Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Video for Skype Users

Posted by CmdrTaco on Tue May 31, 2005 09:53 AM
from the so-more-for-no-pants-fridays dept.
Communications
Kozmik writes "Looks like the first of likely many video plugins for Skype has arrived. Dialcom claims the plugin which works with Skype, will provided end to end encrypted video that will work behind NATs, proxies and firewalls. Currently only supports Windows."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Video for Skype Users 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • IP over Skype? (Score:3, Funny)

    by TopSpin (753) * on Tuesday May 31 2005, @09:56AM (#12684062) Journal
    I thought of this sometime last week. I was astonished to discover no results when I queried Google. I suppose someone out there is knocking together an IP over Skype stack and has yet to unleash it on the world... but at least I wasn't unsuspecting. I wonder if IP over Skype might win the 5000 EUR award for the Skype API Competition [skype.com]
    • Too easy. Dig up two 300-baud modems. Jack them into the headset connections. Put them in local mode. Dial up your skype connection. Send and receive at glorious teletype speed.

      This is much faster than the old technologies of SCSI over pager, or morse code on drive select light.
      • You're joking here, but I seriously considered using Skype for international FTN (FidoNET) calls. If anyone knows how to set this up, preferrably without any hardware trickery (that is, a "software modem" implementation that would use Skype to dial other modems), please tell!
    • For those that seem sceptical, this is actually a reasonably good idea.

      The purpose would be to layer a routable network layer on top of the encrypted P2P network that is the skype network, not to layer it on top of VOIP. Privacy, security and anonymity are the keys to making something like this valuable.

      I don't think you could use IPv4, however. To make such a scheme work, you would need a very large IP address space that was completely reserved for the Skype nodes themselves to ensure propper routi

  • Hardware (Score:3, Informative)

    by graphicartist82 (462767) on Tuesday May 31 2005, @10:01AM (#12684105)
    Maybe I'm missing something, but how does this fall under the "Hardware" /. section?

  • Tried it yesterday (Score:3, Informative)

    by jeanluc.bonnafoux (611600) on Tuesday May 31 2005, @10:08AM (#12684169)
    And it works fine.

    I was using Yahoo! messenger for video and skype for the voice but video4skype seems quite better than Yahoo!
    I wonder what kind of algorithm they use.

  • Yay (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mjrauhal (144713) on Tuesday May 31 2005, @10:09AM (#12684186) Homepage
    More incentive to use a completely closed and proprietary VOIP solution. This increases its appeal level to less than desirable!
    • it can work..

      Ever heard of AOL?

      Yes, losing out on it's subscriber base,
      but really, their closed and proprietary IP connection is quite heavily utilized.

      Shudder-- I actually push it on people who won't get broadband, for their SE edition stuff.
      I just make them yank all their then existing anti-virus stuff first.

      • It's all about vendor lock-in [wikipedia.org]. User friendly software isn't isolated to proprietory protocols.

        Imagine "Proprietory batteries not included" on a the box a toy comes with. You might have a cupboard full of batteries, however, if you don't have the right proprietory one, the kid with the new toy on Christmas day won't be able to play with it.

        Imagine having to buy a TV set for each channel you wanted to watch. Imagine having to buy manufacturer made petrol for each different car. Imagine having to only park

    • More incentive to use a completely closed and proprietary VOIP solution

      Fine. Please recommend an open source, multiplatform VOIP solution that just works, letting people find each other and communicate securely without understanding their firewall configuration etc or having to type in the address of (or install?) a central server. If possible, something that supports video and/or text and/or whiteboard functionality.

      • ..communicate securely..

        Are you implying that Skupe lets you to communicate securely ? Last time I checked that claim that but offer no prove. Sorry, but closed-standard security should be treated as no security at all .. or you'll be in for a big surprise.

  • What the hell is up with those pictures? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    HandStand [217.15.33.218]
    Super Mario [217.15.33.218]
    ?????? [217.15.33.218]

    Just an observation, but they seriously need to get a new set of stock photos.
  • yippeeyahooooooo!! Finally.. some high quality live porn opportunity!
  • I think I'm going to be ill. I had no idea webcams were so good at capturing motion. That girl doing the splits on the help page made me give up in dispair. And I'm pretty sure the "in action" screenshot on the front page is faked -- or a cutscene. Webcam apps have cutscenes, don't they?
  • Great to see that Skype is moving forward.

    Now, when will a Palm client surface? This has been a very long-time requested client, but it has fallen on deaf ears, Very unfortunate...

  • Standards are dropping (Score:3, Interesting)

    by el_womble (779715) on Tuesday May 31 2005, @10:32AM (#12684382) Homepage
    I don't suppose we're in danger of anyone adhering to or creating standards for this anytime soon. I really like Apple's iChat 'solution' but it simply doesn't play well with others which makes it worthless (unless everyone you know owns a mac... which they inevitably don't). It was cool that iChat has adopted jabber and AIM, but it would be cooler if they'd open iChat completely especially as all they appear to do is decoded 3 streams and distribute 1 H.264 streams (I say all I have no idea how complex that should be).

    A four way, hetrogeous video chat shouldn't be a pipedream with todays technology

  • *Reads article*

    Wow! I've been waiting for this. And it will work with my firewall! And... Oh wait, boring.
  • I did a little reading up about Skype, mainly to find out what the hell it was. Allows you to do the headphones/microphone chat with someone else that has Skype, which is nice, yet not very practical. So then I was dismayed to see some sort of "Account Balance" in the Skype GUI screenshot, in Euros. A cost for something supposedly free? Apparently Skype has a "SkypeOut" feature which lets you buy phone credit in advance, then call someone who has a normal phone line. It's dirt cheap if they're in the U
    • all you really need is a speaker and a microphone. my thinkpad has both of them built in, so i just talk straight at it. you can also just use the regular headphone and microphone inputs and outputs on your soundcard.

      skype have also teamed up with a number of 3rd parties to bring, as you mention, usb-based handsets & headsets out that support Skype. you can find them here [skype.com]. the headsets may look a bit ridorkulous, but a colleague (developer) at the office here uses one and swears by it. he can code and
    • Instead of a USB phone, what you can do is get a "USB to RJ11" adaptor. It is actually just a USB based sound card that you can connect a normal telephone handset to. I got one off ebay for about 30 euro (cost+shipping), sent out from Taiwan. These devices haven't reached the computer stores yet. I'm using one with my cordless phone and it works well. (It's connected to a windows box BTW). I've disconnected my landline and use SkypeOut for long distance calls (and my mobile phone).

      Sure Skype is a closed so

      • Sure Skype is a closed source product, but so was my landline. Lesser (and cheaper) of two evils.

        The main issue with Skype isn't whether it is closed source or not, it is that it uses proprietory protocols. You can't get a "skype phone" from anybody else other than skype. While a "skype phone" is free (as in beer), there must be a reason why they continue to use proprietory standards. You'll be paying somewhere else. Generally, it is likely to be Vendor lock-in [wikipedia.org], it is just not obvious yet how they're go

    • In addition to this, you can also buy numbers in foreign countries for a fairly reasonable price. If you have friends/family in another country, you can buy a local number in that country, then they can call that number, which is forwarded over the IP network to ring to your PC... so basically for a small monthly fee, your overseas folks can make a local call which can ring to your PC anywhere it can be connected to a network, or go to skype voicemail which again is accessible via PC. Pretty nifty idea I

      • so basically for a small monthly fee, your overses folks can make a local call

        I can't buy a local number in a country that Skype doesn't support, right? I can, however, buy a number in a country that's much closer to someone else's country. Or am I misunderstanding something? If I have it right, is there an easy way to find the most economical number to purchase from Skype for such a non-Skyped country?

        • I can't buy a local number in a country that Skype doesn't support, right?

          From what I have read, that's correct. As for which is cheapest... general rule of thumb is intra-city I'm guessing that Skype will expand this service as much as is possible (or at least profitable) so their coverage *should* improve with time.

