14 ms·

Skype group video calling becomes free

362 points by Siyfion 12y ago

JetSpiegel 12y ago
I like the smell of competition by the morning.
devx 12y ago
I hope TextSecure/Whisper will get to have video-calling, too, soon. People need to stop using insecure platforms like Skype that make mass spying so easy.
- dublinben 12y ago
  Video calling in Jitsi works fantastically right now. There's little excuse for people still using proprietary video conferencing platforms.
  - wusatiuk 12y ago
    wow, cool. i´ll give it a try to connect our offices... looks really great!
  - seven 12y ago
    I love Jitsi. Since the latest version even the remote desktop sharing on my ubuntu systems is working. It is funny how you say 'right now'. Jitsi tends to be not that stable from time to time.. so I have the same feeling. :) Advice: Use IPv6. If either party can not get a native connection look for a free tunnel provider. Start jitsi with -6 as parameter and it will prioritise v6 connections. This fixed all kinds of 'nat-nat-nat' setups that some friends are forced into. (Make sure the implications of having a public address are understood.) Another wonderful thing about jitsi is the availability for multiple platforms and crypto support for otr or zrtp. There is also a video bridge is bandwidth is a concern on video calls. Does anybody know an skype like echo system for sip or xmpp? Perhaps even with crypto and video support?
  - npizzolato 12y ago
    The fact that you think people are making excuses to use proprietary video conferencing platforms (or other communication platforms) is why things like TextSecure and Jitsi will likely never take off. You're really just making excuses for the TextSecure and Jitsi teams. For the most part, no one cares whether they're using something that is open source or proprietary. Most people don't event care much about abstract concepts like "security" or "encryption" when it comes at the cost of their real goal -- communicating with family and friends. Once some secure platform is as easy to use[0] and as prevalent[1] as Skype or Google Hangouts, maybe people will start using them. [0] A sibling post suggests setting up Jitsi with IPv6 and starting the program with the -6 parameter to fix some connection issues. I would hope it's clear why needing to use certain command line parameters and understanding "the implications of having a public address" to use a chat program makes it a non-starter for a vast amount of people. [1] As it turns out, advertising and marketing matter! You can't have a popular chat platform if no one knows you exist!
    - hackuser 12y ago
      > For the most part, no one cares whether they're using something that is open source or proprietary. Most people don't event care much about abstract concepts like "security" or "encryption" You say it as if it's universal and intractable. Awareness has jumped since Snowden's revelations began, AFAICT, and I've read several places that security-oriented services have seen a very large jump in demand.
- secfirstmd 12y ago
  Agreed!
izzydata 12y ago
I feel like this was the only thing on the premium feature list that even mattered. Does skype even generate revenue?
- asuffield 12y ago
  Skype has only one purpose for Microsoft: to sell Lync.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  I purchase Skype credit and use it when I need to call companies in other countries. It's very inexpensive. I've also used their feature that let's you attach a phone number to your Skype account before when travelling.
- ktavera 12y ago
  Maybe group screen sharing is still limited to just premium subscribers?
  - carlob 12y ago
    I wonder about this too…
  - Heliosmaster 12y ago
    Nope, they removed the premium option altogether.
- CrazedGeek 12y ago
  As an extra feature for Microsoft, I'd bet so. I know plenty of people who listed Skype support as one of the big reasons they got the Xbox One. (Skype on the One is part of Live Gold, which is about $60/year)
- hashmil 12y ago
  though i don't have a premium subscription, i buy skype credit to call my parents in south asia, them not being that tech savvy, i have to call to their landlines/mobiles). for me it's a seamless process, as i can call directly from my computer, or from the app on my mobile if i'm out.
atonse 12y ago
Funny - because just last week I setup new dummy google plus accounts for various family members in Europe and India so we could use hangouts without polluting our regular gmail accounts with Google+ nonsense. We won't need that anymore - We were perfectly happy with Skype, but missed group video.
- spankalee 12y ago
  I work for Google, so I'm obviously biased here, though I don't always like everything we do around our sites and integration. But, I'm genuinely curious, what nonsense does Google+ pollute your regular Google account with? I believe that you get a profile page, but you can leave it entirely blank.
  - webwanderings 12y ago
    I add to this "concern". The reason I would not use G+ Hangout (although it may be a fine product, based on the feedback I have seen) is because I do not trust Google for all kinds of deep integration in multiple products. I am fine using Skype with one particular ID because I am not using that ID on any other system. And that is how I prefer to use Internet everywhere, which I am sure many do as well. I stopped using YouTube for commenting because of this reason exactly.
  - gregcohn 12y ago
