Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook To Launch In-Browser Video Chat With Skype

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the let's-call-it-facetime dept.

Facebook 89

tekgoblin writes "Facebook will be launching a new in-browser video chat application. 'The product has been built on Skype and will include a desktop component. It’s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has Skype already installed on the computer, or if additional software will need to be downloaded even if the user already uses Skype. But it’s clear that there’s very deep integration between the products, and from the user’s perspective, the product will be an in-browser experience.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (-1)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36637862)

is Google, and Microsoft owns part of Facebook and all of skype...

Okay, so this decision makes perfect business sense. I just saved all of you some brain cycles. Move along.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (3, Insightful)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638108)

Google isn't really a competitor to Facebook. However, Facebook is a competitor to Google, as now people spend lots of time on Facebook and find all kinds of interesting links and stuff there, and maybe even use Facebook's search instead of Google. (yes, I know we techies don't do that, but we're a minority)

What comes to Google+, it's quite far from competitor to Facebook. It just misses so much stuff. There isn't any of those games, apps, fan pages, events.. Maybe some of them will be added to Google+, but on their basic idea of circles I don't think they will do games, apps and (fan) pages. Events and calendar, sure. But don't underestimate those apps on pages on Facebook. Normal people love them. So Facebook and Google+ will probably run side to side, serving slightly different purposes for different people. Just like Facebook and LinkedIn are doing now.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638160)

There isn't any of those games, apps, fan pages

Shut up and take my money!

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

econolog (2081738) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638168)

I hope this was a troll. This could be one of the greatest tech battles in recent history. Google is going to do everything they can for this one.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638264)

Google is going to do everything they can for this one.

Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta. Especially so if they still are thinking of adding major features to get users to move from Facebook. And they wouldn't have capacity problems to handle those even those few early users. Come on, they run Google and YouTube and several other huge sites after all.

But you know, we have seen this route before. Orkut was supposed to be this too - it didn't work out. Even started with the same kind of limited invites. Google Talk was supposed to be replace existing IM networks.. That didn't really work out. The software was extremely limited. I don't know how it is now, but why should I or anyone else care. I've seen it and noticed the existing ones are better. It's hard to change that image later on. Google Wave was supposed to be it too... failed.

Seriously, if you're going to compete against one of the biggest sites of the internet, you just don't bring your version out unfinished and missing major features. This is marketing basics. The image a person gets first will stick forever.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (-1, Flamebait)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638346)

Closed Beta is not a release moron.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (3, Interesting)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638484)

Beta means nothing with Google. Everyone should know that by now. When they announce something going beta, it's pretty much same as going live and they will either improve it over time or forget it (and in some cases completely discontinue offering the service).

I seriously wonder the slashdot group think mentality about this. Usually in these Facebook stories people talk about how they lose their privacy and privacy settings on Facebook are hard to use and most are on by default. You guess what, when I signed up for Google+ today it was ever worse. You talk about Facebook leaking your data to advertisers on Google? Well, Google+ uses that data all over their advertising network and for other tracking. They state this in the very registration page. When you sign up, your profile is by default made public to the whole world, including search engines. There is no way to change that before it has already happened. And this being Google's product, it means the data is indexed in almost real time. Google+ privacy controls are MUCH worse than Facebook's. Only thing I miss in Facebook is the idea of different "circles". They kind of have that with friend groups, but it's not as defined. Otherwise Facebook lets you change any privacy setting as much as you like. I've done so.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

reeno49 (1558221) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638972)

I think the main issue with Facebook, or at least mine personally, is that when I started using Facebook a few years ago, I made myself completely private. I was invisible in searches, friend lists, everything. Unless I added you as a friend, you had no idea that I had a Facebook profile. The only reason I really had a Facebook profile was to keep in touch with close friends who've moved cross country or overseas, so this worked well for me.

Then what happened? Random privacy "update" from Facebook! Now all of my privacy settings are reset to default, and because I don't use the service as often as most, it goes unnoticed for a few days. Then the friend invites start rolling in. Then harassing messages from people I didn't want contact from (another reason I was private). So I set it all back to normal and went about my life.

