5 ms·

Skype for Linux Alpha and Calling on Chrome and Chromebooks

56 points by hackernews2000 10y ago

samsonradu 10y ago
Finally! I've been using web.skype.com for over a year now, lacking video/audio calls (usually handling those from my phone)
- hackernews2000 10y ago
  > We will be releasing updates to Skype for Linux every couple of weeks and we hope that video calling, and group video calling will be available in the coming couple of releases. https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34656/more-information-about-skype-for-linux-alpha https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34656/more-information-ab...
Vexs 10y ago
You know what I want? I want the old linux client to work. It didn't have the stupid bubbly UI bloated with ads and "big, friendly buttons" it had functional utility, separate windows, and a much more pleasant user experience just by being unpretty. As it is, I'm glad I have to use it less and less in favor of discord, which is by all accounts, far, far superior.
- hackernews2000 10y ago
  Millions of people use Skype for video calls, which Discord doesn't support.
- ronjouch 10y ago
  I for one consider separate windows a nuisance. I like the new consolidated "all in one" UI, just like I liked when browsers moved to tabs. Honest question: what's the added value of separate windows (to be precise, separating contact list from discussions) to you?
  - Vexs 10y ago
    A big thing (for me anyway) is that the overall interface becomes smaller, and allows for greater customization. I can set it up exactly how I want, and at what size, without messing about. Sure, you can do that in a single-panel application, but skype is never gonna do it. It's kind of like how photoshop is better with floating windows.
    - ronjouch 10y ago
      Got it about the customization. But while it has a benefit to you as a probable "power user", it has a cost: beginners don't get it. They don't understand why part of skype is in a windows while another lives in another. When widgets are dockable/undockable, they undock by mistake, lose the undocked widget in some unseen corner of their screen, are unable to reattach it, and get frustrated. "All-in-one" UIs allow for less customizability/rearranging, but IMHO that's a trade-off they do for one huge benefit: simplicity. With this in mind, how do developers decide which direction to push? By looking at their target user base, of course. And the target user base of Skype is not mostly savvy professionals who like to rearrange windows/widgets, it's humans wanting to talk to other humans. So Skype developers naturally push towards simplifying. Other examples of applications who are kinda, in various ways, reducing such customizability: - Office, with the Ribbon: no more detachable toolbars. - All iOS / Android apps: single-screen, one thing focused at a time (with the exception of left/right tiling in recent iOSes) - Even the GIMP introduced a Single Window mode in recent versions. Now, why don't Skype developers let users pick whether to choose single or multi-window mode? (which they used to do in the Qt-based version under Windows, see the "View" menu). - Because configurability means more code, more tests, more bugs, more money. So if only a tiny part of the userbase requires the configurability, product managers bring the hatchet. - And again, options means beginners will accidentally change them to the one that doesn't fit them, won't understand what the hell happened and how to change it back, ending up either grudgingly accommodating to the undesired option, or getting frustrated and leaving.
      - Vexs 10y ago
        Fair points- I largely don't have an issue with single-window interfaces, (see discord) but it kinda sucks to have your nice, multiwindow taken away and replaced with something much, much worse.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  I know zero people on discord and 100% of my contacts are on Skype.
  - Vexs 10y ago
    It's still primarily a "gaming" voicechat/messaging system, but the software is all there, it just needs expansion. I'd be surprised if some sort of enterprise-grade discord didn't come about.
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      I suspect they're hoping to get bought by someone like Twitch or Steam which have otherwise relatively rudimentary chat capabilities, but is squarely in the gaming space. As a Silicon Valley startup with no viable business plan (charging for themes and chat emojis? at some point "in the future"?), I strongly suspect being acquihired is their exit plan.
- pmlnr 10y ago
  I guess you mean the 2.x as old. That was a good piece of software while it lasted, and I miss it too. But hey, it's M$ now, so get used to flat designed ads.
neverminder 10y ago
So I'm guessing the major "improvement" is that we're getting ads with this version just like Windows users had for a while now?
- hackernews2000 10y ago
  The current (abandoned) Linux client doesn't even support group calls anymore. And if there are ads, just like Windows users, you will be able to block the ads with your hosts file.
  - rogerbinns 10y ago
    It doesn't support group video, but sure as heck supports group audio. I used it just last to do that, as well as the week before.
- Shorel 10y ago
  I'm using it and no ads so far.
cm3 10y ago
In case anyone's wondering, this is Electron using the WebRTC version of Skype. I wonder why they didn't just promote the WebRTC site instead. It would make it easier to have the latest security updates in the browser engine without waiting for Skype (Microsoft) to publish an update.
- ronjouch 10y ago
  Personal guess: while functional (nit: only on Chrome for now :-/ ), the WebRTC site lacks some desktop features (integration, hotkeys, more control on notifications, etc) that they want to provide, and that are covered by the Electron API. For now there's none of it, but I think we'll see those appear little by little.
  - cm3 10y ago
    Not sure about hotkeys. Current Twitter and Github hijack enough well known bindings that it got annoying. So, what hotkeys would Electron allow that wouldn't work in a generic browser?
    - ronjouch 10y ago
      I meant global system-wide hotkeys that work even when the application is not focused, not JavaScript-event-based page hotkeys. In the stable (Qt-based) Skype for example I bind Ctrl+Alt+PgUp to answer a call, and Ctrl+Alt+PgDown to stop the call.
- hackernews2000 10y ago
  For the same reason they don't promote it to Windows users (which will have a similar program in the future replacing the current "native" software): better integration, system tray support, no need to keep your browser open or to enable browser notifications in the desktop, directly accessing and managing your camera and microphone without relying on your browser support and settings etc.
  - cm3 10y ago
ronjouch 10y ago
For those wondering: yes it's an Electron-based app; it's a packaged version of web.skype.com
Wheaties466 10y ago
I wonder how quick this will be up on AUR.
- chrisper 10y ago
  https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/skypeforlinux-bin/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/skypeforlinux-bin/
chinarulezzz 10y ago
In the new version are absent: * One-to one video calling * Skype PSTN calling * Skype SMS messages * Buy Skype credit * Add participants to ongoing call * Change device settings At that, this client support only the new version of the protocol, and can interact with fresh releases of Skype for Windows, macOS, iOS and Android, but can not make and receive calls from the old client for Linux 4.3.0.37. EEE. From m$ with love.
Longhanks 10y ago
Is anyone (especiaially on Linux) still using Skype these days?
- larrik 10y ago
  As someone working in the "Open Source" division of a Microsoft shop: yup.
- snaky 10y ago
  The whole world outside US, basically.
youdontknowtho 10y ago
Reading the comments was brutal. It really makes me think twice about ever releasing software to the public. Sheesh...

