Microsoft Won't Force You To Use the New Skype Just Yet (neowin.net) 94
A few weeks ago, Microsoft launched Skype version 8.0 to replace Skype classic, or version 7. The company initially said that Skype classic would stop working on September 1st, but today, it extended the deadline and said it would continue to support the older application for the time being. Neowin reports: Spotted by Brad Sams of Thurrott.com, the information was posted as an update to a support forum that originally said when Skype v7 would be killed off. The update says the following: "Based on customer feedback, we are extending support for Skype 7 (Skype classic) for some time. Our customers can continue to use Skype classic until then. Thanks for all your comments - we are listening. We are working to bring all the features you've asked for into Skype 8. Watch this space." Microsoft didn't provide a new end of life date for Skype v7, but there's no doubt that it's still coming. Eventually, you'll have to move to Skype v8, or the UWP app if you're on Windows 10.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Linux should have done this with systemd (Score:5, Informative)
Lot's of apps have both the init.d and the systemd startup scripts. Also init.d works in systemd systems.
Gentoo Linux did this with systemd (Score:3)
I fixed the subject line for you.
At least with Gentoo Linux, you can decide whether you want systemd or not. It works fine either way.
People use Skype? (Score:2)
I don't know anyone who still uses Skype. Everyone has moved to WhatsApp or Facebook's Messenger.
Re:People use Skype? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know anyone who still uses Skype. Everyone has moved to WhatsApp or Facebook's Messenger.
Although there is a desktop version of WhatsApp, it is still tied to your phone. In other words, you still need to have it installed on your phone and you need to provide a phone number for it to work. Not everyone wants to have their messaging app tied to their phone number. And many people do not want to have a Facebook account at all due to numerous privacy concerns.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone I know has moved to wire.app [wire.com]. Encrypted text, voice & video. Not tied to a phone number. Works on win, mac, linux, android, ios. Free. Open source [github.com].
Dos it have a Pidgin plug-in?
Re: (Score:1)
I checked the website but can't find any information that I can call an ordinary land-line telephone with it. Can it?
Because if it can't, then it is not a replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
Everyone that isn't me then... not that I use Skype much either, but no way I'd use Facebook anything. Signal is more likely, does that do video? Oh, wait, why the hell would I even care? Video is for raving narcissists and grandmothers.
Re: (Score:2)
Gees no dude. Long duration video calls are for smart TVs and eParties. Where people from afar remotely attend your digital gathering. Don't think just video phone calls, although that is not a bad thing, you'll be able to tell that person calling you trying to sell you some shite, to fuck off, right to their face and they'll be able to see how pissed off you are and maybe changed profession. I would like to see the face of everyone I speak to on the phone, to see their eyes, to monitor their facial express
Re: (Score:1)
Skype for phone (Score:3)
I use it for international phone calls.
Re: (Score:2)
I use SkypeIn to give family and a few other people in the US a way ring me directly overseas without it costing them anything.
Re:People use Skype? (Score:4)
Yeah, right, Facebook. Sorry, your view is skewed by the biased selection of friends. At most 10% of the people I know use Messenger. NOONE I know uses WhatsApp. At least 50% use Skype at work to some extent, ~10% use it a lot, maybe 30% in private life as well.
Depends on the group. Most of the people I know don't even have an FB account and strongly refuse to create one, so Messenger is not even an option. WhatsApp... Does that even have a desktop version? Without it it won't matter much in a business context for at least a few years. If it does, it's not advertised enough.
Yeah, my study group is biased just as well. But I acknowledge that and do not try to draw absolute conclusions like you do, because those would be "Messenger is niche, WhatsApp is completely irrelevant (why is it even alive? Teens?) and Skype trumps both, with old-school SMS texts, Slack, etc. covering the rest of the market." Not very convincing, right?.
Desktop WhatsApp (Score:2)
WhatsApp... Does that even have a desktop version? Without it it won't matter much in a business context for at least a few years. If it does, it's not advertised enough.
Look up Web Whatsapp [whatsapp.com].