Oh, but then another privacy "update" from Facebook! This time, not only do all of my settings go back to default, but they've also removed the ability to be invisible in searches and friends lists! Excellent!

Fuck Facebook. Seriously. I get why people like it, I get why people use it, but for people who really do value their privacy (me) and want to use the service, we'll forever be screwed by their ever changing garbage "updates" and changes without prior notice.

This is the main reason I'm excited about Google+. If they can solve those issues then I'll sign up in a heartbeat, convince the people I use Facebook to communicate with to make the switch as well (or at least get a Google+ profile).

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639690)

for people who really do value their privacy (me) and want to use the service, we'll forever be screwed by their ever changing garbage "updates" and changes without prior notice.

Well, you could do what I did... sign up for Facebook using an alias. Yup, my Slashdot username is also the same as my Facebook ID. I just tell the 3 or 4 people that want to keep in touch with me on Facebook what my made-up name is. Now they know it's me.

I've never had to fiddle with any facebook privacy settings, I just leave them all on default.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

Stone2065 (717387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640336)

So, if you would... could I get an invite to Google Plus? I'd appreciate it. ;)

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641410)

Let me try this again.... CLOSED beta is not a release moron.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639204)

Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta.

People want what they can't have. :-)

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

ludwigf (1208730) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639986)

Then they would had released the thing finished, not in an early beta. Especially so if they still are thinking of adding major features to get users to move from Facebook.

I've used google+ and it doesn't feel like a beta at all. Everything just worked as expected, the UI is great. And its the only out of the box working group video chat for Linux I know of. Plus some extra gimmicks like watching YouTube "together." It is correct that there isn't much you can do on google+ but does it need more "major features"? I've got no idea what they plan to do but what features could it need? Maybe some gardening game? Think of twitter, featurewise its near to nothing and still people spend hours on this site.

Google Talk was supposed to be replace existing IM networks.. That didn't really work out. The software was extremely limited. I don't know how it is now, but why should I or anyone else care.

To me - and luckily some of my friends - Google Talk is the best IM for *mobiles* out there. And so at least I do care.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639390)

As long as FB has those shitty clickfest "games' then Google is SOL. I have actually had folks come into the shop and buy a PC around those stupid games, folks are addicted to Mafia Wars and Farmville/Frontierville like someone on warcrack. I even had to keep a late model P4 at my apt just so when my GF comes over she can have her morning Farmville fix without waking me up.

So give it up Google if you don't get Zynga on board. Maybe Google ought to just buy them out? because while we geeks hate the things those Zynga games are hot shit to the average folks.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

Calos (2281322) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638252)

Maybe people will realize they can get retarded flash games all over the internet, and that they don't really need a social network tying their identity to the games they play.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638404)

You mean like they will realize they can use Usenet for grouped discussions, IRC for real-time discussions, email for sending pictures of their holiday or latest party and install Exchange server for scheduling and calendar services? Both Facebook and Google+ are doomed!

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (2)

Calos (2281322) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638474)

I get your point, hyperbolic as it is, but it's not like people don't realize that there are other websites outside of Facebook.

The things you mention? That's what social networks are for. Connecting with people, all in one place. How do games fit in to that picture? Surely you're not arguing that people enjoy automated and impersonal Farmville spam from friends.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (1)

lolcutusofbong (2041610) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642090)

I use Google Calendar for scheduling and calendar services, but other than that I do all of those things.

Re:Okay, so if Facebook's biggest competitor (0)

DJLuc1d (1010987) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638660)

and maybe even use Facebook's search instead of Google.

Stopped reading right there... Either troll or so painfully ignorant that logic would do little good.

Oh great. (3, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36637902)

Now everyone I Skype is going to automatically know who my friends are, where I went to school, and how many Farmville credits I have.

Will it be like Omegle or Chatroulette? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36637952)

Will it be like Omegle or Chatroulette, where 9/10 videos are of penises?

Re:Will it be like Omegle or Chatroulette? (2)

itchythebear (2198688) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638006)

Only if 9/10 of you friends are named Richard.

