Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bill Davidsen wrote: So everyone should stop using Skype because it doesn't work as you like? All the people I know want a portable phone number usable from any hot spot they can find. And Skype works just fine for that. Your purpose may be to talk to family and friends for free, and that's fine, but it certainly isn't the only way to talk to people, nor is it the only reason to have VOIP. The reason for cell phones is to have a number where you can be reached, rather than a list. That's a valid reason to have a Skype number, too, or any other VOIP to the POTS network provider. As I already wrote, there are providers offering POTS-SIP bridging as well, that feature is not exclusive to Skype. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at writes: As I already wrote, there are providers offering POTS-SIP bridging as well, that feature is not exclusive to Skype. Yup. I've seen as little as 2 cents per minute flat (with no monthly) over a very large area (across the street or across the pond to Europe). Sites www.teliax.com and www.gafachi.com are two I have accounts with. They both work fine with Fedora's asterisk. I haven't tested with a bareback ekiga, but don't see why that shouldn't work either. -wolfgang -- Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Android 1.5 (Cupcake) and Fedora-11 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 11:44 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: I fail to see how my using Skype takes anyone else's freedom away, there are dozens of phone vendors, my choice of Skype does not impact their choice in the slightest, they pick up a phone and call me. To paint the picture more fully, imagine having to have five telephones on your desk, and remember which is the right one to call which people, because they're on different telephone companies, and they don't interconnect. That's the situation with Skype, because *they* refuse to use a standard protocol. I have friends on Skype, I just pick up a phone, any phone, and dial their number. And I'm told that if you have Magic-Jack you can do the same thing, dial and you will be connected. I don't use different phones to talk to Verizon, att, or Sprint users, why Skype? -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: Tim: Skype's a lousy idea, for various reasons, and that's just one of them. Rick Stevens: A blanket statement bound to generate flames if I ever saw one. I might as well start the flame fest. I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. I don't care if they run a service that people can pay for. What I do care about is a lockin/lockout system. Skype only talks to Skype. The same problem with various other VOIP systems; the proprietary ones only talk to their own. I've used a few VOIP systems that gave you no way to even dial anyone outside of their own system. Sure you can pay extra to get a PSTN number, but the other side might have to do the same thing, too. And just having one side *have* to do that, never mind both, obviates the purpose of using VOIP, in the first place. So everyone should stop using Skype because it doesn't work as you like? All the people I know want a portable phone number usable from any hot spot they can find. And Skype works just fine for that. Your purpose may be to talk to family and friends for free, and that's fine, but it certainly isn't the only way to talk to people, nor is it the only reason to have VOIP. The reason for cell phones is to have a number where you can be reached, rather than a list. That's a valid reason to have a Skype number, too, or any other VOIP to the POTS network provider. I suspect when Google Talk (or whatever it's called) gets mature everything else will die. -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: Tim ignored_mail...@yahoo.com.au writes: And their system has plenty of other unsavoury aspects to it. The more anyone reverse engineers their closed system, the more disagreeable things are found out about it. Normally one just has to worry about theoretical problems with trojans hidden inside binary programs like skype. In this case, it is quite clear from looking at the traffic that skype was stealing user's bandwidth for carrying totally unrelated 3rd-party voice traffic by looping it into and out of the user's system. http://chris.pirillo.com/are-you-a-skype-supernode/ Just the fact that they are doing this makes me wonder what other stuff they are pulling. This is only slightly different from the way bittorrent works, and they seem relatively open about it, it's not some secret protocol under the covers. I suspect that if it was open source people would rave about sharing the resources for the good of all, or some such. (And yes, they *now* have a flag to turn off this trojan mode after all the raised eyebrows.) On bittorrent those folks are called leaches... -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. That's what STUN is for. And it really isn't what is needed you will see when reading the spec and thinking of two isp's (companies,schools, etc.) doing large scale nat. But do what you like. Insist that current software does the job and complain how no one is switching away from skype. The thing is that skype works quite reliably because of the agreement that when you use it connections of other people can route through your bandwith. I have managed to call trough it back to Finland in remote places like Urumuqi and being able to talk even surfing web had horrendous latency and speed issues. Granted there was probably some furius person listening it in Beijing who couldn't understand a word because I talked Finnish. (but that is expected when you make phone calls from country with totalitarian goverment) Then with normal sip it would have been even more easy as they can intercept the packets and listen in to the conversation if I could have been able to connect at all. With most probable outcome being that latency of direct Urumuqi - Finland link would have killed the ability to hold meaningfull conversation. That's why you may need 3rd party or 4th party thru which you can get low latency link between two places. -vpk -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 18:05 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. They don't have to do that. The only peer-to-peer thing really necessary is the two sides of the conversation. You don't need to have a mass of peer-to-peer strangers connected together, this isn't file sharing. It's needed for cases of both ends having nat-connections. You can try other possibilities like STUN which Kevin mentioned, and I remember reading Skype trying it first before resolting the use of 3rd party routing of call. But sometimes STUN just doesn't work and some firewall operators actively fight against it. There could quite easily be a simple server installed on ISPs, like they (nearly) all have mail servers, that simply managed the locating of their users online (status and IP), then the clients direct connect together. i.e. The server has a very small, comparatively speaking, workload. There's no need for there to be abusing individuals as a server for all and sundry. And it'd be far better for everyone if ISPs ran a few more servers, like VOIP and instant messaging, which weren't client dependent. As a partial owner of ISP i can tell you that if somone isn't paying for that server it's not going to happen. For us it would only mean one new server, but with bigger operators it could easily mean couple of them in some kind of cluster and atleast one or two guys keeping it running. Of course then would come goverment demanding for surveilance access. But as an idea it's nice and would make sense if there was way to make it for free to ISP's. In here it would be because of small margins from fierce competition and what I read in other parts of the world ISP's who have monopolies for their area probably don't want to offer anything which would eat into their profits. -vpk -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim: There's no need for there to be abusing individuals as a server for all and sundry. And it'd be far better for everyone if ISPs ran a few more servers, like VOIP and instant messaging, which weren't client dependent. Veli-Pekka Kestilä: As a partial owner of ISP i can tell you that if somone isn't paying for that server it's not going to happen. They're called customers... ISPs will buy expensive server software, if they see that it's the easiest solution for them. Or they'll buy cheap, or get free, if they're prepared to do more of the work, themselves. This is no different than running mail, news, and web servers. Customers expect mail and web pages from most ISPs, at the very least. One day VOIP will be one of the attractors to choosing one ISP over another. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Monday 08 June 2009 10:22:39 Tim wrote: Veli-Pekka Kestilä: As a partial owner of ISP i can tell you that if somone isn't paying for that server it's not going to happen. They're called customers... ISPs will buy expensive server software, if they see that it's the easiest solution for them. Or they'll buy cheap, or get free, if they're prepared to do more of the work, themselves. This is no different than running mail, news, and web servers. Customers expect mail and web pages from most ISPs, at the very least. One day VOIP will be one of the attractors to choosing one ISP over another. I chose my ISP on quality of service, knowing that they are not cheap. In a recent survey they scored high marks on all counts, but in the summary were marked way down. Reason? They said that they are too expensive. I agree that VOIP will be one attractor, but I'm not so sure that people will be willing to pay extra to get it. It seems that most people want everything for nothing, or as near to it as they can get. Anne -- New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org Just found a cool new feature? Add it to UserBase signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
I'm presently in Italy, and I want to talk to my family in Ireland. I can and do do this over Skype, for nothing. As far as I can see there is no alternative. There is, you just need to install an SIP client on both ends instead of the proprietary Skype client. There are plenty of SIP clients, all interoperating. Well-behaved SIP servers interoperate too. (It is also possible to connect to multiple SIP servers at once, but normally, that's not necessary.) Kevin Kofler I was running gnomemeeting for (mostly) voice and (some) web cam. My friend in Australia was using Microsoft Netmeeting. I was excited to have this open source alternative. It's just that I could never learn how to optimise it and we always had a huge delay. I am also seeing your point Kevin. But the fatal flaw seems to be in not having good documentation. The other alternative (when there's not sufficient documentation) is to spend forever learning a whole new field of computing. But who has time to do this every time one wants to do something new on the computer? I'm not exactly brilliant, but even if I was, I wouldn't have the time to learn everything about fixing a car, my electric can opener and whatever million things there are to run/fix. Most of this seems to hinge on good/understandable documentation. And I'm not talking about insider techno-speak. Thanks, Rocco -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Besides the fact that Skype is closed source, I was under the impression that the idea of distributed voice transmission was an advantage. Shouldn't a ideal communication system have no single point of failure (or a country club of them, ala a group of ISP servers?) On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Timignored_mail...@yahoo.com.au wrote: There's no need for there to be abusing individuals as a server for all and sundry. And it'd be far better for everyone if ISPs ran a few more servers, like VOIP and instant messaging, which weren't client dependent. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:16 -0500, Jud Craft wrote: Besides the fact that Skype is closed source, I was under the impression that the idea of distributed voice transmission was an advantage. Shouldn't a ideal communication system have no single point of failure (or a country club of them, ala a group of ISP servers?) I am curious. What are the points of failure when using SIP or Skype? For SIP, if I wish to have a voice call between two parties, each party must be on the Internet and reachable by the other party. I would assume each party must also be able to reach the SIP server. If there is a breakdown in the path between the two people, or between a person and the SIP server, won't the Internet attempt to route IP traffic through other paths? If either party or the SIP server can't reach the Internet, there would be a breakdown. I have not looked closely at the SIP protocol. There are things I do not understand. What exactly does the SIP server do? I thought the SIP server acted as a telephone directory where one could register one's presence and look-up the presence of others. I thought the SIP server was used to do call setup and call tear-down between the two parties through a control channel. I thought this control channel could use either TCP or UDP. I thought the actual voice traffic went over a separate data channel, and, if we ignore NAT and conferencing, could be between the two parties. I thought the control channel, with the SIP server, needs to be maintained while the data channel exists. I may never know much about the protocol Skype uses because it is a proprietary protocol. I am guessing Skype must have a server where a party registers. I am guessing the Skype server must do call setup and call tear-down. I am guessing the actual voice data is on a separate, data channel. What exactly do these super-nodes, when using Skype, do? Do these super-nodes only route the voice data -or- do these super-nodes also do directory registration and directory look-up and call setup and call tear-down? Can someone more knowledgeable tell us what is correct? On a personal note, I couldn't get friends and people in a company I used to work for, to switch from Skype to SIP. I tried. They said, Skype just worked. I had to use Skype, on a Windows PC, provided by the people I used to work for. On my personal PC, which runs Linux, I don't have Skype installed. I tried Ekiga on my personal PC, but had problems. My registration with the SIP server would time-out after one hour. I tried changing UDP session time-out values, in iptables, with no success. I suspect, but am not certain, my iptables firewall rules are acting as a NAT/Firewall. I believe iptables keeps a UDP assocation between me and the SIP server when I register. I believe iptables is timing out my UDP association with the SIP servers which, in turn, is causing my registration, with the SIP server, to fail after one hour. I tried Twinkle on my personal PC, with greater success. Twinkle sends periodic keep-alive packets. I am guessing these keep-alive packets keep my iptables UDP association alive. Whatever Twinkle is doing, my registration with the SIP server does not timeout after one hour. I don't run Twinkle often on my personal PC. It does no good running a VoIP program if you have nobody to talk with when you run that program. I have a final question. My cable company is pushing VoIP. Other companies, like Vonage, are pushing VoIP. I thought their VoIP was SIP. Doesn't that mean SIP can be made to work? Sorry for my long-winded messages. I need to learn brevity. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 18:49 -0500, Rick Sewill wrote: On a personal note, I couldn't get friends and people in a company I used to work for, to switch from Skype to SIP. I tried. They said, Skype just worked. I had to use Skype, on a Windows PC, provided by the people I used to work for. That makes for a very expensive phone (a whole computer, plus Windows). For an office, especially, a more sane solution is a hardware VOIP phone that plugs into any standard phone server. Even for home use, a good solution is a hardware phone plugged into a hardware VOIP box. Some modem/routers even have that built into them, now. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim: Skype's a lousy idea, for various reasons, and that's just one of them. Rick Stevens: A blanket statement bound to generate flames if I ever saw one. I might as well start the flame fest. I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. I don't care if they run a service that people can pay for. What I do care about is a lockin/lockout system. Skype only talks to Skype. The same problem with various other VOIP systems; the proprietary ones only talk to their own. I've used a few VOIP systems that gave you no way to even dial anyone outside of their own system. Sure you can pay extra to get a PSTN number, but the other side might have to do the same thing, too. And just having one side *have* to do that, never mind both, obviates the purpose of using VOIP, in the first place. Which leaves you in the position that's stuffed us all around for a decade with instant messaging: Having to run multiple clients, or one multi-client (which never quite does the job well), because some of your contacts are on Yahoo, some on MSN, others on ICQ, etc., and you're unable to convince them all to switch to the same one. Many of them blissfully ignorant about what's wrong about that, and many of them don't give a damn. And good luck with the audio configuration issues of trying to get multiple VOIP systems working side by side. Skype tries to force everyone onto their system. And their system has plenty of other unsavoury aspects to it. The more anyone reverse engineers their closed system, the more disagreeable things are found out about it. Heck, even using some of these VOIP systems you find they suck at audio quality, so not wanting to use a particular client for non-technical reasons, is also a part of the equation. Taking the converse: We've got a standard email system that works no matter what client you use, and you don't have to use the same one as the opposite end of your conversation. Likewise with HTTP, FTP, and other protocols (such as a few VOIP ones). And there's nothing stopping any enterprising business from making money by producing a super dooper client that people might prefer over one of the free ones, yet still uses standard protocols. Skype doesn't have to be a bastard, they do it deliberately. For a change I'm with Kevin on this one. Though it's not the same as his issues with hardware. Anyone can produce and disseminate alternative software. Hardware can only be produced by manufacturers. Kowtowing to Skype is the thin end of the wedge, you might as well go the whole way, and use a completely proprietary system behind it (Windows, etc.), too, if you think it's easier to just go with the flow. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 11:44 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: I fail to see how my using Skype takes anyone else's freedom away, there are dozens of phone vendors, my choice of Skype does not impact their choice in the slightest, they pick up a phone and call me. To paint the picture more fully, imagine having to have five telephones on your desk, and remember which is the right one to call which people, because they're on different telephone companies, and they don't interconnect. That's the situation with Skype, because *they* refuse to use a standard protocol. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 11:44 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: I fail to see how my using Skype takes anyone else's freedom away, there are dozens of phone vendors, my choice of Skype does not impact their choice in the slightest, they pick up a phone and call me. To paint the picture more fully, imagine having to have five telephones on your desk, and remember which is the right one to call which people, because they're on different telephone companies, and they don't interconnect. That's the situation with Skype, because *they* refuse to use a standard protocol. Right Almost as bad as trying to figure out what social network different friends are on... myspace, facebook, linkedin Oh, waitI can get accounts on all of them and using something like ping fm to update to all at the same timeoh darn...still have to read them all to figure out what they are doing -- Yow! Maybe I should have asked for my Neutron Bomb in PAISLEY! mei-mei.gres...@greshko.com http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=cCSz_koUhSg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: I don't care if they run a service that people can pay for. What I do care about is a lockin/lockout system. Skype only talks to Skype. The same problem with various other VOIP systems; the proprietary ones only talk to their own. I've used a few VOIP systems that gave you no way to even dial anyone outside of their own system. Sure you can pay extra to get a PSTN number, but the other side might have to do the same thing, too. And just having one side *have* to do that, never mind both, obviates the purpose of using VOIP, in the first place. ... Skype tries to force everyone onto their system. And their system has plenty of other unsavoury aspects to it. The more anyone reverse engineers their closed system, the more disagreeable things are found out about it. Heck, even using some of these VOIP systems you find they suck at audio quality, so not wanting to use a particular client for non-technical reasons, is also a part of the equation. ... Skype doesn't have to be a bastard, they do it deliberately. For a change I'm with Kevin on this one. Though it's not the same as his issues with hardware. Anyone can produce and disseminate alternative software. Hardware can only be produced by manufacturers. Kowtowing to Skype is the thin end of the wedge, you might as well go the whole way, and use a completely proprietary system behind it (Windows, etc.), too, if you think it's easier to just go with the flow. This is completely unbalanced. I'm presently in Italy, and I want to talk to my family in Ireland. I can and do do this over Skype, for nothing. As far as I can see there is no alternative. So what do you want me to do? Pay for long-distance phone calls, just to satisfy some bizarre ethical concern of yours? I looked at ekiga (and asterisk), and in my opinion they are completely useless for this task. Both seem to have been documented by cyborgs, who are more or less incapable of explaining in simple terms what you have to do to use their toys. I think the commercial basis for Skype is quite appealing. As far as I can see, they rely for funding on those who use Skype for ringing landlines or mobile phones. I don't understand why there is not a similar Linux system. Surely developing a VoIP protocol can't be brain surgery? And what exactly is the advantage or using SIP? -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
I don't understand why there is not a similar Linux system. Surely developing a VoIP protocol can't be brain surgery? And what exactly is the advantage or using SIP? Almost everything else on the planet except Skype uses SIP and they all interwork. You can inspect your SIP code and be sure it contains no suprises while you can't with Skype - see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/25/skype_backdoor_rumours/ and the stuff about China and Skype. With open source you could verify the situation, with Skype you can't. Skype is essentially the MS Windows of the VoIP world: proprietary and closed. It talks to nothing but itself, and even encrypts its own binaries to prevent people reverse engineering it. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim ignored_mail...@yahoo.com.au writes: And their system has plenty of other unsavoury aspects to it. The more anyone reverse engineers their closed system, the more disagreeable things are found out about it. Normally one just has to worry about theoretical problems with trojans hidden inside binary programs like skype. In this case, it is quite clear from looking at the traffic that skype was stealing user's bandwidth for carrying totally unrelated 3rd-party voice traffic by looping it into and out of the user's system. http://chris.pirillo.com/are-you-a-skype-supernode/ Just the fact that they are doing this makes me wonder what other stuff they are pulling. (And yes, they *now* have a flag to turn off this trojan mode after all the raised eyebrows.) -wolfgang -- Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Android 1.5 (Cupcake) and Fedora-11 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: Tim ignored_mail...@yahoo.com.au writes: And their system has plenty of other unsavoury aspects to it. The more anyone reverse engineers their closed system, the more disagreeable things are found out about it. Normally one just has to worry about theoretical problems with trojans hidden inside binary programs like skype. In this case, it is quite clear from looking at the traffic that skype was stealing user's bandwidth for carrying totally unrelated 3rd-party voice traffic by looping it into and out of the user's system. Well as far as I know it's stated that Skype uses p2p-protocol which uses computers of other people to route the calls to get better voice transport and one of the reasons I don't keep it running except when making calls to other countries landlines. As far as I can remember they were quite upfront about it from the start. That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. And because of abundance of free but closed source alternatives like skype, msn, yahoo no one will be willing to pay for the service either. -VPK -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) Skype users all appear to be very happy to do so -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Alan Cox wrote: there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) Skype users all appear to be very happy to do so That's true, but I meant it's usually limited how many connections your skype client is able to redirect. No one is willing to fork money for server infrastructure doing same for thousands of people. And this is why it would be nice to have opensource application doing the same thing as skype. It's basicly only way to compete with commercial providers. It's also the reason how Skype was able to compete in the market as they didn't need big server infrastructure to keep calls working. -vpk -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Veli-Pekka Kestilä fed...@guagua.fi writes: Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. The scurge that is NAT won't get fixed until users start demanding real IP addresses for their computers from their ISP's. So far programs like skype steal bandwidth from unsuspecting users with real IP's in order to service the slackers behind NAT boxes. That has to stop. Now, SIP and especially RTP are good examples of protocols designed by committee. I'm talking large headers and a zillion different operating sub-modes, many of them incompatible or at least ambiguous as to what they mean in combination with one another. Look at any ChangesLog for a sip phone or open source program and you'll see all the weird cases the software folks had to deal with. That is never good. It keeps the cost of entry high enough that you won't see many folks try to write clients. It would be good for some open-source group to just get back to basics. Sending a stream of audio bits across the net shouldn't take a zillion pages of code or a huge header for each data packet. -wolfgang -- Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Android 1.5 (Cupcake) and Fedora-11 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 18:30:33 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä fed...@guagua.fi wrote: And this is why it would be nice to have opensource application doing the same thing as skype. It's basicly only way to compete with commercial providers. There already are. There are some cooperative groups that shared their land lines for local terminations of calls. It's also the reason how Skype was able to compete in the market as they didn't need big server infrastructure to keep calls working. Skype is doing well in part because they refuse to support open standards that would allow people using nonskype software to make calls to their customers. They are trying to create artificial network effects to help them own the market. This isn't the kind of behavior I want to encourage. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 09:03:46 -0700, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wolfgang.rupprecht+gnus200...@gmail.com wrote: It would be good for some open-source group to just get back to basics. Sending a stream of audio bits across the net shouldn't take a zillion pages of code or a huge header for each data packet. How about iax2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Asterisk_eXchange -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 18:30:33 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä fed...@guagua.fi wrote: And this is why it would be nice to have opensource application doing the same thing as skype. It's basicly only way to compete with commercial providers. There already are. There are some cooperative groups that shared their land lines for local terminations of calls. But they don't that well in the way of simple application which would do computer to computer calls and work from any computer to any computer even with nat enabled. It's also the reason how Skype was able to compete in the market as they didn't need big server infrastructure to keep calls working. Skype is doing well in part because they refuse to support open standards that would allow people using nonskype software to make calls to their customers. They are trying to create artificial network effects to help them own the market. This isn't the kind of behavior I want to encourage. Nowdays yes. But it's the ability to keep their operating costs down by using p2p protocol to route calls between users even ones behind nat which enbled them to get going and compete with msn, yahoo etc. which at that time offered allready video call cabability. And they continue to dominate market as there isn't good opensource competition for them. I wouldn't mind to see there being open competitor for them but as the things are for now there really isn't good alternative which has similiar feature set. So as I said nice opensource app which uses somekind secure p2p protocol with call routing for nat users and to which any company could offer landline access services would be something I would use. Currently I'am not using any of the im apps and my use of irc has also declined during the years so maybe I'am not in the user demographic anyway. -vpk -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bruno Wolff III br...@wolff.to writes: How about iax2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Asterisk_eXchange I just had a look at it here. It looks interesting, but still much more heavyweight than I'd think you need for a point-to-point voice system. I see I'm going to have to think of the issues a bit more. http://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc5456.txt -wolfgang -- Wolfgang S. Rupprecht Android 1.5 (Cupcake) and Fedora-11 -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Message: 3 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 15:14:11 +0100 From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: Skype under Fedora-10 To: Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora. fedora-list@redhat.com Cc: gayle...@eircom.net Message-ID: 20090607151411.08f0b...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I don't understand why there is not a similar Linux system. Surely developing a VoIP protocol can't be brain surgery? And what exactly is the advantage or using SIP? Almost everything else on the planet except Skype uses SIP and they all interwork. You can inspect your SIP code and be sure it contains no suprises while you can't with Skype - see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/25/skype_backdoor_rumours/ and the stuff about China and Skype. With open source you could verify the situation, with Skype you can't. Skype is essentially the MS Windows of the VoIP world: proprietary and closed. It talks to nothing but itself, and even encrypts its own binaries to prevent people reverse engineering it. Hi Alan et al. First, thanks for the link - I tend (as a retiree) not to spend a lot of time following the rants and raves in the Internet about big software/hardware suppliers. I'd end up neuroticer than a mad dog! - but it was very interesting to see how something useful like Skype is/maybe financed. I was surprised to learn from the article that S belongs to eBay Now... if one is to avoid supporting the proprietary market does anyone have a quick guide (!) to the Open Source alternatives? An answer to the questions like can I hold an audio meeting with non-Linux friends; does xyz allow video communication; can I use the white board via xyz so on For once I begin to understand the strong points of Kevin Co about the Dark Side of closed systems! Thanks all Dave. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
but it was very interesting to see how something useful like Skype is/maybe financed. I was surprised to learn from the article that S belongs to eBay They paid big money for it, although now the rumour is it's for sale - and ebay just pulled all the skype icons from the auction site, which has really started the rumours back up. Now... if one is to avoid supporting the proprietary market does anyone have a quick guide (!) to the Open Source alternatives? An answer to the questions like can I hold an audio meeting with non-Linux friends; does xyz allow video communication; can I use the white board via xyz so on Probably a good starting spot is: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/ which will also talk to Microsoft Netmeeting There are also other tools such as twinkle (http://www.xs4all.nl/~mfnboer/twinkle/index.html) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Timothy Murphy wrote: I'm presently in Italy, and I want to talk to my family in Ireland. I can and do do this over Skype, for nothing. As far as I can see there is no alternative. There is, you just need to install an SIP client on both ends instead of the proprietary Skype client. There are plenty of SIP clients, all interoperating. Well-behaved SIP servers interoperate too. (It is also possible to connect to multiple SIP servers at once, but normally, that's not necessary.) Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: Normally one just has to worry about theoretical problems with trojans hidden inside binary programs like skype. In this case, it is quite clear from looking at the traffic that skype was stealing user's bandwidth for carrying totally unrelated 3rd-party voice traffic by looping it into and out of the user's system. http://chris.pirillo.com/are-you-a-skype-supernode/ Just the fact that they are doing this makes me wonder what other stuff they are pulling. (And yes, they *now* have a flag to turn off this trojan mode after all the raised eyebrows.) That's exactly what I meant when I said their software abuses user computers as tunnel servers. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. That's what STUN is for. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 18:05 +0300, Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: That feature actually is one which is missing from sip, if someone would make opensource voip-solution which would be secure and use p2p as transport we could maybe see real alternative to skype. Truth is that there is a lot of computers which cannot act as a server and no-one will want to host voip server for free (in large scale) so that two of these behind nat computers could talk with eachother. They don't have to do that. The only peer-to-peer thing really necessary is the two sides of the conversation. You don't need to have a mass of peer-to-peer strangers connected together, this isn't file sharing. There could quite easily be a simple server installed on ISPs, like they (nearly) all have mail servers, that simply managed the locating of their users online (status and IP), then the clients direct connect together. i.e. The server has a very small, comparatively speaking, workload. There's no need for there to be abusing individuals as a server for all and sundry. And it'd be far better for everyone if ISPs ran a few more servers, like VOIP and instant messaging, which weren't client dependent. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 15:14 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: Skype is essentially the MS Windows of the VoIP world: proprietary and closed. It talks to nothing but itself, and even encrypts its own binaries to prevent people reverse engineering it. Because they want to own you, and because they don't want you to know what they're doing... It's not just that they might be doing unwanted things, they *are*. It's nearly always the case that companies do secretive things to get away with doing something they don't want you to know about, not just maintaining trade secrets. It's not a conspiracy theory, they've already been caught out. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.24-78.2.53.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Linux Media wrote: I just wanted to speak up also and say that I agree that it's a good program. I've been telling anyone that wants to use Skype that it's one of the easiest, trouble free programs to install and use. The people behind Skype clearly went out of their way to create a program that works and is easy to understand/use. Sheesh they even have that very simple User called Test Call for testing that your sound is working correctly. So simple... so strait-forward. I would have to vote Skype the best Multi-platform program that I've used with Linux. But it's proprietary software. Quoting from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html : | Powerful, reliable software can be bad | | The idea that we want software to be powerful and reliable comes from the | supposition that the software is designed to serve its users. If it is | powerful and reliable, that means it serves them better. | | But software can only be said to serve its users if it respects their | freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users? Then | powerfulness only means the chains are more constricting, and reliability | that they are harder to remove. Malicious features, such as spying on the | users, restricting the users, back doors, and imposed upgrades are common | in proprietary software, and some open source supporters want to do | likewise. (The article then goes on to rant about Open Source DRM implementations.) Skype locks you into their proprietary network/protocol, by using it, you also force other people into the same lock-in (so you're actively taking their freedom away), it also abuses clients as tunnel servers (supernodes) whenever it feels like it (consuming your bandwidth), it even artificially disabled features depending on your CPU vendor (not sure if they still do that, but that was quite outrageous)! I fail to see how my using Skype takes anyone else's freedom away, there are dozens of phone vendors, my choice of Skype does not impact their choice in the slightest, they pick up a phone and call me. That's any phone, land line, cell, SIP, you name it and they can use it. Or do you mean my choosing to use a phone of any type blocks their freedom to use mental telepathy or whatever? As for abusing my bandwidth, don't I see you telling people to use bittorrent? How is helping move Fedora I get for free good and helping move VOIP I get for free bad? Oh, because Skype is not open source, that's right. It's also not really portable, it doesn't even have a 64-bit version! So you have to litter your 64-bit system with 32-bit compatibility multilibs to use their crap. I think you have bought into the 64 bit thing just like the Open Source crusade. At this point 64 bit does not provide any significant benefit for most users, in terms of better performance or must-have applications which need more than 4GB for the application. What it *does* provide is a chance to litter your system with tool chains and libraries so you can build applications which are open source but have no 64 bit binaries. Oh, and you can find out who made what assumptions which make the app not work right in 64 bit. Open Source is a nice ideal, but the people who write it are often not idealists but rather people who code for fun, many with no formal training, and who feel as though support and documentation are for lesser beings. And as far as lack of choice is an issue, Skype is no worse than Fedora, people were migrated to a new and less functional KDE because someone likes it, people get PulseAudio by default and have to learn to dig it out... why isn't lack of user documentation a stopper bug?!! I finally figured out that it's getting less functional (FC11) and it was cheaper to get a Mac for sound projects than try to make PA work with new brokenness in each release. User have a choice, and many have chosen not to buy into the purity of software but rather to use the freest software which works, including closed source Linux drivers. Time is money, Open Source doesn't equate to free no matter how you define it. People won't use software is it isn't useful. We now return to our previous program, Why good karma is better than usability in software already in progress. -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Rick Stevens wrote: I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. It's not. It locks you into a proprietary protocol and by using it, you also lock in all your friends. So you're actively promoting proprietary software. This is a very bad and antisocial thing to do. Yes, no one can call me from their phone unles... wait, they can call me from their phone. Any phone. Skype no more forces other to use it than ham radio or Twitter, it's an additional channel to reach me, not in any way exclusive. When I was in Europe two years ago, I was able to call my mother in the USA on her land line to check on her (she's 80 and lives alone). The cost using Skype was easily less than 25% of what it would have cost me using my cell phone and standard connections. There are other providers offering the same kind of services over the standard SIP protocol. (I'm not going to advertise any particular one, but I know they exist!) A proprietary protocol is not needed to offer paid services, it's perfectly possible to enforce payment with SIP or another open and interoperable protocol. So you are proposing some nameless service people can't evaluate independently as an alternative. Call that a closed source recommendation, you know a provider who isn't like the one's people have complained about previously, but you don't tell us who so we could check it out. -- Bill Davidsen david...@tmr.com We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. - from Slashdot -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Gabriel Ramirez wrote: Well I knew about SIP, but I'm/was searching a replacement to Instant messaging with Voice/Video included, SIP don't cover IM, so in my user scenario (different from the OP) I discarded SIP. Actually it does, you can also send text messages with Ekiga. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bill Davidsen wrote: I fail to see how my using Skype takes anyone else's freedom away, there are dozens of phone vendors, my choice of Skype does not impact their choice in the slightest, they pick up a phone and call me. That's any phone, land line, cell, SIP, you name it and they can use it. Or do you mean my choosing to use a phone of any type blocks their freedom to use mental telepathy or whatever? And that way they have to pay for the phone call. :-/ If they want to talk to you over VoIP, they're locked into Skype and thus proprietary software. (Well, I guess they could use your phone number to call you through a SIP PBX, but then both they and you have to pay for the call.) As for abusing my bandwidth, don't I see you telling people to use bittorrent? How is helping move Fedora I get for free good and helping move VOIP I get for free bad? Oh, because Skype is not open source, that's right. I actually see HTTP mirrors as the best solution, but indeed, giving bandwidth to Fedora is helping Free Software, giving bandwidth to Skype is hurting it. I think you have bought into the 64 bit thing just like the Open Source crusade. At this point 64 bit does not provide any significant benefit for most users, in terms of better performance or must-have applications which need more than 4GB for the application. What it *does* provide is a chance to litter your system with tool chains and libraries so you can build applications which are open source but have no 64 bit binaries. Oh, and you can find out who made what assumptions which make the app not work right in 64 bit. Applications which are Free Software just need to get packaged in Fedora, then they automatically have 64-bit binaries. The real solution is to get all the software with appropriate licensing into the repository. Kevin Kofler (happy user of KDE 4, currently 4.2.3, and PulseAudio) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bill Davidsen wrote: Yes, no one can call me from their phone unles... wait, they can call me from their phone. Any phone. Skype no more forces other to use it than ham radio or Twitter, it's an additional channel to reach me, not in any way exclusive. Use proprietary software or pay up, SARCASMvery clever/SARCASM... (Plus, you also get to pay for the incoming phonecall, so this attitude is also counterproductive for you.) So you are proposing some nameless service people can't evaluate independently as an alternative. Call that a closed source recommendation, you know a provider who isn't like the one's people have complained about previously, but you don't tell us who so we could check it out. I haven't evaluated any of those providers myself. If you check the Ekiga dialogs, you'll find a link to one such provider (diamondcard.us, which uses an affiliate system similar to Amazon, so if you register through the link in the Ekiga software, referral money goes to the Ekiga project), but I haven't used it, so I don't know if it's any better or worse than the alternatives. (Ekiga's interface only mentions PC-phone, but if you look at the service's price list, you'll also see a service listed called DID which is for incoming calls, you can get a phone number and have it forwarded to SIP (i.e. phone-PC) that way.) Another service I know about is WengoPhone, but unfortunately that's mostly dead, so I'm not sure whether their paid services are still available. And I have never tried it either. The Ekiga project says at http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Calling#Using_Ekiga_to_do_PC-to-phone_calls : Ekiga can be used with several Internet Telephony Service Providers. Those providers will allow calling real phones from your computer using Ekiga at interesting rates. There is no obligation for you to use the default provider, but we recommand it. So I'm sorry I can't really help you make a decision there. You have to ask somebody who knows more about those services, or find some reviews. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Bill Davidsen wrote: So you are proposing some nameless service people can't evaluate independently as an alternative. Call that a closed source recommendation, you know a provider who isn't like the one's people have complained about previously, but you don't tell us who so we could check it out. See also: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/List_of_PC_to_phone_providers for other options (but not all of them offer phone-PC, several are only PC-phone). Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
2009/6/5 Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at: Rick Stevens wrote: I am a realist. No. You're confusing realism with resignation, unwillingness to do anything about problems you encounter and, worse, willful participation in the lock-in matrix. You are confusing being an idealist with being a zealot. -- Sam -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Rick Stevens wrote: You don't need to hack the system. Use H.323/SIP clients (ekiga, etc.) and talk computer-to-computer all you want. I don't buy the if it's on the Internet it HAS to be free, therefore we should hack into it mantra. If it's something that services a need I have, I don't mind paying for it--in fact I expect to. Surely one doesn't have to pay for Skype if it is used through the computer at each end? Even my wife can do this, so it can't be that difficult. Incidentally, I looked at various alternatives. I came to the conclusion that asterisk would require several weeks, if not months, of study, while even ekiga challenged my weakening brain-cells. I thought of getting a SIP-able Siemen's phone, but didn't get round to it. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Suvayu Ali wrote: Perhaps they are talking about transferring contacts between Skype accounts, not merely a new system user who uses the same Skype account. That is indeed what I was talking about. I don't think that would be possible by just copying over a file locally. The contacts have to be present on their servers associated with the new account. Having it locally wouldn't be enough. Isn't that correct? No. It is possible since I did it, under Windows XP. You Backup your contacts to a file, transfer that file to the other user, who can then Restore the contacts to their Skype system. I don't know if this is possible under Linux. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Linux Media wrote: I just wanted to speak up also and say that I agree that it's a good program. I've been telling anyone that wants to use Skype that it's one of the easiest, trouble free programs to install and use. I found it reasonably easy to install under Fedora, but I had problems with the Audio setup on both computers I used (EeePC and Thinkpad). In both cases I had to go to the Options setting, which is in a rather odd place at the bottom of the page, and change the Default Sound setting to the first option, which was for the particular machine. I'm not at all clear what the default sound setting could be? I'd give the program 7/10 for installation and use under Linux, and 9/10 under Windows XP. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Gabriel Ramirez wrote: the only one alternative in opensource was jabber No, there's SIP too. At least Ekiga supports video in addition to audio. I discarded SIP because is create another account So why do you say earlier that there's only Jabber? That said, at least the M$N protocol is supported by Free Software, unlike the Skype one. So it's not that big a problem. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Timothy Murphy wrote: Surely one doesn't have to pay for Skype if it is used through the computer at each end? Free as in beer != Free as in speech I came to the conclusion that asterisk would require several weeks, if not months, of study, Asterisk is for when you want to run your own SIP server. You don't have to, you can just use one of the existing ones. while even ekiga challenged my weakening brain-cells. Just go through the wizard. There's even a link to an SIP provider (ekiga.net) where you can register an account in that wizard. But you could use any SIP provider of your choice. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Gabriel Ramirez wrote: the only one alternative in opensource was jabber No, there's SIP too. At least Ekiga supports video in addition to audio. I discarded SIP because is create another account So why do you say earlier that there's only Jabber? Well I knew about SIP, but I'm/was searching a replacement to Instant messaging with Voice/Video included, SIP don't cover IM, so in my user scenario (different from the OP) I discarded SIP. That said, at least the M$N protocol is supported by Free Software, unlike the Skype one. So it's not that big a problem. Kevin Kofler yeah but still it's a workeable/liveable problem because when Microsoft change the protocol, ( by itself isn't a problem the protocol is property of Microsoft ) and the open source clients need be updated, so not a perfect solution exists today for me. Gabriel -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Rick Stevens wrote: I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. It's not. It locks you into a proprietary protocol and by using it, you also lock in all your friends. So you're actively promoting proprietary software. This is a very bad and antisocial thing to do. When I was in Europe two years ago, I was able to call my mother in the USA on her land line to check on her (she's 80 and lives alone). The cost using Skype was easily less than 25% of what it would have cost me using my cell phone and standard connections. There are other providers offering the same kind of services over the standard SIP protocol. (I'm not going to advertise any particular one, but I know they exist!) A proprietary protocol is not needed to offer paid services, it's perfectly possible to enforce payment with SIP or another open and interoperable protocol. That ability alone as well as the converse (permitting regular telephone users such as my mother the ability to contact my computer via a phone number) is terrific. My mom is something of a technophobe. She'll deal with the phone, but will have nothing whatsoever to do with computers (took me weeks to teach her how to use the OnStar in her car...and that uses voice commands!). See above, you can have the same with SIP. You don't need to hack the system. Use H.323/SIP clients (ekiga, etc.) and talk computer-to-computer all you want. I don't buy the if it's on the Internet it HAS to be free, therefore we should hack into it mantra. If it's something that services a need I have, I don't mind paying for it--in fact I expect to. I don't believe in entitlements of any sort. In Skype's case, someone's got to pick up the bill for the PBX systems. They only charge if you intend to use the PBX anyway. Do you prepay your cell minutes? I'm always dumbfounded by people who do that yet expect their Internet access to be free. We're not asking for the PBX to be free as in beer. We're asking for the software and the protocol to be free as in speech. That they don't charge if you don't use the PBX is irrelevant, that doesn't make their software any less proprietary. Of course they charge for the PBX, but they could do that without proprietary lock-in. Other services do that. Do I wish their Linux client was more solid? Yes. Do I wish they had a native 64-bit version? Yes. Do I wish it was open source and able to be improved upon by others? Yes. However, even in its current state it works (even with PulseAudio) and I'm fine with it and their service. But you're helping spread proprietary software, so you're doing the wrong thing. If you use proprietary software which speaks open protocols, you're only huring yourself. If you use something like Skype which spreads like a virus due to its proprietary protocol, you're hurting others too. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Linux Media wrote: I just wanted to speak up also and say that I agree that it's a good program. I've been telling anyone that wants to use Skype that it's one of the easiest, trouble free programs to install and use. The people behind Skype clearly went out of their way to create a program that works and is easy to understand/use. Sheesh they even have that very simple User called Test Call for testing that your sound is working correctly. So simple... so strait-forward. I would have to vote Skype the best Multi-platform program that I've used with Linux. But it's proprietary software. Quoting from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html : | Powerful, reliable software can be bad | | The idea that we want software to be powerful and reliable comes from the | supposition that the software is designed to serve its users. If it is | powerful and reliable, that means it serves them better. | | But software can only be said to serve its users if it respects their | freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users? Then | powerfulness only means the chains are more constricting, and reliability | that they are harder to remove. Malicious features, such as spying on the | users, restricting the users, back doors, and imposed upgrades are common | in proprietary software, and some open source supporters want to do | likewise. (The article then goes on to rant about Open Source DRM implementations.) Skype locks you into their proprietary network/protocol, by using it, you also force other people into the same lock-in (so you're actively taking their freedom away), it also abuses clients as tunnel servers (supernodes) whenever it feels like it (consuming your bandwidth), it even artificially disabled features depending on your CPU vendor (not sure if they still do that, but that was quite outrageous)! It's also not really portable, it doesn't even have a 64-bit version! So you have to litter your 64-bit system with 32-bit compatibility multilibs to use their crap. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Linux Media wrote: I just wanted to speak up also and say that I agree that it's a good program. I've been telling anyone that wants to use Skype that it's one of the easiest, trouble free programs to install and use. The people behind Skype clearly went out of their way to create a program that works and is easy to understand/use. Sheesh they even have that very simple User called Test Call for testing that your sound is working correctly. So simple... so strait-forward. I would have to vote Skype the best Multi-platform program that I've used with Linux. But it's proprietary software. I KNEW this was going to happen. Kevin, yes, there are H.323 and SIP gateways out there which offer PBX-type services. Most of the ones I've used are not reliable, cost far more than Skype and most don't offer reverse phone numbers. I do have accounts on several SIP systems and I use them. Regardless of your feelings about proprietary software, the vast majority of Windows users--through ignorance, stupidity or laziness-- use Skype. There's no getting around it. Sorry, but that's just how it is. No one said life was fair or was going to conform to your expectations, despite how noble they may be. Quoting from http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html : | Powerful, reliable software can be bad | | The idea that we want software to be powerful and reliable comes from the | supposition that the software is designed to serve its users. If it is | powerful and reliable, that means it serves them better. | | But software can only be said to serve its users if it respects their | freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users? Then | powerfulness only means the chains are more constricting, and reliability | that they are harder to remove. Malicious features, such as spying on the | users, restricting the users, back doors, and imposed upgrades are common | in proprietary software, and some open source supporters want to do | likewise. (The article then goes on to rant about Open Source DRM implementations.) I've read so many of these proprietary software = evil, open source = all-goodness-and-light pieces that I'm sick of them. They're generally written by someone with an axe to grind, ignore any comments to the contrary of their position, and gloss over holes in their own premise. Taking just the excerpt you provide above, it is utter nonsense that those malicious features are _common_ in proprietary software. Some yes, but I'll posit that most spyware comes from some criminal enterprise, installed by people who don't lock down their systems. Does that appear anywhere in that article? As far as constrictions, the F10 installer won't let you change an LVM group name unless you're doing a GUI install. If your machine can't do a GUI install out of the box, you have to carve a penguin in your forehead, sacrifice a chicken and dance naked on an ice floe in Antartica under a full moon to do it (or know the magic xdriver=vesa installer incantation). I'd call that pretty damned restrictive. Different analogy: people don't rail about the concept that Cummins diesel engine parts don't work in Volkswagens. They're different beasts, do different jobs and are just, well, different. Skype locks you into their proprietary network/protocol, by using it, you also force other people into the same lock-in (so you're actively taking their freedom away), it also abuses clients as tunnel servers (supernodes) whenever it feels like it (consuming your bandwidth), it even artificially disabled features depending on your CPU vendor (not sure if they still do that, but that was quite outrageous)! No one is taking anyone's freedom away. I don't see anyone holding a gun to your head to use Skype. Use an H.323/SIP program and relay of your own choosing. Just be aware that not everyone is going to be available on it. You can't IM Yahoo chat users unless you have a Yahoo account, whether you use AIM, Pidgin, Kopete or some other client. There's no one program, system, or protocol that is appropriate for every possible use, and insisting that there is, is short-sighted to say the least. It's also not really portable, it doesn't even have a 64-bit version! So you have to litter your 64-bit system with 32-bit compatibility multilibs to use their crap. Portable? Almost nothing binary is portable unless it uses some lame intermediate virtual machine thing like Java (which isn't a new concept at all...we old timers can recall UCSD P-System Pascal in the '80s). They were called compiling interpreters. As for 64-bit, this is true. But there's a LOT of stuff (open source even) that don't have 64-bit binaries available unless YOU rebuild it yourself--and not everyone is capable of doing that. Ok, we've gone far enough astray on this. All I'm saying is that Skype is available for most of the major OSs out there (Winblow$, Mac, Linux), so in
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin seems to be distraught over the possibility that his friends might be able, through pressure, to force him into a choice of using a system he doesn't like, or not being in touch with people. Skype is a proprietary social service. The only pressure to use it is a social one, which isn't to be taken lightly. It's quite formidable. That social pressure is why he sees Skype as dangerous. You don't really have a free choice to reject proprietary software if pragmatism of any form (social, economical, political) forces your hand. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Jud == Jud Craft craft...@gmail.com writes: Jud use it is a social one, which isn't to be taken lightly. Jud It's quite formidable. That social pressure is why he sees Jud Skype as dangerous. You don't really have a free choice to Jud reject proprietary software if pragmatism of any form Jud (social, economical, political) forces your hand. I used to use Skype for a while. Then I stopped. There are plenty of alternatives. Pragmatism need never force your hand. Just don't be pragmatic. You can be driven by social pressure, or you can exert it (and perhaps be ignored, but at least you aren't enslaved). -- Colin Adams Preston Lancashire -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Rick Stevens wrote: Regardless of your feelings about proprietary software, the vast majority of Windows users--through ignorance, stupidity or laziness-- use Skype. There's no getting around it. Sorry, but that's just how it is. No one said life was fair or was going to conform to your expectations, despite how noble they may be. By accepting that everyone else uses Skype, so I will too you're contributing to the problem, because the people who want to talk to you over VoIP will think the same because of you. By actually REFUSING to install Skype and explaining why (also pointing out practical issues, e.g. that 32-bit multilibs are a PITA), you may actually get people to install software speaking open protocols, which in turn may get their friends to do the same and so on and you may help spreading open standards instead of proprietary lock-in. So installing Skype is entirely the wrong thing to do. Taking just the excerpt you provide above, it is utter nonsense that those malicious features are _common_ in proprietary software. Some yes, but I'll posit that most spyware comes from some criminal enterprise, installed by people who don't lock down their systems. Does that appear anywhere in that article? You seem to underestimate the amount of phoning home proprietary software does without even telling you. Almost all proprietary software phones home to check for updates, and who knows how much statistical information they send while doing that. Without the code, who can check? No one is taking anyone's freedom away. I don't see anyone holding a gun to your head to use Skype. Use an H.323/SIP program and relay of your own choosing. Just be aware that not everyone is going to be available on it. But are YOU? If not, you're forcing your friends to use proprietary software. You can't IM Yahoo chat users unless you have a Yahoo account, whether you use AIM, Pidgin, Kopete or some other client. But that's not a problem because Free Software can speak that protocol. If the Skype protocol gets successfully reverse-engineered and implemented in Free Software, it may become a worthwhile alternative (using that Free client only), but they're doing all they can to prevent that, and so far they have been successful at their quest for lock-in. I'll also observe that, because of people like you who don't care about freedom, releasing a proprietary freeware client for GNU/Linux on x86 is an effective way to stifle development of actual Free Software, all those people who only care about free beer will happily use the proprietary crap. Without the binary-only GNU/Linux port, they'd work together with the people actually caring about freedom on a Free GNU/Linux client. So you have to question a company's motives when they release a proprietary GNU/Linux port of their application: chances are they don't want to support GNU/Linux at all (and they really don't, the only way to support GNU/Linux is to release Free Software, not proprietary binaries), they just want to prevent Free competition (by removing the motivation for a significant subset of the community). As weird as it sounds, it's actually BETTER for us in the long run when there's NO GNU/Linux client at all for something, because that motivates people to write one, which will usually be Free Software. There's no one program, system, or protocol that is appropriate for every possible use, and insisting that there is, is short-sighted to say the least. But there are protocols which are not appropriate for anything, and proprietary protocols are part of that. If SIP is not good enough, we need to help getting a better open protocol worked on, not use a proprietary one. Portable? Almost nothing binary is portable unless it uses some lame intermediate virtual machine thing like Java (which isn't a new concept at all...we old timers can recall UCSD P-System Pascal in the '80s). They were called compiling interpreters. Indeed, and that's another argument against proprietary crap. That said, they could easily provide a 64-bit binary if they cared. They refuse doing this, making their software effectively useless for 64-bit systems. Multilibs are an obsolete hack. As for 64-bit, this is true. But there's a LOT of stuff (open source even) that don't have 64-bit binaries available unless YOU rebuild it yourself--and not everyone is capable of doing that. Most Free Software you actually want to use is packaged in Fedora or RPM Fusion, and almost all the software in Fedora and RPM Fusion Free is available on x86_64. In fact, we actively fix it if it doesn't work there. (For example, I did so for z88dk.) If the software you're thinking of is not packaged yet, where's your wishlist entry? Or even better, your review request? The proper solution is to get the software packaged, not to try to run some third-party binary. Users should never have to run unpackaged binaries nor to build stuff from source themselves.
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Rick Stevens wrote: Regardless of your feelings about proprietary software, the vast majority of Windows users--through ignorance, stupidity or laziness-- use Skype. There's no getting around it. Sorry, but that's just how it is. No one said life was fair or was going to conform to your expectations, despite how noble they may be. By accepting that everyone else uses Skype, so I will too you're contributing to the problem, because the people who want to talk to you over VoIP will think the same because of you. I knew this was going to devolve into a pissing contest. We have different views of the world, obviously. You want it absolutely pure OSS. Fine. I'd like it to be OSS. No matter how much we want it, it's simply not going to happen. I am a realist. I have to use Skype simply because there are people who are unwilling, unable or incapable of installing an OSS solution or need reliable PBX access and don't want a typical DSL-style finger-pointing session when stuff doesn't work. Skype is a simple, one-stop-shop for the technically challenged, OK? If people want to pay for it, let them. Let's drop this now. You're not going to convince me that the world will become OSS only, and I'm not going to convince you that a mix of OSS and proprietary stuff is OK. Let's agree to disagree and move on. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer ri...@nerd.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - If at first you don't succeed, quit. No sense being a damned fool! - -- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
2009/6/5 Rick Stevens ri...@nerd.com: Kevin Kofler wrote: Rick Stevens wrote: Regardless of your feelings about proprietary software, the vast majority of Windows users--through ignorance, stupidity or laziness-- use Skype. There's no getting around it. Sorry, but that's just how it is. No one said life was fair or was going to conform to your expectations, despite how noble they may be. By accepting that everyone else uses Skype, so I will too you're contributing to the problem, because the people who want to talk to you over VoIP will think the same because of you. I knew this was going to devolve into a pissing contest. We have different views of the world, obviously. You want it absolutely pure OSS. Fine. I'd like it to be OSS. No matter how much we want it, it's simply not going to happen. I am a realist. snip Thank you sir, I was thinking earlier about whether I should note the difference between an idealist and a realist/pragmatist, but I went and had a cup of tea instead. When I came back, you'd done all the work. I appreciate Kevin's point of view (and I will defend to the death his right to hold it), BUT I don't mind using the occasional piece of closed-source software when the time is right and at the appropriate juncture. That said, I don't use Skype ;o) +1 to you (I'm a realist because I use kmod-nvidia) -- Sam -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Rick Stevens wrote: I am a realist. No. You're confusing realism with resignation, unwillingness to do anything about problems you encounter and, worse, willful participation in the lock-in matrix. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Kevin Kofler wrote: Rick Stevens wrote: Regardless of your feelings about proprietary software, the vast majority of Windows users--through ignorance, stupidity or laziness-- use Skype. There's no getting around it. Sorry, but that's just how it is. No one said life was fair or was going to conform to your expectations, despite how noble they may be. By accepting that everyone else uses Skype, so I will too you're contributing to the problem, because the people who want to talk to you over VoIP will think the same because of you. By actually REFUSING to install Skype and explaining why (also pointing out practical issues, e.g. that 32-bit multilibs are a PITA), you may actually get people to install software speaking open protocols, which in turn may get their friends to do the same and so on and you may help spreading open standards instead of proprietary lock-in. but at the moment no open source alternative exist, at least in a client program, some months ago I searched a alternative not to skype, but MSN, well I tried to find the following caracteristics: - Instant Messaging - chat via Voice/Video - User friendly client the only one alternative in opensource was jabber, seems which jabber have a protocol defined for Video/voice, but no client is available under Linux supporting Video/Voice, well I don't find one, the only client available if from google and only runs under windows. so at the moment no alternative exist at least under Linux, well when I searched none exists. I understand your points above propietary software and legacy programs, my desktop machine run under x86_64, without flash I discarded SIP because is create another account, already I have too many accounts by the same reason I discarded skype Gabriel But there are protocols which are not appropriate for anything, and proprietary protocols are part of that. If SIP is not good enough, we need to help getting a better open protocol worked on, not use a proprietary one. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Tim wrote: On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 15:23 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: Incidentally, is there any alternative to Skype that works under Linux and Windows XP? Until someone hacks the proprietary Skype system, and I haven't seen any notice that someone has, you're not going to see a non-Skype program that can connect to other Skype programs. Skype's a lousy idea, for various reasons, and that's just one of them. A blanket statement bound to generate flames if I ever saw one. I might as well start the flame fest. I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. When I was in Europe two years ago, I was able to call my mother in the USA on her land line to check on her (she's 80 and lives alone). The cost using Skype was easily less than 25% of what it would have cost me using my cell phone and standard connections. That ability alone as well as the converse (permitting regular telephone users such as my mother the ability to contact my computer via a phone number) is terrific. My mom is something of a technophobe. She'll deal with the phone, but will have nothing whatsoever to do with computers (took me weeks to teach her how to use the OnStar in her car...and that uses voice commands!). You don't need to hack the system. Use H.323/SIP clients (ekiga, etc.) and talk computer-to-computer all you want. I don't buy the if it's on the Internet it HAS to be free, therefore we should hack into it mantra. If it's something that services a need I have, I don't mind paying for it--in fact I expect to. I don't believe in entitlements of any sort. In Skype's case, someone's got to pick up the bill for the PBX systems. They only charge if you intend to use the PBX anyway. Do you prepay your cell minutes? I'm always dumbfounded by people who do that yet expect their Internet access to be free. Do I wish their Linux client was more solid? Yes. Do I wish they had a native 64-bit version? Yes. Do I wish it was open source and able to be improved upon by others? Yes. However, even in its current state it works (even with PulseAudio) and I'm fine with it and their service. Your mileage may vary. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer ri...@nerd.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - Is that a buffer overflow or are you just happy to see me? - -- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Incidentally, is there any alternative to Skype that works under Linux and Windows XP? Until someone hacks the proprietary Skype system, and I haven't seen any notice that someone has, you're not going to see a non-Skype program that can connect to other Skype programs. Skype's a lousy idea, for various reasons, and that's just one of them. A blanket statement bound to generate flames if I ever saw one. I might as well start the flame fest. I disagree, Tim. Skype is a good idea. There are bits that could be done better, but parts of the service require quite a bit of capital investment and there has to be a way to fund that. Subscriptions is one way. When I was in Europe two years ago, I was able to call my mother in the USA on her land line to check on her (she's 80 and lives alone). The cost using Skype was easily less than 25% of what it would have cost me using my cell phone and standard connections. That ability alone as well as the converse (permitting regular telephone users such as my mother the ability to contact my computer via a phone number) is terrific. My mom is something of a technophobe. She'll deal with the phone, but will have nothing whatsoever to do with computers (took me weeks to teach her how to use the OnStar in her car...and that uses voice commands!). You don't need to hack the system. Use H.323/SIP clients (ekiga, etc.) and talk computer-to-computer all you want. I don't buy the if it's on the Internet it HAS to be free, therefore we should hack into it mantra. If it's something that services a need I have, I don't mind paying for it--in fact I expect to. I don't believe in entitlements of any sort. In Skype's case, someone's got to pick up the bill for the PBX systems. They only charge if you intend to use the PBX anyway. Do you prepay your cell minutes? I'm always dumbfounded by people who do that yet expect their Internet access to be free. Do I wish their Linux client was more solid? Yes. Do I wish they had a native 64-bit version? Yes. Do I wish it was open source and able to be improved upon by others? Yes. However, even in its current state it works (even with PulseAudio) and I'm fine with it and their service. Your mileage may vary. I just wanted to speak up also and say that I agree that it's a good program. I've been telling anyone that wants to use Skype that it's one of the easiest, trouble free programs to install and use. The people behind Skype clearly went out of their way to create a program that works and is easy to understand/use. Sheesh they even have that very simple User called Test Call for testing that your sound is working correctly. So simple... so strait-forward. I would have to vote Skype the best Multi-platform program that I've used with Linux. Rocco -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Skype under Fedora-10
Is there a Skype HOWTO or FAQ for Fedora-10? I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. Incidentally, is there any alternative to Skype that works under Linux and Windows XP? As far as I can see, the latest version of Skype for Fedora is called skype...fc5, even though it is in the directory called Fedora 6-7 on the Skype web-site (www.skype.com). -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Ekiga is an open-source voice chat solution. However, it does not use the Skype network. There is also Empathy, which supports voice chat and can do basic IM functions, like Pidgin. I have not used either of these, so consumer beware. I would give Empathy a shot first; Fedora and Ubuntu have considered replacing Pidgin with Empathy before (try googling ubuntu pidgin usability), whereas Ekiga seems to be more voice-only. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 17:25 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: RS wrote: I just finished installing and configuring skype on F11 Pre. Get the static tar.bz2 file and untar. when you run the skype executable. it will complain about a bunch of missing .so files. INstall one by one and you can then launch skype. You may have to try a few tricks to get the audio working properly since skype is coded for ALSA. PLay around with the Sound Devices config in Skype's Options Menu.. But does this get you a newer (or better) version that the RPM file from the Skype repository? -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin My About menu shows 2.0.72 - which is the latest for Linux I believe... -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
ravi2boxster wrote: My About menu shows 2.0.72 - which is the latest for Linux I believe... The following guide still works for F10 I believe - not sure about F11 yet though? http://fedorasolved.org/multimedia-solutions/installing-skype -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Skype-under-Fedora-10-tp23815854p23819394.html Sent from the Fedora List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 15:23 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. I'm afraid my solution was to Backup my contacts list under Windows XP Skype, and Restore the file when logged in as the other user, again under Windows. I didn't see this offered under Linux, but I didn't look very carefully. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Timothy Murphy wrote: Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. I'm afraid my solution was to Backup my contacts list under Windows XP Skype, and Restore the file when logged in as the other user, again under Windows. I didn't see this offered under Linux, but I didn't look very carefully. Contacts for Skype are stored on their servers. All you need to do is install skype and sign in with your userid and password to get your contacts. HTH -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 22:31 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. I'm afraid my solution was to Backup my contacts list under Windows XP Skype, and Restore the file when logged in as the other user, again under Windows. I didn't see this offered under Linux, but I didn't look very carefully. We appear to be speaking at cross purposes. I don't understand what you mean by Backup my contacts list and restore the file. Didn't you try simply logging into Skype on the second machine, without copying anything? To repeat, that's all I've ever had to do and all my contacts just follow me around. I've done this on Linux, MacOS and Windows. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Contacts for Skype are stored on their servers. All you need to do is install skype and sign in with your userid and password to get your contacts. Perhaps they are talking about transferring contacts between Skype accounts, not merely a new system user who uses the same Skype account. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Jud Craft wrote: On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Contacts for Skype are stored on their servers. All you need to do is install skype and sign in with your userid and password to get your contacts. Perhaps they are talking about transferring contacts between Skype accounts, not merely a new system user who uses the same Skype account. I don't think that would be possible by just copying over a file locally. The contacts have to be present on their servers associated with the new account. Having it locally wouldn't be enough. Isn't that correct? -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. I'm afraid my solution was to Backup my contacts list under Windows XP Skype, and Restore the file when logged in as the other user, again under Windows. I didn't see this offered under Linux, but I didn't look very carefully. We appear to be speaking at cross purposes. I don't understand what you mean by Backup my contacts list and restore the file. Didn't you try simply logging into Skype on the second machine, without copying anything? To repeat, that's all I've ever had to do and all my contacts just follow me around. I've done this on Linux, MacOS and Windows. I was trying to copy my Skype contacts list to my wife's Skype account. On Skype under Windows XP there is an Option to Backup the contacts list to a nominated file. I found that one could then Restore this file to another users contact list. As I said, this may be possible under Linux, but if so I did not find it. The contact list itself can be shared by Linux and Windows. The Linux Skype documentation is more or less non-existent, as far as I could see. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 01:06 +0100, Timothy Murphy wrote: Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. AFAIK your Skype contacts are held by Skype, rather like your Gmail contacts are held by Gmail. I use Skype from several machines and have never had to copy stuff from one to another. I'm afraid my solution was to Backup my contacts list under Windows XP Skype, and Restore the file when logged in as the other user, again under Windows. I didn't see this offered under Linux, but I didn't look very carefully. We appear to be speaking at cross purposes. I don't understand what you mean by Backup my contacts list and restore the file. Didn't you try simply logging into Skype on the second machine, without copying anything? To repeat, that's all I've ever had to do and all my contacts just follow me around. I've done this on Linux, MacOS and Windows. I was trying to copy my Skype contacts list to my wife's Skype account. OK, that's a completely different situation. In fact I see you did mention someone else in your original post, but I didn't take it in. I've never tried to do this and have no idea how it's supposed to work. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Re: Skype under Fedora-10
On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 15:23:33 +0100, Timothy Murphy gayle...@eircom.net wrote: Is there a Skype HOWTO or FAQ for Fedora-10? I would like to transfer my Skype contacts to someone else, but don't see any way to do this under Linux. Incidentally, is there any alternative to Skype that works under Linux and Windows XP? Asterisk and Callweaver can act as PBX's. That doesn't get you a POTS connection, but there are cooperative groups allowing people to make local POTS connections from their land line in return for the ability to use other people's land lines. You'll also need something like a sip client (such as ekiga) or some hardware (Digium and Sangoma are two companies that make such hardware) to talk to your phones and/or POTS connection. However the hardware solution doesn't work all that great with Fedora because Digium (and I think Sangoma, but haven't verfied this) haven't upstreamed their drivers. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
