4 ms·
I'm not the original poster, but assuming you're referring to Skype for Business, the main problem with it is that they don't have a Linux client. The only sol
by lokedhs 9y ago
I'm not the original poster, but assuming you're referring to Skype for Business, the main problem with it is that they don't have a Linux client.
The only solution on Linux that implements audio, video and screen sharing is Sky (http://tel.red/ http://tel.red/), and it's incredibly flaky.
- a_bonobo 9y agoNot only is Sky shaky, but it's advertised as 'free as in beer', if you want to talk for more than 2 minutes you have to pay. Everybody wants to talk for more than 2 minutes.
- shaklee3 9y agoSkype for business on Windows is very bad as well. Lots of scaling issues, incorrect status, freezing, etc.
- megaman22 9y agoAs often as not, that's a result of shit infrastructure behind the Skype for Business deployment itself, rather than the client itself. There are a number of baffling restrictions baked into the server and protocol itself, and a real production-grade deployment is a byzantine mess that would give Cthulu nightmares. It doesn't help that the client hasn't had much more than cosmetic changes in at least five years, and is largely abandoned for Microsoft's kludgey Slack competitor.
- pjmlp 9y agoI use it daily and we never had issues with it. When something bad happens, usually it is network infrastructure related or some IT experiment going on.