Re:Oh great. (2, Insightful)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638004)

Moves like this, making their site more clunky are what is going to drive people to Google+. When Facebook started they were lean and mean (at least compared to MySpace). They seem to have forgotten this philosophy of simplicity and are simply trying to cram as many bells and whistles as they can into their site.

Re:Oh great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638226)

You do know Google+ has built-in video chat, right?

Re:Oh great. (0)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638370)

you do know that Google's video chat is not in the way right?

Facebook is a site crammed full of shit that leaks my data to games that my friends are using.

Google+ ? Not so much.

Re:Oh great. (1)

cgeys (2240696) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638442)

What the hell does Facebook's game have to do with a video chat feature in the IM function? Both will probably function about the same - it opens a video chat when you request it from the chat window or profile. In fact, Google+ seems to be promoting the video feature A LOT. I signed up for an account today and there was all over things like "Have some fun and start a group video chat session with your circles!" and various other usages to promote the video features. At least Facebooks version will most likely be a small, unnoticable button to start a video conversation instead of a text chat.

Re:Oh great. (3, Informative)

DJLuc1d (1010987) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638622)

Take it from someone who has actually used the service instead of just saw an ad for it. The video chat is not in the way, and in fact is pretty amazing.

Re:Oh great. (2)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638520)

You do know Google+ has built-in video chat, right?

Actually I was not aware of that, although after thinking about it, it is pretty obvious that it would have the same functionality currently built into Talk. I'm going to withhold judgment until I can play around with the site and measure load times. If Google+ is anything like GMail or Voice then I would expect it to blow Facebook out of the water.

Re:Oh great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638550)

Google+ has the same integration with their own chat extension instead of Skype.

No one is going to Google+ in droves. Believe me, I know. The handful of people who are on there already and the lack of being able to add anyone else isn't exactly making it the gold rush you seem to think it is.

Re:Oh great. (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639810)

Oh please, facebook took a while to catch on as well, as did myspace, nexopia and all the other social networking sites before it.

Some people are dismissing Google+ because of what happened with wave, but the big difference is that Google is being much more conservative it this time around.

Re:Oh great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640372)

Moves like this, making their site more clunky are what is going to drive people to Google+. When Facebook started they were lean and mean (at least compared to MySpace). They seem to have forgotten this philosophy of simplicity and are simply trying to cram as many bells and whistles as they can into their site.

You can see how easily a site like facebook can mushroom from a few thousand to a few million users without much effort. It kind of deceives the creator's into thinking: "Gee, with more effort should be able to get everyone in America using the site!" Maybe in some nightmare dystopia, maybe. People are more varied in their wants and interests than that, fortunately. It's funny to see them shoot themselves in the foot trying to force it.

Re:Oh great. (1)

DavidD_CA (750156) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642390)

I don't know about that. They've also made great strides in removing clutter from their interface. There are features that only appear when you mouse-over them, "submit" buttons can be turned off, there are fewer page refreshes and "endless scrolling" is enabled on many pages, etc.

For all that Facebook does, I think it's a pretty simple interface.

What about linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36637906)

Not that I am happy about the whole Microsoft buying skype ordeal, but what about people using Linux?

Re:What about linux? (1)

cranil (1983560) | more than 3 years ago | (#36637918)

we're screwed.

Re:What about linux? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638876)

yeah, both of you are screwed!

Re:What about linux? (1)

stoborrobots (577882) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639870)

I assume you mean we're saved from having to run all that cruft...

Re:What about linux? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36637994)

Who cares? Honestly.

Re:What about linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638818)

The response from the vast majority of social media users: What's Linux?

Redundant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36637938)

So we have Skype with Facebook integration and Facebook with Skype integration. WTF?

Anyway, g+ hasn't Mafia Wars SPAM yet.

Google+ does this already (0)

cpuh0g (839926) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638012)

This is the Hangouts feature in Google+. I expect FB to roll out a "circles" feature any day now.

Re:Google+ does this already (2)

SOOPRcow (1279010) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638496)

You can already create "friend" groups on facebook. I don't see how they're any different tbh.

