Skyip? question

[Polytropon]

On Wed, 11 May 2011 21:23:14 -0400, Jon Radel <jon at radel.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/11/11 8:20 PM, Gary Kline wrote:
> 
> > (How hard/easy woold be be to hack out a better one...or do GOOG and YHOO
> > already have their own versions of skyip?)
> >
> 
> Not all that trivial, really, but, frankly, rather beside the point. 
> The value of communications networks is more than the technology, it's 
> in whom you can communicate with using it. 

And keep in mind the data "in the background": WHO communi-
cates? WHERE does he communicate from, with WHOM, WHEN? Tech-
nology allows answering questions even about WHAT has been
spoken. Relations between individuals and there interests
can be concluded from such communication profiles. They
are of high value for advertising and industry propaganda
mechanisms.



> So even if you were to hack 
> out something more elegant than Skype, the vast majority of the world 
> wouldn't care in the slightest, as they want to talk to their friends, 
> family, and business associates, and have no interest in talking to you 
> and the 137 hacking buddies who built the better mousetrap.

I may say that there is already a high-quality alternative
(among others), it's called Ekiga. It's not as widespread
as "Skype", I agree.

And google also offers a similar tool, but as I've never
used it, I can't recall the name. It's also not as "well
known" as "Skype" which got a synonym for IP-based tele-
phony utilizing a computer.

With upcoming versions of "Windows", I think MICROS~1 will
integrate "Skype" technology into their system, while they
make sure that this technology - due to the lack of inter-
face program - can't be used on other systems (Mac OS X,
Linux, BSD, but also Android). So I think they bought "Skype",
a company that _never_ made "the big bucks" in order to
obtain their technology and their subscribers for their
own land. They will surely do anything for further "vendor
lock-in" - i. e. make sure nobody except them defines the
terms of use of the former "Skype" infrastructures (in
general, not in a technical sense).



> There's a reason the PSTN still does so well despite its 19th century, 
> low-bandwidth, voice-only roots.

Some people do not "evolve" the technology and service
providers want them to. :-)



> BTW, I believe this discussion belongs over in the discussion list, as 
> it has nothing to do with FreeBSD, so I will sin no more after this.

I think it _will_ have impact to FreeBSD sooner or later
in a form that "Skype" will be unusable at some point in
time, or will be quite limited in what you can actually
do with it. When MICROS~1 incorporates the "Skype" customer
base... who knows, maybe you'll soon need a "Hotmail"
account to call someone by phone, as soon as MICROS~1
got a "real" phone operator. :-)


-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...