why is skype still available for Linux

[c2tarun]

Hi friends,
This question might sound little weird, but why is skype still available for Linux? Microsoft bought skype two years ago. As far as I can recall MS never did anything for open source community. I also don't think they did anything for Linux (especially after huge rumors that they are porting MS-Office to linux). So why is skype still available for linux?

[echo6]

Why are people still using it!?

http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Skype-with-care-Microsoft-is-reading-everything-you-write-1862870.html

[ajgreeny]

Why are people still using it!?

http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Skype-with-care-Microsoft-is-reading-everything-you-write-1862870.html

Because most windows users who we linux users want to talk to use it and probably don't even realise there are alternative available. Certainly I have yet to hear any of my M$ user friends talk in any way other than "I skype my family abroad" etc etc, and frankly, it is easier to just go with it than to try and persuade them that they could use other applications.

[c2tarun]

No no guys, you got my questions wrong. Skype is nice simple great and it really deserves recognition. Even if people in Linux are using it, it must be less than 1% of total skype users right. Why does M$ care for just 1% users?

[mastablasta]

because Skype wasn't always a MS company and even if small percentage use it they still bring in money. Probably the porting is not that difficult now sicne major work was in place anyway (the long Skype 2 beta period...).

btw i use Skype because it has good rates for calls. i searched for an alternative with same or lower rates but haven't found one.

[Dry Lips]

No no guys, you got my questions wrong. Skype is nice simple great and it really deserves recognition. Even if people in Linux are using it, it must be less than 1% of total skype users right. Why does M$ care for just 1% users?

I can think of several reasons. It makes sense to maintain an existing codebase, instead of throwing it out of the window. (No pun intended!) Microsoft has also come to recognize that Linux probably isn't going away, thus it isn't a bad business practice to cater to this group. After all Microsoft provides software to Apple users, even if they are nowhere as many as Windows users. Now, the real question is why Microsoft hasn't ported for instance the Office suite to Linux yet. Earlier this year there were rumors circulation about an official port of Office to Linux, so who knows what will happen?

Often you hear people say that Microsoft views Linux as a major threat to their own hegemony, and thus tries to prevent Linux from growing further. I think there are a certain core of truth to this, but I also suspect that there is a paradigm shift going on right now. Suddenly you have a market where Microsoft is no longer the marked leader, but the underdog, (I'm talking about the phone and tablets), and they might have had to adapt new business strategies because of this situation.

All in all, I'm not surprised that Skype still is maintained.

[grahammechanical]

It is business. Pure and simple, it is business. Check this out and you will be even more surprised.

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/manage/linux/other-resources/endorsed-distributions/ (http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/manage/linux/other-resources/endorsed-distributions/)

Microsoft are endorsing Linux distributions that work well with Microsoft cloud computing software. How strange! No. It is just business. If a company is running Linux machines and Microsoft wants that company to buy Microsoft Cloud products then they are not going to sell anything to that company if they insist that the company throw out all their hardware and buy Microsoft machines.

[c2tarun]

Often you hear people say that Microsoft views Linux as a major threat to their own hegemony, and thus tries to prevent Linux from growing further. I think there are a certain core of truth to this, but I also suspect that there is a paradigm shift going on right now. Suddenly you have a market where Microsoft is no longer the marked leader, but the underdog, (I'm talking about the phone and tablets), and they might have had to adapt new business strategies because of this situation.

All in all, I'm not surprised that Skype still is maintained.

I personally don't think that Linux is still threat to Microsoft (people please don't get me wrong I have Ubuntu as my primary OS, I am hardcore linux fan and I use windows only for syncing music to my IPhone). I am just sharing my opinion. The reason why I think this is people don't like change. See what happened to Windows 8. MS sold it but people stick to win 7 because it is similar to Win XP which is similar to Win 98. Another example is Digg, they changed suddenly and they failed.
Why Canonical is surviving because it is mostly used by people who are always eager to learn. From forums, IRC etc. No matter how much you change behind the UI, changing UI completely is disastrous. Now Ubuntu's Unity is kind of getting constant. In coming years may till Ubuntu 17 or 18 Ubuntu will post some serious threat to Microsoft, but only when they'll maintain the use and feel throughout all the releases.


It is business. Pure and simple, it is business. Check this out and you will be even more surprised.

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/manage/linux/other-resources/endorsed-distributions/ (http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/manage/linux/other-resources/endorsed-distributions/)

Microsoft are endorsing Linux distributions that work well with Microsoft cloud computing software. How strange! No. It is just business. If a company is running Linux machines and Microsoft wants that company to buy Microsoft Cloud products then they are not going to sell anything to that company if they insist that the company throw out all their hardware and buy Microsoft machines.

Hmm... this is an interesting fact. I thought Microsoft is kind of anti-linux but they are just money magnets no matter from where.

[rrich1974]

in my opinion, skype for linux is one of the best apps that run on linux. the quality is just brilliant.
that is the reason i would like to have more proprietary apps for linux.

[Dry Lips]

in my opinion, skype for linux is one of the best apps that run on linux. the quality is just brilliant.
that is the reason i would like to have more proprietary apps for linux.

I use Skype myself, first and foremost because most of my contacts use Skype. However, there is an ongoing thread about some questionable aspects of Skype in the cafe right now. I recommend you to check it out:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2148385

[VanillaMozilla]

Hi friends,
As far as I can recall MS never did anything for open source community.
Au contraire, it used to be that you couldn't write to an NTFS file system without risk. Microsoft helped fix that up.

[monkeybrain2012]

Hmm... this is an interesting fact. I thought Microsoft is kind of anti-linux but they are just money magnets no matter from where.

As the saying goes, he capitalist would sell you the rope to hang himself. :)

[cpatrick08]

Hi friends,
This question might sound little weird, but why is skype still available for Linux? Microsoft bought skype two years ago. As far as I can recall MS never did anything for open source community. I also don't think they did anything for Linux (especially after huge rumors that they are porting MS-Office to linux). So why is skype still available for linux?

Microsoft has contributed to the linux kernel. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2166123/microsoft-contributed-code-canonical-linux-2632

[monkeybrain2012]

Microsoft has contributed to the linux kernel. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2166123/microsoft-contributed-code-canonical-linux-2632

Only for hyper -v drivers, which are for running Linux in virtual machines under Windows, so it is kind of self serving. It is a way to keep entreprises on Windows which may otherwise migrate to Linux.

Moreover, according to wikipedia

"Microsoft was forced to submit the code when it was discovered that Microsoft had incorporated a Hyper-V network driver with GPL-licensed components statically linked to closed-source binaries"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-V

[monkeybrain2012]

Au contraire, it used to be that you couldn't write to an NTFS file system without risk. Microsoft helped fix that up.

Well NTFS is MS's proprietary file system. How is it a contribution to the open source community?

[VanillaMozilla]

Well NTFS is MS's proprietary file system. How is it a contribution to the open source community?
The contributions are open source. I'm part of the community, and I use those contributions. Ergo, a contribution to the open source community.

[monkeybrain2012]

The contributions are open source. I'm part of the community, and I use those contributions. Ergo, a contribution to the open source community.
That may be convenient for you, but it is not a contribution to open source. You only need it for using Windows.

[buzzingrobot]

Microsoft is a business that makes business decisions. Skype for Linux is alive because they believe it's good for Microsoft. Office for Linux hasn't happened because Office is intended to be a product that keeps people on Windows, not encourage them to use Linux.

[VanillaMozilla]

That may be convenient for you, but it is not a contribution to open source. You only need it for using Windows.
ntfs is an old Linux project that was forked as ntfs-3g. ntfs-3g is cross-platform and licensed under the GNU GPL; the package is maintained by Ubuntu, so it most definitely is open-source.

Reading and writing to other file systems is a legitimate, useful, and sometimes essential part of Linux. I suppose you can try to get that changed if you want. :) And by the way, Microsoft helped make ntfs-3g possible, for which I am grateful.

[mamamia88]

Cause they make more money by people on linux paying to use it?

[forcecore]

reason why lot use Skype:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2148385&page=6&p=12689184#post12689184

[HDave]

Microsoft, like many larger corporations, has figured out that some (maybe most) acquisitions work best when they are left alone. They've largely left Skype alone, and apparently the people who run Skype decided that after you subtract the cost of maintaining the Linux version from the revenue garnered from Linux users the remaining profit is accretive. Linux maybe only be 2% of the market, but if that translates into 1 million subscribers (probably close to the real number), you don't need very many to pay for the extra features to more than cover the costs of the linux port.

[unbuntu77]

full featured Skype costs money, and they don't need to lose any customers. just my guess.

[kyme]

Heck. Actually MS didn't own Skype. They only bought some share from Skype, and with their conditions as main IM to MS.
Just like Apple, MS bought a share to Apple --that's why Apple surivived during 90's.

Skype can do what ever they want as well with Apple, as still the SKYPE and the Apple company is
composed with a CEO and a board of directors.
Both companies are being a good arms with MS.

[buzzingrobot]

Just like Apple, MS bought a share to Apple --that's why Apple surivived during 90's.



Popular, and false, myth.

In 1997 Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple and made a five-year commitment to release Office for Macintosh. In return, Apple backed off the longstanding patent suit it had brought against Microsoft asserting Windows infringed Apple patents.

The size of Microsoft's investment was insignificant compared with Apple's market cap at the time and played no real role in the company's future.

[stalkingwolf]

and it is the most reliable i have found so far.