Finally! I've been using web.skype.com for over a year now, lacking video/audio calls (usually handling those from my phone)

hackernews2000 10y ago
> We will be releasing updates to Skype for Linux every couple of weeks and we hope that video calling, and group video calling will be available in the coming couple of releases. https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34656/more-information-about-skype-for-linux-alpha https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA34656/more-information-ab...

Vexs 10y ago

You know what I want? I want the old linux client to work. It didn't have the stupid bubbly UI bloated with ads and "big, friendly buttons" it had functional utility, separate windows, and a much more pleasant user experience just by being unpretty. As it is, I'm glad I have to use it less and less in favor of discord, which is by all accounts, far, far superior.

hackernews2000 10y ago
Millions of people use Skype for video calls, which Discord doesn't support.
ronjouch 10y ago
I for one consider separate windows a nuisance. I like the new consolidated "all in one" UI, just like I liked when browsers moved to tabs. Honest question: what's the added value of separate windows (to be precise, separating contact list from discussions) to you?
- Vexs 10y ago
  A big thing (for me anyway) is that the overall interface becomes smaller, and allows for greater customization. I can set it up exactly how I want, and at what size, without messing about. Sure, you can do that in a single-panel application, but skype is never gonna do it. It's kind of like how photoshop is better with floating windows.
  - ronjouch 10y ago
    Got it about the customization. But while it has a benefit to you as a probable "power user", it has a cost: beginners don't get it. They don't understand why part of skype is in a windows while another lives in another. When widgets are dockable/undockable, they undock by mistake, lose the undocked widget in some unseen corner of their screen, are unable to reattach it, and get frustrated. "All-in-one" UIs allow for less customizability/rearranging, but IMHO that's a trade-off they do for one huge benefit: simplicity. With this in mind, how do developers decide which direction to push? By looking at their target user base, of course. And the target user base of Skype is not mostly savvy professionals who like to rearrange windows/widgets, it's humans wanting to talk to other humans. So Skype developers naturally push towards simplifying. Other examples of applications who are kinda, in various ways, reducing such customizability: - Office, with the Ribbon: no more detachable toolbars. - All iOS / Android apps: single-screen, one thing focused at a time (with the exception of left/right tiling in recent iOSes) - Even the GIMP introduced a Single Window mode in recent versions. Now, why don't Skype developers let users pick whether to choose single or multi-window mode? (which they used to do in the Qt-based version under Windows, see the "View" menu). - Because configurability means more code, more tests, more bugs, more money. So if only a tiny part of the userbase requires the configurability, product managers bring the hatchet. - And again, options means beginners will accidentally change them to the one that doesn't fit them, won't understand what the hell happened and how to change it back, ending up either grudgingly accommodating to the undesired option, or getting frustrated and leaving.
    - Vexs 10y ago
      Fair points- I largely don't have an issue with single-window interfaces, (see discord) but it kinda sucks to have your nice, multiwindow taken away and replaced with something much, much worse.
pjmlp 10y ago
I know zero people on discord and 100% of my contacts are on Skype.
- Vexs 10y ago
  It's still primarily a "gaming" voicechat/messaging system, but the software is all there, it just needs expansion. I'd be surprised if some sort of enterprise-grade discord didn't come about.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    I suspect they're hoping to get bought by someone like Twitch or Steam which have otherwise relatively rudimentary chat capabilities, but is squarely in the gaming space. As a Silicon Valley startup with no viable business plan (charging for themes and chat emojis? at some point "in the future"?), I strongly suspect being acquihired is their exit plan.
pmlnr 10y ago
I guess you mean the 2.x as old. That was a good piece of software while it lasted, and I miss it too. But hey, it's M$ now, so get used to flat designed ads.

neverminder 10y ago

So I'm guessing the major "improvement" is that we're getting ads with this version just like Windows users had for a while now?

hackernews2000 10y ago
The current (abandoned) Linux client doesn't even support group calls anymore. And if there are ads, just like Windows users, you will be able to block the ads with your hosts file.
- rogerbinns 10y ago
  It doesn't support group video, but sure as heck supports group audio. I used it just last to do that, as well as the week before.
Shorel 10y ago
I'm using it and no ads so far.

cm3 10y ago

In case anyone's wondering, this is Electron using the WebRTC version of Skype. I wonder why they didn't just promote the WebRTC site instead. It would make it easier to have the latest security updates in the browser engine without waiting for Skype (Microsoft) to publish an update.

ronjouch 10y ago
Personal guess: while functional (nit: only on Chrome for now :-/ ), the WebRTC site lacks some desktop features (integration, hotkeys, more control on notifications, etc) that they want to provide, and that are covered by the Electron API. For now there's none of it, but I think we'll see those appear little by little.
- cm3 10y ago
  Not sure about hotkeys. Current Twitter and Github hijack enough well known bindings that it got annoying. So, what hotkeys would Electron allow that wouldn't work in a generic browser?
  - ronjouch 10y ago
    I meant global system-wide hotkeys that work even when the application is not focused, not JavaScript-event-based page hotkeys. In the stable (Qt-based) Skype for example I bind Ctrl+Alt+PgUp to answer a call, and Ctrl+Alt+PgDown to stop the call.
hackernews2000 10y ago
For the same reason they don't promote it to Windows users (which will have a similar program in the future replacing the current "native" software): better integration, system tray support, no need to keep your browser open or to enable browser notifications in the desktop, directly accessing and managing your camera and microphone without relying on your browser support and settings etc.
- cm3 10y ago

ronjouch 10y ago

For those wondering: yes it's an Electron-based app; it's a packaged version of web.skype.com

Wheaties466 10y ago

I wonder how quick this will be up on AUR.

chrisper 10y ago
https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/skypeforlinux-bin/ https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/skypeforlinux-bin/

chinarulezzz 10y ago

In the new version are absent: * One-to one video calling * Skype PSTN calling * Skype SMS messages * Buy Skype credit * Add participants to ongoing call * Change device settings At that, this client support only the new version of the protocol, and can interact with fresh releases of Skype for Windows, macOS, iOS and Android, but can not make and receive calls from the old client for Linux 4.3.0.37. EEE. From m$ with love.

Longhanks 10y ago

Is anyone (especiaially on Linux) still using Skype these days?

larrik 10y ago
As someone working in the "Open Source" division of a Microsoft shop: yup.
snaky 10y ago
The whole world outside US, basically.

youdontknowtho 10y ago

Reading the comments was brutal. It really makes me think twice about ever releasing software to the public. Sheesh...