  • Can anyone please post a mirror for the download? or seed a torrent? please?
  • I've been waiting for an inexpensive way to allow non-tech types at the office talk to other non-techies with video for a while. Any way to be able to do this easily through NATs is a boon, even if it's not standards based. Bring it on!

  • 2 bad points (Score:4, Informative)

    by Chatterton (228704) on Tuesday May 31 2005, @01:24PM (#12686062) Homepage
    I have just tried it... And uninstalled it...

    1) Doesn't work if you have any TV card installed
    2) Why does he need an ActiveX component to download it ?
    • That is the big selling point though. There's really no config required to use it behind a NAT box. This makes things a lot simpler for a lot of people. Even if users on both ends are behind NAT boxes, the traffic if forwarded through a 3rd party PC so that at least one end of the data is coming from a public IP.

      This is a big bonus for home users and those who don't know how or don't want to play with the settings on their router.
      • This is a big bonus for home users and those who don't know how or don't want to play with the settings on their router.

        Not only that, I have found very useful the Skype service because I am living inside my University accommodation halls, and although we hav broadband connection it is a LAN hence we have a NAT and are also firewalled (it is even not possible to see our LAN neighbors!, quite paranoic no?).

        So as I live far away from my home, when I want to call my parents or some other friends I can not

    • Re:what is skype? (Score:5, Informative)

      by TopSpin (753) * on Tuesday May 31 2005, @10:13AM (#12684221) Journal
      P2P VOIP app. It's main claim to fame is its ability to "just work" despite firewalls. This is done using several techniques that the clients automatically discover. Most frequently clients "hole punch" via UDP packets emerging from both ends so connections work when both sides are behind stateful packet filters. Other stuff fueling Skype popularity includes; multiple platforms supported (Linux, OS-X, etc.,) friendly API terms (thus these sort of plugins appearing) and, best of all, it's free (as in beer.)
      • Have your read "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell? You should - it explains a lot about how Skype was able to market themselves so well. If they market this plugin in the same way, you may be right about it taking over the market. However, I still think that not too many people actually want video conferencing (except maybe just to say they have done it) and that the extra hardware required (including the fiddling you need to do with cameras) are two barriers to making VC really ubiquitous.
    • It seems like a lot of people say "Skype is just another VoIP product" when in truth it is, however, it does perform noticeably better than most alternatives.

      I have yet to see another H323 based app with such a large user base that is as centralized as Skype. It really is easy to find people I'm looking for that I assumed would have Skype.

      Audio quality and compression are also better than many H323 alternatives. Using gnomemeeting and several different codecs, bandwidth usage was much higher than Skype fo

    • Re:Spyware? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by b0bby (201198)
      Yeah, I don't like the wording of their agreement either:
      "You also understand and agree that the Service may include advertisements and that these advertisements are necessary for Dialcom to provide the Service. You also understand and agree that the Service may include certain communications from Dialcom, such as service announcements, administrative messages and the Dialcom Newsletter, and that these communications are considered part of Dialcom membership."
      Sounds like agreeing to adware & spam to me.
      • Skype actually is from some of the designers of KaZaa IIRC, but they weren't the ones who added the spyware and Skype is spyware free. This video add-on, however, isn't actually from Skype, it's a third party and it looks to me like adware. I won't be installing it until I'm clear on what it might do, but I've tried Skype and been very impressed with it on calls from the US to Korea.
    • No, no, not GAIM. I want this as an asterisk plugin, compatible with iChat, MSN, Y!Messenger, and the new VVoIP (Video/Voice over IP) hardware phones that are comming out.

      I really want this -- when people start doing it I'll ditch my landline for sure.

      Hopefully, this'll persuade the OSS community to come up with an equivilent. Thunderbirds-style video conferancing here we come!
    • Don't be lured into using this just because it runs on linux too.

      Try reading the article or even the Slashdot story - it doesn't run on Linux, only Windows!

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.