P2P Telephony
September 23, 2003 6:08 AM   Subscribe

Skype, a new P2P Telephony service from the people who created KaZaA. [more inside]
posted by davehat (16 comments total)
 
It appears to be free for now, but there is a caveat in the end user license

6. Payment.

You acknowledge that certain functions in the Skype Software are only available to paid subscribers after a free trial period of the Skype Software and Services (the "Free Trial Period") ends. After the Free Trial Period ends, you will be presented with the option to subscribe to the Subscription Services. If you do not wish to subscribe, you acknowledge that you can not access functions and services only available to paid subscribers. To subscribe to the Subscription Services you must agree to the terms and conditions of the Subscription Services

posted by davehat at 6:11 AM on September 23, 2003


This seems like another doomed business plan to me. The P2P buzzword means nothing for a telephony application. Your ordinary run of the mill telephone with 10 digits and maybe a couple of other keys on it's keypad is a peer to peer telephony application. The fatal flaws I see in it's business plan are:
  1. It's a subscription service, it'll have to compete against the low rates available with a cellular plan. If most of the people I speak with weren't outside of the US I'd ditch my landline and go purely cellular in a minute.
  2. It requires special software. Fine, I can talk to my geek friends but I won't be able to speak with my non-geek friends, or especially my parents.
  3. There's no reason for a man-in-the-middle for any peer to peer scheme. Some enterprising (well, I suppose I mean intelligent and non-enterprising) individual will come up with an Open Source VOIP application. This will have an advantage in this case since it can be ported to any platform.
Hmm, for mainstream acceptance you'd have to make it operate over the phone once it reaches the consumer. I can see a market for a small box that works as follows:
  1. Phone line comes into the house and plugs into the magic box.
  2. 10-base T or 100-base T line comes in and plugs into the magic box. (There's probably a switch involved that splits the net connection so a computer shares it, but, very important, there doesn't need to be)
  3. The household phone system plugs into the magic box.
  4. If a call comes in via land-line the phone system works as normal. The phone rings, the user picks up.
  5. If a call comes in via the network the phone system is disconnected from the land-line and the phone rings. To the end user on either side of the conversation there is no difference.
  6. If somebody in the household with the magic box makes a phonecall then from their point of view nothing is different. If the person they're calling also has a magic box then the call is routed via the internet however.
      Where does money come in? First, hardware costs. Ideally this would be a very small computer system with a couple of custom ASICs in it to handle the voice encoding and decoding as well as telephony. Second, subscription fees. Most people have dynamic IP addresses, so there needs to be a third party to keep track of this. Computer saavy people might use dyndns.org or other solutions but this box is aimed at people who may not even own a computer. Second there needs to be a means of translating phone numbers into network addresses if the destination also owns one of these boxes. Maybe in larger cities installations could eventually be deployed so that incoming calls to that city may be routed over the network up until the last step, so it only appears as a local call.
posted by substrate at 6:45 AM on September 23, 2003


My god, that's a detailed analysis of the faults this thing has, substrate. Forward that post to the maker's themselves :)

It's an interesting concept, nonetheless... It'll be great to see how the phone companies respond once they realize the potential impact of it. I forcast mass subpeonas for 'illegal bandwidth and connection piracy' by AT&T for mid 2004.

...it requires special software. fine, i can talk to my geek friends but i won't be able to speak with my non-geek friends, or especially my parents.

Oh c'mon, even if they have AOL they'll know how to work this thing. It just might work.
posted by phylum sinter at 7:08 AM on September 23, 2003


It's an interesting concept but one thing freaks me out.

They don't seem to address issues of 9-1-1. It may seem nitpicky, but right now, the VoIP services have a really difficult time with getting a proper number into the 911 center for purposes of getting your address.

Also, I don't buy the idea that the quality of service (QoS - sound quality) is better than my copper landline. QoS is usually only controllable if you own the bandwidth from end to end, unless they're doing something new.

Finally, there sort of *IS* an open-source VoIP telephony standard, which Dialogic put out a while back, called CT Media. It covers more than just telephony, but it's been a framework for a few different Soft-PBX and IP companies. The problem there is that it requires the hardware to support the specific CT media components, if I understand it correctly (and I may not - the technology moves AWFULLY fast.)

But the 911 thing is an issue, at least in the US, anyway.
posted by TeamBilly at 7:16 AM on September 23, 2003


But the 911 thing is an issue, at least in the US, anyway.

"Ohmygod... FIRE! Quick, honey, turn the computer on!, call 911 with that program!!"

Really, who would use this for emergency phone calls? That's too funny.
posted by phylum sinter at 7:33 AM on September 23, 2003


This is glorified voice chat. Dialing 911 on this would be like telling a chat room that you're a hermaphrodite with four breasts.
posted by angry modem at 7:53 AM on September 23, 2003


a hermaphrodite with four breasts

Isn't s/he related to Eccentrica Gallumbits?
posted by ao4047 at 8:03 AM on September 23, 2003


My iChat application does the same thing, and it supports video as well as audio.
posted by benjh at 9:37 AM on September 23, 2003


But GPhone actually is free.
posted by Hackworth at 9:38 AM on September 23, 2003


windows version, too.
posted by Hackworth at 9:40 AM on September 23, 2003


Didn't substrate just describe Vonage?
posted by Tubes at 9:53 AM on September 23, 2003


this reminds me of that television thing.. and nothing ever came of that.
posted by mrplab at 10:30 AM on September 23, 2003


"This is glorified voice chat. Dialing 911 on this would be like telling a chat room that you're a hermaphrodite with four breasts."

I couldn't be more confused.
posted by kavasa at 11:57 AM on September 23, 2003


no substrate described this
posted by vincentmeanie at 1:28 PM on September 23, 2003


"Really, who would use this for emergency phone calls? That's too funny."

If it's the only phone service you have, it's very possible that you might have to try. Also, keep in mind that in the US, anyway, we're still a few years from locating every cell phone call to 911. If you're incapacitated, or being beaten or killed, a dispatcher sitting in a call center is going to be the final witness to your demise besides the person doing it.

But also consider this: the only reason to buy this type of service is if you make tons of intercontinental calls. Otherwise, long-distance calling has become so ridiculously cheap that there wouldn't be a big incentive to replace your landline.

To me, it looks like an interesting toy.
posted by TeamBilly at 4:39 PM on September 23, 2003


I got a call from an Estonian teenaged girl who helped me figure out how to get my microphone working. She, in returned, wanted lessons on how to curse more authentically in English. She learned the confusing rules around the usage of "b**ch" On the other hand, it is going to save me a ton on long-distance to Brazil, where I do make calls, and which is anything but cheap.
posted by hairyeyeball at 9:52 AM on September 27, 2003


« Older Breaking the silence   |   rockface rescue Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments