From years of observation, it seems Microsoft tends to ignore products in industries that are in 1 of 2 states:
1. Stagnant growth 2. Low competition
Skype is in the former.
It's embedded deep in the culture to follow rather than lead. (Edit: I should add that it's not that Microsoft doesn't try to lead, its just that generally they aren't very good at it. They are much better as a second mover. Far more so it seems than other companies.)
Most of their great products were a response to a rapid rise of a competitor.
Windows after Apple's GUI. Word after Wordperfect. Excel after Lotus 1 2 3. IE after Netscape. Azure after AWS. C# & .NET after Java. SQL Server after Oracle.
Once the industry stops growing or there is no competition, the product is neglected or drifts listlessly unless another company causes the space to boom financially again or gain mindshare, in which case Microsoft might start moving again.
(The only place where Microsoft truly leads is in developer platforms, because they are a company of developers, so they get it better than the other products they offer.)
Don't get me wrong, I use Microsoft products almost exclusively.
I've just learned to be very depressed when Microsoft doesn't face an existential threat with the piece of software I use. The product will inevitably drift and likely even get worse over time, until another company can create an existential threat (like Chrome has done to an extent) and literally drag Microsoft kicking and screaming into putting serious thought into the product again.
It's just in their DNA, I guess...
But when they do finally get around to it, they usually do something cool. See VS Code, WSL, etc.
So we just need someone to make Skype-like products cool again, and ideally start making millions upon millions in the process, and then Skype will improve. :)
Could you elaborate on the difficulty with concurrent calls? I'm never in two or more calls at the same time so I'm curious.
I really don't like the current design because they took a lot of options away (e.g. you can't customize the themes that much and they look ugly to me). However, at least on Linux, it seems to be improving.
I think they are trying to be everything to everybody, power users and non-tech mobile users and are failing at both. The network effect part of this makes it hard to separate those two audiences though.
Is there a call/chat app that you like better?
OK i understand that, but at least have the option to somehow have "less than 3 phones and computers ringing at the same time for a call". Also , i know it s a windows thing , but i dont want to receive msg notifications on a computer if skype is not running on it (but i do want notifications if i have it running).
[I should note i m talking about the desktop version]
> Could you elaborate on the difficulty with concurrent calls?
Allow popping out each chat window separately. Switching from a call to a text message of another user causes redrawing the entire page and loses the layout every time. It's very annoying. Also don't reset the setting of (view full video) whenever i resize the window.
> Is there a call/chat app that you like better?
Good question. Zoom's video chat management seems more reasonable, and as for the chat, just use the skype classic layout, it's simple. In fact yes i think i like skype classic better ;)
Microsoft really don't care about its customers if you judge it on that application.
Not every product can be successful and its true for any company.
Teams isn't really up to feature parity yet, and the UI is awful; multitasking is completely impossible. Of course, the target isn't replacing SfB, actually, because Teams is really Microsoft Slack.
I think things were at their best in the Lync 2010 iteration, to be honest. The most egregious thing was when they bought Skype, rebranded Lync as Skype for Business, and clearly just did a light reskin of the client with Skype colors and logos - it was over a year before the About dialog showed a minor revision bump, or stopped calling itself Lync 2013.
Teams is a mess. An electron app that is a voice/video/chat/forum/Sharepoint front end can’t be anything else.
All IM and Voice apps only get worse over time. AIM was probably the best overall client to this day. The video stuff was lacking (understanding given it was 20 years ago), but the UI wasn’t hostile, audio was great, and end to end encryption was there for those who wanted it.
The other thing is that people can’t communicate between teams and Skype in many scenarios. There are also potential compliance gotchas for some scenarios that are difficult to identify.
I’m wary of anything new with Microsoft as when you stray from the happy path, (which changes over time) they don’t test or fix regressions anymore and create downstream problems.
So the answer as I see it is "because of Teams".
Now when I look at Slack or Atom...