Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Open-Source Skype Effort Is Dormant Or Dead

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    Skype sucks, Flash sucks.

    We need the major browsers to support this:

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html-media-capture/

    So we can create web applications that can use the webcam and microphone without relying on proprietary technologies like Flash and Skype.

    The advantage of having this supported natively on browsers would be that everyone will be able to use it, it would be OS/architecture independent.

    Free video/webcam/voice for everyone.
    a browser solution is not a p2p application ? the browser solution only works for big players like google!

    for small people without a web-space it just don't work.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    This is one of things I appreciate Nvidia does not do. They are not against nouveau.

    Skype is straight crap, straight from its birth as Kazaa (Malware p2p) up till today.

    What was that guy doing, is trying to make skype available on non-w32, the thing that skype itself should have done.

    Well, Skype has just shown off what piece of crap it is. Apparently devices to monitor and decode skype communications have been LONG available to governments and agencies (in case somebody thinks its secure), so it has virtually no advantages.

    Im using ekiga to communicate with w32 machine of my relatives, no problem.

    I still wait for pidgin to implement video/audio from unix machines to w32.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    107

    Default

    The existence of the intellectual properties in the usa questiones the freedom of the usa market, and also questiones legitimity of the regime of usa.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,108

    Default

    WTF? Who the hell cares? We don't need open source implementations of reverse engineered proprietary protocols when we have FULLY OPEN protocols that do the same thing, but better, and aren't subject to the random protocol changes that break everything without notice.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    WTF? Who the hell cares? We don't need open source implementations of reverse engineered proprietary protocols when we have FULLY OPEN protocols that do the same thing, but better, and aren't subject to the random protocol changes that break everything without notice.
    We != Me. Open protocols are welcome, but I have to connect with people who still use Skype and I certainly don't want to resort to Windows partitions or using Skype under wine, or using a 1+ years old version of skype beta for linux.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,273

    Default

    DMCA? That's disgusting. I'm glad I don't use Skype.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2

    Thumbs up Gene is out of the bottle/ Open-Source must be addaptive

    True, MS bought Skype; True the code was purchased at the time of purchase. Question remains: Was the 'Skype' code available as a open-sourced code up until that moment? If so, the 'gene is out of the bottle' (Grandfathered) code.

    I submit: Because the -open source' code was available pre MS purchase the existence of use was years prior; Can the 'open-sourced' code, available 'pre MS purchase' be re branded; and use existing 'port' functions? I think so.

    When MS purchased 'Skype/ code': They now have the rights to alter that code how they see fit, from that point forward. Previous 'open-sourced' versions; however, might be 're-branded' and 'fork off' to create an independent application.

    This could be in the form of an adaptive 'Google+ (Hang Out) tool. A Google 'sponsored' open source application that can be used to contact 'Skype/ Google+' client lists might be developed? Reliance on driver specifics for hardware use has already been developed for the 'Google+' (Hang Out) appliance. It would be a matter of either porting the existing contact info from an open-sourced 'Skype'; or creating them independently, one at a time.

    I remind the developers about the existence of 'Pigeon Internet Messaging (PIM)' as a starting platform. Just add Video/Audio functions and a wider array of function to pre-existing' IM services is available. This again excludes the client list of Skype; as PIM opens Skype independently. Expand the PIM function to accept individual 'manual' entry of a contact list might be the only alternative for 'Skype' contact lists; as it might be considered a violation of service to port list as a mass 'export'.

    Like with all network changes: 'morphing' into a better application takes organization and planning. Do not give up!!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    When was skype ever open-source? This is talking about an attempt to reverse-engineer the skype protocol, which has always been closed-source and proprietary as far as I am aware.

    I think our only hope is that microsoft makes skype xmpp compatible like they did with msn. I don't think it is impossible, if they are pushing xmpp it makes sense to make all their products compatible with it.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halo9en View Post
    We != Me. Open protocols are welcome, but I have to connect with people who still use Skype and I certainly don't want to resort to Windows partitions or using Skype under wine, or using a 1+ years old version of skype beta for linux.
    Bullsh**. Tell your retard's to upgrade to open protocols. Ekiga.net accounts are FREE and offer SIP-to-SIP (no PSTN linkup).

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2

    Thumbs up Negatie input, breads negative results ... .

    Prior to MS purchase of Skype: I used two versions. One Linux(Ubuntu); the other MS(Windows 7). After MS Purchased: When I added a new contact in Linux, which is working; this same contact was not present in MS. Using the recipricating method; I am able to add a contact in MS, and havevisible in the Linux version (Skype 2.2 (Beta)).

    The fore mentioned version of Skype might have been 'open sourced' at one time (Pre-MS Sale). This is not the argument: Skype is now a MS subsidiary. Running from WINE has 'layering' issue that make the application inoperable. Skype is now proprietary software.

    Using 'xmpp' is a starting point. At present: 'Pigeon Internet Messaging (PIM)' will allow activation Skype 2.2 (Beta). Only the (Beta) application runs independently; seperate from (PIM). This (Beta) mod must have been developed at a time prior to MS purchase; the newer versions of MS Skype only accept 'grandfathered' contact lists, for the (Beta). At present: New contacts created in MS Skype are operable from the (Beta). This too may change.

    Because MSN in PIM is available; AND (Beta) as a seperate executable - It stands to reason that MSN may become inoperable, in the future. Maybe, that is the original purpose for the MS purchase of Skype? To exclude MSN from PIM like application.

    Constructive evaluation of the issue will aid in a progressive path for resolution. Negatie input, breads negative results; AND only looses trackion towards the agreed on goal.

    What is that goal? I do not know; however, getting there is not following the 'path of least resistance'.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •