Skype for Android is available
skype.com
skype.com
This could be an issue with the protocol itself, but it's still annoying.
When I am running Skype on my iPhone or now on Android and at the same time having a conversation on the PC, my phone will notify me for every incoming and outgoing message happening on the PC.
Now, on the PC, a conversation is something happening quickly and in abundance. This basically leads to my phone constantly vibrating.
Jabber, even back then, recognized this. When you log in multiple times, it registers multiple presences and once you send a message from one location, all other clients will not be notified any more until you start a new conversation on that device.
This is a requirement as always-on mobile-clients are appearing.
Now, on the iPhone I can at least quickly start Skype, make a call and close it down using the easily accessible task manager.
On Android, while still possible, it's a really big tour through nearly every screen the OS can throw at me before I finally can close down the application for good.
Also, Android Skype insta-crashes the WhatsApp beta and seems to be constantly sending/receiving data (the background sync icon is constantly on until I uninstall Skype).
Unusable. Sorry.
What are you talking about? The Skype client itself has the option to either go offline or sign out completely, which stops the service altogether.
And I just tried Skype for my HTC Desire on 2.1 and yikes, he's right: it's a usability nightmare.
You can continue a Jabber conversation by just sending a message from the device you moved to. As far as I know, all subsequent messages will go to that one. It's also great for preventing snooping when you leave one device on at work and chat on another at home.
I want all messages to appear on all devices. I want to be able to close the laptop, get up from the couch and continue the conversation seamlessly on the desktop or phone - with all context being present.
It's just the little notification sound that needs to be handled smarter.
Ideally skype would only ring the notification on the device that you have been last active on (skype already detects that anyways). Also let me select a default device that becomes the noisy one when all clients have gone idle for a while.
Unfortunately the impl is a far cry from that. As it stands skype doesn't even reliably deliver all messages to all clients for me. When I leave my desktop-skype running over night and open the laptop in the morning then sometimes I'll receive the messages from the night - but usually not. I literally have to walk around and check any open skype clients (including the one at work that I forgot to shutdown over the weekend..) if I want to ensure I didn't miss a message.
It's not exactly rocket science and I sometimes wonder what those skype engineers are doing all day. ;-)
I haven't noticed any functional advancement in ~3 years. Only some minor GUI polishing.
Sidenote: So skype is now available for many major platforms including iPhone, Symbian and now Android. Does anyone know if Skype (and not skype-lite) is available on blackberry?
Can you link/quote the part that says that? I can't see it.
edit: Sorry, I read your post wrong. I thought you meant, "skype over wifi is (a feature that) is only available in the US". Rather, I see now you mean, "Those in the US can only use skype over wifi (not on 3G networks)".
I just went through the whole process of skyping myself from phone to laptop, and back again (and getting some nasty feedback!) before realising what you meant!
On the bottom you can find the following disclaimers:
* Skype is not available in the Android Market in China or Japan.
* Skype has been tested on HTC and Motorola devices with Android OS 2.1 and above. It may work on other Android phones, but we can’t guarantee full functionality or compatibility.
* We’re aware of some problems with the Samsung Galaxy S, and we’re looking to address these in the future.
* It’s free to use Skype in a WiFi zone. If you use Skype with a mobile data connection, operator charges may apply, so we recommend an unlimited data plan.
* In the US, you can make calls only over WiFi.
* A fair use policy applies to unlimited subscriptions.
Welcome to the wonderful world of proprietary software.
The client is pretty packed. Apparently you can't use it on wifi though, but otherwise it's a full-blown Skype client.
Here's to hoping they fix the version for the Galaxy S soon.
[Edit: hm wait, this might be my provider limiting VOIP bandwidth :S]
oh boy oh boy oh boy !
Does everything work, or do vendors have too much integration to install the vanilla OS?
As for rooting, see here. http://android-dls.com/wiki/index.php?title=Why_Root
... what's the name of the alternative that actually works over 3G?
Is there some sort of workaround for root users that can fool it into thinking it's on WiFi?
I've found the quality to be pretty good - but I do only use it via wifi.
I signed up for a free geographic number from Sipgate, and set up sipdroid to automatically answer any calls that are made to it whenever I have connectivity.
I've found it's a fairly nice solution, as missed calls (e.g. when I don't have connectivity) are automatically taken care of by Sipgate's free answer service (and I'm sent the message as an mp3 via email).
I'm using it with an HTC Desire.
use at your own caution
(I'm probably going to get downvoted for this because it always seems to be that any negative comment about skype == downvotes on HN.)
:edit: a hacker I've been following for a some time has a blog and writes about emerging open voice+video standards. I think that Thiago Camargo expresses many points very well. http://xmppjingle.blogspot.com/
Ideals aren't about convenience, that's why they're ideals. While I love Skype, I can appreciate the fact that it's stifling innovation and killing interoperability, since you can't use it with SIP...
It's as if we had email, and then a proprietary protocol which everyone used. Countless services would never have been created.
EDIT: Wait, this just converts your SIP phones to work with Skype, it doesn't allow you to call other SIP phones. E.g. I can't use it to call Truphone/Gizmo users with it. It's a two-tier phone service, same as IM clients. This is why the GP's ideals are a good thing.
anyways I don't like making predictions, but I can't see skype lasting 10+ years if they continue to pursue a closed architecture. it just will not happen.
What is most uncomfortable about skype to me is the fact that they are the single provider of their service; for example if you wanted to use another service you wouldn't be allowed to use that other network to contact a skype user. This is an example of a choice I consider to be wrong.
I can't see skype lasting 10+ years if they continue to
pursue a closed architecture. it just will not happen.
You can obtain similar functionality using a generic SIP VoIP account purchased through a reseller .. which will be free from the negative restrictions mentioned.
My understanding is that there's a benefit to choosing SIP over skype, because the technology is interoperable and non-proprietary.
I suppose, my point is that people don't need to rely on Skype to be able to call people for free. In my opinion, Skype isn't the only - or even best - choice.
Facetime on iphone 4 uses open standards including SIP, STUN and ICE. These are mature p2p technologies heavily used and deployed and are the same used in xmpp jingle specifications. open standard p2p already won this battle which skype will persist to fight.
I don't understand why the fact that Skype's proprietary makes it 'work [..] well going through a firewall'.
However, I'd argue that the fact Skype might work well with firewall's isn't _because_ it's proprietary. An open-standard could work just as well; it would take more effort and time to achieve it, but I think it would be worth the extra effort because the benefit would be more universally felt.
In my opinion, this shouldn't be a primary reason for preferring a proprietary solution over an open standard. If it was, Microsoft's early efforts to introduce proprietary tags into HTML markup wouldn't have been so universally deplored.
I can't imagine what kind of confusion would cause somebody to type that.
What sort of BS is that. For most people, it solves a real world problem very well.
I am of the opinion that for a site called Hacker News, most people here seem complacent to emprofit a company that locks you into their walled garden, meanwhile giving the finger to choice enablers that do the same exact thing.
I'd like to be able to contact friends/family/business partners using a service of my own chooising.