After all those discussions and blaming, it's here and live! I'm just impressed. You seem to have done a fantastic job. Installed it, used it and it just works. That simple. And that's exactly what I like.

Thank you Skype! I reckon we can skip Christmas this year

Jürgen

[size=18]Skype 2.0 — now with free video calling
Say hello, smile or even wave to anyone, anywhere in the world.
For free, of course
Happy video skyping
regards velipoja

...don't forget the new groups...

Given that it was late to market, it is not cross-platform and there is no way to do video conferncing with more than one person (ala - Apple iChat) nothing special. All it is is one of the plug-ins embedded in the Skype window, the quality and functionality is about the same.

I thought after such a long wait there would actually be some innovation...

Where's the Mac OS X version??

[quote=muppetmaster]Given that it was late to market, it is not cross-platform and there is no way to do video conferncing with more than one person (ala - Apple iChat) nothing special. All it is is one of the plug-ins embedded in the Skype window, the quality and functionality is about the same.

I thought after such a long wait there would actually be some innovation... [/quote]

I think the users disagree with you. The whole point is getting it integrated. I agree that this could probably be achieved with other products, but I like getting an all-in-one solution. I have not tried Apple iChat, but I guess it is only available for Apple anyways.

Edit: But sure, you are correct when you are saying that it is not very innovative - it is just a matter of making it easier.

Man, who is this muppetmaster crank anyway? I think he must post 24x7 just to get airtime for the ads he puts in his posts...

After all, the iPod itself didn't do anything truly different (from Rio, etc) - it just did it better, made it simple/easy for the masses, and it just worked.

Sorta like uh, Skype.

[quote=xmac]Where's the Mac OS X version??[/quote]

And what about Linux ?

[quote=roam92]Man, who is this muppetmaster crank anyway? I think he must post 24x7 just to get airtime for the ads he puts in his posts...

After all, the iPod itself didn't do anything truly different (from Rio, etc) - it just did it better, made it simple/easy for the masses, and it just worked.

Sorta like uh, Skype.[/quote]

The iPod was and is innovative. Its integration with iTunes, its click-wheel interface, its elegant design, its organization of content, built-in podcast management, were all different than what the other players were doing. Skype has innovated, v2.0 is just not an example of that.

Simply replicating what has existed in plug-ins for months inside the window of Skype is hardly innovative, I simply expected more after such a long wait.

At last. We waited so long for this. Thank You Skype !!

Give Skype the chance to get this working and to leave the beta-status. Once it works properly nobody will use plugins for video anymore.

[quote=1st-timer]At last. We waited so long for this. Thank You Skype !!

Give Skype the chance to get this working and to leave the beta-status. Once it works properly nobody will use plugins for video anymore.[/quote]

Unless those plug-ins outpace Skpe with some real innovation, such as multi-party video chat...

[quote=muppetmaster]Given that it was late to market, it is not cross-platform and there is no way to do video conferncing with more than one person (ala - Apple iChat) nothing special. All it is is one of the plug-ins embedded in the Skype window, the quality and functionality is about the same.

I thought after such a long wait there would actually be some innovation... [/quote]

Frankly, I'm glad Muppetmaster has decided to make a comparison between iChat and Skype. IChat is many respects the most feature-laden of the non-Skype chat services (AIM, Yahoo, MSN, Google). It has encryption, video, audio, interconnection with certain outside services (AIM and ICQ), and yes, it permits video conferencing.

Trouble with iChat conferencing is that you have the bandwidth (which most of us don't). Trouble with the interconnection with ICQ and AIM etc. is that it does not include the full iChat feature set... and iChat doesn't have the equivalent of SkypeIN or SkypeOUT, or phones. But the biggest trouble with iChat is that the installed user base is a small fraction of Skype's. If Apple were to come out with a version for Windows and Linux, and add iChatIN/OUT, then they might have something, but will it ever catch up to Skype? I doubt it.

[quote=garnet_stone]Frankly, I'm glad Muppetmaster has decided to make a comparison between iChat and Skype. IChat is many respects the most feature-laden of the non-Skype chat services (AIM, Yahoo, MSN, Google). It has encryption, video, audio, interconnection with certain outside services (AIM and ICQ), and yes, it permits video conferencing.