    If you're seriously asking, I'm happy to answer my two cents, but i'm very concerned that you don't have a sense for the reasons people would want to use G+ gated products without being part of G+. As someone who has a personal G+ account and doesn't mind, and who runs a company that pays Google for apps for my domain on which we manage our email, I still had to register for G+ to be able to use the hangouts product in invitations and threads I'm having with my work email. Now that I've done so (without adding a profile photo or anything else), i'm getting tons of people adding me to circles, etc., which I don't want. It's essentially forcing a social-connection construct on a relationship with an empty profile that I don't want to create or have to maintain.
    - 12y ago
gum_ina_package 12y ago
Finally! I don't know anyone who likes G+ over Skype, but we all use it for the group video features.
- shawabawa3 12y ago
  funny, because I don't know anyone who likes skype over G+
  - sremani 12y ago
    I prefer Skype over Google Video in that I can pick my call on my PC, laptop, phone or Xbox One. Imagine having a group call on Xbox One - TV, that would be a sweet conversation and I for one really appreciate this new feature.
    - kyrra 12y ago
      Google Hangouts work on PCs, laptops, and phones. When I get a hangout call, it rings on all devices where I'm currently logged into hangouts. TV is the only place Xbox wins today. Though google does have some TV toys right now (Google TV and Chromecast). They could probably look into adding a webcam to that with hangouts.
      - jonknee 12y ago
        They have a TV solution for conference rooms, but it's "enterprisey" in that it's not cheap and comes with an annual fee. https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/solutions/for-meetings.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/solutions/for...
    - nobotty 12y ago
      hail corporate
      - apu 12y ago
        This kind of comment is not appreciated here.
Lockyy 12y ago
I wonder if this includes group screen share That and the group video are the only two reasons any of the people I know have Skype premium.
- sinaa 12y ago
  It does, according to the replies here by Skype http://blogs.skype.com/2014/04/28/skype-loves-bringing-groups-together-with-free-group-video-calling/ http://blogs.skype.com/2014/04/28/skype-loves-bringing-group...
tshadwell 12y ago
But will they update Skype for Linux to have group video at all?
- fixedd 12y ago
  It's only been 4 years, give them time.
wusatiuk 12y ago
cool. anybody using conference call equipment for skype? We have tried some logitech quipment to connect 2 offices (http://www.logitech.com/de-de/product/tvcam-hd http://www.logitech.com/de-de/product/tvcam-hd) which didn´t work out very well. any recommendations?
- dave_sullivan 12y ago
  Why not have everyone call in from their own machine? This way, it normalizes the communication bandwidth between everyone, no one feels like it's harder to be heard. A big failing of many remote teams I've seen is when they try to "strap on" a remote team. But if you can minimize the feeling of "real office vs virtual office" it works a lot better.
  - wusatiuk 12y ago
    generally a good idea but we need some kind of conference system, if there is a meeting at office #1 with e.g. four people, to connect the one or another colleague form office #2.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
badman_ting 12y ago
Nice! Paying a premium for this was a bummer, but it does still work better than all of Skype's competitors, in my opinion. The primary problem of Hangouts and whatever else is out there is audio echo. I don't know if that problem is simply unsolvable in Flash or what, but Skype has handled it much better. All you need is one person on your Hangout call who doesn't mute their mic and the experience is a disaster, unfortunately.
- marquis 12y ago
  >audio echo That's a difference in the audio algorithms used. Skype uses SILK while I believe that Google Hangouts uses Opus. SILK and Opus are closely related however. I would assume that Skype didn't allow all their fancy echo-cancellation tweaks to be open-sourced so it's a little better in the Skype implementation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SILK#Opus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SILK#Opus
G711 12y ago
Oh, now the NSA wants your group sex tapes too?
tzakrajs 12y ago
Skype group video calling becomes free (again)
Loque 12y ago
That title/URL is bugging me, I was thinking in a more cynical world it may read something like: "skype-is-concerned-of-competition-and-matches-features" About the spying, I feel sorry for any poor sucker watching my life! :¬D All that effort for such little excitement.
- valevk 12y ago
  I am pretty sure, if I had access to your skype chat/camera I would find enough information to extort you. There is one moment, or one line of text or one picture that you don't want to escape your mind.
  - Loque 12y ago
    Edit: Meh, pointless reply is pointless, I'll just agree, it's easier. My attempts at humouring others escapes me once again... a well.
good-citizen 12y ago
This is awesome! Been wanting this for years but never wanted to pay for it because there are so many free options.
yawz 12y ago
Finally! I've used many video conferencing solutions but I have the impression that Skype is going to be the most convenient (largely because we're already using Skype as a team). Sqwiggle[0] is pretty neat as well (Edit: I had to mention that, AFAIK Sqwiggle doesn't support group video conferencing). [0] https://www.sqwiggle.com/ https://www.sqwiggle.com/