Now there's a huge difference.
When you use Web Skype [skype.com], the WebApp is connecting directly to the Microsoft servers. You basically get in your browser the same thing as in the new gen applications. (The new gen Skype application is basically a wrapper around the web app).
It's basically "your browser -> Microsoft's Skype server".
In WhatsApp's case, it's a bit different. You still need a smartphone app (either Android or iOS), that app still makes connection to the Facebook servers itself
Re: (Score:2)
NOONE I know uses WhatsApp.
Wow, selection bias much? Talk about skewed. 100% of people I know use WhatsApp. Furthermore complete strangers contact me on WhatsApp, as do companies. I get my airline tickets sent to me through WhatsApp.
SMS? The only SMSes I have in my phone are from the government, microsoft, and Whatsapp themsevles in the form of 2FA codes and the one colleage I have in the UK where they don't use it as much .... dammit okay 99% of people I know use WhatsApp.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Wow, selection bias much? Talk about skewed." - Now go back to my comment and re-read it, especially the last paragraph - and thanks for restating my point.
A personal circle of friends is not a good model of the market, especially a global market. Depending on where you live, who you hang out with and so on you're going to get very different results. To the point where for example WhatsApp can range from "THE chat" through "very popular", "a niche app" to "noone uses that". You may see it as absolutely dom
Re: (Score:2)
WhatsApp is completely irrelevant (why is it even alive? Teens?)
In the USA maybe, but not in the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup pretty much the same, or Viber or Zoom, here. Skype just isn't on the radar any more.
Re: (Score:3)
We have three offices, two in the US and one in eastern europe. The bay area office uses slack and RHEL, the midwestern office uses email and windows, and the eastern europe office (the largest, their wages are about 20% us wages) uses Skype and some combination of windows and linux.
I know WhatsApp is very popular in south america, most of western europe and chunks of asia, but Skype is still huge in eastern europe for some reason. I don't know why. I think because everyone already has their friends
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I use (the old) Skype as it allows a convenient way to screen sharing + group video chats + ability to run multiple accounts at once (this makes it useful for remote support for clients .. I can switch from video to screen sharing mid-chat etc.). Neither WhatsApp nor FB messenger can do those things; HangOuts is a privacy nightmare and seem to be very few people using it. Actually, there doesn't seem to be any reasonable alternatives, and the new UWP skype is a feature and UI regression. Skype came many yea
Re: (Score:2)
Every job I have worked at uses either Skype or Jabber.
I prefer Skype.
For home use, though, you are probably correct.
Lets not force us on to Windows 10 either (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Windows 10 sucks. In more ways than one. Not only is it slow even on newer machines, bit calls home FAR too often.
I run Win 10 in a VM. But it's a VERY good machine, so I can assign resources to the VM beyond most laptops. Even so, 10 is sluggish, and my network monitor is constantly popping up, telling me that 10 is telling Microsoft about damned near everything I try to do.
I only have a couple of programs I still need Windows for, so for the most part I'll stick with Linux and MacOS.
THEY ke
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 10 is snappy, as long as you have an SSD. It is slow, if you run it off a HDD.
Yes, It should not be this way, but I don't think anyone using it off a modern, even budget laptop with a modest SSD, finds it slow. That is the only resource it badly needs.
Yes, "telemetry" that the user is not allowed to disable (or even fully disclosed) is basically spyware. We have more of a case for open source OS today than 10 years ago.
Given what v8 removes ... (Score:5, Informative)
... when they shut off 7, I'll be off skype.
Last week I tried v8. And was relieved that there was still some place to download v7. What remained of the user interface was a bad attempt to map a screen-limited smart phone app onto a desktop.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe I'm blind, but where have they hidden the download link to Skype classic?
Re: (Score:2)
Type "download skype classic" in to the evil Google search box, and several non-Microsoft sites, including Bleeping Computer, come up.
Re: (Score:2)
V8 inhereted all the great features of the Windows Store App, such as the inability to adjust any camera settings and the wonderful bug that prevents autoexposure working correctly.
