GNU Free Call has been announced (Skype-like software)
planet.gnu.org
planet.gnu.org
However, as a person who talks to people outside the US all the time (therefore, can be legally spied on by NSA, et al, most likely), it is a little annoying I am probably being recorded at least some of the time when on skype (although the most they're going to do is hear about some iPad app specs a few months early).
For people who talk about more important things (say, rebel troop movements in Libya), I think a secure communications channel such as a GFC would be a fantastic thing, and I'd surely make an account to encourage that.
I honestly do not think you stand a chance competing against Skype, it is so insanely great and wide spread. I'd be impressed if they can actually make the UI/UX better than the latest (horrendous) Skype client.
It's like the Diaspora of VoIP.
See firefox, inkscape as successful examples.
1/ policy makers do not like running a third-party closed-source obfuscated binary with undefined behavior aggressively evading firewalls inside their business or country (in the case of China).
2/ the network effects are not nearly as strong as, for instance, ebay's. i do not care about being able to call random strangers on skype, only about my contacts. the scope of the network effect is to some extent that of a social group, not an entire market.
But more importantly Skype can fix the ux. They cannot fix the freedom issue (and if they somehow manage to do so anyway, great).
So Alice has to install Google talk to call you, skype to call Bob and SIP to talk to Carol
Meanwhile Bob has microsoft phone to talk to ....
Which cell phone manufacturer has "taken all"?
You seem to be basing your statement on the impossibility of interoperability, which is an odd position to take, at least if you actually think about it.
Phone numbers are universal. It's not like an iPhone user on AT&T can only call other AT&T users[1], or that T-Mobile customers can only call other T-Mobile customers. Skype limits me to reaching out to other Skype users. FaceTime only works with people who have bought into the Apple ecosystem.
[1] Although one might suggest that these iPhone users can, in fact, call no one.
Yes, but do you remember surfing the web in the days between Netscape 4 and Mozilla being launched, and quite how horrible it was for anyone with a technical mind who just wanted to be able to, e.g., debug some Javascript in a timely manner?
If FF was only available for Linux it would never have taken off. Attempting to challenge an already hugely successful product that's works excellently on Windows is every bit as pointless as writing yet another office suite.
The real tragedy is the engineering effort that will go into this, when it could be spent on parts of the Linux system that really matter to the average user, e.g. sorting out the mess that is sound.
Firefox is a great alternative to a sucky dominant player (IE). Inkscape is a great alternative to expensive dominant players (graphic software). The problem with this case is that Skype is excellent, free and dominant. There is no incentive for users to switch, other than being open source (which appeals to people like you and me, but the masses don't care)
...unless you're on Linux.
It's Galaxy S Android client doesn't work and the problem hasn't been addressed in many months.
I'll be one of the first to jump ship.
While that is true, occasionally people care about the consequences of software being open. I think that skype is an example where this is true. I personally don't have any ideological problems with using non-free software, but I do mind the fact that skype on ubuntu is an abomination UI-wise (believe me, it is far far worse than the windows and osx versions), and I have never actually managed to make a call with it. I know that at least some of my (non-geek) friends share that pain.
Unfortunately I agree that the network effect probably means that the chances of any open alternative are slim to none.
Agreed about Skype for Linux, mind.
Sorry if that wasn't clear.
Not that it matters of course, the network effects are so strong it will be hard to beat.
If they've done nothing else, the FSF has accomplished that.
In addition, the Android version lacks video, and is a bit clunky, but I have not had problems with its performance.
The strange thing I notice about this submission is that it's not actually a software product. It's not even a prototype "weekend project, try it out" thing. It's just a announcement that somebody intends to build some software.
I'm surprised to find it at the top of HN.
Everyone I know who uses Skype complains (eventually) about the quality.
Additionally, Skype is effectively a closed (in the sense of opaque) system controlled by corporate interests. Now, I'm not against someone making a fair return on a fair service, but I do worry about who has control over my information. Who is Skype accountable to?
Some random thoughts on scenarios where this might make sense over Skype
1. You want to make a game that includes voice chat.
2. You're building something that's more a one-way flow of audio (like a baby monitor).
3. Self hosted Twilio type services.
4. An in house/office intercom system.
Actually, it should. If you want to have meaningful external/community participation in a project, you need to involve the community from the earliest stages. (Sorry, I'm a bit sensitive to this complaint after working for Mozilla. Apparently some people would rather we do our planning and development in secret, rather than allow community access to our design and product discussions.)
Does design by committee (or, worse, design by community) ever work? You are likely more qualified to answer this question than I am, but in my experience it seems like the only time that it can work is when the project has very strong guiding principles and a shepherd (or small number of shepherds) willing to say "your feature/idea is cool, but it doesn't fit right now".
Everybody has a different idea of what a Skype replacement should do. I want something which will run on Linux or Android and use my Google Voice for calling in. Maybe others want something which will allow them to have conversations of a religious or seditious nature in countries which don't allow that without worrying about getting caught. Others use it for phone interviews with video because the user experience is better than standard telephony. Still others just want to talk to relatives in other countries without paying a fortune.
Which ones should the project focus on first? Obviously I'm going to be passionate about my preferred use cases, but if I'm in the minority then from a traction and market share standpoint it makes sense to work on other use cases first. But I don't even see a lot of thought around this, just a wish list of high-level features.
In five years, maybe I'll be using GNU telephony all the time. Or maybe it will have failed to gain traction or the developers will have gotten bogged down trying to implement everything at once or chasing rabbits down community rabbit holes. Show me a product and I'll be excited. Show me a press release and I'll be cynical.
</unnecessarily long rant>
The Freedom Box can happen with current technology, yet I often feel people treat it like they do the Singularity. Are we so poor at rationality, or did I miss some reason why the Freedom Box should fail?
They have binaries for any major linux distro , mac and windows, and it's fairly easy to compile from source if needed.
The NAT traversal improved tremendously by the transparently use of stun, no configuration necessary. Give me my SIP IPv6 address and ekiga would work just fine for everyone, no need for P2P, except perhaps behind very restrictive firewalls.
Don't forget that Skype's UX is only one fraction of why people like or don't like Skype. The codec they use is often vastly superior for "normal people" situations than even commercial SIP clients, or the WebEx-es of the world.
I don't doubt that the Skype network topology has something to do with it, but I am (perhaps erroneously) lumping those features together for the purposes of this discussion.
I often find audio and video quality of ekiga superior to skype. It's understandable that it might be difficult to convince someone to switch, as the other side must have a sip account and skype account creation is particularly easy, but in terms of audio and video quality, I think ekiga wins, specially the latest versions.
I also run a private mumble server which uses speex and the audio quality is amazing, only limited by the available bandwidth.
I think it has a better chance than zfone did or does:
1. Built in desktop 'platform', ie market, the Linux distros.
2. Skype and Mobile Operators will make enough potential customers enemies on mobile that any competitor who gets a mobile product out the door will do well..
I like their desktop approach better than zfone..as zfone wanted to piggyback on desktop clients rather than come up with their own P2p platform.
...it's gonna go absolutely nowhere. Next please.