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  I like Sococo for teams (I work at Sococo). No scheduling conferences (talk/view any time they're available); integrated video/chat/doc sharing; can tell who's talking to whom/who's not busy/who has their door shut.
  - yawz 12y ago
    Thanks for the reference. I'll definitely check it out. That's what I like with Sqwiggle (or similar tools). It's the ease of connecting with a team member using video. (I'm just noticing something: I forgot to mention that AFAIK Sqwiggle doesn't support group conferencing.). Your connection/team member is a click away and you know if they're at their desk thanks to the snapshots.
    - hiharryhere 12y ago
      With sqwiggle you can group conference a bunch of people by clicking everyone. You all get joined. Pretty neat. Unfortunately the way it reacts to changes in bandwidth isn't up to hangouts or skype. We've got one team member working out in the sticks and it just drops out when his bandwidth gets choked. Hangouts on the other hand just falls back gracefully to audio only. If we all had better connections sqwiggle would be more of a contender.
      - tommoor 12y ago
        Thanks guys! We're working hard on improving Sqwiggle's quality on low bandwidth / multiparty calls :-D
- 12y ago
brador 12y ago
What's the best open source alternative to Skype?
- leorocky 12y ago
  Skype is a service, not just a desktop client. It's like asking what the best open source alternative to Google search or Google maps might be.
  - e1ven 12y ago
    Keep in mind, for most of Skype's history, the application ran peer-to-peer.. You could replicate that functionality with another app.
  - Istof 12y ago
    Can you point me to Skype's API? I always thought that Skype was a closed protocol and that they don't want any other client applications using their service...
    - rlu 12y ago
      Messenger probably didn't want any other clients using their service, but that didn't stop the Pidgins and Trillians of the world... :)
      - Istof 12y ago
        Very true but Skype appears to present a much bigger problem for reverse engineering (I have only seen someone reverse engineer the texting part of Skype and not the video)
- gnopgnip 12y ago
  Jitsi
- m6t3 12y ago
  Take a look at Ekiga (http://www.ekiga.org/ http://www.ekiga.org/).
rdl 12y ago
I don't understand why Microsoft took so long to do this. If they had been faster after Google Hangouts, it never would have gained a beachhead. Xbox One could easily find a secondary market as a conference room device; a Microsoft version of Airplay and Chromecast (ideally open to Mac and general web as well) would take more engineering, but would have been awesome too.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- andrewfong 12y ago
  > If they had been faster after Google Hangouts, it never would have gained a beachhead. That's why Microsoft took so long to do this. They had little incentive to do so until others did, and even when the writing on the wall was clear, they still faced the innovator's dilemma.
  - rdl 12y ago
    Innovator's dilemma matters if you're actually making money from your current product. Skype isn't in any way material to Microsoft's revenues, but is an important mindshare property (and could tie in to other Microsoft tools; integration on WP and Windows desktops, etc.)
    - jackowayed 12y ago
      I'm not sure how important of a mindshare property it is. I would guess most users don't even realize that Microsoft owns Skype.
      - tbassetto 12y ago
        I beg to differ. Nowadays Skype is always inquiring people to convert their account to a Microsoft Account! The "Metro"/"Modern" version of Skype for Windows 8 even requires a Microsoft account.
subdane 12y ago
Another neat fact - announced in a Youtube video! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4C1DGzHiis&list=PLaLRbjVhH6kJOvE3V28UbfkuF_4xaA2MR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4C1DGzHiis&list=PLaLRbjVhH6...
- webwanderings 12y ago
  Strange, on their website, they "recommend" group talking with 5 people. On above YouTube video, they said, you "can" talk with 10 people.
  - aroch 12y ago
    I imagine 5 is the upper bounds in their testing for users on the low/mid-level speed tiers from ISPs (ie. what most consumers buy) for "acceptable" video quality.
exo762 12y ago
Skype, awesome communication tool, turned most expensive honeypot ever.
shmerl 12y ago
I hope open protocols will catch up already. XMPP/Jingle has user side multiplexing for a while (MUJI), but it requires decent bandwidth. It's a deferred XEP for some reason though. Also, most clients lack support for it. Server side multiplexing wasn't standardized for some reason, so XMPP servers didn't come up with anything common so far. Skype remains just another proprietary walled garden communication network which in addition can't be trusted. It should be avoided.
- AceJohnny2 12y ago
  How's XMPP mobile nowadays? OTR?
  - shmerl 12y ago
    Depends on the client. A major hole is Telepathy, which lacks end to end encryption support, so all mobile clients based on that (Sailfish one, Plasma Active one and etc.) are lacking it. Jitsi (which is in Java and WIP in alpha stage for Android) supports OTR and ZRTP. There are clients like Xabber which support just OTR on Android (none of them support Jingle and ZRTP). Not sure about the situation on other mobile OSes.
- rz2k 12y ago
