubuntu, because not invented here. Basically.
What makes them "safe to run"? Is the software that they run in the container open source and can be inspected? If not, how do you know it is "safe to run"?
Debian to be specific. It would not work with my friends who use the Windows version of Skype. Skype would connect, but no video, no audio. And no error message of any kind.
skype or Skype for Business?
" the company has actually transformed into an open source champion"
Really? So Skype is being released as an open source app? No. Windows is being released as an open source OS? No. Microsoft has agreed to stop using patents and fear mongering to extract money from companies using open source software? No.
So Microsoft is actively working against open source companies and is not releasing its software under open source licenses. How exactly is Microsoft an open source champion?
Just not true. Linux support was stalled for years until Microsoft bought them and released an updated version. It receives frequent updates since then.
In the early days of microcomputing, we used static linking when creating an application binary. The code we wrote would be linked against any third-party libraries, and a single binary containing the application code and the library code would be the result. Life was easy.
Then there was this huge push toward dynamic linking, with its proponents going on about how it's supposed to use less memory, it's supposed to use less disk space, and it's supposed to allow libraries to be updated easily, and so on and so forth.
But then we experienced "DLL hell" or the "shared object shitshow", which turned out to be far worse than anything we experienced with static linking.
So workarounds, like the various Linux package managers, were created to try to handle the complex dependencies between applications and their shared libraries. This is effectively a complex form of static linking, done by keeping shared library versions consistent with the installed applications.
When that proved to be problematic, such as when there were different applications that depended on different versions of the same shared library, we started seeing a move toward this "containerization" nonsense. There are different approaches used, but again they all have one thing in common: they're a complex way of imitating static linking.
I hope that someday soon the industry at large wakes up to the fact that static linking is just the most sensible thing to do. Yes, the binaries might be slightly larger, but that's well worth it if it means we can avoid "DLL hell" or the "shared object shitshow", and if we can avoid complex package managers, and most important of all, if we can avoid this goddamn "containerization" bullshit.
Now there may be problems when it comes to certain libraries, because they use highly restrictive licenses like the LGPL that effectively force the use of dynamic linking if you don't want your code to be infected by a viral license. The solution to this is simple: don't use poorly licensed libraries. Stick with libraries that use static-linking-friendly licenses like the MIT or BSD licenses, for example.
A whole lot of problems would be solved if we stopped with all of this dynamic stupidity and just went back to static linking.
Really? So shere is the source code for this "snap"? In fact:
In fact, to the extent Microsoft champions "open source", this open-source is about taking advantage of source code released by others without Microsoft releasing any of its own. When I see Microsoft releasing source code under a free license (say BSD) for a significant program originally created by Microsoft (Skype, their web browser) I will believe them.
I believe each snap is sandboxed by default.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
This particular snap install is NOT safe to run. When you run "snap install skype" in a terminal you get a warning that skype is packaged using "classical" isolation and may escape the sandbox and make unrelated system changes. In order to install, you have to add the --classic flag to indicate you understand the risks. I did not install skype.
"He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
As someone who actually uses Skype for Linux, I can say definitively that it's a torture device meant to make Linux users experience excruciatingly unpleasant interfaces, Windows ME stability, Windows Vista levels of bugs, and pointless slowness for what is actually no more than a frame around a website. The Skype for Linux from before MS bought it was a far better, more feature-full and reliable product... since the MS purchase it has only been progressively sabotaged. The several years it went without an update were nice, but ever since updates resumed it gets more painful in each release.
This space intentionally left blank
In fact, this is Microsoft trying to support a dangerous undercurrent in the Linux world of walled gardens and insecure vendor-controlled installations.
If something is wrong in libc, libm, or libgtk Microsoft should get it fixed upstream, not ship their own incompatible version. Do you really trust them to backport every future bugfix after their fork?
What is the address of these turtles? I'd be glad to sent my assistants Mr R Steady and Mr B Bop round and to take care of them
Yours,
Oroku Saki
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
An IM client which spies on me and logs all my conversations for Microsoft without so much as a decent search function for me to view my own archives. There's no reason to use Skype outside of a business environment where you have to do so, there are plenty of open source alternatives and there are plenty of more popular things if you can't get your friends to switch.
What makes them "safe to run"? Is the software that they run in the container open source and can be inspected? If not, how do you know it is "safe to run"?
They think it's safe to run because Microsoft said so. You know, just like they said their "operating system" (hahaha) is "safe to run". There's no real reason to believe a word out of the mouth of anyone who works or worked for Microsoft. Also, you know how Skype is used by "millions of users" to make "free" calls? Yeah, well, if you're not paying for a service, you're not the customer, you're the PRODUCT. In the case of Free/Libre Open Source Software, the motivation is generally altruistic. The ability to legally fork software if the owner/maintainer ever gets greedy prevents malfeasance of the type Microsoft routinely practices.
