Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Thorzdad · May 10, 2011, 07:36 AM

For $8.5 billion. Details here and here.

The Final Dakar · May 10, 2011, 08:21 AM

Skype for XBOX Live confirmed.

Paco500 · May 10, 2011, 08:27 AM

Dammit I hope they don't mess with it. Skype is a go-to tool for communicating with family/friends in the states.

Are there any decent competitors out there with as wide client support? iPhone 3GS on 3G is a must, as well as Mac to Windows Video Chat.

P · May 10, 2011, 08:57 AM

Why - or at least, why so expensive? eBay tried it for much less and had to sell it back for less than they bought it for.

Each of the founders gets at 3.5 billion $ payout. With a B. That's a LOT of money to spend - or to feed back into Rdio, I guess. They founded FastTrack (the tech behind Kazaa), sold out and found Skype, sold out and found Rdio...

ajprice · May 10, 2011, 09:10 AM

Maybe its a kind of defence against Facetime being in iPods, iPads, iPhones and Macs, beyond that there could be an AppleTV version with a reborn iSight accessory type thing, and/or a Windows software version of Facetime in the future. So MS buy Skype, build it into Windows, Windows Phone, Xbox, Kin... oh wait, no not Kin

. Instant universally known and used chat/video/phone client.

I suppose it remains to be seen if they keep Skype as multi platform or bring it in to just being a MS/Windows thing.

Why $8.5bn? No idea.

turtle777 · May 10, 2011, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by ajprice

Maybe its a kind of defence against Facetime

*sigh*

If Facetime only was supported on 3G as well.

It really sucks that you have to have WiFi.

I can understand that limitation if you are on an unlimited plan, but please, if I am on a capped plan, give me Facetime on 3G

So for now, Skype it is for me.

-t

andi*pandi · May 10, 2011, 09:33 AM

I hope we don't have platform separation on this app. I have folks on PC I'd still like to be able to skype.

Waragainstsleep · May 10, 2011, 09:58 AM

Another service ruined.

Skype was long a source of amusement/annoyance to me. The number of customers who used to say "Skype is brilliant, I can talk to people all over the world and its free as long as they get Skype too."

To which I would reply "You could have been doing that years ago with iChat AV. The actual beauty of Skype is that its plumbed into the telephone network so you can make cheap calls to real phones. Free text/audio/video chat is old news you f**kwit."

I may not have said the last part audibly.

Phileas · May 10, 2011, 10:01 AM

Problem with Skype for me has always been the fact it wasn't reliable when making calls to the phone network. Echoes, delays, just all round poor call quality had me kill many a Skype call and just suck it up and dial long distance.

Atheist · May 10, 2011, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep

Another service ruined.

Skype was long a source of amusement/annoyance to me. The number of customers who used to say "Skype is brilliant, I can talk to people all over the world and its free as long as they get Skype too."

To which I would reply "You could have been doing that years ago with iChat AV. The actual beauty of Skype is that its plumbed into the telephone network so you can make cheap calls to real phones. Free text/audio/video chat is old news you f**kwit."

I may not have said the last part audibly.

Skype works on multiple platforms... iChat AV is limited to OS X. Big difference. I've never once used iChat for a video call because nobody I know has a Mac.

Originally Posted by Phileas

Problem with Skype for me has always been the fact it wasn't reliable when making calls to the phone network. Echoes, delays, just all round poor call quality had me kill many a Skype call and just suck it up and dial long distance.

I have issues all the time with call quality. I use Skype every day for work and typically after about 20 mins my voice will become totally garbled... as though I'm talking underwater. I have to hang up and call again. Happens on every computer I've ever used Skype on.

imitchellg5 · May 10, 2011, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

I can understand that limitation if you are on an unlimited plan, but please, if I am on a capped plan, give me Facetime on 3G

Shouldn't it be the other way around? Why would you want to use FaceTime over 3G if you have a cap?

P · May 10, 2011, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

I hope we don't have platform separation on this app. I have folks on PC I'd still like to be able to skype.

That would be bad, but what would be even worse is that MS doesn't even make apps for XP anymore. XP is still the most common OS in the world (and more than twice the market share of Win 7). One of the big deals of Skype is that you can install it on anything and it will Just Work - if MS kills that, Skype is dead.

I don't think they will though. I think they will do a Hotmail, associate the Skype brand with Windows stuff (mainly Windows 7 Phone, probably) but keep it working with everything else.

