« Skype Works well on EvDO too! | Main | In Chicago for SUPERCOMM... »
June 06, 2005
How Can SIP Compete with Skype? The Best of Both Worlds:
Skype is without doubt the most successful VoIP download in the history of the Internet and Skype has established themselves as the biggest VoIP service provider on a global scale. Skype has the fastest adoption rate ever recorded. We have to ask ourselves why Skype is working so well.
So I have discussed with Henry if and how the SIP community can leverage SIP to make the best of both worlds into something that is greater than the sum of both. This would imply using SIP in both client-server and peer-to-peer mode, using the IETF standards for NAT traversal, auditable security, providing equal or better than PSTN sound quality, presence, IM and last but not least providing the ultimate user experience overall.
We would like such software and SIP devices to be compatible with the Free World Dialup service and invite interested developers across the industry to look at our Request for Information (RFI) and send their question, replies and comments to SIP-UA-RFI@pulver.com
Henry will talk about this topic also at the SIP Summit in Chicago on Tuesday at 9:00-9:30 am, for details see: http://www.pulver.com/sipsummit05/schedule.html.
Share this post:
Digg |
del.icio.us |
Reddit |
Newsvine |
Google Bookmark |
Yahoo MyWeb |
StumbleUpon
Posted by jeff on June 6, 2005 01:41 AM | Permalink
Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos
Comments
Cheapest VoIP with good Quality. http://www.skysiptel.com
Get you free sip number and free softphone in a minute.
If you are interested in VoIP revolution this is a right place to start. You can start calling right away using free minutes to ANY destinations.
Give us a try...
Questions, comments? visit alias site:
http://www.freevoipservices.net/ and post on forum any questions.
Folow all VoIP news here:
http://www.free-voipservice.net/
Thanks, and hope to see you as customer soon. skysiptel.com
Posted by: sam at March 6, 2008 09:54 AM
I has found http://www.az-voipproviders.com lunched at 26-09-2007 , here you can compare VoIP Providers (Like myvoipprovider.com, voipproviderslist.com or ...).
Top 10 providers ranking is available but i'm seeking for a voip providers international rate compare site :( Please ....
Posted by: aria at October 1, 2007 05:53 PM
I just saw this comment of SIP desktop sharing. Is damaka also trying to break into webex's area of expertise? I find it interesting that the traditional softphones are breaking into the collaboration market space. It's a good trend for the consumer. Why should I have to pay a monthly fee when I can just download a software and get the same service for free. It's not just about voice anymore...
Posted by: hroberts at October 12, 2006 05:56 PM
DAMAKA LAUNCHES P2P DESKTOP SHARING. THIS IS COOOL.
damaka Launches Industry’s First Peer-to-Peer Desktop Share;
damaka users see each others' desktop while communicating using voice, video and IM
October 5, 2006 09:00 AM US ET
RICHARDSON, Texas – October 5, 2006 – damaka™, a fast-growing communication and collaboration software company, introduces peer-to-peer desktop share. This feature allows users to see the desktop of their friends, family, and business associates after downloading the damaka software for free from the company website. Desktop share is a new feature added to damaka’s existing product offering which includes voice, video, DialOut™, IM, and file transfer.
damaka is the first company in the world to offer SIP-based, peer-to-peer desktop sharing, along with multi-party video-conferencing, IM conference chats, and 8-party voice-calls. The company founders noted that their vision is to create an interconnected world where all aspects of communication, from a simple phone call to a powerful collaboration session can take place in a virtual environment seamlessly, easily, and joyfully.
According to Siva Ravikumar, damaka CEO, “damaka has already tackled the unified communication space. Our goal now is to be the cutting-edge provider of peer-to-peer collaboration. Desktop share is just the beginning of a suite of collaboration tools we plan to launch. Our goal is to create a Connection Revolution where you will not have to fly to another city again for your meetings.”
The damaka free consumer version offers peer-to-peer desktop sharing in view mode only. The damaka Enterprise and Operator version will include an upgrade where one user can give control of their desktop to another user within his or her peer-to-peer network.
Posted by: dennis at October 6, 2006 07:32 PM
many skype users are not aware that they are a part of a Supernode when they download skype. A pc with skype installed can be used as a node for other callers to use when they call their friends. this is why your PC can get really slow after skype is downloaded. check out the skype privacy policy.
Skype's Privacy Policy (which you sign when you download skype!)
From time-to-time your computer may become a Supernode. A Supernode is a computer running Skype Software that has been automatically elevated to act as a hub. Supernodes may assist in helping other users to communicate or use the Skype software efficiently. This may include the ability for your computer to help anonymously and securely facilitate communications between other users of the Skype Software who, due to network and firewall constraints, cannot establish direct connections.
Posted by: sebastian at June 27, 2006 05:32 AM
DAMAKA LAUNCHES ITS SIP P2P OPERATOR AND SERVICE PROVIDER VERSION OF ITS PERSONAL SOFTSWITCH
damaka Launches Operator and Service Provider Version of Its Peer-to-Peer Personal Softswitch(TM)
Monday June 12, 9:00 am ET
RICHARDSON, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 12, 2006--damaka, a leading provider of real time peer-to-peer multimedia collaboration and communication software solutions, announced the release of "damaka powered" Partner Operator version of it's Personal Softswitch(TM) that enables Operators and Service providers to offer unique high value, easy to use voice, video and data services to their customers with the highest flexibility and lowest cost of ownership compared to any solution available today.
ADVERTISEMENT
"damaka now empowers Operators, VoIP Providers and ISPs with branded solution to leapfrog their competition by providing next generation services with secure, high quality Video and Voice (PC-to-PSTN/Mobile and PC-to-PC) communication," said Siva Ravikumar, Founder and CEO of damaka. "damaka's cutting-edge peer-to-peer technology based on SIP standards allows our customers to take advantage of its service enabling and highly scalable solution to increase revenue and reduce cost significantly."
damaka has announced their Operator launch with Mortel Telecom (www.mortel.com), a next generation Turkey based VoIP Provider focusing on Turkey and International markets. Mortel has implemented the complete "damaka powered" solution to deliver creative peer-to-peer services. damaka is currently working with numerous other operators and VoIP providers to enable them to launch their own peer-to-peer networks and be in the forefront of offering tailored communication and collaboration solutions to their customers.
"We require our partners' solutions to seamlessly integrate into our infrastructure so that we can maximize our capabilities, quickly deliver superior quality, and offer advanced services that touch people's lives every day. damaka's technology is changing the way we deliver services," said Vahit Aykut, CEO of Mortel. "The secure peer-to-peer model helps Mortel to scale with the most cost effective infrastructure possible today and this is a key element to our overall growth plan."
damaka has also recently developed and released the best-in-class peer-to-peer video (H.263/H.264) as the cornerstone of its video offering.
For information on how to have your own peer-to-peer "damaka powered" network contact: bizdev@damaka.net
About damaka, Inc.
damaka (www.damaka.com) is a technology pioneer in distributed softswitching for multimedia communication and collaboration services. damaka offers its state-of-the-art software solutions to Operators, Enterprises and Consumers. damaka platform is based on industry standards and uses patent pending technology, which provides a very secure peer-to-peer environment for Internet users worldwide.
Contact:
damaka, Richardson
Sylvia, 972-979-6464
sylvia@damaka.net
www.damaka.com
Posted by: Dennis at June 12, 2006 02:22 PM
PortSIP softphone is a powerful and unique Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) software phone capable of voice over IP communications. It has been used and downloaded by a lot of users.
If you are looking for a softphone for your commnucation needs, try PortSIP softphone please! It' free!
Posted by: PortSIP at June 8, 2006 12:26 AM
I agree with Ian's comments from a few months ago. Ask the questions to identify the problem, then apply the solution as simply as possible for the masses, not for the techies.
Example. As a student sitting in a telecom class about 10 years ago, I remember learning about POTS/PANS/PSTN and a little technology called "ISDN" just waiting to take it's rightful place in telecom history. I also remember an article headline later stating ISDN was a "solution in search of a problem". Sound familiar?
