dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
34
share rss forum feed

Test99
Premium
join:2003-04-24
San Jose, CA
kudos:1
reply to Simmer911

Re: Skype is nothing but hype...

I couldn't disagree more. On a typical day, Skype has more than a million users online. That's probably more than all the other VOIP providers combined. It's easy to persuade people to download Skype and it's easy to get it running. Skype has the best audio quality. And it uses symbolic names instead of phone numbers. Skype's major drawback is that it is not yet SIP-compatible.

Access to the PSTN may be important now, but in my experience it is becoming less so every day.
--
Welcome to the 21st century. You'll do fine here. Just don't expect anything to work quite the way it is supposed to...


Simmer911
Premium
join:2005-01-12
Chelsea, AL
yah but when I hear free internet telephony then I expect to be able to call any number and not just other user that use the program. I am sure this is useful for a lot of people, but I do not want to be tied to the computer or have to set up a phone compatible with this service. I am content with paying a small fee for what I get and using regular phones. Don't tempt me with a "free" service and then tell me...oh you can only use it free with other people that use only our software. I am sure thier call quality is great and people love it. But it is not what I am looking for and I was just trying to see if it really was free...and to me it is not for what it claims to be.
--
»www.talkaboutvoip.com

craigsn

join:2004-08-16
Kent, WA
reply to Test99
I would agree that Skype is easy to get running, but will disagree about the audio quality being the best.

I have been using MSN Messenger for 3 1/2 years with their audio services (& then video on top of it), and their voice quality is much better than skype in direct connections. AIM is also better, but not as good as MSN, and IChat AV for the Mac is pretty darn good as well. I would take all 3 over Skype, any day.

And I use SunRocket as my VOIP provider, and their voice quality is better than Skype. So while Skype, in my opinion, is a good product, there are much better ones on the market. (Free anyway).

Craig

Test99
Premium
join:2003-04-24
San Jose, CA
kudos:1
In my experience, MSN Messenger's audio is barely tolerable and the video is just a sequence of still images. And there are frequent disconnects. Communication via MSN Messenger feels like hard labor.

It's puzzling that our experiences with MSN Messenger and Skype are radically different. Any ideas?
--
Welcome to the 21st century. You'll do fine here. Just don't expect anything to work quite the way it is supposed to...

craigsn

join:2004-08-16
Kent, WA
I don't really have a clue why it doesn't work as well for you, unless maybe you have a low speed internet connection. I've had cable (3mbs) & now DSL (1.5mbs) and for those speeds MSN has worked fine.

What surprises me is that Skype doesn't work for me as well as it does others.

Anyone else have ideas on this?

Craig


vonsen
Just Because
Premium
join:2005-01-06
reply to Test99
Not sure how the poster managed to get good results with MSN messenger. I have demonstrated skype and MSN side by side at dozens of different corporate sites and would have noticed if messenger even approached skype's clarity once.

ceocio

join:2004-04-16
Columbus, OH
reply to craigsn
Your connection is fine. Did you try another computer? Skype audio quality suffers greatly if the cpu is not powerful enough. Also while skype works well with firewall, it does so by relaying the stream via other nodes, which would cause bad voice qualitiy and delay...
said by craigsn:

What surprises me is that Skype doesn't work for me as well as it does others.

Anyone else have ideas on this?

Craig


voiplover
Premium
join:2004-05-28
Portsmouth, NH

1 edit

wrong reply, my goof!

Edit: Further down.

ceocio

join:2004-04-16
Columbus, OH

Re: Wrong and misleading topic headings!

calm down....It's just the origianl poster's opinion.There's nothing wrong or misleading about that..Some ppl hate skype while others love it. Neither side is wrong or misleading by posting their opinions. Meanwhile, can you edit your post in response to the OP, instead of mine? but it's ok if you can't edit it, I won't call it "wrong" or "misleading" follow up.

craigsn

join:2004-08-16
Kent, WA
reply to ceocio

Re: Skype is nothing but hype...

I have an AMD Athlon 2500+ w/ 1gb ram, separate sound card (can't remember the brand, but a middle of the road one), and it works fine, running Win XP Pro SP2.

I've got Skype on a Mac Dual Proc G5 as well. I guess I'll try it from there and see how it works, but since that isn't my main machine, I don't use it often.

Craig

Beetle_B

join:2004-12-29
reply to craigsn
I would agree that Skype is easy to get running, but will disagree about the audio quality being the best.


YMMV.

I live in the US, and have been wanting to call a friend in Pakistan for years (last time I met him in person was in 1997).

Over the years, we both had dialup, and tried everything - including Yahoo IM and MSN Messenger. Sound quality was just not good enough. So we never got anywhere

Then recently, I realized that I had broadband and that we never tried it after I got high speed Internet. So I suggested we try again. He's still on dialup.

Yahoo IM sucked. As did MSN Messenger.

We almost gave up, as Skype is something like a 10MB download (big for dialup). But he downloaded it anyway, and we tried the next day.

We spoke for 4 hours and 20 minutes (actually, four hours and 45 minutes with breaks). It dropped once or twice, but we just reconnected anyway. Sound quality was superb. Lag, if any, was not noticed. Absolutely NO dropped packets. I heard EVERYTHING he said and likewise. The only complaint was with his mic - it picked up too much background noise.

Not to say it was as good as phone quality. Voice was sort of dull.

The next day and the day after we did about 2 hours each.

Again, YMMV. A friend of mine (who also has broadband) calls someone else (also in Pakistan, also using dialup), and usually gets better quality with MSN.

juanfermin

join:2004-10-18
Pompano Beach, FL
reply to craigsn
You must be joking about MSN being better quality.. let's see communications that go through MS servers, VS communications that go direct from my computer to the person who I'm calling. Which do you think would be better?

craigsn

join:2004-08-16
Kent, WA
Well, it is for me. Maybe not you though.