I wonder if they've fixed the White Screen of Death that the latest version of Skype for Linux in the repos suffers with (start program, receive white screen with basic window controls and nothing else). I've rolled back to an older version and blocked updates for the package to work around it.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
And Skype was already available as a Flatpak available on flathub (and easily installable from the gnome-software GUI).
The summary could have mentiomed that (and, of course, that Slack and Spotify are also available as Flatpak's from Flathub)
MS has been one of the largest contributors of open source projects and applications over the past few years. MS has been positioning themselves to transforming their flagship OS and related applications to a true cross platform solution. Think about all those people and companies that cannot move to a Linux platform due to the lack of Linux application support. No think of signing into your computer and being able to start a Windows session or Linux session without any intervening VM. Think about a version of .NET that is open source and cross platform. The number one rule in capturing a large market share is to make it easy for developers to create applications. It's a lesson the Linux fateful have never really understood. MS has always catered to the developers. MS VB was probably the one product that pushed MS to the top. VB allowed almost anyone to become a developer. VB was certainly not a perfect development tool but it was easy compared to C\C++ or any other native languages that the average person could not use. VB allowed the rapid creation of applications that ran on the MS application stack. (VB had a lot of faults. People created a bunch a sup-par applications. These two characteristics didn't stop the adoption of VB and all the subsequent adoption of a pure MS application stack.)
"I tried $linux_distro on my laptop, but it couldn't find my audio or Wi-Fi, and when I took it out of suspend, it stayed on a black screen. Others on forums mentioned the same problem without a solution." What's your next course of action for a friend who tried and failed to defenestrate his laptop?
To save people trying to find the link to the official page, here it is: https://snapcraft.io/skype/
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
"Skype has turned to snaps to ensure its users on Linux, are automatically delivered to its latest version upon release."
Are they also going to release a new snap any time one of the static linked dependencies are updated as well?
"And with snaps' roll-back feature, whereby applications can revert back to the previous working version in the event of a bug" ...and also previous unpatched versions of static linked dependencies as well.
I think I like normal packages with shared libraries I can ensure are up to date whenever any app or utility relies on them to run.
Twinstiq, game news
The fact that they bundle dependencies are what makes me feel they're unsafe. I can't rely on snap packages to have up to date dependencies.
Twinstiq, game news
Why do you want full duplex audio? Its not like the turtles can talk back.
Instead of trying to find something that does things exactly the way they used to be (whether you need that feature or not), you should start with something that works and build on it. It requires more time and effort, but you are less likely to find yourself in the situation you are right now.. a web site with a live cam first perhaps.
As for SIP alternatives, I have had good luck with mumble, but have not yet tested it on ARM.
ideals
Ideas??Ideologies?! ideal what??
Snaps are containerised software packages that are simple to create and install. They auto-update and are safe to run. And because they bundle their dependencies, they work on all major Linux systems without modification.
https://snapcraft.io/ [snapcraft.io]
Ah, so they've recreated PC-BSD .PBI packages for Linux!
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! :)
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
They won't do anything bad with your data. Promise. Yeah, right! I don't want MS storing all my personal and contacts' information anywhere - they are the least secure mainstream OS in the world. I was a long time Skype user on LINUX. Recent versions want access to all kinds of private data on my system so I have purged Skype from my main computer (LINUX) and my MACs as well. There are plenty of other free, secure, multi-platform and unobtrusive alternatives out there, many of them browser-based so you don't need to install anything at all.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
How DARE you mod down this post for merely disagreeing with ideals. Slashdot is an OPEN FORUM where every man is allowed to express his opinion.
Amen.
So you claim the right to express your opinion but wish to deny those who moderate the right to express theirs? Hypocrite.
MS has been one of the largest contributors of open source projects and applications over the past few years. MS has been positioning themselves to transforming their flagship OS and related applications to a true cross platform solution. Think about all those people and companies that cannot move to a Linux platform due to the lack of Linux application support. No think of signing into your computer and being able to start a Windows session or Linux session without any intervening VM. Think about a version of .NET that is open source and cross platform. The number one rule in capturing a large market share is to make it easy for developers to create applications. It's a lesson the Linux fateful have never really understood. MS has always catered to the developers. MS VB was probably the one product that pushed MS to the top. VB allowed almost anyone to become a developer. VB was certainly not a perfect development tool but it was easy compared to C\C++ or any other native languages that the average person could not use. VB allowed the rapid creation of applications that ran on the MS application stack. (VB had a lot of faults. People created a bunch a sup-par applications. These two characteristics didn't stop the adoption of VB and all the subsequent adoption of a pure MS application stack.)
