My gripe with the hype around Skype and five good reasons why you shouldn't cancel your other phone services just yet
I've been giving a lot of thought to all the hype that Skype has been getting as of late. So much has been said about the great aspects of Skype, of which there are a few, that in the interest of balancing this with a bit of perspective on the downsides, I thought I'd throw a few of my own opinions into the ring for you all to chew on.
Before we can really talk about what Skype is, and why it's good and cool and innovative (oh...wait, it's not really innovative), we need to be clear about what Skype is not. Skype is not a new concept and Skype is not a replacement for your other phones. It may be good for calling your other geek friends (I do) and it may be good for calling your possibly tech savvy parents in Florida, but don't try calling grandma or grandpa.
I'm not trying to bash Skype here. I think it's an interesting and innovative solution in the sense that, well, it's free, but it's not the first of its kind. Ever heard of Net2Phone or the more or less defunctNetMeetingwhich also added video conferencing but never got around to allowing you to call peoples land lines? There are others as well. Not to mention the recent offering from BT / Yahoo.
To be clear, the main difference between Skype and those other services, from a technology perspective, is that Skype has adopted something of a Peer to Peer (P2P) methodology for facilitating communication. Skypes roots are deeply ingrained in the more or less unrecognizable Kazaa after all. Yet, as far as I can see, the only main differences with Skype, and you can read about them on their site, is that the user directory is distributed and communication is point to point encrypted. So, once you are authenticated, you don't need to contact the central infrastructure again and theoretically, you don't need to worry about privacy. But make no mistake about it...You do need a central server to authenticate and seed the client with information about the network. Just like all the other services.
First, one could argue that these are advantages in the sense that you don't have a central infrastructure being bogged down by routing thousands of concurrent conversations or requests for information about the network. Voice traffic does have some significant issues with latency. read about my personal experiences here. With Skype, once you login, that's it...its up to your broadband link speed unless you're using the SkypeOut service to call a land line. Also, if you consider that traditional VOIP carriers cannot offer point to point encryption for the commerical or corporate consumer...score one for Skype.
Second, PC to PC calls are completed without the need for a central infrastructure. Score two for Skype...AND the other services that I mentioned earlier who have been doing this for much longer then Skype.
My main gripe is that Skype is trying to redefine the terminologies VOIP and P2P for their own purposes. Sure this is not a major crime, and it has been done numerous times where a company has hijacked terminologies for their own purposes, but I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.
One can certainly argue that Skype is a VOIP service as your voice IS being transferred as a data stream to a receiving client, but Skype is not a traditional VOIP service such as Vonage, Packet8 or offerings from Verizon (VoiceWing), AT&T (CallVantage) and some of the local cable providers, such as Cablevision or Time Warner Cable, that I am familiar with in the Northeast. In my opinion, by borrowing those terms, Skype, other then creating some buzz, is doing more damage to the VOIP industry then good.
Traditional VOIP services require some additional hardware at the carrier (a SIP gateway) and at the client, a SIP client in hardware (a digital to analog converter for your broadband connection that talks to the SIP gateway so you can connect your home phones, faxes, etc...) or in the case of a soft phone, a SIP (software based) client...there are a few good ones out their, but make no mistake about it, Skype is not one of them. Sure, they could build this into their client if they wanted, but the smart money says that this is not in the cards for Skype. They are all about owning the gateway (their SkypeOut service) to landlines and keeping people captive, just like their predecessors. This, in my opinion, is reason number one that they are going to do as well as they would like.
But I digress. Here are a few more reasons why I don't think that Skype is going to be a replacement for your landline or cell phone any time soon.
Reason number one that Skype is not a replacement for your phone line
...You can't receive calls from land lines, traditional VOIP services or cell phones.
Unless every single person that you talk to and every single person that you can ever conceive of talking to and every single person who you can ever conceive of wanting to call you also uses Skype, don't get rid of your land line or cell phones yet. Why? Plain and simple, you can't receive incoming calls from a landline or a non Skype user.
Ever tried calling someone from Skype? You don't have a phone number identifiable by caller ID.
So, reason number one that Skype is not like a Soft Phone is NO INCOMING CALLS from LAND LINES or CELL PHONES. Let me be clear, this includes all VOIP service providers such as Vonage or Packet8.
Reason number two that Skype is not a replacement for your phone line...
...No location awareness and No 911
No 911, AT ALL. Unfortunately, Skype does not offer 911. There is no way for them to know where you are. Just like the traditional VOIP providers have done, Skype could put together a pseudo 911 routing service with direction of 911 to local emergency access numbers set when you register with them. But I don't think that this is in the cards, yet...it's a bit early.
Reason number three that Skype is not a replacement for your phone line
...You can't use your land lines or cordless phones
Skype does not offer the ability to bridge your wired or cordless phones to their services. So, the only place that you can make calls is from your PC, or PDA, if you have one with wireless access all over the inside and outside of your house. Therefore, unless you can carry your PC around with you or rest it on the side of the inflatable raft while floating around in your pool...this leads me to reason number four.
Reason number four that Skype is not a replacement for your phone line
...WiFi just isn't pervasive enough...Yet.
Don't think that you can replace your cell phone just yet. WiFi isn't pervasive enough, yet, for Skype clients running on PDAs to be considered useful except in very very niche circumstances.
Secondly, WiFi roaming is not yet supported. Sure, many of the main "carriers" like T-Mobile, Pronto, Verizon, etc... are going to work on this, but it's still not in their best interest financially as the use of this technology for roaming has not yet reached a critical mass.
Reason number five that Skype is not a replacement for your phone line
...You can't take your address book with you...
When you log into Skype from a desktop PC and add contacts, then log out and login from a laptop, you have to add all of your contacts again. Why? Its P2P Stupid...all the information is stored on the client and Skype hasn't yet given us a way to export our contact lists or store them in their servers. This is very very frustrating, particularly when you ask the same person to authorize you three times (once for your desktop, once for a laptop and once for a PDA).
I'm very interested to know what you all think about Skype. Please feel free to write me and let me know.
Get a WordPress.com Blog
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Ed fladung said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
For my money, calling the states from Mexico, where i live, SkypeOut is by far the cheapest rate i could find for VoIP and traditional phone calling cards. I'm basically not even using Skype for instant messaging and computer to computer voice services (that's why i have ichat and aim). But SkypeOut really is a nifty little tool for those of us ex-pats that want to call home without being pushed around by jerk-off companies like MCI (worst customer service ever) and AT&T (far more expensive).
here are my grudges:
1. No dial pad implementation for OS X (i'm assuming this will change some time soon).
2. network latency is bad in mexico (my sneaking suspicion is that the US/Mexico backbone is notoriously brittle)
3. people can't call me.
4. can't call 800 numbers. this is a problem since a have to call 800 #s pretty often.
5. I know Skype is still beta on OS X, but whoa there are some really big holes (ex: editing a contact's info. - anyone, anyone?).
But again, for the money, and for my limited use, that 10 euros i spent on minutes for SkypeOut, is the best money i ever spent, to talk with friends back home.
Reply
Julian Bond said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
Re porting a contacts list beween computers. Take a look at C:Documents and SettingsyourNameApplication DataSkypeyourSkypeName and the config.xml file. Has anyone tried copying this across or hacking it directly?
BTW. The next thing on the roadmap is Skype-In. that will answer many of the objections in the article.
BTW2. The real USP of Skype is that it *just works*. Anyone who's wrestled with trying to make audio and video work in MSN Messenger, Netmeeting, Yahoo Messenger or SIP (soft and hard) really appreciates that. And free conference calls across the net is pretty neat as well.
Reply
Waldo Jaquith said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
I signed up last week, spending 10 Euros on SkypeOut, but the bloody thing crashes -- the program just bails mid-conversation. This makes it useless for any conversation that I don't want to end randomly and abruptly, which is to say nearly all of them.
I know it's in beta, and such things should be expected, but...dang.
Reply
skibare said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
wow, I guess in your PERFECT world, you cannot see a ""Innovators Dilema''' in front of you growing at the speed of 50,000 NEW folks per day and all very happy making FREE calls or CHEAPER calls than the RBOC's!
Do YOU work for an RBOC??????
I could give ya 22,100,000 folks that DISAGREE with your '''perfect''' world but this world aint perfect, Skype aint the SOLUTION to all world problems but 50,000 NEW ones joining today dont care to find perfect world! When Vonage figures out you NEED ""Quality of Service'' to make a phone call, then Voip might just grow even faster..........VoipNuke.com
Skibare
Reply
Neville Hobson said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
Greg, you're probably correct in all the tech-related limitations you mention (although I see Om Malik is taking you to task on some of them).
But does it really matter to the average Joe User? I've been using Skype for a couple of months. I evangelize it, commenting on my blog and telling everyone I know. What I do know mostly is - it works, it works great and, if you call normal phones, it's incredibly cheap.
Not only that, in my experience voice quality is excellent, at least as good as a normal phone.
No, you can't call emergency numbers (yet), people can't call you from normal phones, there's no answering machine, etc, etc. I can live with that. I know what Skype offers and doesn't offer and that's fine.
