"The Desktop API was created in 2004 and it doesn’t support mobile application development." So what?
Desktop users built Skype with their Skype-to-phone and phone-to-Skype (Skype Number) subscription money. We want what we paid for: Skype API, and whatever apps and devices are supported by it.
Mobile will necessarily have different apps and devices with some (perhaps) overlap. Developers should be courted to redeploy their apps to a Mobile API if they like, and if their customers want. Microsoft should leave Desktop alone, rather than dumbing it down and damaging ongoing Desktop product value.
Microsoft has been perennially wrong about product value. This is just one more bold misstep.
That's just the thing though, the customer base no-longer require the desktop API, because there is a new more attractive (mobile) market.
Whatever amounts of cash we threw at them in earlier years matters nothing, nothing at all.
>These changes will significantly improve the call quality and speed of delivery of instant messages, while retaining excellent battery life of mobile devices.
How does scrapping a desktop API affect mobile in this way?
Because Microsoft can update the Skype architecture so that it is more centralized like other IM applications. Right now a lot of Skype is peer-to-peer, which is not good on mobile. I, for one, am really looking forwards to this change.
All I can find on their developer webpage that they appear to support is Skype URIs. It's basically HTML tags that register the skype: service to send commands to skype. The functionality appears to be completely one way. The app sends a message to skype and skype takes over from there.
Skype API appears to be the same things as Skype Desktop API which is the ops focus.
I can't see anything at all about hardware that supports skype. This is probably through some enterprise BD channel. Hopefully they aren't being abandoned too.
A company I used to work for is panicking over this. One of their core products had an integration with Skype using Skype4Com for various reasons. They came to me recently asking if I had any recommendations for a better platform. (They knew Skype was a temporary hack but didn't expect it to die this fast)
Basically they need a white-labeled, web-based video conference solution. They'd like centralized recording with the recordings accessible via an API and support 1-to-1 and 1-to-N broadcasts. They've played around with TokBox and UStream but they're not the greatest fit.
If anyone knows of a company or is working on a startup in this space I'll gladly point them that direction. They're a global e-learning company with huge government/education contracts.
Our technology is being used in the security field in companies such as BAE Systems stratsec, CyberPoint International, and for other uses like recording YouTube videos in http://www.jaksta.com/
Feel free to contact me, even if you just need some guidance.
At vLine, we provide a WebRTC-based cloud solution: https://vline.com. We're still working on some of the features you mentioned (recording), but would be happy to chat with them to see what we can do.
Last time I tried to use the Skype API, it was horribly broken, and the documentation was downright incorrect in several places. I guess it's not had any love for a while.
I agree with you, and I hope they continue their glorious plan to follow current trends rather than be market leaders, all the way to the end-goal of being an also-ran or footnote in history.
After watching the last 20 years of Microsoft's rise, domination, and fall, I've concluded that no tech corporation should be the 800lb gorilla for more than 5 years. At that point, it should be considered an area ripe for disruption. I'm seeing Apple, Google, and Canonical (!) falling into that category now. The sooner they're disrupted/replaced, the better off the rest of us will be.
>And this is why building a great product with the intention of selling it to the highest bidder is a fundamental betrayal of your customers.
Maybe you might furnish us with a list of business models you do approve of? How about:
- Building a crap product and selling it to the highest bidder?
- Building a great product and selling it to the lowest bidder?
Building a great product and selling it (when the offer is) made to the highest bidder is the basis a of large number of business models. Are you against selling companies at all?
This is really screwing us up and will force us to cancel paid subscriptions prematurely. There was no outreach to the developer community to even find out what interesting and/or thriving applications are relying on the API - just an expiration date. I understand a new architecture for mobile is most important right now, but it's at the expense of pissing off a loyal group of Skype developers who could help further drive the platform's success.
I've taken a copy of the most recent standalone installer which precedes the api-warning-nag version. It appears to be able to install over the top of the more recent version, and when my desktop API is disabled I will install it and see what happens.
The change-log of the api-warning-nag version does not mention the warning popups and just lists a higher contrast UI as an accessibility improvement. I think I can do without those kinds of updates if it means keeping the API. Fluxon mentions a forced update, hopefully that was also a featured added with the api-warning-nag update.
The standalone installer has already been signed by Skype, so it can be passed around without worries about whether it's genuine.
(I would post all the version info but am on a different computer)
I just got a forced update with no way to cancel. But I haven't gone to OldApps to see how far back to go so that A) forced updates don't happen and B) the API and apps still work reliably. Don't know which version at which those two criteria are satisfied.
Did anyone mention closed source? They just retired their XMPP interface... If there is any way to go, it's not something that is almost equally closed source.
Also Google+ and anything related has about the same reputation as Nokia in the Netherlands. I don't know how it is in the US, but here I'm quite sure I can't even find a single friend willing to use that service.
[+] [-] fluxon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hrkristian|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ancarda|12 years ago|reply
How does scrapping a desktop API affect mobile in this way?
[+] [-] isaacwaller|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anonymfus|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yelnatz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ffk|12 years ago|reply
Skype API appears to be the same things as Skype Desktop API which is the ops focus.
SkypeKit which allowed developers to create a headless skype client is no longer accepting new developer registrations. https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA12322/what-is-skypekit
I can't see anything at all about hardware that supports skype. This is probably through some enterprise BD channel. Hopefully they aren't being abandoned too.
[+] [-] vyrotek|12 years ago|reply
Basically they need a white-labeled, web-based video conference solution. They'd like centralized recording with the recordings accessible via an API and support 1-to-1 and 1-to-N broadcasts. They've played around with TokBox and UStream but they're not the greatest fit.
If anyone knows of a company or is working on a startup in this space I'll gladly point them that direction. They're a global e-learning company with huge government/education contracts.
[+] [-] wslh|12 years ago|reply
Our technology is being used in the security field in companies such as BAE Systems stratsec, CyberPoint International, and for other uses like recording YouTube videos in http://www.jaksta.com/
Feel free to contact me, even if you just need some guidance.
[+] [-] nodata|12 years ago|reply
Not sure how integration would work.
[+] [-] tomtheengineer|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sahaskatta|12 years ago|reply
I haven't tried it out personally, but I've heard good things.
[+] [-] shanselman|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jenncom|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] morgante|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dexcs|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sdfjkl|12 years ago|reply
Edit: Personally, I've switched to OTR (Adium/Pidgin) for text and ZRTP (Jitsi) for voice/video.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/11/microsoft-nsa-c...
[+] [-] davexunit|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wubbfindel|12 years ago|reply
I built a Skype bot using it for work just a few months ago. Really annoying if it is.
[+] [-] nezza-_-|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] matthewmacleod|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vezycash|12 years ago|reply
Compatibility is a word that could explain microsoft's success. Destroy that and their competitive advantage is none existent.
I dont want to say more... But a lot of decisions these days are "change for change sake."
[+] [-] aclevernickname|12 years ago|reply
After watching the last 20 years of Microsoft's rise, domination, and fall, I've concluded that no tech corporation should be the 800lb gorilla for more than 5 years. At that point, it should be considered an area ripe for disruption. I'm seeing Apple, Google, and Canonical (!) falling into that category now. The sooner they're disrupted/replaced, the better off the rest of us will be.
[+] [-] PhasmaFelis|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidjgraph|12 years ago|reply
Maybe you might furnish us with a list of business models you do approve of? How about:
- Building a crap product and selling it to the highest bidder?
- Building a great product and selling it to the lowest bidder?
Building a great product and selling it (when the offer is) made to the highest bidder is the basis a of large number of business models. Are you against selling companies at all?
[+] [-] languagehacker|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AYBABTME|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] telecuda|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tatata|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fluxon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] WhiteDawn|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CookieMon|12 years ago|reply
I've taken a copy of the most recent standalone installer which precedes the api-warning-nag version. It appears to be able to install over the top of the more recent version, and when my desktop API is disabled I will install it and see what happens.
The change-log of the api-warning-nag version does not mention the warning popups and just lists a higher contrast UI as an accessibility improvement. I think I can do without those kinds of updates if it means keeping the API. Fluxon mentions a forced update, hopefully that was also a featured added with the api-warning-nag update.
The standalone installer has already been signed by Skype, so it can be passed around without worries about whether it's genuine.
(I would post all the version info but am on a different computer)
[+] [-] fluxon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] namuol|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lucb1e|12 years ago|reply
Also Google+ and anything related has about the same reputation as Nokia in the Netherlands. I don't know how it is in the US, but here I'm quite sure I can't even find a single friend willing to use that service.