skype

[Tim]

Allegedly, on or about 18 January 2016, jd1008 sent:
> So, I am wondering why is the skype implementation proprietary?
> Since it is the physical infrastructure (the communications equipment
> and accounts database computers ...etc) that is (are) the primary 
> investment, why should the protocol implementation be so proprietary?
> If anyone wanted to set up a similar service and had the money for the
> equipment, they can do so now, using open source, without the
> proprietary implementation of skype.
> So, I am just somewhat puzzled by the secretiveness of MS and the
> previous proprietors of skype. 

Because that would be against their plans of world domination.  I only
say that in half-jest.  It's not untrue, and it sums it up quite
succinctly.

We've known for decades that they want everyone to use Microsoft,
locking you into their systems, by locking out alternatives.  They'll
let things get out that hook you into their systems, because what they
deign to let work, only has partial functionality (e.g. like other
software not being fully able to read and write Word documents), so that
you'll stump up the money and swap over to them for something that
(purports to be) fully functional.

With mickeysoft, it's all about the money.  How can they get as much
from you as possible, time and time again.  The software can be rotten
as hell, so long as they get your money.  Crude capitalism at its worst.
With other programmers, that don't have that mindset, the prime goal can
be that the software does what it's supposed to, properly.

I make no bones about being anti-Microsoft.  I suffered the nightmare of
using their shite product for years, and the carnage they inflict upon
everyone else, for even longer.

And much as I'd like to say, just don't use Skype, use something else;
that doesn't work when someone wants to Skype you.  They see it as a
failing in your OS that you can't, not that it's a deliberately
engineered obstacle in the Skype product, to exclude you (because you
don't run Windows), nor do they grasp that it's deliberate
incompatibility with any other VOIP protocol.  And they're not going to
abandon using Skype just for you.

Skype's a dopey thing, anyway.  It makes sense only as an alternative to
expensive long distance and overseas calls.  For other calls, the
ordinary telephone is better (it "simply works," and sounds clearer),
than using a $1000 computer that has to be permanently powered up,
running, and you logged in, to make and receive phone calls.

And another thing.  We've had video camming for over a decade, now.  And
it's still just as crashy and buggy.  Trying to send or receive a webcam
has always been an exercise in the whole computer, or webcam software
crashing, and doing damn fool things.  Half the time I tried to use it
you had to fight to get a picture working.  There was many hang-up and
call again attempts, restart the camera, restart the software, even
reboots.  And I've had one call where the other person's picture was
upside down, of all the stupid video processing errors to make.

-- 
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64

Boilerplate:  All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.

Windows (TM) [Typhoid Mary]. They refuse to believe that there's
anything wrong with it, but everyone else knows Windows is a disease
that spreads.