digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at linuxjournal.com

Skype for Linux: Where's the R-E-S-P-E-C-T?

linuxjournal.com — We Linux folk are the reliable early adopters of innovative applications like Skype who have done a disproportionate amount of work to make it popular. The gift horse we've gotten in return is a usable but much less feature-rich version that is years behind the other platforms.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Dongvid, on 06/21/2008, -5/+52This is probably the dumbest thing to gripe about, but what annoys me most about Skype on Linux is that they havn't added that thing that allows you to see if someone is typing to you or not. It really hinders the text chat.
    • Fergy, on 06/22/2008, -3/+24Yeah, really the most important thing about Skype is text chat...
      • PopcornDave, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5Yeah, you say that, but there's a lot of people that just use it for text chat. I still can't figure out why they don't just use AIM, ICQ or something similar.
    • Dracusis, on 06/22/2008, -14/+9I thought Linux was so cool because if some program doesn't do what you want you just jump on the open source bandwagon and do it yourself?
      • IdanH14, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4There's Ekiga Softphone, but I don't know how similar it is to Skype, or even if it's open source.
        • madeinbrazil, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3I tried Ekiga but I wasn't too happy with it. I don't know if it was the problem with the VoIP company I used or Ekiga itself though.
      • Giga, on 06/22/2008, -1/+7You can make open source replacements on Windows as well. On Linux, most software is open source meaning you can modify and fix problems in existing software. Having a proprietary application on Linux doesn't make it inherently open.
      • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Ekiga is open source, but the problem is you can't make a video/voice call from ekiga to skype or vice versa. Skype is mainstream and linux needs to comunicate with other platforms to check if Windows is catching up!
        • voyvf, on 06/25/2008, -0/+1Sure you can. You just have to reverse engineer Skype's protocol.

          It's what was done with ICQ, originally. A PITA, really, since Mirabilis kept changing the protocol and breaking all the FOSS apps that were using it.
      • MacParrot, on 06/22/2008, -3/+6@Dracusis

        I hate to make assumptions, but I'm guessing yours is a troll comment (we need a better word for that...Trollment?). Not everyone who uses Linux has any desire or need to code open source programs. Many users use it because it meets every one of whatever their needs are and doesn't require OS X or Windows to just get it done.

        While mostly free is certainly a pretty good incentive, others may use it because it does what they need without all the bloat that's in other more mainstream OS.
      • PaulOwen, on 06/22/2008, -8/+5@Dracusis is actually right.

        When open source advocates want to tell you how Linux has the upper hand, they'll tell you about hwo people can write their own programs and share the code. But open source advocates don't like it when that argument is given back to them which is hypocritical. I've got LPI2 BTW (I don't currently run Linux though).

        Compared to the number of Windows users, Linux is a drop in a big ocean and sorry but writing a whole new VOIP protocol stack for a small but vociferously noisy group is hard enough.

        You want R-E-S-P-E-C-T just because you run Linux? Grow up. Skype is free after all - write your own (and hey even charge for it if you like) or keep quiet, but don't whinge that free software doesn't do everything you want.

        There's your R-E-S-P-E-C-T.
        • mrsteveman1, on 06/22/2008, -6/+4First of all, you didn't even get your point across before turning your comment into a rant against Linux and its users, telling people to "grow up". Shut the ***** up, you are annoying.

          Are you saying that Linux users should develop their own Skype app? What makes you think Skype/ebay would allow it to work with the network? Yea, thats the problem you don't seem to understand, people would be happy to develop their own if they could, and they have proven this point a number of times. But if Skype won't allow any 3rd party client to function, there isn't anything anyone can do.

          So to sum up your view, this is all a strike against Linux or its users, simply because a company who makes a proprietary app won't let users modify it to fix their lack of development?
        • MavRevMatt, on 06/22/2008, -5/+5Well ***** you too PaulOwen and welcome to my block list. You are one of the reasons open source will never be supported by big companies. The mindset that "Windows is top and that's all we have to do" is ridiculous. The fact that Skype doesn't do anything that they should now for Linux is even worse because, correct me if I'm wrong, but Skype stole code from other projects didn't it?
        • PaulOwen, on 06/23/2008, -2/+1@ MamRevMatt

          Welcome to your blocked list? Oh no! Please, PUHLEEASE don't put me on your blocked list ... how could you be so cruel?

          Write your OWN protocol stack, that's what I said. OpenOffice.org did it, and Microsoft followed - do you even use free software, or do you just whinge about Microsoft all day you big baby - your mommy's calling you up from your basement for dinner. Wash your hands.
      • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -3/+5Dracusis: You're right! We'll get right on that! Oh, wait. Crap. Skype's a closed source app with a proprietary protocol -- since there's no documentation about the Skype protocol or its codecs, we can't just hop out there, bang out a compatible client, and Skype away with all you Windows snobs. :P
        • Dracusis, on 06/24/2008, -1/+2Then complain that's it's not open!

          Whining about it not supporting feature X for a an OS that has a consumer penetration level of around 1% (as a Consumer/Desktop OS) is NOT going to make it happen. Seriously, what were you lot expecting?

          Skype is in the business of making money, thus the majority of their development time will be spent on operating systems where consumer adoption is high. Regardless, wasn't the release of Wine 1.0 meant to signal the end of Linux users griping about your OS lacking software support?

          ~sigh~

          I though Linux users were smart, but from the comments here all I see is a bunch of bitter and immature cry babies who can't handle not having their cake and eating it too. Your OS of choice has a hell of a lot going for it, but expecting top-end support from commercial software companies like Skype is borderline moronic. Yes, it's be nice, but it's not going to happen because there's virtually no return of investment for a full linux client. You'd be better off rallying them to open up their protocols or offer some kind of open service so that the Linux community can create and support it's own Skype client, but you're not, you're just pissing about and whining.

          Grow up.
    • yayintertubes, on 06/22/2008, -7/+17I don't know why anyone's complaining.. Skype for windows is a piece of *****, you linux users aint missing out on anything.
    • IdanH14, on 06/22/2008, -0/+6It doesn't have that feature? :O I didn't even notice. Probably because I don't use it for text messages. :D
    • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5I like skype for linux. true there are some key features missing (mostly paid), but the interface is simple, elegant, little retro yet very functional, plus every featture I use in windows is in linux skype, so it doesn't bother me. also the fullscreen view of video calls is much clearer than in windows (but this might be the OS, not skype)
    • Amiga500, on 06/22/2008, -3/+2Dude, just run the Windows version of Skype using Wine. I think I saw on Digg recently that version 1.0 came out, so it should work as fast if not faster than the it would running on Windows.
  • n0odles, on 06/21/2008, -4/+126He forgot to mention the fact that Skype was taken to court & lost for stealing open source software and refused to acknowledge that the open source GPL license exists:

    http://arstechnica.com/journals/linux.ars/2007/07/ ...
    • qwuinc, on 06/22/2008, -0/+19And they were basically digging their own grave with that claim ;-)

      No GPL -> plain copyright violation... "oops"
      • MikeSD34, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10They were probably going to claim that because there was no GPL and the source was distributed that it was somehow public domain.
  • Dzonatas, on 06/22/2008, -2/+72Sounds like pidgin needs an interface to SkypeAPI.
    • ascendingPig, on 06/22/2008, -1/+17There actually is one, an extension called Skype4Pidgin, but you need Skype running to do the actual calls anyway.
      • MavRevMatt, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5Which is quite useless in the long run. Why bother using Pidgin if you already have Skype open?
        • mossblaser, on 06/24/2008, -0/+1The main reason I do is so that I can take advantage of Pidgin's general neat features (pounces, seamless switching between different protocals, excellent log searching stuff, GTK intergration (for gnome) and so I can have just one contact list.). It is well worth doing if you use other protocals as well but if its just skype, your milage may vary...
      • redwallhp, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4I'm sure some enterprising Linux user could create a hack to Skype without Skype. Not an easy undertaking, but it's essentially possible,
    • madeinbrazil, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3The way Skype's API is build only allows anything to communicate to Skype if it is actually opened. Thus, although Skype4Pidgin has a very good heart it doesn't serve that much purpose.
  • TheRealToma, on 06/22/2008, -5/+22I wouldnt bother complaining about a proprietary interface, built rather shakily on an proprietary protocol. Dont use it, and theyll get the idea.
    "But my mum uses skype!" - So? Get her onto a good SIP account and program.
    • gavintlgold, on 06/22/2008, -1/+16Ekiga does not work as well as skype does, even though skype is horrible.
    • MasteRR, on 06/22/2008, -6/+16"But (insert name of any of the millions of Skype users who don't give a ***** about Linux here) uses Skype."

      Try and create a revolution on a large group of people who don't care. Ain't gonna happen.
      • ErikHK, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5Exactly, in a perfect world I wouldn't have to use MSN...
    • blackjack75, on 06/22/2008, -2/+12You can digg down masterRR as much as you want but what he says is just the plain truth. The average people don't care. Skype does work exceptionnally well on Windows (and macs). There's no way I'll be able to convince the dozens of people I know to use anything else.

      The only solution is for someone to reverse engineer the protocol and make it open source, so it can be integrated into pidgin, adium, or whatever.
      • sark666, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7Yes what you say is true, but a shame. It's like when firefox starting becoming popular. People were annoyed with IE's security and popups, so switched to something better. But one of the huge underlying benefits was standards compliance. No longer did you need IE to get the best experience. Thank god MS let IE rot for awhile. IF they just fixed some security issues and stopped popups and maybe added tabbed browsing, a lot of people wouldn't bother switching.

        But because FF became popular, stnadards compliance rules the day now, and any broswer,OS or little internet device will give you a good experience because of it.

        Same thing here, the standard is SIP. There are tons of devices, tons of clients for all OS's. It has video support, you can have encryption with addons. And the early firewall issues are pretty much long gone. You can do neat things, like capture the incoming call and have call display on your myth frontend. Not for the faint of heart but you could run your own asterisk server.

        Routers these days have built in voip ports. Use your own phone, without needing a computer on. SIP is the standard and should be the future, but I'm not sure what it'll take for joe blow to 'get it' this time around.
        • Rocco03, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Yeah, but in the case of IE it was the Windows community, a large community, that wanted a change.
        • sark666, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1You missed my point. They only wanted a change because pop-ups and security issued plagued IE. Fix those two things and most wouldn't have switched. When really standards compliance is a huge issue, but if you said to joe blow back then, 'hey switch to FF it's standards compliant!', most would have said 'yeah whatever', not realizing how big an issue it is.

          Only because of microsoft's neglect did users switch. Well, the same thing here, skype is a massive proprietary lockin, but users don't care. They should but they don't.

          In this situation skype is 'handy' and pretty easy to use. There isn't any glaring security issues or annoyances like popups to make them want to switch.

          So basically I'm saying people should want a change whether they realize it or not. They should have wanted a change from IE not because of security/popups but because of standards, so to enjoy the net one wouldn't need MS or nothing. But of course joe blow is never going to see it that way and there is nothing sorely lacking in skype to make uses switch again, so I'm afraid this lockin is going to last a long time.

          Btw, I think microsoft letting IE rot is one of the biggest blunders the company ever did. The browser war was over, microsoft had won. And then they did nothing. Thank god they did, or otherwise people would say firefox? What's that? I use IE and that's the only way on the net.
  • colonelbuckshot, on 06/22/2008, -6/+53Instead of bitching about this, I'd love to see the Mozilla project (or some other open-source/protocol people) make an app that is to Skype what Firefox is to IE.
    • samthurston, on 06/22/2008, -1/+24openWengo:
      http://www.openwengo.org/

      Problem being, it doesn't work with skype and most voip users are on skype, so... kind of a problem unless you can get people to switch.

      • macaholic, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4Ugg wat is with the VoIP applications and not offering a 64-bit version? People think Skype is bad on 32-bit linux? Try force installing it on 64-bit, it's almost unusable. And does openwengo have a 64-bit download? I can't seem to find it on there site.
        EDIT: Well it appears to be in the ubuntu repositories, too bad I'm not on ubuntu/debian, guess I'll just download the source package from the ubuntu site and compile it by hand. Why wouldn't they put a 64-bit binary on their site?
    • courtjester555, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3Ekiga? Comes preinstalled in Ubuntu. Not sure if they fill the exact same roles though...
    • neosublime, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4What about Gizmo5?
    • ilgaz, on 06/24/2008, -0/+1Gizmo has everything. Even big name company support but people still use Skype and whine about it.
  • ileftfark, on 06/22/2008, -7/+25BAWW- a proprietary closed-source application doesn't give us the same attention as it does for the other markets, which carry >95% of their users.

    I run Linux almost exclusively, but feel no entitlement to any for-profit applications. If the author was so instrumental in getting Skype to the mainstream, I have every bit of confidence that he will be able to propogate an open-source alternative that will be every bit as feature-rich, stable, and usable as Skype. I look forward to seeing it in the repositories.
    • Rocco03, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Don't hold your breath.
    • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3How 'bout the paying users? Do they get any special treatment, or should they just shut their cake holes and keep sending money every year for their POTS termination services like good little consumers?
    • Twee, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1BAWW -- Built Around the Windows World?
  • gurellia53, on 06/22/2008, -17/+76Skype: So how do you like the new GUI?
    Linux User: I want a freaking command line!
  • Alex2, on 06/22/2008, -8/+5Sounds like someone isn't running Asterisk on their OpenWRT box.
    Bitter Much?
  • legendxx, on 06/22/2008, -15/+13Yeah they should devote time to appeasing the linux nerds and not to scaling their application, which is sorely needs.. good idea.
    • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -4/+8yes, they should!
      because if "linux nerds" didn't exist, now you were gonna be stuck with windows 98, IE5 and send e-mails to communicate instead fo real-time video voice calls.
      • MavRevMatt, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4And about what, 70 - 80 % of the internet would be gone.
        • Serial0Hacker, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0It would run Xenix 386 as it should. It would go down when someone VTP into thier machine.
    • legendxx, on 06/22/2008, -3/+2Rofl please.. you guys make great foundation programs like linux and apache.. but suck ass when it comes to anything beyond that.
  • vacax, on 06/22/2008, -25/+83Prepare to feel the wrath of 0% of the people!
  • Holocaust, on 06/22/2008, -11/+2Do diggers go to bed?
    • aussieNickuss, on 06/22/2008, -0/+8They do on the side of the earth that is dark at a particular point in time.
      • nielkie, on 06/22/2008, -0/+6Aren't digger nocturnal?
        • Pixelante, on 06/22/2008, -2/+3Hamsters are nocturnal too, but at least they do something meaningful.
  • scotishstriker, on 06/22/2008, -10/+4what a slow day for digg
  • Sliperyfish, on 06/22/2008, -9/+19Umm, there is a far greater userbase for windows. Why would they put more effort into a prouduct less people will use?
    • aussieNickuss, on 06/22/2008, -5/+8Out of all the staff that work on Skype, there is only one guy who has the sole responsibility of porting it to Mac and Linux. Their priorities are Windows > Mac > Linux, so sorry guys.....you have to wait your turn.
    • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -5/+2I hope you were just being sarcastic!
    • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7Um, because some of them will *pay* for their service if it's sufficiently useful? $3 a month for unlimited local/long distance calling kicks ass, and Skype actually happens to work for me just fine for what do with it (voice calling), but it *does* suck that features available on win32 aren't available on the other platforms they supposedly support. I *am* paying them, after all -- it'd sure be nice not to be completely ignored by the people I'm paying.
  • teh_spazz, on 06/22/2008, -2/+7Probably the millions of users on Windows and OS X?
    • bdbr, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Its a little strange that the poster feels that unix Skype users are "early adopters", when Skype has been on Windows for years, or that unix users are the ones making Skype popular when its popularity preceded the Linux version.
    • shadowsurfr1, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1OS X is only around 2.7 now. Nothing terribly exciting.
  • JrGhoull, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5if you have an earlier version of skype, then you have skype. the newer version(s) dont have much in the way of new super useful features. even the new "revolutionary" skype that is in beta right now isnt much to write home about. the newest and best feature that the beta version has is that it does away with all the chat boxes by incorporating them into the skype chat list. in exchange however, the skype chat box is now HUGE and will take up most of your screen.

    what i dont get is that if there is an open sourced version of skype, couldnt linux users modify it to include all the new features?

    note: i just remembered...if you really want skype, just use wine
    • twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2008, -7/+2First they boast and brag at how 'lean' their systems are and they'd never use something like windows which is a 'hog' (My XP boots from off to fully loaded desktop than k/ubuntu does from off to log in screen -- and loading the desktop on k/ubuntu takes like 3x longer than the boot)..
      And now they WANT the bloat and crap that windows have...
      I stopped using skype years ago because it just got to be too bloated.

      And yeah... I dont get why some users cant just whip up an add-on that mimics/emulates the windows version in terms of features.
      • MacParrot, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3Why don't "you" do it then and get back to all the linux users. Not everyone on linux is an uber-programmer.
      • twiztidsinz, on 06/22/2008, -4/+1Because -I- (you dont use quotes to accent or add emphasis to a word, there are plenty of other characters that can do that) am not a programmer, because -I- do not use linux and because -I- have no desire to do it.
        I don't use linux (though I love and support the opensource nature of it) because nothing I do can be done better or easier on Linux.

        Go back to your self-congratulating, smug little mac prick.
    • aussieNickuss, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3Most of the updates are to do with the audio compression and transmission technologies.......all under the hood stuff. Apparently the upcoming version is going to have superior audio quality and better compression to reduce bandwidth usage.
    • gnimsh, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2I tried installing the beta 4 with wine, it failed...
  • molom, on 06/22/2008, -1/+9I don't see the big deal, at least ebay (Ebay owns skype) is providing us a linux version that can make calls unlike Joost, where they don't provide a linux version at all.
  • agentBanana, on 06/22/2008, -3/+13Skype sucks anyway. They steal your account balance if it is idle for over 180 days. I will never give them another penny.
    • blackjack75, on 06/22/2008, -3/+8On the other hand if you don't send say, one sms every six months (or make a call), why the hell do you have money on your skypeout account?

      I agree the policy sucks however, but it's not that hard to live by if you actually use the service.
      • agentBanana, on 06/23/2008, -0/+2My SkypeOut balance was leftover from when I used their service more frequently. However, I would still use it on an infrequent basis for things like long conference calls--that is until Skype decided to use my idle account balance as their personal piggy bank.
    • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4skype for linux isn't open source, it's just free like the windows version. there's a difference between open source and free for use.
      • moonman36, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3Skype is free as in beer, but not free as in speech.
    • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1Do yourself a favor: don't bother with a prepaid cell phone :) With few exceptions (T-Mobile comes to mind -- once you've put a combined $100 of prepaid minutes on a single prepaid phone, they won't expire your unused minutes for a year instead of the usual 30 days, and they give you an extra stipend of minutes), prepaid minutes get munched very quickly if you let them idle. Many companies expire them in 30 days (they *will* get their money, whether you want them to or not :)). Others let them live three months. Only once you've thrown a big pile of money at a prepaid do the minutes start living longer idle lifetimes.
      • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1Yay for Vodafone (Australia).
        365 day credit. Even if you only recharge with $20.
        Love it!
  • MBHockey, on 06/22/2008, -13/+2Linux?
  • walnoj, on 06/22/2008, -18/+9You'll get your R-E-S-P-E-C-T when Linux gets a much larger U-S-E-R-B-A-S-E. Sorry fellows, them's the breaks. I wish they'd help you out, but there's not enough of you to warrant this much. I'd be happy that they made a Linux version at all.
    • silfiriel, on 06/22/2008, -4/+4we can't get a larger userbase, with D-U-M-B-A-S-S-E-S (that spells dumbasses) like you.
    • MavRevMatt, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Again I say, that's the reason Windows will always be on top. Because of ignorant assholes like yourself. Thank you.
    • Atomic1fire, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1play nice and G-R-O-W-U-P (that spells grow up for the fighting children over here)
  • banmaster, on 06/22/2008, -14/+4Better title for this story -
    Skype for Linux: Who the ***** cares
    • molom, on 06/22/2008, -1/+10Ummmm... Linux users maybe?
      • crossmr, on 06/22/2008, -11/+2So there is like you, that guy over there and linus.... why don't you form a club so your moms can tell you all how cool you are.
  • FarisMadi, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4I only use linux and i use skype on it
    but believe me there are loads of differences between skype-linux and skype-windows
    many times skype-linux get crazy and i dont know why.
    So, I suggested we as linux community to build our own skype like our own msn "amsn"
    • molom, on 06/22/2008, -0/+8Thats not possible because Skype uses a propriety network that Skype is only allowed to use.
      There are already alternatives like OpenWengo and Google Talk (Not sure if its available for Linux), but they can't and don't use the skype network. If there was a complete skype equivalent, people wouldn't be complaining.
      • MavRevMatt, on 06/22/2008, -2/+2And that's the problem with people who don't understand this saying "oh it's linux go build your own". It's not possible, that's why we're complaining.
      • FarisMadi, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1Yes, we are linux and lets go and build our own.
        if you cant mimic skype because of the "property thing" then lets build our network, our property
  • SEGA4life, on 06/22/2008, -17/+8People still use Linux ?????
  • viksmaester, on 06/22/2008, -16/+10well that's the true essence of using linux. You spend most of your time looking for stuff that might work and rest of the time trying to make it work. When there's actually time to work and be productive.....its windows XP time!!!!!!
    • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -1/+3If only digg was hosted on Windows XP maybe I could just use it instead of.... oh hang on.
  • tehmoth, on 06/22/2008, -10/+2Skype doesn't show Linux users respect because they gave up on open formats and standards in choosing a proprietary protocol and network for VOIP without complaining. Skype knows Linux users are an easy lay.
    • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -2/+3Lol. Why did they end up in court after trying to steal our code? Oh cause we are soooo easy.
  • Vektuz, on 06/22/2008, -13/+8thats because the platform is years behind the other platforms in terms of being able to build an app that works on every distro. Its a tech support nightmare
  • whiteguysamurai, on 06/22/2008, -10/+3Because linux scares the ***** out of my father, and that guy is always buying ***** online.
    Bottom line, linux is still too intimidating to windows people, one day, this will be fixed.
    • markmeinteil, on 06/22/2008, -2/+9Since 99% of all home users just operate a web browser when they "use" the computer. I have no idea why so many people fear it. There is less to fear with Linux than Windows. (Like trojans, spyware, adware, keyloggers, malicious hackers, Steve Balmer.) A distro like Ubuntu is probably easier for a first time computer user than Vista.

      Or, you can always buy a Mac, and forget about all these issues altogether.
    • dudefaceguyman, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5I'm normally a mac/PC user and I finally got around to dropping Ubuntu on my computer for my first taste of Linux yesterday.

      I consider myself an average tech guy, but I see how this would be a great OS for the average joe...even though it'll frustrate them. Why? Because installing software is ***** confusing but it will prevent them from installing useless ***** that ends up breaking the computer. It's never anything like, "download then click to install" it's all this command line crap.

      Which is good! and I really am trying to learn it! But the average Joe will laugh at you if you suggest they learn that stuff. Luckily Ubuntu 8.04 comes with Open Office, Firefox, Gimp, and many other basic applications right off the bat that'll fill the needs of 95% of casual computer users out there. Also it auto updated everything drivers/software/ect it needed right off the bat for me. Great (not to mention flashy) little OS. Having fun with it. =]
      • manitoba98xp, on 06/22/2008, -1/+6There are many ways to install software. You don't have to use the command-line if you don't want to. (Though many Linux users do...)

        Ubuntu offers a nice "Install Applications" app which lists some common applications you might want. You pick one and click Install. It doesn't get easier than that. If you want the full APT package list, you can get that through Synaptic, the GUI package manager. More advanced, certainly, but still no CLI.

        And if you want to download the package from the site, many provide DEB packages for Ubuntu (you can also get many at sites like getdeb). Download that, double-click it, and it install via a GUI tool called "gdebi". Again, no CLI.

        The CLI is only really necessary for software installation if you need to compile the application or things like that. And to be honest, everything most users need is baked in already.
      • Rocco03, on 06/22/2008, -2/+2So, making it difficult to install new software is actually good?
        Then I have an idea for the ultimate system. It involves a PC and a hammer.
      • 1053r, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3I guess you didn't find the "add / remove..." entry under the applications menu that let's you install applications from a nice little GUI without messing around with any of that command line stuff.
        • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -0/+2You missed the point. When installing a virus involves downloading, extracting, (possibly compiling,) chmod +x, ./runvirus. how many people could be bothered. "Why cant my virus just auto install and run?"
      • markmeinteil, on 06/23/2008, -1/+3I have a feeling most Linux bashers have NEVER used the OS themselves. They just hear a 'word of mouth' experience from other non-Linux users, then repeat it whenever the opportunity arises.

        And that is why whenever a digg story about Linux pops up, I always have to read stupid posts of misinformation. Wait.... That's basically every digg story on any topic. Finding people on digg who are knowledgeable, yet objective is very rare indeed.
  • dasbacon, on 06/22/2008, -2/+5Skype 4.0 beta is horrid. They've integrated everything into one single window which annoys me a lot..
  • duckyinc, on 06/22/2008, -10/+3Skype thinks linux isn't worth it, just accept it and make your OS better? Or use wine if it's so awesome
    • manitoba98xp, on 06/22/2008, -2/+2If Skype "thinks linux isn't worth it", it certainly isn't because they think Linux needs to be "better". It's simply the installed user base in terms of desktops. There's no characteristic of Windows Vista that Linux lacks that makes it "better" to write Skype for it – there's simply more users, and thus more potential business.
      • duckyinc, on 06/22/2008, -4/+1If it's better than more people would use it.. right?
        • manitoba98xp, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Not necessarily. Besides, I never said Linux was better. I simply said that there's no attribute of Windows that makes it a superior platform for a VoIP client.

          Which is "better" is really a matter of opinion. But most people simply get the "default", which is currently Windows. By your logic, China is the best nation on Earth, Internet Explorer is the best browser, and John is the best male first name. Popularity is not a metric for quality.
        • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -0/+3The problem is that most computers come with windows installed so the average user doesnt even know there is a choice, let alone a better choice.
  • computershack, on 06/22/2008, -10/+2The Linux community has a reputation as being a bunch of freeloaders who refuse to pay for anything. Ebay bought Skype to make money out of it. So why should they bother giving anything but a cursory glance to an insignificant percentage of the desktop market who are mostly hell bent on paying nothing for what they use?
    • Frostek, on 06/22/2008, -0/+8Money saved on the OS, can be spent elsewhere. Like on eBay for example?
    • zeebo, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4That may be the reputation, but its wrong. We earned that reputation when Loki went under, but it wasn't our fault. Over the next few years we all learned just how horribly managed the company was. Linux users today support three different premium products designed to allow us to run Windows software, we support several multi-billion dollar corporations, and I personally spend several thousand dollars on software a year (mostly on games and donations).

      There are far fewer pirates on linux even by percentage than there are on windows. Of course that isn't all that surprising considering that perhaps as much as half of all the PCs in the world are running illicit copies of windows, which is what we have to thank for the plague of botnets we face today.
    • thallenthur, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5I have to disagree.
      1. Linux users are more likely to obey the rules and pay for something than Windows users. Most of the PC's have unauthorized Windows copies installed and no one amongst Windows userbase seems to care about piracy. On the other hand Linux gives you a great opportunity to get yourself legal OS which is not only free but also open source.
      2. The Linux userbase grows bigger and bigger with laptops such as Eee PC, MSI Wind, etc.
      • Atomic1fire, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2Plus linux is scalable
        there are versions for mobile phones, older pc's and more
        which means that you dont always need high end requirements
    • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -0/+3Im still yet to find a "cracked" version of any linux software, yet I still get spam offering me "discounted" (ie stolen and cracked) versions of all sorts of software. Let alone whole portion of the internet devoted to "cracked" software and "keygens".
  • IdanH14, on 06/22/2008, -3/+4I installed Skype on my Ubuntu machine just the other day, and it's horrible!
    In compare with the Windows version, there's nothing good to it. :( I just use my Windows VM to work with Skype, whenever I need it.
    • Macuyiko, on 06/22/2008, -0/+3Agreed, the Skype developers could at least try to make their program work with pulseaudio (and I mean: correctly and solidly work). A lot of Fedora/Ubuntu users are hating Skype just for that reason alone.
      • Frostek, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2Sorry, but I've been using Skype on Ubuntu since 2006 (I'm not even that great of a tech geek), and I think it works fine! It does VOIP perfectly, and my no-drivers-required Creative Labs Cam Optia works a treat with it. Any time I've had an issue, it's been because of Windows issues on the machines I was talking to.

        It would be nice to see a definite release schedule, even every 3 months would be good, but it's still not bloated in the Linux version, and I'm happy for it to receive small improvements, rather than turn into some huge resource hog.
        • Macuyiko, on 06/23/2008, -0/+1Skype used to work... Ubuntu hardy, try calling someone while playing music with some other app. Uninstalling pulseaudio doesn't count. You have to use the oss static Skype with padsp, also see this topic ( http://forum.skype.com/index.php?showtopic=119961 ) and numerous Ubuntu-forum posts. I've only just managed to get the normal Skype running, using libasound2 Intrepid-packages.
  • MattBD, on 06/22/2008, -0/+6There is a ray of hope: the Asus Eee PC includes Skype, and I'm sure that other subnotebooks which run Linux will also include it out of the box. So IMHO we are likely to see increasing demand for it. People who normally use Windows or a Mac but have an Eee PC will no doubt want a version that offers parity or near-parity with what they use on other machines. So give it a year or two and I reckon we might see some improvement.
  • 000ShaDoW000, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10I am no linux fan but my daughter has skype on her eeePC now and I belive thats some sort of linux OS isnt it?

    works fine i spoke to my sister and her kids in NZ for about 1 hour this morning (I live in AU)

    Used webcam with no issues at all
    • manitoba98xp, on 06/22/2008, -0/+8Assuming you didn't buy the Windows Eee PC, you're correct – it's a custom Xandros Linux distribution. Skype for Linux has most of the key features nowadays – it can place calls just fine, etc.