Now, as a IT professional 10 years later, I've seen ISDN used once for an office video conference system. Home and office users alike just want to hear ringing on the other end of their home analog phone, office digital pbx, or even Skype on their home computer.
Simply put, no dropped calls or limited number of call transfers will be tolerated like the VoIP problems I saw happen on a recently installed office voice over ip system just 3 short months ago.
As for the home user in me, all I have to do is put my headset on, go to the eBay site, hit the download Skype link, install, and use PayPal to buy $10 of SkypeOut minutes to call my brother in Japan. It's that easy.
The techie in me hates to admit it, but technology usually has to solve a business problem for anyone to buy it. New technology will fail if it doesn't solve a problem, set a standard (beta or vhs?), or is too proprietary ...most of the time, (Does IBM still make proprietary hardware? PCs?).
Competition tends to be good for all of us. But honestly, Skype really isn't the biggest competitor to SIP technology. The entrenched winner and still champion is "plain old telephone service".
Just ask yourself or anyone else, "When was the last time you picked up a basic telephone and didn't hear a dialtone?"
Posted by: Chris at April 10, 2006 10:24 PM
I use skype to talk to family around the world. It is always reliable. Hope to start using video.
Posted by: malc at March 15, 2006 09:20 PM
Hi, guys, starving inventor here.
I'm an averagie, not a newbie, not a full techie.
What I'm good at is spotting trends and deals.
I downloaded damaka, skype, gizmo, and a couple
others, and have been trying to get the funds to
build a machine to run win2k/xp well so I can use them. still on 98se here, but with all bugs out!
I'd rather run 98se well than xp buggy, imho.
but I understand the reasons etc and am happy to
join in the 2k / xp world. bye bye dos, sigh...
BTW certified genius wants to work on and in think tank, email for details...
OK now that you know WHO I am, I got the perfect
name for the thing. And I'll GIVE it to you, but don't screw me over.
S L I P (not the old modem protocol, a name)
A new catchy name. Slogan: "Let 'er slip..."
Your secrets. Your conversations. Your gossip.
Let 'er slip, over the new slip phone.
Super Local Internet Phone with Call-In builtin!
Got friends? Around the world? Give them the
S L I P! Sign up now at www.(jointventurewithmeslip.)com
See how easy it would be? then us geeks would
give it some tech name like
Scsi Lan Irc Protocol or some bs like that...
HA HA HA! Anyway, from a consumer point of
view, I want to hook pgp or better quality
encryption etc with george jetson voice synthesis/recognition and webcam with full dvd and pdf making capabilities and slipstreaming
over winamp with different pay member areas for
advanced members like a 900 number or pin code and NO it's not porn it's video learning like video professor only better. Could you have a thing that added a code to the number you dial, or say a 900 number for a url, but not 900 obviously, something else, where you go to:
www.myvoicephone.com/members/payid.cgi?membername
or something like that, and it deducts course price from paypal? or clickbank? HEY I WANT DIBS ON THIS IDEA YOU GUYS IF YOU BUILD IT, I WANT IN ON IT, I DON'T CARE SO MUCH ABOUT MAKING MONEY ON THE IDEA AS I DO GETTING THE TECHNOLOGY OF IT AVAILABLE FOR ME TO USE!!!!!! SO HELP ME!!!
Posted by: supercheeper at February 13, 2006 04:16 PM
Henry, as usual you're on the mark.
Skype = Consumer, mass market Supply Tool/Package. Zero LAN/WAN security = Immediate Market Limitation.
SIP = Scalable, secure protocol for use across all market segments (Mass Market, Corporate, Global Enterprise, Government).
The questions above seem not to be which (underlying service) is better but more what are the realistic target markets?
I am yet to find a CIO in his/her right mind who would convert to Skype en masse as a chosen, secure method of communicating. However I know dozens who have experimented with very ingenious and secure deployments of SIP (Including Wireless and dual mode deployments).