What a win. I can only recommend it. ... If you're ugly and you don't want anyone to see you during a video chat.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
No support for user-defined GIFs. etc.
Yeah, that's fucking important...
I know it sounds stupid, but that's the sort of feature that attracts kids / millennials these days, so the'd be shooting themselves in the market share eventually by not including it.
The counterpoint of course is that MS will kill Skype for business users if they implement it in the same way that they did on MSN messenger (giant fucking animations popping up on your desktop and causing slowdown)
Re: (Score:1)
Skype, what's that? (Score:2)
Isn't everybody on Slack now?
Re: (Score:2)
sssh, do you want them to get bought up too?
Re: (Score:2)
No, we're on Discord.
First I heard of it, but with 135 million active users compared to 8 million for Slack, impressive. Skype has maybe 400 million active users, so not quite dead yet. Open source needs a winning horse in this race, but at least it seems nobody has a stranglehold on it yet, Microsoft's and Google's attempts notwithstanding.
Re: (Score:2)
Cut out Skype for Business and how many are left? What defines an active user? Everyone I know used to be on Skype, now if they're even online it just sits dormant for everyone I know 99% of the time. Yeah, it's running in the tray, but are they active on it? No.
A large chunk of the general people 25 and under are on Snapchat/Whatsapp, and basically all of the gamer crowd uses Discord. Microsoft has done literally nothing good with Skype since buying it. It's almost like still being on ICQ. The only thing t
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft has done literally nothing good with Skype since buying it. It's almost like still being on ICQ. The only thing they have done is ruin the UI and insert a bunch of ads into it.
Don't forget, made it not peer-to-peer, removing its main unique characteristic.
Yeah right (Score:1)
I'm not worried. (Score:2)
I tried using it a couple of months ago and I couldn't remember my password. Part of the "prove to us you own the account" process Microsoft has is "what is the last password you remember?" Well, deary, since there's only ever been one password on the account. if I could remember the last one I wouldn't have to be trying to reset it, now would I?
For good reason (Score:5, Insightful)
People are reticent to upgrade because the new version is yet another triumph of Obfuscation Of Functionality for Microsoft.
Let's hide shit under nearly invisible screen cues with no tooltips and watch people twist in the wind! WOO! FUNNY!
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. They've hidden everything useful, wrecked a completely useable UI trying to imitate the stylistic cues of a river rock.
Re: (Score:2)
Obfuscation Of Functionality
Don't be daft. No functionality is obfuscated. Microsoft doesn't bother playing those games. They simply outright remove functionality. Who needs camera settings anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
*sheepish*
I staaaaaand corrected...
Can't force me (Score:2)
Microsoft can't and won't force me to use any version of skype. After MS bought skype and made some UI changes that made it harder to use, I just switched to facetime. "Problem" solved. Even my Mom is getting an iphone, in part so she can use facetime with everyone else who has ditched skype after MS ruined the UI.
Skype circa 2011 was pretty useable. It's been destroyed since then by UI mismanagement. I still prefer windows over apple OS and I use a windows computer instead of a mac, but for video chat
Re: (Score:2)
I find it humorous and sad at the same time to think they probably have a whole team of people responsible for the UI changes over the years and this is what they thought was best. Who looks at the stuff and says "Yeah, the UX is very streamlined and intuitive now, let's go with this."
Linux/Android version (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If it ain't broke, break it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Are they going to reinstate the APIs on which my Skype certified DECT handset depends?
Yeah, thought not.
Another perfectly functional load of hardware gone to landfill.
Skype on win10 is horrible... (Score:2)
At work we use Skype for Business, which is OK (considering we used to use Jabber). But because we have some contract teams that aren't on the corporate network, some genius decided that we can use regular Skype to chat with them as a 'group chat'. AND.. we are piloting MS Teams as well because regular Skype is so unstable and just stops working randomly all the time - which kind of defeats the purpose of having a persistent group chat. So I have THREE different chat programs, and all of them are pretty