4 ms·

Ooh! Ooh! Does it have the new Conversation Ads feature? http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skype_advertising_update.html http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skyp

Ooh! Ooh! Does it have the new Conversation Ads feature? http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skype_advertising_update.html http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/06/skype_advertising_update.h... I, for one, cannot WAIT to see these new ads, which Microsoft describes as "content that could spark additional topics of conversation that are relevant to Skype users." Isn't that great? Ads are now "content." And the motivation isn't to make a bundle of money on ads, it's to "spark conversations." Add this to the craptastical user interface and built-in backdoor eavesdropping, and it's plain to see that Skype has a bright future ahead! http://memeburn.com/2011/07/microsoft-and-skype-set-to-allow-backdoor-eavesdropping/ http://memeburn.com/2011/07/microsoft-and-skype-set-to-allow...

bernalkc 14y ago
no ads in this client, on any screen, presumptuous one. next time look before you embarrass yourself.
- SnowLprd 14y ago
  To be fair, I wasn't presuming anything. While I applaud the release of the Linux version, I was merely trying to show that Microsoft's stewardship of Skype seems to be headed in a rather unsavory direction.
  - throwaway64 14y ago
    to be additionally fair, the Skype interface was heading in a downhill direction well before the Microsoft acquisition.
  - davidandgoliath 14y ago
    How are advertisements unsavory? Is this same opinion of yours applicable against google, for the ads on it's search engine? Just curious. I've never had anything against ads personally unless they're intrusive -- or that my data is being bought & sold to show them. Not that I trust $vendor to keep that data private, but showing me the latest advertisement for some movie coming out next week isn't going to ruin my experience. Youtube's advertisement implementation for example, I find intrusive & frustrating as it literally displays over top of the content and returns on every video you watch. Until skype starts strapping a pepsi logo to my partner-in-chat's face, I'm content. If it helps keep skype around longer, kudos. I enjoy using the app.
    - rhizome 14y ago
      Google doesn't portray its ads as content.
      - barista 14y ago
        right that's why they don't show right above where the actual content of search results is displayed....oh wait...
        rhizome 14y ago
        I think your definition of "content" is too expansive in this context. Just because it's on the page doesn't mean it's content. Skype/MS saying that the presence of in-line ads will foster conversation is much different than sponsored or side results in Google SERPs.
        hetman 14y ago
        He meant the ads are in line with the content. The fact that it's an ad is certainly highlighted but it is intentionally subtle.
        rhizome 14y ago
        They aren't interspersed except at the page level. It's not the same thing.
        hetman 14y ago
        I don't know how Google show up for you, but when I do a search for a term such as "cars" I get ads that appear very similar to the actual search results at the beginning and end of the same list. In fact all the high contrast features are identical between the two, and it is only the lower contrast features that distinguish the ads from the results.
    - SnowLprd 14y ago
- beedogs 14y ago
  Wow. Do you post dickish replies much? You seem good at it.
itsboring 14y ago
I'm inclined to agree with your points, I always preferred the linux client over the windows one, but skype just gets on my nerves recently. My team has switched to mumble for meetings and stuff and we find it immeasurably better. Plus, channels are a much better method for general collaboration than the outdated concept of conference calls.
- etherealG 14y ago
  what do you use for a mumble server? I would happily choose this if there were an easy to use free version like skype.
  - nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
    Isn't the "murmur" server that comes from Mumble free to use?
  - itsboring 14y ago
    We use the murmur server on a linode, so it's totally free (if you have a linux server already). Just "apt-get install mumble-server" on ubuntu server. Still have to use skype for external calls and stuff, but for internal comms we love it so far.
  - Lammy 14y ago
    I use µMurmur from the OpenWRT project.
  - devicenull 14y ago
    I know it's not free, but you can easily find fully managed mumble hosting for $4 month (for up to 10 people connected at a time). It may not be completely free, but it's pretty damn close.
- ZeroGravitas 14y ago
  And mumble should get even better in a future update when it switches to Opus which combines their current CELT codec with, relevantly, Skype's SILK for better low-bitrate speech encoding.
lwhi 14y ago
Just tried it .. works pretty flawlessly for me, very impressed. There aren't any adverts so far ..
Jabbles 14y ago
How else could they possibly justify spending $8billion on it?
- brudgers 14y ago
  Skype has been a disruptive technology within the phone industry. Combined with Microsoft's mobile operating system and perhaps a hardware partner such as Nokia, it is quite possible that we may say mobile "phones" that completely bypass the current established carriers. To put it another way, how often are most people away from a WiFi network when they make a call? Or more importantly, when they access a data stream with their device? $8 billion for Microsoft is not a significant amount when it comes to purchasing growth, and the article isn't about Facetime for Linux.
  - jsnell 14y ago
    At least I will much more often be with a phone with no WiFi access than within WiFi access with no computing device except a phone. And if I have something other than a phone available, I'm really not going to use Skype on the phone. The old Linux version of Skype wasn't the most brilliant piece of software ever, but even it is so far ahead of the phone versions of Skype that it's not even funny. Does Skype run decently on any phone platform? I know the Android version will drain the battery dry faster than playing a 3D game and will not reliably receive calls even when running in the foreground. And it's my understanding that the WP7 version requires so much memory it doesn't even run on all WP7 phones, and will not run at all in the background making it totally useless. At this point the idea that Skype + mobile would be some kind of a killer combination worth billions seems like a total pipe-dream. The only real-world effect it has is to kill Nokia faster due to mobile operators hating Skype, and not wanting to be aligned with MS.
    - brudgers 14y ago
      Having at one time worked in a Fortune 100 company, people take a lot of calls on their mobile phone while sitting at their desk. Those plan minutes add up. Like most Microsoft products, the big fish is enterprise, not consumers. The 3D game comparison is somewhat misleading. As an aside, the current version of Windows Phone was developed prior to the acquisition of Skype. Closer integration in future versions would not be unexpected.
wendsday 14y ago
Feel the awesomeness. Mi-cro-soft. Oh yeah. Linux used to be "cancer" but now it's OK. Check out "Azure". You want VM's? Linux VM's? Sure, we got that. Whatever you want, we got it. Trust us, we know what we're doing. We're the good guys. Just tell us what you want. Where do you want to go today? You want Skype? No problem. We have made Skype better. Just for you!

