Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Businesses Communications Internet Explorer Upgrades

Microsoft Is Bringing WebRTC To Explorer, Eyes Plugin-Free Skype Calls 66

Posted by samzenpus from the call-window dept.
An anonymous reader writes Microsoft today announced it is backing the Web Real-Time Communication (WebRTC) technology and will be supporting the ORTC API in Internet Explorer. Put another way, the company is finally throwing its weight behind the broader industry trend of bringing voice and video calling to the browser without the need for plugins. Both Google and Mozilla are way ahead of Microsoft in this area, both in terms of adding WebRTC features to their respective browsers and in terms of building plugin-free calling services that rely on the technology. In short, Skype is under threat, and Microsoft has finally decided to opt for an "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" strategy.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Is Bringing WebRTC To Explorer, Eyes Plugin-Free Skype Calls More

Microsoft Is Bringing WebRTC To Explorer, Eyes Plugin-Free Skype Calls

Comments Filter:

  • If you can't beat 'em, troll them (Score:3)

    by NotInHere ( 3654617 ) on Monday October 27, 2014 @03:05PM (#48244683)

    ORTC can be seen as a microsoft troll of google, which has invested a lot of money into webrtc: http://bloggeek.me/ortc-webrtc... [bloggeek.me]
    With WebRTC, google has a head start. With ORTC, the bias isn't as great.

  • About bloody time... (Score:3)

    by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 ) on Monday October 27, 2014 @03:05PM (#48244689)
    The corporate world can finally move away IE6 for their intranet websites.

  • Wrong strategy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 ) <gameboyrmh.gmail@com> on Monday October 27, 2014 @03:19PM (#48244843) Journal

    Microsoft hasn't done "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" in the past. This is more likely another attempt at "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish." So let's wait for the next E to drop.

    • They have a way to go. Google Voice to PTSN works great which is a feature Skype lacks. Skype requires fees to use a call in number, and minutes to call out of Skype. These three features leaves it way behind Google Voice. The only thing going for Skype is the size of the user base and you can have it in many countries.

      If I need to call phones in the US and Canada and not use an expensive cell plan, Google Voice works great for free unlike Skype. I use Google Voice as a second line to filter salesmen.

      • Re:Wrong strategy (Score:4, Informative)

        by phoenix_rizzen ( 256998 ) on Monday October 27, 2014 @03:42PM (#48245077)

        Except that Google Voice only works for Americans. If you don't live in the US, it's extremely difficult to get a GV number, or to use GV.

        Skype works on any Windows/MacOS computer, virtually any iOS, Android, or MS phone device, some consoles, and probably other devices. Even if you can't phone a landline using it, you can still connect with people using it.

        A better comparison would be Google Hangouts which can be used to:
            - send/receive SMS messages on cell phones
            - send/receive instant messages on cell phones, tablets, chromebooks, laptops, PCs, etc
            - make voice or video calls between Hangouts users
            - make voice calls to landlines within North America for free (and other countries for pennies)

        Google Hangouts is quickly overtaking Microsoft Skype in features, although it's still building it's userbase.

        • Thanks for the info. I haven't switched to Hangouts yet because it only works on Chrome so It requires a browser switch.

          For worldwide users another competitor is the open standard SIP. Many manufactures have SIP (VOIP) phones and adapters, and many with free SIP service. Unlike Skype many of the SIP registars permit multiple resistrations (extensions) at the same time, so I can have a phone at home and at work. A call rings both just like Google Voice. Inexpensive calling plans can be added if needed fr

        • I like Hangouts a lot, and the kinks in the Google Voice integration on my phone are finally mostly worked out. I do think that RTC is important, MS being late to the game was able to look at the problems, and both Google and Mozilla agree, which is why ORTC is coming into play... similar to how IndexedDB came out after other implementations. The crappy part is I'm still stuck supporting IE8 and IE9... so it will be close to a decade before I can really use this for certain things.

          Other issues with Web

        • Some time ago I took a long, hard look on "Skype alternatives". Let me share my finds with all of you:

          Skype is Shit. Let me repeat that: Skype is Shit, and this Shit that Skype is mostly became shit after Microsoft messed with it. Allow me to elaborate:

          - Call quality auto-degrades, when Skype 'decides' you are not to be prioritized. No other option given to the user to prioritize or adjust it in any way; useful settings to manage call parameters are virtually non-existent;

          - Land line connectivity is poor,

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • ...and why do I want this 'feature' again?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      To make more browser security holes for anti-malware scanning software makers to get rich from. It's a symbiotic relationship.