Big Mac · May 10, 2011, 10:36 AM

I've been quite impressed with Skype quality as long as I've a semi-decent Internet connection. It's performed very well for the most part when I've used it. I'm not too thrilled about the Microsoft acquisition, but whatever. Microsoft is a better company than it used to be, so maybe they won't make Skype suck.

Eug · May 10, 2011, 10:45 AM

I pay for long distance on POTS as well.

Skype over 3G on the iPhone 4 sucks. Skype to phone on a computer with hardwired broadband is OK, but not great. So, I rarely use Skype.

Given this, I'm a little surprised that Skype is worth $8.5 billion.

turtle777 · May 10, 2011, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

Shouldn't it be the other way around? Why would you want to use FaceTime over 3G if you have a cap?

I want to use Facetime whenever and wherever. I don't mind "paying" for it (i.e., using my capped data for it). I just want to be able to make those calls.

-t

Salty · May 10, 2011, 01:20 PM

Skype was really useful when my friend took his iPhone 4 to europe. We turned off data and it basically became an iPod touch with awesome battery life. At one point he was on a long ferry trip and the boat had WiFi so he called back here and we chatted for a while until he was ready to disembark.

I don't get why Microsoft paid that much for them though. I imagine they're just buying the user base and the phone integration, because I'm sure Microsoft can develop a better video codec. I would have liked to see Apple own Skype though.

P · May 10, 2011, 01:25 PM

Just realized something: The MS antitrust settlement is supposed to expire on Thursday. Do you think they were holding the Skype deal off until Friday?

turtle777 · May 10, 2011, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Salty

because I'm sure Microsoft can develop a better video codec.

What makes you think that ?

Originally Posted by Salty

I would have liked to see Apple own Skype though.

Nah, for that money, Apple could have promoted Facetime like hell and crush Skype.

-t

Eug · 02:21 PM

FWIW, MS is extremely good at developing video codecs. VC-1 competes directly against H.264, and MS developed it themselves.

I'm thinking that MS would migrate Skype to VC-1, which by the way has now been adopted (along with H.264) by some of the big video conferencing companies, and lots of the embedded chip makers.

So, I'm not seeing this necessarily only as targeting the VoIP market, but as a direct counter attack against the H.264 onslaught.

In fact, with VC-1 as part of Skype, all of a sudden a bazillion Mac users would be installing VC-1 and Silverlight when they install Skype, just like a bazillion Windows users are installing Quicktime when they install iTunes. Furthermore, H.264 is starting to get some traction in HTML5. Having VC-1 as a requirement for Skype would be a backdoor for increased VC-1 / Silverlight browser support.

Stogieman · May 10, 2011, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

Given this, I'm a little surprised that Skype is worth $8.5 billion.

It's not. MS just overpaid.

Microsoft said tricked into overbidding for Skype by $4.5b | Electronista

Favorite comment:

Microsoft doesn't bid on anything...
Microsoft just clicks the "buy it now" link.

P · May 10, 2011, 04:23 PM

The problem about VC-1 is that once MS opened the spec to it, almost everyone who had patents in the H.264 pool stepped forward with their hand out for VC-1 as well. VC-1 costs almost exactly as much as H.264 these days. VC-1 has become like another, non-compatible profile for H.264, and MS is no longer pushing it very hard. They had to pay a few millions for the components that they had distributed before, and now has to keep paying.

Eug · May 10, 2011, 07:04 PM

MS still makes much more money on VC-1 than they do for H.264.

ShortcutToMoncton · May 10, 2011, 07:24 PM

My prediction is that this acquisition will not bear fruit.

imitchellg5 · May 10, 2011, 08:16 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

MS still makes much more money on VC-1 than they do for H.264.

I thought H.264 was an open codec without licensing costs now?

Waragainstsleep · May 10, 2011, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Atheist

Skype works on multiple platforms... iChat AV is limited to OS X. Big difference. I've never once used iChat for a video call because nobody I know has a Mac.

Its called AIM.

-Q- · May 10, 2011, 08:28 PM

Might be they want to compete in the VOIP arena for offices ("Not only can you do real time collaboration as you work on your excel/powerpoint, you can also power your office phones with Microsoft Office!")? Or bolt on voice/video chat onto all their tech?

Still overpaid...

Cold Warrior · May 10, 2011, 08:34 PM

I suspect this is the end of Skype call security. MS will no doubt implement CALEA backdoors.

Eug · May 10, 2011, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

I thought H.264 was an open codec without licensing costs now?

AFAIK... Free if it's free content for you and me, but not if you're making stuff like iTunes movies, Blu-ray discs, or H.264 hardware encoders, etc.

In fact, that's much of what the big brouhaha is about in terms of HTML5 adoption. Firefox simply refuses to support H.264 because it ain't free.

---

My official prediction: MS will EOL Skype's proprietary codec. It will replace it with one of two technologies. H.264 or VC-1. MS makes money from both of them, but more from VC-1. and it links to the whole Silverlight platform.

I'm betting on VC-1 for Skype.

Salty · May 10, 2011, 09:06 PM

The problem is that Microsoft already had video conferencing over Windows Live, now they've got two incompatible IM and Video Chatting networks. The question is, why did Microsoft want them so badly?

Eug · May 10, 2011, 09:11 PM

Eug's speculation:

They will likely all be made to be compatible with each other.

Furthermore, developers will be able to build Silverlight applications that do VoIP as well, with native VC-1 support, and direct Skype support. Skype will no longer be Skype. It will be the platform for MS based video-conferencing, integrated into their other platforms, like Silverlight supported apps and even Office.

Or... It will fade into oblivion.

besson3c · May 10, 2011, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

*sigh*

If Facetime only was supported on 3G as well.

It really sucks that you have to have WiFi.

I can understand that limitation if you are on an unlimited plan, but please, if I am on a capped plan, give me Facetime on 3G

So for now, Skype it is for me.

-t

Isn't there an app on Cydia that brings this functionality to the 3G?

besson3c · May 10, 2011, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep

Another service ruined.

Skype was long a source of amusement/annoyance to me. The number of customers who used to say "Skype is brilliant, I can talk to people all over the world and its free as long as they get Skype too."

To which I would reply "You could have been doing that years ago with iChat AV. The actual beauty of Skype is that its plumbed into the telephone network so you can make cheap calls to real phones. Free text/audio/video chat is old news you f**kwit."

I may not have said the last part audibly.

Perhaps Apple should have made a Windows version of iChat AV? I used to have connectivity problems with it, probably about the same time I gave up on it. I've never had any connectivity problems with Skype.

turtle777 · May 10, 2011, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Isn't there an app on Cydia that brings this functionality to the 3G?

I got no patience for jailbreaking.

-t

besson3c · May 10, 2011, 11:34 PM

You guys with Skype audio problems: have you tried a headset? I wonder if some of the background stuff the mic picks up makes a difference in saturating bandwidth or something, because I've had problems using just the built in mic, but my USB headset has been absolutely brilliant.

besson3c · May 10, 2011, 11:35 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

I got no patience for jailbreaking.

-t

Why? It's not terribly hard, it sounded like you were really clamoring for this feature.

turtle777 · May 10, 2011, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Why? It's not terribly hard, it sounded like you were really clamoring for this feature.

The problem is that you need to do it over and and over again after every update. I got no time and nerves for that.

-t

besson3c · May 11, 2011, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

The problem is that you need to do it over and and over again after every update. I got no time and nerves for that.

-t

True on both accounts!

turtle777 · May 11, 2011, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

True on both accounts!

I did one jailbrake. My wife's 3G. Never touched it again after the jailbrake. Works.

But it needed multiple patches to make Youtube, push notifications and some other things work. Heck, the push notification patch cost $5. I can't imagine going through this crap every 2 months.

-t

exca1ibur · May 11, 2011, 12:51 AM

It's nowhere near like that anymore. A few clicks and go if you use the right tools. I've jailbroken tons of phones and just did mine for 4.3.3 in about 3 minutes. The extra functionality is worth the hassle for me, personally.

besson3c · May 11, 2011, 01:17 AM

Originally Posted by turtle777

I did one jailbrake. My wife's 3G. Never touched it again after the jailbrake. Works.

But it needed multiple patches to make Youtube, push notifications and some other things work. Heck, the push notification patch cost $5. I can't imagine going through this ganja every 2 months.

-t

I didn't know you had a wife! Do you like it when she puts turtle pellets in your mouth?

When was the last time you tried a jailbreak?

Spheric Harlot · May 11, 2011, 01:27 AM

Except that you still need to research whether you can just update your phone, or whether you need to revert the jailbreak before doing so in order to avoid bricking your phone.