      Since the Eee PC was designed for Linux, all of the drivers, etc. are baked in to work wonderfully. That's the beauty of Asus' solution.

      The article is complaining about the new GUI, etc. not being immediately ported to Linux, but I'm glad Skype is working well for you.
  • jamesmcm, on 06/22/2008, -8/+3It's GNU/Linux :P
  • mohtasham, on 06/22/2008, -1/+5I kinda like the linux version more than the windows version. The linux version looks very clean and it has all necessary features that I use. The windows version is too complicated for me,
  • benasselstine, on 06/22/2008, -6/+1Skype isn't free software. Where's the respect for the freedom lovers?
    • MacParrot, on 06/22/2008, -2/+3Um....What? Funny, I downloaded Skype for the Mac and use it all the time and have yet to pay a dime for it.
      • Atomic1fire, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Wrong kind of free
        Free as in beer (no payment involved)
        Free as in speech (much more lax restrictions like you can change the source and distribute the software without copyright infridgement)
  • DarkJesus, on 06/22/2008, -2/+7A 64-bit version is needed.
    • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1True, though the 32-bit binaries run fine on 64-bit Ubuntu (8.04).
  • MrSarcasm, on 06/22/2008, -10/+1as an everyday skype user on windows desktops-linux servers: haha ***** that *****.
  • snatchertas, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2Skype is built on QT so they can develop cross-platform Win-Lin-OSX. Maybe the latest builds use flash for the fancy crap and you know this spells trouble for linux... (Why would linux users need the crapified new versions anyway?)
  • eclectro, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3OK skype is evil. Somebody show me an alternative to "skype-in" for $60 USD a year or less and runs on Linux.
    I wish that the Magic Jack had a linux client, but customer reviews say it's very flaky on Windows even.
    • gnimsh, on 06/22/2008, -1/+3I have the magicjack. Once you get your sip info, you can use twinkle as your sip phone, and it works great. Also, it is NOT flaky in windows. Works even better in windows that it does on linux, since in windows you can dial from the hardphone, in linux you can only dial from twinkle and use the phone as a sound device. But, if you want to keep a windows VM running in linux, you can use the MJ just fine. Ubuntu 8.04 picks up the magicjack without having to install any of the drivers too. Check these 2 links from the unofficial magicjack forums for more info: http://tinyurl.com/4cylas and http://tinyurl.com/4w3kls
    • rocbranco, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0Gizmo. You can integrate w/ your own sip server, has dial in and dial out like skype, charges are pretty much the same. Oh yeah, and there's also a native mobile client
  • Blooish, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Same problem as with yahoo messenger. It's unfair what happens with linux distribution.
  • SharkAtlantis, on 06/22/2008, -0/+6every linux-user should use jingle (the gtalk vo-ip library)!

    Go go open source!
    • chaos386, on 06/22/2008, -0/+4I use Empathy's Jingle support to talk with my mother in the US (she uses Google Talk on Windows).

      I certainly don't need Skype.
  • teatime, on 06/22/2008, -3/+3Maybe the problem is with the development environment and tools provided on Linux, having loads of variety in applications is great but as a .NET developer I have access to Visual Studio and a consistent (mostly) set of development libraries. Add to that Microsoft offer quite simply outstanding support to developers (not perfect but good enough for me), which includes great documentation and sample code and it becomes very easy to developer Windows applications.

    In contrast we have Linux which even though there is great variety in development tools, loads of support, it leaves me completely lost, I have absolutely no clue where to start and none of the languages appeal, although C comes close, it would be a backwards step from C#. Java seems a bit bloated and slow to me, Python and PHP a bit to cobbled together and Perl rather archaic.

    Looking at some of the applications, especially the games, reminds me of the Atari ST shareware scene, all very sweet and all that but not exactly ground breaking.

    Maybe other professional developers feel the same as me and that's why we don't see as much attention on Linux as Windows with crappy conversions, even in the current climate with Linux is getting a lot of praise.

    Incidentally I have Ubuntu installed on a laptop used for web browsing at home as well as running XP for development and games.
    • rowjimmy, on 06/22/2008, -4/+4LOL you have to be joking. You think .net and visual basic are "better" languages/development tools than python/ruby/perl? Looks like somebody is a jackass who can only point-and-click and doesn't actually know the first thing about computer science. Here's a hint - making a windows gui is not programming - it's making a powerpoint presentation with some actions onclick.

      The fact there are more windows applications has nothing to do with windows being a better development environment, and everything to do with standards being VERY low, intelligence being non-existent, and microsoft having a ginormous PR department. Go pick up the O'Reilly books for Perl & Python and get your head out of your ass. Windows "developers" are not professionals, they are clowns.
      • teatime, on 06/24/2008, -0/+0lol. You actually know nothing about me and yet you comment as if you do.

        I have been developing software (which is completely different to 'programming' and 'scripting') for over 10 years.

        I have a Software Engineering degree and have used every language from Assembler, COBOL, C all they way up to C#, so don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

        Have you ever had to write a piece of distributed server software used by over 20,000 users?
    • evilbeatfarmer, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4rowjimmy, go back to your 1st year CS homework, shut up and let real developers get some work done.

      teatime makes a great point, the dev environment for linux isn't all that great. If I want to prototype a quick app I'm going to use Visual Studio. Why? because it's QUICK. I can throw together a working application in a few hours with a GUI that any moron can use and get feedback on it. That's far more important than language superiority or whatever lame argument you're making. Sure I could write some beautiful perl script, using a bunch of cool modules from CPAN, but what have I got? A SCRIPT that may or may not run on someone elses computer and has lots of obscure dependencies. So now I have to take that into account and waste even more time. Microsoft has made it incredibly easy to reuse code from other developers and have it work on any other windows machine. I don't even like windows, but I recognize that it has the best development tools simply because of microsoft. And when I'm done what do I have? a working full fledged distributable program that I can sell, open source, sharewarize or whatever I need to do to pay the mortgage. Get your head out of your ass and pay some bills.

      And.. you recommend someone go pick up some dead trees? Are you serious? Why would I do that when I can just point my web browser at MSDN and have all the information I need? It's too bad there isn't a linux equivalent that would be great. Perhaps someone should setup a Linux developer network, linux could really use a centralized development documentation repository. I suppose there is the man pages, but that's just a start, it really doesn't compare to MSDN's wealth of information, examples, and tools.

      Ugh look what you made me do, here I am evangelizing a platform I don't even like. I LIKE developing on linux, but you're such a moron that reading your comment has temporarily infected me with your idiocy.
  • hohlermann, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2I met some Skype developers at the 2007 Zend PHP Conference last fall. As a Linux user, I was curious about the development of the Skype Linux client, so I asked some relatively similar questions (who works on it, why does it lag by at least a generation, etc.). The brief explanation is that there are between three and four developers working on the Linux client, and even then not always full time. Therefore, the lack of development resources means less development overall. Yes, it's frustrating, but it helps explain the difference between clients.

    I'm just glad to have the ability to be able to use voice and video chat from my Linux workstation and be able to interact with both Windows and Mac users, which allows me to do my job. Is it imperfect? Without a doubt. However, it does work.
  • liquidmetalband, on 06/22/2008, -8/+3All you need is to be able to call people. You guys should be lucky they even developed for ***** Linux.
    • MrViklund, on 06/22/2008, -2/+2Yea I somewhat agree. But some more effort should be put in I think.
  • thallenthur, on 06/22/2008, -1/+2I have to idea what's wrong with those Skype and Joost devs. They base their software on open source technologies and give nothing back. They also violated the gpl license by not releasing the modified code. Apple, on the other hand, seems to be fine with the fact that they have to spread WebKit code which is based on KHTML.
  • fucter, on 06/22/2008, -0/+2http://www.openwengo.org/
    • koumed, on 06/24/2008, -0/+0Well, the problem is, i should convince everyone to use it, and my contacts have to convince their contacts too, which is kinda hard! I wish i could use openwengo, but seriously, its not my choice. My familly and friends use skype, what can i do about it? :S
  • MrViklund, on 06/22/2008, -7/+2Use Windows.
  • willwillywilson, on 06/22/2008, -6/+2WHAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! My Skype is old. Isn't Linux supposed to be for L33t H/c|
  • salazarmark, on 06/22/2008, -8/+2". . . a disproportionate amount of work to make it popular. " Yeah for the 1000 people that use Linux. You losers could get everyone you know and show them and teach them how magnificent the OS is instead of whining on the net why no one uses it.
    • willfe, on 06/22/2008, -1/+4Aw, you mean if the millions of satisfied Linux users and developers kiss your ass and hold your hand enough, we'll get to enjoy your charming company in the treehouse? Wow! Sign me up, baby, I can't *wait* to hear your witty insights at the next club meeting :P
    • koumed, on 06/24/2008, -0/+1yyyyyyah! dugg doooown
  • kjpweb, on 06/22/2008, -5/+5Buhu - cry me a river, will ya? It's not an open source program!
    But - if you can explain why a for-profit company should direct it's efforts in favor of an OS that
    statistically is irrelevant - then I might start listening.
    • jay019, on 06/23/2008, -1/+2So irrelevant that Skype needed to "borrow" some of its code?
    • CircleFusion, on 06/23/2008, -1/+2It's statistically growing in numbers and appearing more often in desktop environments, and there are competing projects that are crossplatform. That's just off the top of my head. Not to mention that Linux is getting quite huge on the mobile market now.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.