5 ms·

This happened because they migrated skype from a peer to peer software to centralized servers. While this has enabled certain innovations, like web-based skype

This happened because they migrated skype from a peer to peer software to centralized servers. While this has enabled certain innovations, like web-based skype and better integeration with other devices, it negatively impacted overall quality of skype.

cuckcuckspruce 8y ago
It also got the US Intelligence Community off they are back as it gives them a single point of interception.
saagarjha 8y ago
Why can you not have a peer-to-peer Skype that works on the web?
- monocasa 8y ago
  WebRTC didn't exist at the time.
dmitriid 8y ago
You can't have peer-to-peer and expect it to work on mobile phones.
- monocasa 8y ago
  Why not? The signaling layer DHT probably shouldn't be on the phone clients, but everything else should be fine.
  - dmitriid 8y ago
    Because data plans and batteries run out too quickly. And the quality of the networks is really bad compared to non-mobile networks
    - monocasa 8y ago
      Right, so like I said, don't run the signalling DHT on the phones, but run it on everything else.
      - dmitriid 8y ago
        For peer-to-peer to work you need to reroute data/traffic through nodes as well. You you can't really do that on mobile devices because once again: data, battery, network reliability. If you don't do that and connect directly to a central node, you've done what Skype has done: become a client-server application with centralised servers.
        monocasa 8y ago
        I'm saying make the nodes heterogeneous, and classify them into "actively participates in the primary functions of the distributed network", and "simply receives pushes that are related to me".
        dmitriid 8y ago
        What you're saying is: make all mobile nodes clients to centralised servers ;) As a result, it's much easier to maintain a single architecture than two different architectures with rapidly diminishing number of desktop nodes taking all the traffic.
        monocasa 8y ago
        ...no. It's totally fine to have a decentralized network with a subset of the nodes doing more work depending on what their users want. TOR works like that, PopcornTime did that, etc. Hell, the original Skype network did that to. Gnutella was pretty asymmetric as well. > rapidly diminishing number of desktop nodes Do you have any data on that? Or are you counting laptops here as mobile for some reason?
        8y ago
smackfu 8y ago
Slack did the same thing with the ScreenHero service they acquired and it had the same effect: much more lag and worse quality.

cuckcuckspruce 8y ago

It also got the US Intelligence Community off they are back as it gives them a single point of interception.

saagarjha 8y ago

Why can you not have a peer-to-peer Skype that works on the web?

monocasa 8y ago
WebRTC didn't exist at the time.

dmitriid 8y ago

You can't have peer-to-peer and expect it to work on mobile phones.

monocasa 8y ago
Why not? The signaling layer DHT probably shouldn't be on the phone clients, but everything else should be fine.
- dmitriid 8y ago
  Because data plans and batteries run out too quickly. And the quality of the networks is really bad compared to non-mobile networks
  - monocasa 8y ago
    Right, so like I said, don't run the signalling DHT on the phones, but run it on everything else.
    - dmitriid 8y ago
      For peer-to-peer to work you need to reroute data/traffic through nodes as well. You you can't really do that on mobile devices because once again: data, battery, network reliability. If you don't do that and connect directly to a central node, you've done what Skype has done: become a client-server application with centralised servers.
      - monocasa 8y ago
        I'm saying make the nodes heterogeneous, and classify them into "actively participates in the primary functions of the distributed network", and "simply receives pushes that are related to me".
        dmitriid 8y ago
        What you're saying is: make all mobile nodes clients to centralised servers ;) As a result, it's much easier to maintain a single architecture than two different architectures with rapidly diminishing number of desktop nodes taking all the traffic.
        monocasa 8y ago
        ...no. It's totally fine to have a decentralized network with a subset of the nodes doing more work depending on what their users want. TOR works like that, PopcornTime did that, etc. Hell, the original Skype network did that to. Gnutella was pretty asymmetric as well. > rapidly diminishing number of desktop nodes Do you have any data on that? Or are you counting laptops here as mobile for some reason?
        8y ago

smackfu 8y ago

Slack did the same thing with the ScreenHero service they acquired and it had the same effect: much more lag and worse quality.