I'm waiting for the public apology from the executives who have used their position in Microsoft, its wealth and its power to publicly attack Linux in particular and open source in general. Not to mention spending as much money on promoting Linux and open source as they did to fighting it. Where are the apologies for calling open source/Linux Communist, unAmerican and viral? How about all the public claims of patent violation but total unwillingness to say what patents so the violation (if it even existed) could be removed?
Also I'm waiting for Microsoft and many other big corporations to comprehend that the novel 1984 was not a HOW-TO manual and STOP the big brother aspects of their software and hardware.
It will take at LEAST as many years of being a GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN as they have spent being vile to earn trust, respect and forgiveness. Still waiting for them to start.
I see the good folk an MS have provided a marketing spin to publish straight onto /. "open source champion", "wildly popular" hardly an independent or realistic view of MS or Skype - there's just a little bit to much hype going on there, maybe now farcebook isn't accepting fake news they thought they could dump some on /.
Corporations don't care about your hurt feelings and you'll never get anywhere if you're going to sit around and "wait for an apology". The fact that you suffer hurt feelings and feel you are in need of an apology on the back of criticism of Linux at all is quite lame. Grow up snowflake.
Tell it to the snowflakes who tell us "Microsoft doesn't do that stuff now so stop being mean to them/us". They tell us to forgive Microsoft and the execs and to trust them when they haven't shown they DESERVE trust. Tell those snowflakes that Microsoft has to earn what they forfeited by their loooong history of horrible corporate behavior.
Just use the web app... Problem solved.
I literally NEVER use the desktop version of office now. Using it in your browser is much more convenient and works on any modern browser.
'actually transformed into an open source champion', 'wildly popular' etc. etc. No. Microsoft has stopped throwing chairs, issuing Halloween memos and is now burrowing into open source with a view to subverting it since open source is a threat to revenue and shareholder value.
You have to ask yourself, each time, there's some breathy announcement, followed by the shill commentary below it, 'Do I trust Microsoft? For me, the answer is and will remain, 'no'.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
So I finally went through a major hoopla to upgrade my system so I could run a more recent version of Skype (so mom could keep calling me and get her remote support).
There was absolutely no reason to update (ok, a system update is never wrong) as the old version of Skype worked just _fine_ (well, after a lot of tweaking) and the only reason it stopped working was M$ throwing all the toys out of the pram and refusing to let the old version keep running.
The new Skype wont take my camera (Cheese likes it plenty fine) and the incoming sound is so scratchy and choppy that I have major trouble understanding peoples' speech.
First up against the wall etc...
It's better than 'Lync'.
"Hey, can you send me the Lync link?"
Eat the rich.
Sometimes people don't want to see how the older free software movement (a social movement which advocates for the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software) and the younger open source development methodology are philosophically different (1, 2) and that philosophical difference leads to radical differences on the ground. Objections to raising this difference tend to take the form of trying to make it look like any reminder of software freedom (which open source enthusiasts don't like because their philosophy was founded to reject software freedom) is being somehow rude. But time after time we see this difference in action and this article promoting Skype is no different.
Here a proprietary (non-free, user subjugating) program—Skype—is being advertised for use on what might be a free software system (unfairly referred to as a "Linux" system). No reminder of anything to do with software freedom except in a place where the proprietor thinks they can benefit from the conflation the open source philosophy was designed to achieve: "While Microsoft has long been viewed as an enemy of the Linux community -- and it still is by some -- the company has actually transformed into an open source champion." tries to get you to think of "open source" but not to the extent that one would wonder if even that group's weaker philosophy is going to be available to Skype's users by running Skype. No mention of GNU as in a GNU/Linux operating system; any mention of GNU is far too strong a reminder of the software freedom you're not getting with Skype. Better to stick to distracting technocratic details that are irrelevant compared with the profound problems of running Skype, details like the software's packaging. And to reinforce the notion that open source advocates will often abandon their own developmental philosophy if it gets in the way of a powerful proprietor, we get a quote from Canonical, an open source supporting company, further encouraging users to install the non-free communications software.
Nowhere will you find a reminder that not only is Skype non-free software (and that this alone carries horrible implications) but Microsoft is an NSA partner, and Microsoft changed Skype specifically for spying. Apparently the "seamless user experience" Canonical championed and the "high quality experience" Microsoft talked about doesn't include respecting a user's software freedom, their privacy, or the security of their computer.
Digital Citizen