bernalkc 14y ago

no ads in this client, on any screen, presumptuous one. next time look before you embarrass yourself.

SnowLprd 14y ago
To be fair, I wasn't presuming anything. While I applaud the release of the Linux version, I was merely trying to show that Microsoft's stewardship of Skype seems to be headed in a rather unsavory direction.
- throwaway64 14y ago
  to be additionally fair, the Skype interface was heading in a downhill direction well before the Microsoft acquisition.
- davidandgoliath 14y ago
  How are advertisements unsavory? Is this same opinion of yours applicable against google, for the ads on it's search engine? Just curious. I've never had anything against ads personally unless they're intrusive -- or that my data is being bought & sold to show them. Not that I trust $vendor to keep that data private, but showing me the latest advertisement for some movie coming out next week isn't going to ruin my experience. Youtube's advertisement implementation for example, I find intrusive & frustrating as it literally displays over top of the content and returns on every video you watch. Until skype starts strapping a pepsi logo to my partner-in-chat's face, I'm content. If it helps keep skype around longer, kudos. I enjoy using the app.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    Google doesn't portray its ads as content.
    - barista 14y ago
      right that's why they don't show right above where the actual content of search results is displayed....oh wait...
      - rhizome 14y ago
        I think your definition of "content" is too expansive in this context. Just because it's on the page doesn't mean it's content. Skype/MS saying that the presence of in-line ads will foster conversation is much different than sponsored or side results in Google SERPs.
        hetman 14y ago
        He meant the ads are in line with the content. The fact that it's an ad is certainly highlighted but it is intentionally subtle.
        rhizome 14y ago
        They aren't interspersed except at the page level. It's not the same thing.
        hetman 14y ago
        I don't know how Google show up for you, but when I do a search for a term such as "cars" I get ads that appear very similar to the actual search results at the beginning and end of the same list. In fact all the high contrast features are identical between the two, and it is only the lower contrast features that distinguish the ads from the results.
  - SnowLprd 14y ago
beedogs 14y ago
Wow. Do you post dickish replies much? You seem good at it.

