Re: [dev] [proposal] Suckless Tox-Client as a Skype replacement

From: FRIGN <>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:41:34 +0100

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:09:14 +0100 wrote:

> While I'd love to see a distributed system which comes with all benefits
> of decentralisation -- flexibility, dependability, hard to compromise,
> etc. --, I am not aware of any, so one such needs to be first
> implemented, then promoted, adopted. So, I'm looking for what I can use
> now.

Well, read into Tox and check your requirements on it.

> Jitsi does that right: I have less troubles with it than with what I've
> tried before, e.g. linphone.

Please don't go too off-topic. We should discuss Tox here, and not the
benefits of different clients for different protocols, as this is
definitely a matter of personal preference.

On topic, I would like to know how you would implement a chat client on
the terminal. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is all for a ii-like interface, but
I'd be really glad to hear more opinions on that.

> Right now, people more and more care about privacy. I think this is the
> chance to push things like jitsi (and XMPP, SIP) because they indeed
> offer this obvious advantage not present in the saturated environment
> (Skype). I must admit, it became obvious to the masses only recently
> and not as obvious as I wish, but still something happens.

Well, that's a wish sadly. People like to claim they care about
privacy, but don't want to miss out on their comfort.
Setting up XMPP and SIP is not easy, and don't forget: It's not only
XMPP and SIP you have to take care of!
Why would anybody make the switch from Skype to XMPP+SIP, involving at
least a few hours of work to set it up?
Mot people wouldn't, because they think the things they talk about with
their friends on Skype are not as important as they really are to the
mass-surveillance-machinery waiting to be fully uncovered.

Developing a new solution is all about delivering the comfort the users
are used to with an icing of breakthrough-features on top of it.
As powerful as XMPP+SIP are in their regard, they don't offer the
comfort Skype offers.
As I want to bring this discussion back on Tox, I experienced Tox to be
way more straightforward when it comes to ease of setup and usability.

> I've converged to the policy to promote things which go in the right
> direction, although I'm aware they suck in some respect. You can always
> say “what sucks, sucks, period,” but also you can look at the gradients
> and admit that some suck less and try to improve. Skype sucks big time,
> inherently, by the fact it is owned by someone who does not share the
> public interest. Give up the hope that it can remotely suck less.

What you need to take into consideration is the different perception of
I can definitely understand when the average Joe thinks LibreOffice
sucks, because the UI is not as polished as Microsoft Office's and that
some Word-documents are not displayed properly (of course!).

We can definitely look at things only with the technical glasses, but
other than specialized tools, an instant messaging system stands and
falls with the amount of users actually using the system at the end of
the day.

> Didn't get that. I need some reading about tox before feeling
> comfortable with technical discussions.

Well, take your time.

I'm bored of discussing XMPP+SIP to be honest, when there are more
interesting things like Tox in the making ;).



Received on Mon Mar 24 2014 - 14:41:34 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Mar 24 2014 - 14:48:05 CET