Skype. Do I need it?

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by turtill@hotmail.com, Sep 18, 2005.

  1. Guest

    I have voipbuster which works well enough and 1899 which also works
    well enough. However after reading the Economist article and the very
    important comments of the poster, I am concerned that I should sign up
    to Skype just to be in on the ground floor. Has anyone else any views
    on doing just this?
    pete
     
    , Sep 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ivor Jones Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:
    > I have voipbuster which works well enough and 1899 which
    > also works well enough. However after reading the
    > Economist article and the very important comments of the
    > poster, I am concerned that I should sign up to Skype
    > just to be in on the ground floor. Has anyone else any
    > views on doing just this?
    > pete


    If you know people who use it, it's fine. I fire it up occasionally as I
    have a couple of friends who use it, but otherwise I don't bother much.
    I'm not keen on systems that (a) use proprietary protocols and (b) require
    a PC to be on to use it.

    It's free anyway, so it doesn't hurt to have it.

    Ivor
     
    Ivor Jones, Sep 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ad C Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I have voipbuster which works well enough and 1899 which also works
    > well enough. However after reading the Economist article and the very
    > important comments of the poster, I am concerned that I should sign up
    > to Skype just to be in on the ground floor. Has anyone else any views
    > on doing just this?
    > pete
    >


    skype is ok, I don't know what will happen to is now som big compnay
    have taken it over. I expect they will do the same thing AOl did to
    Winamp and spoil it.

    We will wait and see,

    I use Skype now and again, but most of the time I use MSN messenger.
     
    Ad C, Sep 18, 2005
    #3
  4. Guest

    On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:09:48 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >
    ><> wrote in message
    >news:
    >> I have voipbuster which works well enough and 1899 which
    >> also works well enough. However after reading the
    >> Economist article and the very important comments of the
    >> poster, I am concerned that I should sign up to Skype
    >> just to be in on the ground floor. Has anyone else any
    >> views on doing just this?
    >> pete

    >
    >If you know people who use it, it's fine. I fire it up occasionally as I
    >have a couple of friends who use it, but otherwise I don't bother much.
    >I'm not keen on systems that (a) use proprietary protocols and (b) require
    >a PC to be on to use it.
    >
    >It's free anyway, so it doesn't hurt to have it.


    I read John (Valiant <>) comments and the article he
    posted from the economist. I thought his comment were better than the
    article actually but it made me wonder if I should sign on just to
    make sure I had an account in case they have caused telecoms to
    consider buying up all the voip operators and start to impose
    conditions etc. But there again I always am suspicious when I see
    loads of unnecessary money being thrown around;-)
    pete
     
    , Sep 19, 2005
    #4
  5. Guest

    On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:27:56 +0100, Ad C <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> I have voipbuster which works well enough and 1899 which also works
    >> well enough. However after reading the Economist article and the very
    >> important comments of the poster, I am concerned that I should sign up
    >> to Skype just to be in on the ground floor. Has anyone else any views
    >> on doing just this?
    >> pete
    >>

    >
    >skype is ok, I don't know what will happen to is now som big compnay
    >have taken it over. I expect they will do the same thing AOl did to
    >Winamp and spoil it.
    >
    >We will wait and see,
    >
    >I use Skype now and again, but most of the time I use MSN messenger.


    Yes I can imagine ebay spoiling Skype. That is why I am considering
    what may happen to other gateways.
    pete
     
    , Sep 19, 2005
    #5
  6. Ad C Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > >I use Skype now and again, but most of the time I use MSN messenger.

    >
    > Yes I can imagine ebay spoiling Skype. That is why I am considering
    > what may happen to other gateways.


    Other gateways? sorry I am not sure what you mean, maybe it is too early
    in the morning :)
     
    Ad C, Sep 19, 2005
    #6
  7. Guest

    On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 08:11:45 +0100, Ad C <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> >I use Skype now and again, but most of the time I use MSN messenger.

    >>
    >> Yes I can imagine ebay spoiling Skype. That is why I am considering
    >> what may happen to other gateways.

    >
    >Other gateways? sorry I am not sure what you mean, maybe it is too early
    >in the morning :)


    As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    telephone and the computer. Rather I think that was the comment added
    by John. So the other voip companies must also be gateways too. No?
    pete
     
    , Sep 19, 2005
    #7
  8. On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:32:59 +0100, wrote:

    >As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    >telephone and the computer.


    Skype is primarily software and protocols to facilitate voice
    communication between computers. As add-ons it has "skype out" and
    "skype in" gateways to the PSTN phone system to allow calls between
    computers and "normal" phone users.

    Phil
    --
    Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :)
     
    Phil Thompson, Sep 19, 2005
    #8
  9. Guest

    On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:55:57 +0100, Phil Thompson
    <> wrote:

    >On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:32:59 +0100, wrote:
    >
    >>As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    >>telephone and the computer.

    >
    >Skype is primarily software and protocols to facilitate voice
    >communication between computers. As add-ons it has "skype out" and
    >"skype in" gateways to the PSTN phone system to allow calls between
    >computers and "normal" phone users.


    Thanks for putting me straight on that. I am new to voip and I still
    do not really understand what it is. Thanks.
    pete
     
    , Sep 19, 2005
    #9
  10. Ad C Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > >
    > >Other gateways? sorry I am not sure what you mean, maybe it is too early
    > >in the morning :)

    >
    > As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    > telephone and the computer. Rather I think that was the comment added
    > by John. So the other voip companies must also be gateways too. No?
    > pete
    >



    Yes, of cause, I said it was too early in the momrning :)
     
    Ad C, Sep 20, 2005
    #10
  11. Ad C Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:32:59 +0100, wrote:
    >
    > >As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    > >telephone and the computer.

    >
    > Skype is primarily software and protocols to facilitate voice
    > communication between computers. As add-ons it has "skype out" and
    > "skype in" gateways to the PSTN phone system to allow calls between
    > computers and "normal" phone users.
    >



    Too early again, I must stop trying to undertsand these things at this
    time of the momrning :)
     
    Ad C, Sep 20, 2005
    #11
  12. Guest

    On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:48:35 +0100, Ad C <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:32:59 +0100, wrote:
    >>
    >> >As I read the economist article Skype is only a gateway between the
    >> >telephone and the computer.

    >>
    >> Skype is primarily software and protocols to facilitate voice
    >> communication between computers. As add-ons it has "skype out" and
    >> "skype in" gateways to the PSTN phone system to allow calls between
    >> computers and "normal" phone users.
    >>

    >
    >
    >Too early again, I must stop trying to undertsand these things at this
    >time of the momrning :)


    Don't worry. I don't understand it either and I was only quoting the
    Economist article and more importantly Johns comments which were far
    more significant to me;-)
    pete
     
    , Sep 20, 2005
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    630
  2. dianasun via HWKB.com
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,595
    alkis
    Sep 14, 2009
  3. dianasun
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    920
    spammersarevermin
    Nov 17, 2005
  4. dianasun
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,964
    dianasun
    Jun 1, 2006
  5. synchronism
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    733
    synchronism
    Aug 23, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page