Trouble with iChat conferencing is that you have the bandwidth (which most of us don't). Trouble with the interconnection with ICQ and AIM etc. is that it does not include the full iChat feature set... and iChat doesn't have the equivalent of SkypeIN or SkypeOUT, or phones. But the biggest trouble with iChat is that the installed user base is a small fraction of Skype's. If Apple were to come out with a version for Windows and Linux, and add iChatIN/OUT, then they might have something, but will it ever catch up to Skype? I doubt it.[/quote]

Who was comparing Skype to iChat in terms of openness and interconnectivity? These are valid points as it concerns iChat, the iChat example was given as an example of what Skype could have been with a twist.

The point here is that since it took Skype so long to come out with video when plug-ins existed, one would have expected some type of innovation. An example of what Skype could have done is cross-platform multi-party chat (iChat only does the latter). So what was the long wait for? A me-too embedded capability?

A version 2.0 release that does what many other platforms have done already, video and group contacts. Skype is just catching up on some of the basics.

muppetmaster, let me disagree. I can't be negative today. This is exactly because it took so long to get Video and we shouldn't criticise them for it. Give them a hug and let them also feel good about it. They should have made their community happy.

And I tell you one more thing which I strongly believe is so much more important than permanent innovation these days: properly design software that's easy to use.

And next to the great features Skype comes up with, this to me is their biggest benefit. They focus on ease-of-use. And I'm greatful for that.

If it has taken that long for them to integrate Video properly, I congratulate the team at Skype for that decision.

Keep going.

Jürgen

Some people are negative by nature...

The user time (as in what time is it where your contact is) feature was something I didn't know I needed. I actually find it really useful!

[quote=muppetblaster]Some people are negative by nature...

The user time (as in what time is it where your contact is) feature was something I didn't know I needed. I actually find it really useful![/quote]

Not negative. Just realistic, factual, and honest.

Muppetmaster is right and people are missing his point. You can be happy that Skype has video now. You can pat them on the back and say "Good Job!" You can applaud them for making it a seamless easy integration to Skype.

But the inclusion of video in Skype is indeed late to market, not innovative, and lacking in features of some other video chat programs. Plain and simple. Skype has proven to be an innovative company in the past, but this latest showing is not an example of that.

You guys jump on muppetmaster on principle these days instead of reading what he has to say.

Would some of you guys just relax. It's still a beta. There WILL be more features added and there Will be MAc and Linux versions. SHEEESH!!!

[quote=Crazy Ivan]Would some of you guys just relax. It's still a beta. There WILL be more features added and there Will be MAc and Linux versions. SHEEESH!!![/quote]

It's a public beta. It is unlikely that major features will be added in this version. It is also unlikely that Linux and Mac versions will come out anywhere near the same timeline as the Windows version.

No doubt they will add video features in future versions. The point was that for as long as the wait was, some of us expected more features in the initial video release. Seems like a lot of time spent for something that's been done before many many times.

[quote=muppetmaster]Simply replicating what has existed in plug-ins for months inside the window of Skype is hardly innovative, I simply expected more after such a long wait.[/quote]

I suspect you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone here that you of all people actually *expected* more from Skype. I'd be hesitant to even wager on "hoped for".

Nice to see that video is finally here. I hope it isn't as bad as you say. I've never had any success with the available plugins - they always give me either ridiculously slow frame rates (<5 fps) or fail to load entirely.

Either way I'm going to go give it a shot now and see for myself what all the waiting was for!

[quote=lazysean]I suspect you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone here that you of all people actually *expected* more from Skype. I'd be hesitant to even wager on "hoped for".[/quote]

I honestly expected a surprise. After such a long wait, the closed beta, the secrecy, etc. Why not even something like full screen video (ie - SightSpeed)?

What were they hiding and why did it take so long? If this is the pace of major feature release at Skype (with no innovation), they will fall behind much quicker than even I anticipated.

WHERE is Skype for MAC OS X?
Small fraction of the total users or not, that's not the point. How do they reckon how much buzz Mac users contribute to the success and spread of Skype. I have four computers and I use both Mac and Windows XP machines. I want Skype Video on MAC and I cannot be the only one!

Also, this is still Beta so I am hoping by the time they are done fooling around, there will be Video Conferencing on the final release.