      Next question?

  • it's a web browser (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Can't we just settle for it rendering web pages properly instead of bolting on all sorts of shit ?

    • Can't we just settle for it rendering web pages properly instead of bolting on all sorts of shit ?

      It seems like only yesterday that the geek was on a crusade to eliminate any and all plug-is. The problem is that the web page has evolved far beyond the one-way-street, the silent, static, display of text and low-res graphics, typical of the early nineties.

      The web browser is in serious danger of being eclipsed by the walled garden and the app --- which are in no way burdened by the geek's sense of propriety, his belief that he owns the web and the web browser and can dictate what it can and cannot do.

    • IE has for 5 years now. Oh your comparing a 13 year old version when Mozilla and even Opera required quirks and hacks? Yeah real fair comparison. IE 6 was more standards compliant than Netscape and Mozilla 1.0 anyday. Compare a modern browsers

  • "Plugin-Free" (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Monday October 27, 2014 @03:38PM (#48245047)

    I'd rather have to deal with plugins than deal with the feature creep, bloat, and widened attack surface you get from shoehorning all this shit into the browser.
    With plugins, you get the best, fastest, and most secure experience. (By not installing the plugins.)

    I DON'T want my browser to support fucking Skype calls on the web, encourage shitty web-design trends that sacrifice usability in favor of a hip image, support shitty DRM over HTML, etc.
    The merits of any individual feature, as well as the shitty design choices of any give site, are beside the point. Baking all this shit into the browser removes my choice, shifts development focus away from performance, security, and enhancement of core features, steals my megahertz and megabytes, etc.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      That's why you should be using a decent browser that lets you turn the damn thing off. The rest of us are looking forward to finally getting decent P2P software that is cross-platform capable, but you're free to turn it off entirely if you'd prefer.

      • Please tell me how to turn this shit off in Firefox, for example.
        Do I have to go to some undocumented or barely-documented flag in about:config ?
        How do I know Firefox is respecting that flag? How do I know Firefox will respect it in the future?
        Assuming Firefox is respecting that flag, what exactly is it doing? Is it actually NOT loading the modules necessary for that feature? Or is it loading entire browser+bloat as usual, and just not calling the module? Does disabling the shit protect me from the late

    • I DON'T want my browser to support fucking Skype calls on the web, encourage shitty web-design trends that sacrifice usability in favor of a hip image, support shitty DRM over HTML, etc.

      There are plenty of options from you to choose from if you want a featureless browser.

      What you really mean is that you don't want anyone else to have features either. If all you wanted was to just not use DRM'd content you could simply ... not use DRM'd content. What you want is for no one else to have DRM'd content because you think if no one else does you'll get your way and all content will be DRM free.

      Hint: It won't happen. Content producers will simply not produce before they let you freely copy th

    • Flash has an install base of 99%. Of the 1% that don't have flash installed, there are some people (like me) who dislike it, but welcome the open web with all its new standards. So the people who have a worse experience (as they can't not install those 'bloaty features') are less than 1%. And even for you the situation improves. You can turn on and off everything you want or don't want, at least in firefox, in which there are about:config settings for most of the APIs. With flash you have a very binary choi

  • Anyone know a browser that's just a WEB browser? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It's becoming annoying to have to disable so many features I don't want, never knowing if I got them all. Just a web browser, please. HTML, CSS, maybe Javascript. Doesn't need persistent anything (history, cookies, storage, etc.).

  • Privacy of Skype communications is very important for Microsoft and always good to keep in mind (probably all logged and kept forever):

    http://www.theguardian.com/wor... [theguardian.com]
  • Opus codec [opus-codec.org] support is "Mandatory to Implement" for the WebRTC standard. If this also brings in support for .opus in <audio> (as Firefox, Chrome, and I think most of the "little" browser projects like Opera, Konqueror, etc already have) that would be a great side-benefit.

    • In their blog post, they pledged to implement opus for webrtc. Let's hope they also enable it for <audio> elements. But still I'm very happy about this, as perhaps one day I don't need a closed-source native application to chat and talk with my friends over skype.

Slashdot Top Deals

Truly simple systems... require infinite testing. -- Norman Augustine

Close