Re:Google+ does this already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36660938)

Honestly Facebook groups are obscure, not very well integrated and are not usable in many places. I can't see posts only by group, I can't easily make post visible only for certain group or groups etc. So groups are kind of not "finished" for Facebook and I find it to be one of FB greatest weaknesses so far.
Not sure how well Google+ will work in this sense, not expecting much so far but will be curious to check it out.

Re:Google+ does this already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638540)

This is the Hangouts feature in Google+. I expect FB to roll out a "circles" feature any day now.

Yes but Facebook has over 600million users. Google+ has a lot fewer.

Re:Google+ does this already (1)

cakeslam (1965246) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641446)

It's irrelevant what google+ has right now because the service is not open to the public and doesn't have critical mass yet. What facebook is doing is co-opting every single decent feature google+ has before google has a chance to launch it. By the time google gets their act together and rolls it out to everybody, facebook will have made the whole service moot. And that's a real shame for google. Google should have kept the field trial very small (google employees + family) and then launched it for everyone.

Different markets ... (3, Interesting)

MacTO (1161105) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638016)

People seem to use Skype with family and close friends.

People seem to use Facebook with acquaintances.

Their uses are mostly incompatible.

Something tells me that this is going to be a nice feature to have, but that it isn't going to beef up Skype's or Facebook's userbase (as TFA suggests).

Re:Different markets ... (1)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638282)

People seem to use Skype for whatever purposes.

Re:Different markets ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638506)

People seem

Is that "seem", like Iraq seemed to have WMDs?

Quit pulling "facts" out of a hat and drawing conclusions.

Re:Different markets ... (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638928)

People tend to have their family and close friends added in Facebook, though. So if they suddenly get the ability to video chat with them there conveniently, why not? The point here, I think, is to attract Facebook users to Skype, not Skype users to Facebook.

Re:Different markets ... (1)

microbee (682094) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639528)

People seem to use Skype with family and close friends.

AKA people who can see me naked.

Re:Different markets ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36639834)

I'm using Skype mostly for business. That's why I have my computer switched on all the day long: to work, not to chat with family and friends.

What I'm interested in knowing is : (2)

John R. Isidore (2330334) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638024)

Do they archive all video content for datamining purposes?

Facebook To Launch In-Browser Toilet (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638034)

Facebook will be launching a new in-browser toilet application. 'The product has been built on a toilet and will include a desktop component. Itâ(TM)s not clear to me whether that means it will just work if a user has a toilet already, or if additional work will need to be done in the house even if the user already uses a toilet. But itâ(TM)s clear that thereâ(TM)s very deep integration between the products, and from the userâ(TM)s perspective, the product will be an in-browser experience.

Re:Facebook To Launch In-Browser Toilet (1)

Normal Dan (1053064) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638044)

I can't wait for this feature!

Re:Facebook To Launch In-Browser Toilet (1)

SilverHatHacker (1381259) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638142)

But don't people already just dump all their crap into their Facebook profile?

Re:Facebook To Launch In-Browser Toilet (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638248)

Well, nothing stops you from using it right now, but if you like to read while at it, get a second monitor.

Hulu then this? (1)

recharged95 (782975) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638060)

Looks like Facebook is heading into what MySpace wanted to be. Just hope they make the UI looks read-able, and we all know what they're going to do with *your* (cough: their) information.

Microsoft + Facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638092)

inb4 Microsoft merges with Facebook and Microsoft v2 emerges.

Re:Microsoft + Facebook (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638134)

I wonder in all this where is Apple, oh, Ping and FaceTime.

Linux?

Re:Microsoft + Facebook (2)

SilverHatHacker (1381259) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638180)

Diaspora and GNU Free Call. In other words, talk to me in about five years when it's ready.

Re:Microsoft + Facebook (2)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638222)

Exactly. You need a simple or cute name to catch on.

Diaspora is an awful name, I know it has a meaning (although I had to Google it so as to make sure it wasn't a disease) but it's hardly catchy.

Tuxchat would have been better.

Re:Microsoft + Facebook (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638206)

Perhaps there's no money in it? Apple are quite happy raking in record sums of money from hardware sales rather than trying to figure out how to monetize a free online service.

Re:Microsoft + Facebook (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638230)

Google+ and WebRTC [google.com] maybe. I am quite excited about the latter.

Group Chat? (2)

Necroman (61604) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638204)

So Skype allows group of text-only for their free accounts. Group video chat requires that everyone be a Skype subscriber to get access. Will this limitation continue?

Google+ allows group video chat (Hangouts) up to 10 people for free, though there is no mobile support yet.

Also, I'm uncertain of what Google's back-end architecture is (looks like it's P2P also, using XMPP Jingle, but I don't know the details of this tech). Skype uses supernodes to connect people together, which is really a P2P technology. Since any person running a skype client that is not behind NAT can act as a supernode, connection quality on skype calls can easily vary.

Re:Group Chat? (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639228)

So Skype allows group of text-only for their free accounts.

Text + voice, actually. Don't know about video.

Re:Group Chat? (1)

js_sebastian (946118) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640680)

So Skype allows group of text-only for their free accounts. Group video chat requires that everyone be a Skype subscriber to get access. Will this limitation continue?

Only one participant needs to be a subscriber (otherwise lack of network effect would make this worthless). I make regular group calls with skype, and we've tried the group video call as well. The bigger problem is that video conferences with 3+ participants don't really seem to work acceptably, with audio and video coming and going and participants being dropped... If the google version works (and I plan to try it out next week as soon as my new fancy webcam arrives), that will make more difference to me than the fact it is free.

Re:Group Chat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36651090)

Have you even ever tried a group video call ? most people don't even need it ... and most people on facebook will do 1:1 calls anyway and unlike google+, facebook has a huge social linked advantage. Google+ might be a hundred times better, but if none of your friends are up there, there's little chance for you to call anyone anyway.

Sorry about that. That's just the way it is (orkut, buzz, wave ... google doesn't always rule how things are done)

Google+ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638364)

Google+ already has it, way to play catch-up Facebook!

Why they don't make a new one? (1)

if4124l (1929794) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638402)

They already have a large user base, they already have fb chat, if they create a new product maybe they could kill skype and take their business(e.g. call to landlines for pay subscribers). And if they allow people to connect with XMPP we have a multiplatform video chat.

Re:Why they don't make a new one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638794)

the code it self has been live before jan 4. :)

on Tuesday, June 7, 2011 at 9:37pm
Your messages will be sent to her inbox.","titan:user-is-offline-male":"{name} is offline. Your messages will be sent to his inbox.","cht08":"Clear window","cht09":"Report","cht12":"send as a message","cht15":"{message} ({=send as a message})","cht16":"[encrypted message]","titan:chat-see-all":"See all","cht:online":"Online","cht:idle":"Idle","cht:offline":"Offline","cht:presence:online":"{name} is available","cht:presence:idle":"{name} is idle","cht:presence:offline":"{name} is unavailable","cht:video:incoming-call-title":"{firstname} is calling...","cht:video:incoming-setup-text":"To talk to {firstname}, please complete a quick, one-time setup","cht:video:incoming-setup":"Set up video calling","cht:video:incoming-setup-cancel":"Not now","cht:video:learn-more":"Learn more","cht:video:leaving-during-call-connection":"Leaving this page will end your call.","cht:video:unsupported-tooltip":"Your browser is not supported","cht:video:callee-installing-title":"{firstname} is setting up now","cht:video:call-in-progress-title":"Call Already in Progress","cht:video:call-in-progress-body":"You can only make one call at a time. Please end your first call and then try again.","cht:video:call-answered-connecting":"{firstname} answered. Connecting...","cht:video:connecting":"Connecting...","cht:video:missed-call":"Missed call","cht:video:call-back":"Call Back","cht:video:connected-call":"Call with {firstname}","cht:video:caller-history":"Called {firstname}","cht:video:callee-history":"{firstname} called","cht:video:install-error-title":"Unable to Set Up Video Calling","cht:video:applet-error":"Something went wrong during your video calling setup.","cht:video:try-again-button":"Try again","cht:video:call-unanswered-title":"{firstname} is unavailable","cht:video:call-unanswered-dialog":"Would you like to leave a video message?","cht:video:record-message":"Record Message","cht:video:calling-error":"Problem with video calling","cht:video:calling-error-msg":"The Skype software that powers video calling is temporarily unavailable. Please try again later.","cht:video:server-error":"There was an issue connecting with the server. Please try again later.","cht:video:activate-failed":"The video call plugin encountered an error when starting."

Re:Why they don't make a new one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638836)

function VideoEvents(){}Function.mixin(VideoEvents,'Arbiter',{ACTIVATING:'videochat/activating',LOGGING_IN:'videochat/logging_in',GETTING_TOKEN:'videochat/getting_token',CONNECTING:'videochat/connecting',CALL_INCOMING:'videochat/call_incoming',CALL_CONNECTED:'videochat/call_connected',CALL_HANDLED:'videochat/call_handled',CALLEE_ANSWERING:'videochat/callee_answering',FATAL_ERROR:'videochat/fatal_error',CALL_IN_PROGRESS:'videochat/call_in_progress',SERVER_ERROR:'videochat/server_error',ACTIVATE_FAILED:'videochat/activate_failed',FATAL_PLUGIN_ERROR:'videochat/plugin_fatality',SILENT_PLUGIN_ERROR:'videochat/plugin_silent_fatality',START_CALL_UI:'videochat/start_call_ui',START_CALL:'videochat/start_call',ANSWER_CALL:'videochat/answer_call',IGNORE_CALL:'videochat/ignore_call',CANCEL_CALL:'videochat/cancel_call',INSTALL_COMPLETED:'videochat/install_completed',log:function(a){if(window.console&&console.log)console.log(a);},warn:function(a){if(window.console&&console.warn)console.warn(a);},error:function(a){if(window.console&&console.error)console.error(a);}}); :Bootloader.loadComponents('VideoChatPlugin',function(){DOM.setContent(f,_tx("Missed call"));if(ChatConfig.get('video.can_call',false)&&VideoChatPlugin.isSupported()){ /*1306808424,169776320*/

if (window.CavalryLogger) { CavalryLogger.start_js(["5Cbdt"]); }

function VideoEvents(){}Function.mixin(VideoEvents,'Arbiter',{ACTIVATING:'videochat/activating',LOGGING_IN:'videochat/logging_in',GETTING_TOKEN:'videochat/getting_token',CONNECTING:'videochat/connecting',CALL_INCOMING:'videochat/call_incoming',CALL_CONNECTED:'videochat/call_connected',CALL_HANDLED:'videochat/call_handled',CALLEE_ANSWERING:'videochat/callee_answering',FATAL_ERROR:'videochat/fatal_error',CALL_IN_PROGRESS:'videochat/call_in_progress',SERVER_ERROR:'videochat/server_error',ACTIVATE_FAILED:'videochat/activate_failed',FATAL_PLUGIN_ERROR:'videochat/plugin_fatality',SILENT_PLUGIN_ERROR:'videochat/plugin_silent_fatality',START_CALL_UI:'videochat/start_call_ui',START_CALL:'videochat/start_call',ANSWER_CALL:'videochat/answer_call',IGNORE_CALL:'videochat/ignore_call',CANCEL_CALL:'videochat/cancel_call',STOP_RINGING:'videochat/stop_ringing',INSTALL_COMPLETED:'videochat/install_completed',log:function(a){if(window.console&&console.log)console.log(a);},warn:function(a){if(window.console&&console.warn)console.warn(a);},error:function(a){if(window.console&&console.error)console.error(a);}});

 

Face-to-face book and feature creep (2)

wjcofkc (964165) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638416)

Well, now Facebook is face-to-face. So Facebook has evolved into Facebook. It's also getting awfully bloated with needless this and that. There must be a point where a centralized social networking service collapses under the weight of features that must eventually be spread out across the web. Mid 90's everybody on AOL jumped ship when the realized the same stuff was on the web, only spread out across a better and wide open landscape. It seems like Facebook is running headlong into it's own demise. It is inevitable the we will eventually be able to manager social networking features across the vast, open playing field that is the web. Google+ is showing a small taste of this.

Damn! That was fast! (2)

The O Rly Factor (1977536) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638558)

G+ invites have been out for what, like a week? And already FB is playing the me too! feature creep game with Google. Could this actually finally be the beginning of the end of the reign of Zuck?

Re:Damn! That was fast! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640248)

Do you honestly think Facebook didn't have this in the works before G+ launched? How do you think Software Engineering works?

Re:Damn! That was fast! (1)

The O Rly Factor (1977536) | more than 3 years ago | (#36648266)

Well, taking a chapter out of the Stephen A. Ballmer book of software engineering, something like this:

1. Ignore the core products of your technology because "they work, why do they need any more upkeep?"
2. Potential competitor comes out with product or feature that everyone seems to like
3. "GODDAMIT WHY DIDNT WE THINK OF THAT MAKE THAT NOW GO GO GO!"
4. Show up late to the party with a half-assed implementation of said product or feature that doesn't really catch on
5. Lather, rinse, repeat.

This seems to be the preferred method of software development for your modern, MBA-wielding CTOs.

Re:Damn! That was fast! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640766)

Troll. The feature launches next week. This clearly has been in the works for many months.

Re:Damn! That was fast! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36640972)

G+ invites have been out for what, like a week? And already FB is playing the me too! feature creep game with Google.

It has been reported long ago [slashdot.org] already that this is in the works.

Re:Damn! That was fast! (1)

cakeslam (1965246) | more than 3 years ago | (#36641406)

By the time Google+ launches to the public, facebook will have implemented every decent feature that Google+ has. I think google is making a mistake by not launching the site any time soon- it will never gain critical mass if facebook is given the opportunity to copy it. Not that this is a bad thing for the market place, because the consumer will benefit from facebook's upgrades. But this does nothing but hurt google's chances for success.

Re:Damn! That was fast! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36668416)

>>>G+ invites have been out for what, like a week? And already FB is playing the me too! feature creep game with Google

Do you really think one week is enough to develop a product like in-browser video chat?

Port-a-palooza! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638606)

Our browsers will have permission to use all manner of tcp/ip ports then? So much for security!

how long until... (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638734)

MS buys Facebook?

Re:how long until... (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#36638950)

Why waste money? Facebook and MS have been pals for a long time already. Do you know that all thirdparty ads on FB pages are served exclusively by Microsoft [facebook.com] ? Or that Bing integrates FB in search results [bloomberg.com] ? Or, on Windows Phone, guess which social network is automatically integrated [microsoft.com] into the contact list?

Re:how long until... (2)

AlexBirch (1137019) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639290)

Microsoft dropped three times the value of Facebook for Skype... that shows:
1.) they have the money to waste
2.) they enjoy wasting money

Terrible idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36638908)

Enough world colliding already. How much time is there in a day to present your life to all individuals you know. All day.

Skype Plugin (1)

yarnosh (2055818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639386)

A Skype browser plugin? I don't see any other way to really integrate a desktop app and also embed in a browser. Does Silverlight allow generic network access and access to webcams for apps?

Microsoft and Facebook (1)

TomBifkin (1306511) | more than 3 years ago | (#36639946)

Coincidence that Microsoft first partners with Facebook with Bing, then Microsoft goes on to buy Skype, and now Skype is being integrated into Facebook? I think not....

So now Facebook ... (1)

Jaro (4361) | more than 3 years ago | (#36640092)

... could now also ad "value advertising" to your phone calls. You ring a friend, talk about something and suddenly a commercial is played "Did you also know that 3509 of your friends also like that product?".

Skype into social net (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36641180)

Before this I thought MSFT would feature creep Skype into a social network. You have friends listed. The next step is posting photos for your friends to look at, etc.
I guess it still could happen.

Any wonder they chose skype? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36668342)

They're probably working on a way of automatically transcribing conversations and sending targeted ads based on the content of your conversations with relatives. Seriously, of all setups why use Skype? The most insecure protocol not only because of any lack of technical sophistication but because Skype is the only system built to allow Law Enforcement's wet dream of surveillance capabilities.

I normally don't find Facebook so invasive but this just makes me cringe a little. Not that I'll ever use it, but I hope a lot of people make sure to bang their drums about how Skype is built to enable conversation snooping and should be avoided whenever possible for just that reason.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?