Reply
Andrew said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
"Traditional VOIP services require some additional hardware at the carrier (a SIP gateway) and at the client, a SIP client in hardware"
True, Skype doesn't have these things, and I for one am thankful. VOIP is much more than a re-engineered PSTN on broadband, the current "players" in the subscribed services market, are all offering just that, PSTN service over broadband. I already have a PSTN connection, and my minutes are 3 cents.. I look to partners like Skype to add seemless communcation solutions, not PSTN re-invention. If I could start a company today and in 1 year, be discussed at the highest level of telecom business as a threat, I would consider what I have done very sucessful, and would be very proud of the accomplishment.
Reply
Ras Freeman said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
(I also posted this over at Om Malik's VoIP site, and I thought it would be relevent here as well.)
Skype's core competency is clearly marketing, in particular public relations. However, there is a limit to how long the buzz can last. It reminds me of the buzz surrounding pc-to-pc calling in 2000, which disappeared with the bursting of the tech and telecom bubbles.
A few of my gripes:
1) I still have not seen a single feature of Skype's P2P technology that improves the experience for consumers. From the standpoint of what early and late majority consumers are concerned about, Skype's technology is a gimmick.
2) Whether Skype is abusing the VoIP moniker or not, I do think the buzz surrounding Skype is bad for the VoIP market in the US. VoIP providers--ATT and Vonage in particular--are sinking substantial amounts of money into educating consumers about VoIP, and that Skype is muddying the message. For example, Skype is once again making "VoIP" synonymous with "free", which is wrong for anything other than in-network PC-to-PC calls.
3) The companies competing in the PC-to-PC and/or PC-to-PSTN space for the last several years all see PC-to-PC calling as low growth. Ask anyone at Net2Phone, Go2Call, Deltathree, Primus, 8x8, Mediaring, etc. what products they are emphasizing these days. They are all laser-focused on rolling out SIP-based outbound AND inbound calling solutions.
I would be interested to hear reactions to the above.
Reply
Don Hazen said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
I have had Skype for some time now and I am pleased with it considering what it was designed to do: communicate. We live in a world where everyone is split into two camps. Those that see the glass half full or half empty. I see Skype with optimism, here some facts and I don't see them being disputed.
1. Its free, yes the service to call non PC users phone costs, you don't have to use it, if you choose so, its incredibly cost efficient.
2. It works. The most forgotten element but most important. It works and works good. I have used all different versions of so called VoIP software. Cisco VoIP, Ventrillio, MS Messenger, Yahoo, Net2Phone, etc and it quality and clarity is incredible. Hearing my friends wife in the background whispering sweet nothings into his ear over the line like it was my ear made me worried my wife would say something behind me and he would hear it.
3.It's secure. As a computer security professional I would recommend Skype alone even if the quality was poor, but Its Not. It uses a form of ssh encryption which a known standard for secure data transmission. Free secure voice software is hard to come by it at all.
4.It's simple. It conforms with the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid. Its ease to set up compared with the experiences of other voice related software is unparalleled. I could even confidently tell my father to install it, which is a stretch. You would agree if you knew him.
5. It is cross platform capable. I because of my position, have to work all Operating system platforms. To have a software that runs on Mac, Linux, Windows, etc is out standing. I would use it just for that if I didn't already have many other reasons.
Those are a condensed tally of pros, the cons were covered already with the why you shouldn't give up your phone yet. Concur to the assertion that you shouldn't give up your phone or cell for the foreseeable future. I respond with an acronym we used in the military:
PACE.
Primary: Phone hard line or Cell depends on the user
Alternate: Phone hard line or Cell depends on the user
Contingency: Skype
Emergency: Walkie talkies, smoke signals etc.
And for those do not get this right away, its in order of which you would pick up first to make a important call. Emergency doesn't mean call 911 with a walkie talkie but its has happened.
I would put Skype as Contingency Communication at best. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have a place in you household Communication plan. It can definitely be used to cut costs. It shouldn't ever be your direct connection to the emergency services, but it could if your phone was dead, cell battery was empty.. etc it could call the Police Dept.
So look at skype at is merits now because it has some and do not get rid of your phone. Just enjoy free voice software that makes me think the pin drop commercial may be back via P2P.
Sincerely Don Hazen
Reply
Don Hazen said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
I have had Skype for some time now and I am pleased with it considering what it was designed to do: communicate. We live in a world where everyone is split into two camps. Those that see the glass half full or half empty. I see Skype with optimism, here some facts and I don't see them being disputed.
1. Its free, yes the service to call non PC users phone costs, you don't have to use it, if you choose so, its incredibly cost efficient.
2. It works. The most forgotten element but most important. It works and works good. I have used all different versions of so called VoIP software. Cisco VoIP, Ventrillio, MS Messenger, Yahoo, Net2Phone, etc and it quality and clarity is incredible. Hearing my friends wife in the background whispering sweet nothings into his ear over the line like it was my ear made me worried my wife would say something behind me and he would hear it.
3.It's secure. As a computer security professional I would recommend Skype alone even if the quality was poor, but Its Not. It uses a form of ssh encryption which a known standard for secure data transmission. Free secure voice software is hard to come by it at all.
4.It's simple. It conforms with the KISS principle. Keep It Simple Stupid. Its ease to set up compared with the experiences of other voice related software is unparalleled. I could even confidently tell my father to install it, which is a stretch. You would agree if you knew him.
5. It is cross platform capable. I because of my position, have to work all Operating system platforms. To have a software that runs on Mac, Linux, Windows, etc is out standing. I would use it just for that if I didn't already have many other reasons.
Those are a condensed tally of pros, the cons were covered already with the why you shouldn't give up your phone yet. Concur to the assertion that you shouldn't give up your phone or cell for the foreseeable future. I respond with an acronym we used in the military:
PACE.
Primary: Phone hard line or Cell depends on the user
Alternate: Phone hard line or Cell depends on the user
Contingency: Skype
Emergency: Walkie talkies, smoke signals etc.
And for those do not get this right away, its in order of which you would pick up first to make a important call. Emergency doesn't mean call 911 with a walkie talkie but its has happened.
I would put Skype as Contingency Communication at best. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have a place in you household Communication plan. It can definitely be used to cut costs. It shouldn't ever be your direct connection to the emergency services, but it could if your phone was dead, cell battery was empty.. etc it could call the Police Dept.
So look at skype at is merits now because it has some and do not get rid of your phone. Just enjoy free voice software that makes me think the pin drop commercial may be back via P2P.
Sincerely Don Hazen
Reply
acidoom said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
As I agree the pocketPC version of Skype that is using Wi-Fi protocol will never substitute cell phone (at least in the near future) it has another great advantage. I use my pockePC at home (where I have Wi-Fi network set-up) as the cordless headset. And it does work great.
Reply
Tom Keating said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
Just a quick comment..
>>For example, Skype is once again making "VoIP" synonymous with "free", which is wrong for anything other than in-network PC-to-PC calls.
What's wrong with associating VoIP with "free"? Sure, that moniker has the connotation of PC-to-PC calling and not PC-to-PSTN dialing, but so what! There are VoIP companies driving VoIP pricepoints down to ZERO. Take a look at SIPPhone http://www.sipphone.com/ for one. The founder of SIPPhone previously founded MP3.com and her personally told me that his goal IS TO DRIVE VOIP to "free".
That's just one examnple. Your assertion that "free" is only for PC-related VoIP calls is wrong.
There are already VoIP companies offering free "in network calls" and virtually free, low-cost "out of network calls".
They key here is making the "experience" seemless and user-friendly to the user. You can't expect users to dial a different phone number or userID just to make a low-cost of FREE phone call. Once that dialing problem is solved, you will see plenty of "free" VoIP providers out there. (I have news that at least one company has, but I can't comment at this time)
Keep your eye on my VoIP blog for more info: http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/
I'll be discussing this interesting VoIP news and a few other tidbits in a few days.
Reply
steve sarakas said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
I'm not so sure Skype is more than a little clever. They're not genius industrialists, since they merely found a way to use the existing infrastructure. For those who did build the infrastructure we take for granted, that was monumental. Secondly, I wouldn't take too much away from Skype, even if they turn out to be a flash in the telecom pan. Very often these kind of innovations are later seen as having precipitated all kinds of profound changes.
Reply
Yiango said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/voip/voip-blog/skype-keynote.asp
Reply
Tracy Fortune said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
Having just recently switched to the newest Skype sofware I was disappointed in the lost connections I now experience.
I don't mean "every so often"- I mean all the time. I cannot stay connected to my friend in UK for more than 1 minute. Previously, we had enjoyed great sound quality & connections for over an hour w/o issue- including many conference calls with our other geek friends.
I'm not sure what happened but it sucks! We have written to Skype but no reply.
Too bad... :^(
Reply
Tony said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
Most of your issues have been fixed in this weeks latest Mac Skype release. It certainly made me happy :)
Reply
hiya said 4:15PM on 6-16-2005
I like yahoo messengers free voice service. skype sucks.
Reply