  I think it is amazing how little strategy and disruption there seems to be in the industry. My dad is mostly retired, he rents out his office, but his secretary still comes into the office one afternoon a week. I didn't want to stress her out by asking her to learn new technology, but the phone was used only an hour or two a month. I ported the same number he'd had for a few decades to Google Voice, and attached an ObiHai box so that she can use a regular phone, rather than needing to understand why messages are in Google Voice but outgoing calls are placed using Google Chat, or use a special earpiece plugged into the computer. Anyway, over the two years that it worked it saved a couple thousand dollars that would have been spent to use the phone for about 30 hours. Since Google Voice will no longer be compatible with ObiHai devices this month (moving away from XMPP), I ported the number to Anveo, which is no longer free, but still only $40/year. Both Microsoft and Google should offer small businesses packaged services where you bring your own internet service, then buy telephone plus email using your own domain name from them for a flat fee. Something like $200-400/year for 1-3 users would find an enormous market. Afterwards, they could sell office suites, billing/accounting software, scheduling software as add-ons. Right now it is needlessly complicated for people who have minimal communication needs, and don't care about technology, to avoid huge costs. It's kind of absurd to consider how little service someone like a barber or a shop owner gets after paying fees that make up a significant part of their operating costs.
wxm 12y ago
It used to be free a few years ago too until it became 'premium' in early 2011. [1] Difference is that now Skype features more ads than in 2011, even if you have multiple monthly subscriptions (A no-ad version is now a considerable perk of the premium version). [1] - http://www.macworld.com/article/1157435/skype5.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1157435/skype5.html
trustfundbaby 12y ago
Just happy that screensharing is free again ... I was forced to go create a Google+ hangout account just to get access to this functionality. Glad I can just go ahead and delete that now.
jamra 12y ago
I use Skype everyday to communicate with family abroad. I have a camera mounted on my television. The quality of Skype is abysmal. Most of the time, you do not have HD video. When I switch over to using facetime, the video quality is amazing. I don't know what happened to Skype, but its quality is by far the worst available on the market.
- calbear81 12y ago
  Yeah, I don't know what the heck is wrong with Skype either. On video calls, the quality is lacking most of the time and even though we're both on fast broadband connections, the "call quality" is still a 3 out of 5 bars. Switch to Google Hangouts and everything works fine with a lot less connectivity issues.
  - innoying 12y ago
    The problem is Skype recently moved to a centralized infrastructure instead of a P2P which has caused terrible issues for pretty much everybody. Allegedly this was done to allow the NSA to snoop on conversations easier.
    - astrange 12y ago
      Allegedly according to whom? P2P infrastructure isn't realistic when most of your clients are on mobile. Skype used to drain your battery simply by logging in for an hour. Now it doesn't! Skype and G+ use the same codec families as well, so the differences would be in bandwidth allocation.
      - skeletonjelly 12y ago
        It wasn't P2P for everyone, they had "servers" in the P2P network called supernodes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol#Peer-to-peer_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol#Peer-to-peer_ar... The battery drain could be from anything. I'm not sure if they use GCM (Google Cloud Messaging) to reduce battery these days but without looking at the code I don't think you could say switching to a centralised server model fixed the battery issues.
huangc10 12y ago
this made my Monday
AxisOfEval 12y ago
Too little. Too late. My team and me moved from Skype to Hangouts and then to Fuze already. We're very happy with Fuze. More here: https://www.fuze.com/ https://www.fuze.com/
terrifixrex 12y ago
Finally! Google Hangouts had it since,like forever
skiltz 12y ago
In New Zealand I always come back to Skype. It just works, always seem to have issues with Google Hangouts and FaceTime.
paul_f 12y ago
I see another player that Skype is going after - WebEx. Most uses for WebEx are simple video chatting. Most times no one need the dozens of other features that WebEx offers in their bloated product. In true innovators dilemma fashion, I can see Skype now truly eating into WebEx's market from the bottom up.
dalanmiller 12y ago
Does anyone else refuse to use Skype because Microsoft was complicit with PRISM? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-collaboration-user-data http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-c...
- scrrr 12y ago
  Of course. They should suffer the loss of ALL their users if you ask me. If anyone here is still using Skype, I wonder what kind of community this is and what kind of future we are building..
gmjosack 12y ago
I'd written Skype off as malware after it continued to put a browser extension on my computer that parsed every single page I visited without my permission. Even after removing the plugin it would regularly disappear. This behavior is not okay.
- donniezazen 12y ago
  That's is a Windows thing. I think you could uninstall Skype plugin.
- Tagbert 12y ago
  If it is the plugin that I remember disabling, it reads the page looking for phone numbers and creates buttons to make skype calls. Wasn't anything I wanted so I disabled the plugin. no biggie.
felipesabino 12y ago
Good timing microsoft, specially now that we have this for free for an year already using google hangouts