itsboring 14y ago

I'm inclined to agree with your points, I always preferred the linux client over the windows one, but skype just gets on my nerves recently. My team has switched to mumble for meetings and stuff and we find it immeasurably better. Plus, channels are a much better method for general collaboration than the outdated concept of conference calls.

etherealG 14y ago
what do you use for a mumble server? I would happily choose this if there were an easy to use free version like skype.
- nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
  Isn't the "murmur" server that comes from Mumble free to use?
- itsboring 14y ago
  We use the murmur server on a linode, so it's totally free (if you have a linux server already). Just "apt-get install mumble-server" on ubuntu server. Still have to use skype for external calls and stuff, but for internal comms we love it so far.
- Lammy 14y ago
  I use µMurmur from the OpenWRT project.
- devicenull 14y ago
  I know it's not free, but you can easily find fully managed mumble hosting for $4 month (for up to 10 people connected at a time). It may not be completely free, but it's pretty damn close.
ZeroGravitas 14y ago
And mumble should get even better in a future update when it switches to Opus which combines their current CELT codec with, relevantly, Skype's SILK for better low-bitrate speech encoding.

lwhi 14y ago

Just tried it .. works pretty flawlessly for me, very impressed. There aren't any adverts so far ..

Jabbles 14y ago

How else could they possibly justify spending $8billion on it?

brudgers 14y ago
Skype has been a disruptive technology within the phone industry. Combined with Microsoft's mobile operating system and perhaps a hardware partner such as Nokia, it is quite possible that we may say mobile "phones" that completely bypass the current established carriers. To put it another way, how often are most people away from a WiFi network when they make a call? Or more importantly, when they access a data stream with their device? $8 billion for Microsoft is not a significant amount when it comes to purchasing growth, and the article isn't about Facetime for Linux.
- jsnell 14y ago
  At least I will much more often be with a phone with no WiFi access than within WiFi access with no computing device except a phone. And if I have something other than a phone available, I'm really not going to use Skype on the phone. The old Linux version of Skype wasn't the most brilliant piece of software ever, but even it is so far ahead of the phone versions of Skype that it's not even funny. Does Skype run decently on any phone platform? I know the Android version will drain the battery dry faster than playing a 3D game and will not reliably receive calls even when running in the foreground. And it's my understanding that the WP7 version requires so much memory it doesn't even run on all WP7 phones, and will not run at all in the background making it totally useless. At this point the idea that Skype + mobile would be some kind of a killer combination worth billions seems like a total pipe-dream. The only real-world effect it has is to kill Nokia faster due to mobile operators hating Skype, and not wanting to be aligned with MS.
  - brudgers 14y ago
    Having at one time worked in a Fortune 100 company, people take a lot of calls on their mobile phone while sitting at their desk. Those plan minutes add up. Like most Microsoft products, the big fish is enterprise, not consumers. The 3D game comparison is somewhat misleading. As an aside, the current version of Windows Phone was developed prior to the acquisition of Skype. Closer integration in future versions would not be unexpected.

wendsday 14y ago

Feel the awesomeness. Mi-cro-soft. Oh yeah. Linux used to be "cancer" but now it's OK. Check out "Azure". You want VM's? Linux VM's? Sure, we got that. Whatever you want, we got it. Trust us, we know what we're doing. We're the good guys. Just tell us what you want. Where do you want to go today? You want Skype? No problem. We have made Skype better. Just for you!