Ciao.
Posted by: Tom Young at January 4, 2006 08:18 PM
We've got a naming problem and that's for sure.
The SIP acronym no longer distinguishes between the protocol, the end user software or device, and the network service. We've confused the consumer.
To Geoff's point, you can in fact walk into a Walmart and get a SIP phone, it's called Vonage (link here: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=3650538)
Note that it's not called a SIP phone, it's called a VoIP phone adaptor.
Skype rolled the service, the network, and the software into a seamless whole that just works. When someone says Skype you know what they mean.
When someone says call me on SIP, you've got no clue what the mean. I mean, hell, I'm embarresed to say I haven't even set up a SIP URI for myself yet -- it's on my todo list to config into my home Asterisk server, but I just haven't had the time to sort it out and no-one is really asking me for it so that they can make calls to me.
To ramble just a bit further, I think we in technology often understand the value of a clean name (or brand, lets say). Having done the tech side of a web / voice dating company for years now, I've gotten to know some top-notch brand people and I have learned to respect them.
Let's look at the three names from a consumer perspective:
Skype - not an acronym, means nothing innately, had been branded to be equated with free high quality internet calling
SIP - stands for Session Initiaion Protocol. Sound's complicated. Hopelessly muddled and overloaded term. Time to reboot. (Other than to continue to use it for it's original purpose, the name on the RFC). Starting to call the soft and hard phones "SIP phones" was a big marketing mistake. I mean, even if you don't explain the acronym I would venture the term "sip" is inherently confused with foamy pink cocktails or some such. Bad brand.
Gizmo -- sorry to pick on this, but gizmo sounds too geeky and cheap. The brand association here does not connote easy to use, straightforward. It connotes complicated, clever technology.
Free World Dialup -- this is much better, I can get a sense of what it is -- and Jeff I'm glad to see the "telephony by geeks for geeks" message has been replaced, I thought that it was limiting.
You know, there was a great article on slashdot last month about the fact that the Linux community is really bad at naming things. I would agree, here's an excerpt "This article at XYZ Computing takes a look at Linux's strange naming practices. When compared to their Window's equivalents, the names of many Linux programs are difficult to recognize and even tougher to remember. This may seem like splitting hairs, but it is actually an important usability issue.", link here http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/27/174226&from=rss
I would submit this has spilled over into our SIP community, which after all has been by and large built by the technologists.
OK, enough on this topic, I'm likely preaching to the choir anyway...
[BTW in previewing this comment Movable Type seems to be stripping out all of my paragraph breaks, I'm hoping that when I actually post it the breaks will be there as intended, otherwise this will probably be pretty unreadable]
Posted by: Steve Smith at January 4, 2006 10:50 AM
While the question may have been relevant in June, now it is a moot point. Skype is here, Skype is VOIP and as far as the man on the street, Skype is the way to talk to someone on your computer.
SIP will survive as the backend protocol for the infrastructure people. The IP phone systems, computer geeks, etc. BUT you will never see a SIP phone in Wal-Mart.
In order for SIP to be relevant, SIP devices or at least SIP networks will have to interoperate with Skype.
I've come up with a solution to the problem and have discussed it with Jeff in email. I'm hoping to attract VC money for it, so I can't discuss it here.
Geoff.
Posted by: Geoff Mendelson at January 4, 2006 06:52 AM
Skype works because the *application* focuses on the user experience. The folks at Skype could have used SIP instead of a proprietary protocol and gained the additional beneficial attributes of openness and possibly even interoperability. Unfortunately, they did not.
It is wrong to compare SIP vs. Skype. One is a protocol and the other is an application. Instead you should compare Application A to Application B. The reason that Application B sucks is not because it is using Protocol X, but because Application B did not focus enough on the user experience. If someone builds an application that delivers a user experience as good or better than Skype, but ALSO uses an open protocol and allows interoperability with other VoIP products, then we are getting somewhere. I predict that the most likely application to approach this bar will be Google Talk.
As for this RFI, I think it is a complete waste of time and exactly the kind of thing a telco would do. Rather than spend a huge quantity of effort writing and responding to an RFI, actually go build or fix an application and stop wanking about?
Posted by: Rohan Mahy at January 3, 2006 01:16 PM
The discussion seems to focus on the ease-of-use
aspect - which has been a pet-peeve of mine. The IETF seems to be
dominated right now by people that want to require Cisco (or Nortel or
Siemens or ...) certification for setting up anything VoIP related.
It should be quite possible to create a SIP client that only requires a user name and password to get a basic, working configuration, even without the on-going, far-too-complicated, configuration work in the IETF.
Having each of the hundreds of small SIP providers maintain their own namespace also doesn't help. At least with IM solutions, there's only a handful of providers to keep track of. Why would I want to sign up with a service that has an unknown, but likely very small, number of customers and may or may not let me talk directly to my friend, who picked another provider? By protecting their tiny little turf against other, relatively-speeaking, tiny providers, they relegate themselves to being niche providers.
Unfortunately, most of the SIP clients that emerge seem
to rely on users to do their testing for them. Whenever I have pointed
my students to them, they come back with "crashes", "doesn't work
right", "doesn't work with well-known SIP client X" or "requires strange
configuration". Unfortunately, they also tend to give SIP-related stuff
a bad name in the process. Maybe the BlueTooth and 802.11 (WiFi) folks
had it right: You shouldn't be able to call your product as implementing
a protocol or specification for the mass market unless you have proven
minimal functionality and interoperability. Otherwise, proprietary will
win in the long run since users don't care about labels unless they
actually mean something. There is an opportunity here for some creative marketing: create a label that certifies that a service provider will talk to any other certified SIP service provider - and make the requirement for entry nothing more than verified compliance with a set of standards, not 2-inch thick set of peering agreements.
Posted by: Henning Schulzrinne at January 3, 2006 10:45 AM
SIP and Skype are both very successful in meeting the objectives for which they have been designed:
SIP has been designed mainly to replace TDM for carriers and for the PBX. SIP has succeeded to be the world standard for wireline and wireless carriers alike, as well as most state of the art IP PBX products. There are countless SIP phones, adapters and PC clients out there. Features were more important than ease of use, though setting up a SIP adapter, phone or videophone (I have the Packet8) requires you only to plug it in. The site http://www.myvoipprovider.com/ lists 552 providers and I believe most of them are SIP compliant. So are the 3G wireless phones, Microsoft, IBM, Yahoo, etc.
Skype has been designed for consumers and ease of use. The file sharing background of its founders has allowed Skype to leverage great knowledge for serverless (P2P) functionality, lack of any VoIP network infrastructure, agility in NAT/Firewall traversal, and the ultimate users experience for simplicity. Skype has also avoided the legacy ITU-T codecs and uses state of the art Internet codecs instead, plus echo control and automatic audio gain control. Last but not least, Skype seems to have a very well engineered security architecture. This splendid engineering was eased by the fact that Skype is fundamentally one single piece of software - the peer node in your PC and they were not tied down by any standards process, such as SIP had to be in order to become the world standard.
We have seen similar excellence from Apple communication protocols, but being a closed system, the market share will ultimately be limited, as for any closed protocol. For similar reasons, Skype cannot be the world standard for service providers and enterprise systems, unless Skype decides to migrate to SIP.
I believe P2P SIP that learns from Skype is the right thing to do and maybe we can discuss P2P SIP at the VON Spring and VON Europe.
Posted by: Henry Sinnreich at January 2, 2006 09:19 PM
How can SIP compete with Skype? Make it simple and easy to use.
18 months ago I started looking at IP telephony as a possible key to improving processes and enabling new business models in health care. I am not an engineer, but I am very good at surveying new technologies and figuring out how to leverage them in practical applications. But the VoIP space is hopelessly dominated by techno-babblers. Even after months of research and spending $100K on a testbed VoIP implementation the only thing I can say that I really understand about VoIP is that it is a can of worms.
But Skype just works. You don't need to learn about it, determine which standards it uses, worry about NAT routers, configure it, buy or maintain costly servers, organise user training--you just install it and start using it. It doesn't do everything I know VoIP to be capable of, but it does work.
If you tech mavens expect ANYTHING to compete with something like Skype you need to get realistic about the reducing barriers to adoption, simplifying the product, and making it easy to use.
Posted by: David Lynn at January 2, 2006 04:24 PM
Have you heard of a company called Damaka (www.damaka.com).
The are in the SIP P2P space and they have an application that lets you do instant message, chat, voice calls, audio conference up to four users, personalized voice mail, send SMS all from a laptop.
Have you guys heard of this company and does anyone know about their product.
I went to their site www.damaka.com because a friend of mine recommended it but I don't know much about the company.
Has anyone heard about Damaka or their product?
Posted by: Dennis at September 27, 2005 06:49 PM
I am a VOIP tester.I have used both Communicator and Skype.Infact, I have tested a product which can block Skype.To be frank we can name the no. of products available to block skype(as it uses dynamic ports).But if u take SIP to be blocked, its very simple(could be blocked on the basis of port 5060)! I would always recommend skype to my Friends as all are working in Corporate environment where blocking is common!
Other important thing is that the packets are encrypted in Skype whereas in SIP its text based!
I have always worked around the market to check for any company offering SIP and Skype interoperability featured product.I am very much interested in working on such a product!
Hope i will get a chance in future as both growing!
Posted by: suresh at September 23, 2005 08:22 AM
I signed up for Skype a while ago... found that I started receiving an abundance of calls from china ... (I'm in Canada)... could the popularity of skype be geographically connected?
The tool is very "cutesy" and very easy to get setup for PC-PC... given the popluation of countries like china, and the ability to install, configure and run the product without having to be able to read English, it would seem to be an obvious choice of competing products
I believe that there is a desire for voip as the progression of global comms... I personally think Vonage has a sound business model... they could lose the annoying ads... but their product offering looks great, and they present it well.
Posted by: Mack at August 14, 2005 09:51 PM
Why does Skype have so much success as opposed to SIP? That is really a simple question and the answer is extremely simple. People use Skype because they are trying what new capabilities have to offer. People involved in the development of SIP think of my old PSTN phone as king. The PSTN is not going away any time soon. But if the traditional phone is all people wanted, Skype wouldn't be a viable offering. A SIP message needs to route as simply as an SMTP message and needs to be offered as ubiquitously as e-mail accounts. Then features that allow for multiple addresses, forwarding rules, etc. can be provided. The use of PSTN and gateways should be an add on that ultimately fewer and fewer people would want. SIP has the potential to provide more capabilities then previously imagined. In short the providers of SIP need to look forward which is exactly what the providers of Skype did.
Posted by: Ken at July 25, 2005 04:11 PM
The technology just doesn't matter to the market. When you start with the assumption that any protocol or technology is the solution, you have not asked the right questions.
Skype was designed by engineers who took a pragmatic approach to building a nextGen communications network. As it happens the solution to their set of needs was none of MGCP, SIP, 323, nor was it any known protocol .. so they rolled their own.
SIP was designed and continues to be evolved by idealists (sorry Henry, Jonathan). And SIP has not been used to build the sort of open, accessible networks that it was originally intended to spawn. SIP right now has been subjugated to being an inexpensive protocol for running closed-domain telecom networks, kind of like SS7. And no VoIP protocol in existence has been truly, practicably, P2P... and in any case, SIP's native inability to traverse firewalls pretty much requires it to be administered by a for-profit Service Provider (to pay for all those Jasomi boxen).
The market doesn't care about things like "auditability" (in fact, the market may be more attracted by Skype's supposed security than they would be put off by it)... the market wants it to work the first time, every time, when they download it. They will put up with some jitter and dropouts, but they'll be impressed by greater acoustic quality.
So having open protocols is only part of the solution. Even the web is not P2P, when you realize that having memorable domain names was the catalyst for HTTP. The domain authorities become the arbiters of the network. That which is fundamentally open is more often than not defeated by that which is practicable.