What's wrong with the Skype Team?

[quote=RichardFranco]What's wrong with the Skype Team?[/quote]

In this case it seems that maybe they are just too slow.

I wouldn't hold my breath for major features being added before the final version. Usually once you've released a public beta major new features are locked in.

I think you are right.

It is interesting to note that most innovative entreprises fall into this evolution.

They come blasting through and they grow old and lazy with success.

Yes, yes, video is nice now they have it but it is so up-setting that after all this wait all they could achieve is catch up with what third-parties did 6 months ago!

The most important in my opinion is that they have a clear shot a cornering the market of computer-based communication given their clout.
Currently there is no (reliable) cross-platform client. All they have to do is bridge that gap.

Idiots! Wake-up! Let's go!

[quote="muppetmaster"][quote=lazysean]I honestly expected a surprise. After such a long wait, the closed beta, the secrecy, etc. Why not even something like full screen video (ie - SightSpeed)?
[/quote]

Have you used it yet muppetmaster? I would think that if you had then you would immediately find the Fullscreen button when making a call - given it's pretty prominant on the remote video feed that you are vieweing. Then you'd see the fantastic Picture in Picture sliding control, hang up and mute overlay controls. It's really elegant.

So coming back to your point on innovation, the innovation is in it's simplicity - much like your iPod example.

[quote=mydigitalself]Have you used it yet muppetmaster?[/quote]

Owned! :lol:

[quote=mydigitalself]Have you used it yet muppetmaster?[/quote]

Yes I have. And now that you point it out, I do see and have tried it since. Apologies for my oversight and mis-speaking on this point, thank you for the correction.

[quote=mydigitalself]I would think that if you had then you would immediately find the Fullscreen button when making a call - given it's pretty prominant on the remote video feed that you are vieweing. Then you'd see the fantastic Picture in Picture sliding control, hang up and mute overlay controls. It's really elegant.[/quote]

Indeed, it is good quality, much like SightSpeed in that mode.

[quote=mydigitalself]So coming back to your point on innovation, the innovation is in it's simplicity - much like your iPod example.[/quote]

I stand to differ on this point. While it is easy to use, this is not significantly different than many other video applications I have used and therefore not an example of innovation. Simply embedding a video window in your application is not innovation, especially with a product that is late to market.

[quote=muppetmaster]
I honestly expected a surprise. After such a long wait, the closed beta, the secrecy, etc. Why not even something like full screen video (ie - SightSpeed)?
[/quote]

Hmm, full screen video seems to work here...but maybe you meant something else by that?! :wink:

Edit: Damnit :wink:

Is it also possible to start a video chat when only one party has a webcam?

G.H.vandoorn,

New stuff in this version
Video (obviously!). Free one-to-one video calls. Even if only one party of the call has a webcam, the video is still shown to the other party. And if you both have a camera, you get cool picture-in-picture effect. You can see the video in Skype window, in a separate window or even fullscreen.

http://share.skype.com/blog/products_and_s..._video_calling/

Ike

My sentiments echoed:

[quote=Om Malik]Skype, a division of eBay launched Skype 2.0 beta for Windows. Just in time for some customers who got their passwords compromised. The elaborate press release and WSJ review while impressive don’t help mask the fact that, Skype is short on new ground breaking ideas.

Personalization via avatars and ring-tones… big new idea? Not really. Phil Wolff over on Skype Journal puts it nicely when he writes, “If you’ve been using Skype, the Beta version of Skype 2.0 for Windows won’t give you a new Wow! experience.” (A nice review in the Journal should help put incumbent CEOs in a bad mood first thing, and well, redouble their efforts. …. okay just kidding about that! Actually Israel is getting pretty serious about giving Skype the shank. So are other Gulf states!) [/quote]

Source

I have now "played" with Skype 2.0 for a while and I am impressed. There are of course a few things that need to be fixed before the final version (topics in "Suggestions" forum), but overall it is actually more than I expected.

I will now abandon the other IM's that I have installed, because they no longer have an edge over Skype in the features that I require.

Thank you Skype!

Edit: Check out http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000690070520/ and look for the "Thank you"-note at the bottom :wink:

[quote=muppetmaster]Given that it was late to market, it is not cross-platform and there is no way to do video conferncing with more than one person (ala - Apple iChat) nothing special. All it is is one of the plug-ins embedded in the Skype window, the quality and functionality is about the same.