362 points by Siyfion 12y ago

I like the smell of competition by the morning.

devx 12y ago

I hope TextSecure/Whisper will get to have video-calling, too, soon. People need to stop using insecure platforms like Skype that make mass spying so easy.

dublinben 12y ago
Video calling in Jitsi works fantastically right now. There's little excuse for people still using proprietary video conferencing platforms.
- wusatiuk 12y ago
  wow, cool. i´ll give it a try to connect our offices... looks really great!
- seven 12y ago
  I love Jitsi. Since the latest version even the remote desktop sharing on my ubuntu systems is working. It is funny how you say 'right now'. Jitsi tends to be not that stable from time to time.. so I have the same feeling. :) Advice: Use IPv6. If either party can not get a native connection look for a free tunnel provider. Start jitsi with -6 as parameter and it will prioritise v6 connections. This fixed all kinds of 'nat-nat-nat' setups that some friends are forced into. (Make sure the implications of having a public address are understood.) Another wonderful thing about jitsi is the availability for multiple platforms and crypto support for otr or zrtp. There is also a video bridge is bandwidth is a concern on video calls. Does anybody know an skype like echo system for sip or xmpp? Perhaps even with crypto and video support?
- npizzolato 12y ago
  The fact that you think people are making excuses to use proprietary video conferencing platforms (or other communication platforms) is why things like TextSecure and Jitsi will likely never take off. You're really just making excuses for the TextSecure and Jitsi teams. For the most part, no one cares whether they're using something that is open source or proprietary. Most people don't event care much about abstract concepts like "security" or "encryption" when it comes at the cost of their real goal -- communicating with family and friends. Once some secure platform is as easy to use[0] and as prevalent[1] as Skype or Google Hangouts, maybe people will start using them. [0] A sibling post suggests setting up Jitsi with IPv6 and starting the program with the -6 parameter to fix some connection issues. I would hope it's clear why needing to use certain command line parameters and understanding "the implications of having a public address" to use a chat program makes it a non-starter for a vast amount of people. [1] As it turns out, advertising and marketing matter! You can't have a popular chat platform if no one knows you exist!
  - hackuser 12y ago
    > For the most part, no one cares whether they're using something that is open source or proprietary. Most people don't event care much about abstract concepts like "security" or "encryption" You say it as if it's universal and intractable. Awareness has jumped since Snowden's revelations began, AFAICT, and I've read several places that security-oriented services have seen a very large jump in demand.
secfirstmd 12y ago
Agreed!

izzydata 12y ago

I feel like this was the only thing on the premium feature list that even mattered. Does skype even generate revenue?

asuffield 12y ago
Skype has only one purpose for Microsoft: to sell Lync.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
I purchase Skype credit and use it when I need to call companies in other countries. It's very inexpensive. I've also used their feature that let's you attach a phone number to your Skype account before when travelling.
ktavera 12y ago
Maybe group screen sharing is still limited to just premium subscribers?
- carlob 12y ago
  I wonder about this too…
- Heliosmaster 12y ago
  Nope, they removed the premium option altogether.
CrazedGeek 12y ago
As an extra feature for Microsoft, I'd bet so. I know plenty of people who listed Skype support as one of the big reasons they got the Xbox One. (Skype on the One is part of Live Gold, which is about $60/year)
hashmil 12y ago
though i don't have a premium subscription, i buy skype credit to call my parents in south asia, them not being that tech savvy, i have to call to their landlines/mobiles). for me it's a seamless process, as i can call directly from my computer, or from the app on my mobile if i'm out.

atonse 12y ago

Funny - because just last week I setup new dummy google plus accounts for various family members in Europe and India so we could use hangouts without polluting our regular gmail accounts with Google+ nonsense. We won't need that anymore - We were perfectly happy with Skype, but missed group video.

spankalee 12y ago
I work for Google, so I'm obviously biased here, though I don't always like everything we do around our sites and integration. But, I'm genuinely curious, what nonsense does Google+ pollute your regular Google account with? I believe that you get a profile page, but you can leave it entirely blank.
- webwanderings 12y ago
  I add to this "concern". The reason I would not use G+ Hangout (although it may be a fine product, based on the feedback I have seen) is because I do not trust Google for all kinds of deep integration in multiple products. I am fine using Skype with one particular ID because I am not using that ID on any other system. And that is how I prefer to use Internet everywhere, which I am sure many do as well. I stopped using YouTube for commenting because of this reason exactly.
- gregcohn 12y ago
  If you're seriously asking, I'm happy to answer my two cents, but i'm very concerned that you don't have a sense for the reasons people would want to use G+ gated products without being part of G+. As someone who has a personal G+ account and doesn't mind, and who runs a company that pays Google for apps for my domain on which we manage our email, I still had to register for G+ to be able to use the hangouts product in invitations and threads I'm having with my work email. Now that I've done so (without adding a profile photo or anything else), i'm getting tons of people adding me to circles, etc., which I don't want. It's essentially forcing a social-connection construct on a relationship with an empty profile that I don't want to create or have to maintain.
  - 12y ago

gum_ina_package 12y ago

Finally! I don't know anyone who likes G+ over Skype, but we all use it for the group video features.

shawabawa3 12y ago
funny, because I don't know anyone who likes skype over G+
- sremani 12y ago
  I prefer Skype over Google Video in that I can pick my call on my PC, laptop, phone or Xbox One. Imagine having a group call on Xbox One - TV, that would be a sweet conversation and I for one really appreciate this new feature.
  - kyrra 12y ago
    Google Hangouts work on PCs, laptops, and phones. When I get a hangout call, it rings on all devices where I'm currently logged into hangouts. TV is the only place Xbox wins today. Though google does have some TV toys right now (Google TV and Chromecast). They could probably look into adding a webcam to that with hangouts.
    - jonknee 12y ago
      They have a TV solution for conference rooms, but it's "enterprisey" in that it's not cheap and comes with an annual fee. https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/solutions/for-meetings.html https://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/business/solutions/for...
  - nobotty 12y ago
    hail corporate
    - apu 12y ago
      This kind of comment is not appreciated here.

Lockyy 12y ago

I wonder if this includes group screen share That and the group video are the only two reasons any of the people I know have Skype premium.

sinaa 12y ago
It does, according to the replies here by Skype http://blogs.skype.com/2014/04/28/skype-loves-bringing-groups-together-with-free-group-video-calling/ http://blogs.skype.com/2014/04/28/skype-loves-bringing-group...

tshadwell 12y ago

But will they update Skype for Linux to have group video at all?

fixedd 12y ago
It's only been 4 years, give them time.

wusatiuk 12y ago

cool. anybody using conference call equipment for skype? We have tried some logitech quipment to connect 2 offices (http://www.logitech.com/de-de/product/tvcam-hd http://www.logitech.com/de-de/product/tvcam-hd) which didn´t work out very well. any recommendations?

dave_sullivan 12y ago
Why not have everyone call in from their own machine? This way, it normalizes the communication bandwidth between everyone, no one feels like it's harder to be heard. A big failing of many remote teams I've seen is when they try to "strap on" a remote team. But if you can minimize the feeling of "real office vs virtual office" it works a lot better.
- wusatiuk 12y ago
  generally a good idea but we need some kind of conference system, if there is a meeting at office #1 with e.g. four people, to connect the one or another colleague form office #2.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

badman_ting 12y ago

Nice! Paying a premium for this was a bummer, but it does still work better than all of Skype's competitors, in my opinion. The primary problem of Hangouts and whatever else is out there is audio echo. I don't know if that problem is simply unsolvable in Flash or what, but Skype has handled it much better. All you need is one person on your Hangout call who doesn't mute their mic and the experience is a disaster, unfortunately.

marquis 12y ago
>audio echo That's a difference in the audio algorithms used. Skype uses SILK while I believe that Google Hangouts uses Opus. SILK and Opus are closely related however. I would assume that Skype didn't allow all their fancy echo-cancellation tweaks to be open-sourced so it's a little better in the Skype implementation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SILK#Opus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SILK#Opus

G711 12y ago

Oh, now the NSA wants your group sex tapes too?

tzakrajs 12y ago

Skype group video calling becomes free (again)

Loque 12y ago

That title/URL is bugging me, I was thinking in a more cynical world it may read something like: "skype-is-concerned-of-competition-and-matches-features" About the spying, I feel sorry for any poor sucker watching my life! :¬D All that effort for such little excitement.

valevk 12y ago
I am pretty sure, if I had access to your skype chat/camera I would find enough information to extort you. There is one moment, or one line of text or one picture that you don't want to escape your mind.
- Loque 12y ago
  Edit: Meh, pointless reply is pointless, I'll just agree, it's easier. My attempts at humouring others escapes me once again... a well.

good-citizen 12y ago

This is awesome! Been wanting this for years but never wanted to pay for it because there are so many free options.

yawz 12y ago

Finally! I've used many video conferencing solutions but I have the impression that Skype is going to be the most convenient (largely because we're already using Skype as a team). Sqwiggle[0] is pretty neat as well (Edit: I had to mention that, AFAIK Sqwiggle doesn't support group video conferencing). [0] https://www.sqwiggle.com/ https://www.sqwiggle.com/

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
I like Sococo for teams (I work at Sococo). No scheduling conferences (talk/view any time they're available); integrated video/chat/doc sharing; can tell who's talking to whom/who's not busy/who has their door shut.
- yawz 12y ago
  Thanks for the reference. I'll definitely check it out. That's what I like with Sqwiggle (or similar tools). It's the ease of connecting with a team member using video. (I'm just noticing something: I forgot to mention that AFAIK Sqwiggle doesn't support group conferencing.). Your connection/team member is a click away and you know if they're at their desk thanks to the snapshots.
  - hiharryhere 12y ago
    With sqwiggle you can group conference a bunch of people by clicking everyone. You all get joined. Pretty neat. Unfortunately the way it reacts to changes in bandwidth isn't up to hangouts or skype. We've got one team member working out in the sticks and it just drops out when his bandwidth gets choked. Hangouts on the other hand just falls back gracefully to audio only. If we all had better connections sqwiggle would be more of a contender.
    - tommoor 12y ago
      Thanks guys! We're working hard on improving Sqwiggle's quality on low bandwidth / multiparty calls :-D
12y ago

brador 12y ago

What's the best open source alternative to Skype?

leorocky 12y ago
Skype is a service, not just a desktop client. It's like asking what the best open source alternative to Google search or Google maps might be.
- e1ven 12y ago
  Keep in mind, for most of Skype's history, the application ran peer-to-peer.. You could replicate that functionality with another app.
- Istof 12y ago
  Can you point me to Skype's API? I always thought that Skype was a closed protocol and that they don't want any other client applications using their service...
  - rlu 12y ago
    Messenger probably didn't want any other clients using their service, but that didn't stop the Pidgins and Trillians of the world... :)
    - Istof 12y ago
      Very true but Skype appears to present a much bigger problem for reverse engineering (I have only seen someone reverse engineer the texting part of Skype and not the video)
gnopgnip 12y ago
Jitsi
m6t3 12y ago
Take a look at Ekiga (http://www.ekiga.org/ http://www.ekiga.org/).

rdl 12y ago

I don't understand why Microsoft took so long to do this. If they had been faster after Google Hangouts, it never would have gained a beachhead. Xbox One could easily find a secondary market as a conference room device; a Microsoft version of Airplay and Chromecast (ideally open to Mac and general web as well) would take more engineering, but would have been awesome too.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
andrewfong 12y ago
> If they had been faster after Google Hangouts, it never would have gained a beachhead. That's why Microsoft took so long to do this. They had little incentive to do so until others did, and even when the writing on the wall was clear, they still faced the innovator's dilemma.
- rdl 12y ago
  Innovator's dilemma matters if you're actually making money from your current product. Skype isn't in any way material to Microsoft's revenues, but is an important mindshare property (and could tie in to other Microsoft tools; integration on WP and Windows desktops, etc.)
  - jackowayed 12y ago
    I'm not sure how important of a mindshare property it is. I would guess most users don't even realize that Microsoft owns Skype.
    - tbassetto 12y ago
      I beg to differ. Nowadays Skype is always inquiring people to convert their account to a Microsoft Account! The "Metro"/"Modern" version of Skype for Windows 8 even requires a Microsoft account.

subdane 12y ago

Another neat fact - announced in a Youtube video! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4C1DGzHiis&list=PLaLRbjVhH6kJOvE3V28UbfkuF_4xaA2MR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4C1DGzHiis&list=PLaLRbjVhH6...

webwanderings 12y ago
Strange, on their website, they "recommend" group talking with 5 people. On above YouTube video, they said, you "can" talk with 10 people.
- aroch 12y ago
  I imagine 5 is the upper bounds in their testing for users on the low/mid-level speed tiers from ISPs (ie. what most consumers buy) for "acceptable" video quality.

exo762 12y ago

Skype, awesome communication tool, turned most expensive honeypot ever.

shmerl 12y ago

I hope open protocols will catch up already. XMPP/Jingle has user side multiplexing for a while (MUJI), but it requires decent bandwidth. It's a deferred XEP for some reason though. Also, most clients lack support for it. Server side multiplexing wasn't standardized for some reason, so XMPP servers didn't come up with anything common so far. Skype remains just another proprietary walled garden communication network which in addition can't be trusted. It should be avoided.

AceJohnny2 12y ago
How's XMPP mobile nowadays? OTR?
- shmerl 12y ago
  Depends on the client. A major hole is Telepathy, which lacks end to end encryption support, so all mobile clients based on that (Sailfish one, Plasma Active one and etc.) are lacking it. Jitsi (which is in Java and WIP in alpha stage for Android) supports OTR and ZRTP. There are clients like Xabber which support just OTR on Android (none of them support Jingle and ZRTP). Not sure about the situation on other mobile OSes.
rz2k 12y ago
I think it is amazing how little strategy and disruption there seems to be in the industry. My dad is mostly retired, he rents out his office, but his secretary still comes into the office one afternoon a week. I didn't want to stress her out by asking her to learn new technology, but the phone was used only an hour or two a month. I ported the same number he'd had for a few decades to Google Voice, and attached an ObiHai box so that she can use a regular phone, rather than needing to understand why messages are in Google Voice but outgoing calls are placed using Google Chat, or use a special earpiece plugged into the computer. Anyway, over the two years that it worked it saved a couple thousand dollars that would have been spent to use the phone for about 30 hours. Since Google Voice will no longer be compatible with ObiHai devices this month (moving away from XMPP), I ported the number to Anveo, which is no longer free, but still only $40/year. Both Microsoft and Google should offer small businesses packaged services where you bring your own internet service, then buy telephone plus email using your own domain name from them for a flat fee. Something like $200-400/year for 1-3 users would find an enormous market. Afterwards, they could sell office suites, billing/accounting software, scheduling software as add-ons. Right now it is needlessly complicated for people who have minimal communication needs, and don't care about technology, to avoid huge costs. It's kind of absurd to consider how little service someone like a barber or a shop owner gets after paying fees that make up a significant part of their operating costs.

wxm 12y ago

It used to be free a few years ago too until it became 'premium' in early 2011. [1] Difference is that now Skype features more ads than in 2011, even if you have multiple monthly subscriptions (A no-ad version is now a considerable perk of the premium version). [1] - http://www.macworld.com/article/1157435/skype5.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1157435/skype5.html

trustfundbaby 12y ago

Just happy that screensharing is free again ... I was forced to go create a Google+ hangout account just to get access to this functionality. Glad I can just go ahead and delete that now.

jamra 12y ago

I use Skype everyday to communicate with family abroad. I have a camera mounted on my television. The quality of Skype is abysmal. Most of the time, you do not have HD video. When I switch over to using facetime, the video quality is amazing. I don't know what happened to Skype, but its quality is by far the worst available on the market.

calbear81 12y ago
Yeah, I don't know what the heck is wrong with Skype either. On video calls, the quality is lacking most of the time and even though we're both on fast broadband connections, the "call quality" is still a 3 out of 5 bars. Switch to Google Hangouts and everything works fine with a lot less connectivity issues.
- innoying 12y ago
  The problem is Skype recently moved to a centralized infrastructure instead of a P2P which has caused terrible issues for pretty much everybody. Allegedly this was done to allow the NSA to snoop on conversations easier.
  - astrange 12y ago
    Allegedly according to whom? P2P infrastructure isn't realistic when most of your clients are on mobile. Skype used to drain your battery simply by logging in for an hour. Now it doesn't! Skype and G+ use the same codec families as well, so the differences would be in bandwidth allocation.
    - skeletonjelly 12y ago
      It wasn't P2P for everyone, they had "servers" in the P2P network called supernodes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol#Peer-to-peer_architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype_protocol#Peer-to-peer_ar... The battery drain could be from anything. I'm not sure if they use GCM (Google Cloud Messaging) to reduce battery these days but without looking at the code I don't think you could say switching to a centralised server model fixed the battery issues.

huangc10 12y ago

this made my Monday

AxisOfEval 12y ago

Too little. Too late. My team and me moved from Skype to Hangouts and then to Fuze already. We're very happy with Fuze. More here: https://www.fuze.com/ https://www.fuze.com/

terrifixrex 12y ago

Finally! Google Hangouts had it since,like forever

skiltz 12y ago

In New Zealand I always come back to Skype. It just works, always seem to have issues with Google Hangouts and FaceTime.

paul_f 12y ago

I see another player that Skype is going after - WebEx. Most uses for WebEx are simple video chatting. Most times no one need the dozens of other features that WebEx offers in their bloated product. In true innovators dilemma fashion, I can see Skype now truly eating into WebEx's market from the bottom up.

dalanmiller 12y ago

Does anyone else refuse to use Skype because Microsoft was complicit with PRISM? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-collaboration-user-data http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-c...

scrrr 12y ago
Of course. They should suffer the loss of ALL their users if you ask me. If anyone here is still using Skype, I wonder what kind of community this is and what kind of future we are building..

gmjosack 12y ago

I'd written Skype off as malware after it continued to put a browser extension on my computer that parsed every single page I visited without my permission. Even after removing the plugin it would regularly disappear. This behavior is not okay.

donniezazen 12y ago
That's is a Windows thing. I think you could uninstall Skype plugin.
Tagbert 12y ago
If it is the plugin that I remember disabling, it reads the page looking for phone numbers and creates buttons to make skype calls. Wasn't anything I wanted so I disabled the plugin. no biggie.

felipesabino 12y ago

Good timing microsoft, specially now that we have this for free for an year already using google hangouts