4 ms·
They undoubtedly did a bad job, but I think that Skype has a lot going against it from external factors anyway. Everyone I know is using FaceTime or Facebook M
by KyeRussell 8y ago
They undoubtedly did a bad job, but I think that Skype has a lot going against it from external factors anyway.
Everyone I know is using FaceTime or Facebook Messenger. The only time I hear Skype anymore is people using it for podcasts. Obvious anecdata but it seems reasonable that services with better device integration (FaceTime) or social graph access (Facebook) would do better in the long run.
- sandov 8y agoOr google hangouts. It's skype but in the web and with an interface that actually works.
- discordance 8y agoMinus a few gigs of ram
- rapind 8y agoHangouts is a great example of another horrible UI. The whole tie in to Chrome made it unusable for anyone non technical (where did it go? What did you want me to click? I am in the call, but you're not there... oh you're in another call? How do you hangup? I don't see the window anymore, etc.) A standalone app would fix this, but there seems to be some strange internal agenda tying it to Chrome... Chromebooks I guess?
- Rjevski 8y agoDisagreed. Skype used to be mainstream. It was essentially a cross platform iMessage & FaceTime, almost ahead of its time. It was also efficient in terms of network usage, being peer-to-peer for the most part. Had it continued to be usable, it would still be mainstream and might have the place of WhatsApp today. Instead, we now have this garbage Snapchat-like UI, a server-based model that doesn't even work (it was supposed to "fix" the P2P model, but for me it's been way worse than P2P which always worked), and a shitty Electron client that melts your battery and looks awful (they killed a gorgeous - especially on Mac - native client to replace it with this shit).
- flud 8y agoYup, all these came after Skype started sucking, most probably because of it.