Most of us have started with the protocol (SIP) and looked for questions into which that protocol fits, and the result has been some odd marriages.
My advice: Stop coming up with answers, start asking questions ... as did the Skype guys.
-Ian.
Posted by: Ian at July 20, 2005 10:41 AM
I've tried VOIP everytime somethings turns up on the Internet, and SKYPE works straight out of the box - it does what it says on the tin. All of the others needed lots of 'fiddling' about and even then they were not as simple or as good as the SKYPE service. People who I call on PSTN via SKYPE don't believe that I'm using a PC VOIP phone service, that's how good it is. I'd love for SIP to work, but it's got to be a lot simpler to setup.
Posted by: Peter Carnegie at July 11, 2005 09:48 PM
I am a new user to SIP softphones, including communicator, X-lite, Sipphone...
i asked myself why the number of free EMAILS accounts has grown so quickly and spread so quickly all around the globe ? ...
because obviously it works well, people need it, but the most important thing is that it's easy to create an account, and immediately start using it.
I asked myself about SKYPE, and it's success should be for the same reasons ! it's as simple to start using SKYPE than to start using a free email !
I downloaded yesterday SIP based softphones, and i'm still trying today to start using it... i'm not a rookie, but i'm still trying to understrand how it works...
Pulver Communicator seems to be the simplest SIP softphones, there is also a clear FAQ, but it's not as simple and intuitive as Skype.. and that is i think the power of Skype...
and for that reason, when someone start using it and see how simple it is and how well it works, he tell about it to friends, colleagues and family, and it spreads all around the globe...
i'm not an engineer, i recently finished marketing and business studies, i can tell you that the most business success stories were based on concepts which were easy to use by the majority of consumers, and that is as important as the technicals strenghts of the product...
otherwise the product stay confined for a limited market of experts users...
Posted by: zoom2x at July 8, 2005 09:59 AM
The idea to combine the winning features found in Skype with SIP has also occurred to the developers of Gizmo, see http://www.gizmoproject.com/ .
Skype has indeed posed a commendable challenge to SIP developers and we will probably see SIP implementations that have learned from the good features of Skype. NAT traversal (a venerable P2P industry skill set) using ICE, the ultimate user experience and the superior GIPS sound package with the iLBC codec are features that can be better implemented with standards based SIP IMHO. Gizmo is just one welcome proof of this, and there are doubtless more to come.
Posted by: Henry Sinnreich at July 6, 2005 12:40 PM
I'd argue that skype's ease of adoption is intimtly tied to the set of technologies. For all of Dean, Rohan, and others' work, most SIP clients NAT handling is waaay behind that of skype. And skype's choice of gips, rather than the narrow-band codecs preferred by previous incarnations of AIM, Yahoo, and MSN made skype sound one heck of a lot better.
Another suggestion: make the RFI a wiki (with registration, if needed). When do you think you might get to working code? :-)
Posted by: Venki Iyer at July 6, 2005 01:47 AM
Hello,
I tried the SIP video phone (Make-Thomson speed touch ) on free world dial up service, But did not work. Is free world dial up service support the SIP video phone. If yes, Kindly let me kow the support E-mail id for further support.
Best Regards
Ravinder Sharma
GSM=+967-71123419
Yemen
Posted by: Ravinder Sharma at July 4, 2005 02:07 AM
I think you answered your own question earlier:
"While we have done limited testing with pulver.Communicator and third-party SIP networks, we haven't tested with everyone...so your individual mileage may vary."
As long as users have to expend more than zero energy to know when it might work, it's a non-starter. Skype is winning because of a superior distribution strategy (ease of adoption and spread), not the product or technology per se. Many subtle factors come together to create this "delight" experience that makes people want to tell their friends.
Jeff -- ask users of Communicator and Skype whether they would recommend them to their friends; if not, find out why. That's your answer.
Posted by: Martin Geddes at June 6, 2005 07:07 PM