Also, that new OS might incorporate fixes to severe security issues, but you can't update yet because there's no jailbreak out. And you don't know when or if that's gonna happen, due to a spat between the children responsible for the hack having stolen each others' cred, resulting in a release halt.

You're at the mercy of people with zero accountability, even if you decide it's worth the constant research and effort on your part.

besson3c · May 11, 2011, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Except that you still need to research whether you can just update your phone, or whether you need to revert the jailbreak before doing so in order to avoid bricking your phone.

Also, that new OS might incorporate fixes to severe security issues, but you can't update yet because there's no jailbreak out. And you don't know when or if that's gonna happen, due to a spat between the children responsible for the hack having stolen each others' cred, resulting in a release halt.

You're at the mercy of people with zero accountability, even if you decide it's worth the constant research and effort on your part.

If there is a problem, just revert... It's just a phone, it's not as if horrible things will happen if you postpone an update or have to revert. The whole security argument I don't really understand, the entire system is a black box to us.

I can totally understand the argument of not wanting to put in the time to bother. The only thing that motivates me to do so is tethering, and since I won't need this for a while I'm taking a wait-and-see approach with the whole AT&T thing and the TOD (text of death) issue, but otherwise I think that your arguments here are a little excessive.

Spheric Harlot · May 11, 2011, 02:20 AM

Security, you don't understand?

You don't remember the PDF exploit?

Black box or not is completely beside the point. Publicized vulnerabilities will be exploited. As long as you can't or won't patch them, you're at risk.

exca1ibur · May 11, 2011, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

If there is a problem, just revert... It's just a phone, it's not as if horrible things will happen if you postpone an update or have to revert. The whole security argument I don't really understand, the entire system is a black box to us.

You are correct.

The PDF exploit was blocked via Cydia even before Apple addressed it. Also it had nothing to do with jailbreaking that was an issue with iOS in general at the time. The main issue with security is that if SSH is running you can just use the standard root password to get in, if you don't change it. So change it, and you are fine, or turn off SSH.

No need to worry about bricking because if there is a problem all you do is a standard restore, and you are back to factory, no harm, no foul.

P · May 11, 2011, 05:08 AM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

I thought H.264 was an open codec without licensing costs now?

There is still a cost for making the encoder or decoder. That cost is a 10-20 cents per copy (with the first ones always free...), but with a cap of 5 million US$ per year. This means that companies like Apple and MS can simply pay that 5 million once a year and distribute it freely. This was the case for all previous MPEG standards as well, including MPEG1 and MPEG4 ASP. MPEG2 had a similar setup minus the cap, which is why Apple never included the MPEG2 codec with the free Quicktime.

What is different about H.264 is that there is also a cost for the media produced - the encoded stream or file on disc. This is not unheard of - MPEG2 had the same situation - and the reason is that the rightsholders want a piece of your cable bill when you watch digital channels. H.264 has always had a "temporary" exception for free (as in beer) media on the Internet, and that exception was recently made permanent - meaning that the licensing was essentially equivalent to MPEG1 and MPEG4 ASP for the common Internet video case.

Doc HM · May 11, 2011, 05:27 AM

Can't find the link but I believe Balmer has admitted that MS just bought the name. (well they bought it all FOR the name I mean). If so that's surely the most expensive single word in human history.

Eug · May 11, 2011, 07:44 AM

I'm sure he's just simplifying. Not just the name, but the user base as well.

I'm sure he has little interest in Skype's codec, cuz MS's own codecs are better anyway.

besson3c · May 11, 2011, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Security, you don't understand?

You don't remember the PDF exploit?

Black box or not is completely beside the point. Publicized vulnerabilities will be exploited. As long as you can't or won't patch them, you're at risk.

I see your point.

Well, this would not be too dissimilar than a Safari update that used to break Safari hacks pre-extension days, or the like. A total PITA, you are right, but...

besson3c · May 11, 2011, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by exca1ibur

You are correct.

The PDF exploit was blocked via Cydia even before Apple addressed it. Also it had nothing to do with jailbreaking that was an issue with iOS in general at the time. The main issue with security is that if SSH is running you can just use the standard root password to get in, if you don't change it. So change it, and you are fine, or turn off SSH.

No need to worry about bricking because if there is a problem all you do is a standard restore, and you are back to factory, no harm, no foul.

SSH, is disabled by default, isn't it?

Waragainstsleep · May 11, 2011, 08:27 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

SSH, is disabled by default, isn't it?

Not when you jailbreak.