Re: I had a DREAM!
 

Sorry, I didn't know his grandmother was stuck on Skype. :rolleyes:

And some of you just don't get it: it isn't up to Nokia to get video working on Skype. It's up to Skype.

Gizmo folks got it working... what's Skype's holdup? Quit aiming the anger at the wrong people, focus it where it belongs, and demand THEY fix it.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

I have used gizmo... and it is pretty useful for video chatting. Well it would be great if we had skype video chat....but until than instead of crying we could use gizmo.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

I too had a similar dream...I assumed the IT would support H.323

(See Polycom, Tandberg, Aethra, Sony..MS NetMeeting etc.)

95% of video conferencing today is done using H.323

H.323 is simple, mature and well..everywhere...

Hey, I know SIP is probably the future..but this device would really benefit by supporting this STANDARD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.323

http://www.openh323.org

http://www.h323plus.org

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

I don't think it's even a matter of "everyone uses skype". It's a matter of:

• Giving the users to choose
• Fully supporting the choices given

Having an 80% supported client isn't a full choice.

Locking people into particular choices isn't any more embracing of openness than avoiding a "gross and proprietary" solution. Forcing them to abandon Skype and use Gizmo is just as "gross" and limiting a solution as forcing them to only use Skype.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

Nokia had zero involvement in getting Skype onto the NIT? No deals were made, Skype just showed up on the NIT one day, all on their own?

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

Oh boy, a sarcasm war! :D

John, who's doing the actual coding? Who developed the proprietary protocols? Need a hint?

I have another question: how is it that video works for Google talk and Gizmo? I'll give a hint on this one: search the friggin' forum and you'll find the answer.

Sheesh.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

No one at Nokia locked users into Gizmo or Google talk for video, John.

Relax, move past your current anger, do a little research, and the answer to your questions will be revealed.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

For me, "proprietary, VOIP, video-chat solution" boldly advances uselessness in at least three directions, but for the good of the entire ITT community, I really, really hope Skype adds video support to their Internet tablet client soon. Far too many people have been upset by that glaring omission in the software for far too long, and it's causing a lot of pain. It's clearly high time for Skype to add video support so we, as a community, can begin to heal and more forward united...to complain about how the video quality sucks.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

Who did the coding is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Nokia has a relationship with Skype, has the leverage that goes with that relationship, and the user perception of device usefulness and device satisfaction is tied to Nokia, not Skype. Therefore, users will go to Nokia with issues, and it is Nokia's burden to use their relationship with Skype to get those issues fixed.

If Nokia doesn't want Skype users to pick a different Skype device, or "upgrade" to a non-Nokia Skype device, then Nokia has to manage the situation, not the customers. If Nokia doesn't want to do that, then they should completely sever their relationship with Skype, instead of having a sort of half-assed relationship with Skype.

If Nokia doesn't like that, then they shouldn't be doing things like playing up Skype capability in the product blurbs, nor including Skype as a featured download in the application menu, etc. Just relegate Skype to the same download app status as any other third party app (like, say, Gizmo). THEN and only THEN has Nokia removed itself from the picture of who the user should go to when an application isn't being fully delivered.

Nokia's official mesage shouldn't be "just use Gizmo instead" when Skype IS on the official app list, and Gizmo IS NOT. (and, yes, I know you're not necessarily speaking for Nokia in an official capacity on this, but you also didn't direct us to the official channel for complaining to Nokia, either) It's not like Nokia sold me a device that has no mention of Skype anywhere, and I just stumbled onto a Skype client for the NIT.

It is not as agnostic a situation for Nokia as it would be if we were talking about missing functionality with Gizmo. Or Pidgin. Or Clawmail. etc. Nokia is the vendor of this platform. The platform, out of the box, has a nice prominent shiny Skype logo in the application menu (so, it's part of the base product, even if it's just an installer link at first). Therefore, problems with making that base platform work in its entirety go to Nokia. The situation is only comparable to Gizmo if Gizmo also has such a logo bundled into the product. Or if Skype stops having such a logo bundled into the product.



And, I'm not angry. I don't even directly care about video conferencing (with any application/protocol). Remember, I'm the person who keeps suggesting that the NITs should have a picture camera, even if it's at the expense of the chat camera. What I am, though, is rigorous about who has responsibility for what, and Nokia is not without responsibility on this issue. Shirking it back to the users, when Nokia definitely shows itself as having a product based relationship with Skype, is not taking responsibility for its own role and relationship with Skype.

Re: I had a DREAM!
 

Good points Steve.

I also apologize in general and especially to johnkzin for posting in exasperation. I just have this thing about assigning blame and credit where they're truly due...

But I wouldn't hold my breath where Skype is concerned. Remember, it was purchased by ebay under Meg Whitman's direction-- and she's gone now, replaced by a CEO determined to "enhance ebay's revenue" even at the price of pissing off longtime sellers. I could see him scrapping Skype. Even if they try to sell it, that act alone could put the service in peril.