I thought after such a long wait there would actually be some innovation... [/quote]

I think its great as do many others in here, looks like your the odd one out Muppet, sour grapes?

[quote=muffinman][quote=muppetmaster]Given that it was late to market, it is not cross-platform and there is no way to do video conferncing with more than one person (ala - Apple iChat) nothing special. All it is is one of the plug-ins embedded in the Skype window, the quality and functionality is about the same.

I thought after such a long wait there would actually be some innovation... [/quote]

I think its great as do many others in here, looks like your the odd one out Muppet, sour grapes?[/quote]

I never stated that the video quality or implementation itself was poor, quite the contrary I have stated in this thread the quality is good. The distinction is that there is no innovation, this is effectively what everone expected and no more. As SkypeJournal put it:

[quote=SkypeJournal]If you've been using Skype, the Beta version of Skype 2.0 for Windows won't give you a new Wow! experience.[/quote]

After such a long wait and being late to market, I honestly expected Skype to suprise the market with giving just that little bit more. A long time coming just for vanilla video and grouping of contacts.

So, no, I am not alone in my assessment...

I second that.

Perhaps they are too busy coming up with with new avatars...who knows?

[quote=RichardFranco]I second that.

Perhaps they are too busy coming up with with new avatars...who knows?[/quote]

As do I. I'm going with muppetmaster and RichardFranco on this one.

So muppetmaster clearly does not stand alone.

Let's just agree that these guys are in minority now. :wink:

Don't you think it's a bit ironic to be talking about innovation and then to echo the praise of countries that want to protect their state monopolies. Frankly I think it's pretty innovative to have a product that scares these totalitarian morons. Furthermore, I wish everyone would stop assuming that any of the Skype blocking devices and techniques actually work.... and protect the blocking countries from retribution. Hell hath no fury like a Skyper spurned, if you know what I mean.

Back to 2.0 video.... the LA Times has compared the quality with iChat and iChat wins... sort of. http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-te...ack=1&cset=true

iChat wins, as it requires a base bandwidth to use H.264. If that bandwidth is not available on both sides, it will not run. Therefore it is not really an apple to apples (no pun intended) comparison, as the codec Skype uses will run on variable bandwidths on both sides (what is the minimum? who knows). So, Skype has a benefit here that they will allow for varaible bandwidth below the relatively high threshold of iChat.

Having said this, so do most other video programs, so this is not a Skype innovation, just that Apple has chosen a different path assuming its users want quality over connection under all circumstances.

Nowhere in this thread is it stated that Skype has not been innovative in the past, as there is no question they have been, further nowhere in this thread have I stated the video implementation is bad. The distinction being made is that after being so late to market with video, they brought nothing new to the table with a 2.0 release. No innovation, just a rather basic video support that everyone expected. If they had done this 6 months ago, this would be a more difficult argument to make.

Funny how someone who seems to promote open source (and hopefully cross-platform) suddenly seems to like iChat...well well :wink:

iChat uses SIP and XMPP, so indeed do use open standards. Never have I said that Skype needed to be opensource. Do not get confused.

I'll download iChat immediately and try it in Windows :wink:

Looking forward to comparing the video to Skype 2.0 ....

Just as Skype video is Windows only so is iChat video OSX only. But you may chat with my iChat client from AIM...

What was the point you were trying to make?

AIM is definately an alternative to Skype :wink: I also believe Skype will release video for Mac before iChat is released for Windows...



Source

All just speculation until it arrives...

I will have to disagree on the whole discussion here. Skype did come with the video even when they said in the past that it is not in their priority. Also during this time they were developing all other useful paid features - I mean do you expect them to wait on donations and develop Skype for free? Of course that first you need to establish the paid services and make sure they are well developed and with as less glitches as possible before working on implementing a very nice, but free feature, i.e. feature that will not bring them any money. After all nothing is for free in this world, right?
Think about that before blaming the company providing you with the means to have absolutely free PC2PC audio/video communication almost in any network, connected to Internet (which no other IM does at the moment, even for chatting!!!).
That's what I have to say and everyone is most welcome to disagree with me :lol: