Because We All Know What Skype Was Missing Was Intrusive Advertising, Microsoft Has Decided To Add It

from the that's-not-how-it-works dept

Tue, Jun 19th 2012 10:41am — Mike Masnick

It appears that Microsoft's first big contribution to Skype... is to put giant-ass ads in the middle of your call that look kinda like another caller has joined your call... except that caller is some company wanting you to buy stuff:

I actually don't really have that much of a problem with Skype trying to figure out how to monetize with ads -- in general. I do tend to think that intrusive advertising is not a particularly good way to go about it. However, what really gets me about this is the way Skype wants to pretend that these ads are something consumers want:

While on a 1:1 audio call, users will see content that could spark additional topics of conversation that are relevant to Skype users and highlight unique and local brand experiences. So, you should think of Conversation Ads as a way for Skype to generate fun interactivity between your circle of friends and family and the brands you care about. Ultimately, we believe this will help make Skype a more engaging and useful place to have your conversations each and every day.

Now, I've been a big believer that good advertising is relevant content, and not just intrusive content. So I can understand the basics of what they're saying. But there's almost nothing in the execution that suggests that the folks at Skype actually understand why "advertising is content" works. It's because it provides useful or compelling content in a manner such that people want to seek it out, not have it suddenly jump up in the middle of their conversation.

As Jon Brodkin, over at Ars Technica notes (sarcastically), positioning this as a user enhancement is just silly:

Skype has provided a great service for years, keeping us connected with friends and family. But there's always been one thing missing—marketers interrupting calls with giant display ads.

This stinks of an idea that some committee came up with, where no one on that committee actually uses Skype.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: advertising, content
Companies: microsoft, skype

75 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Baldaur Regis (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:49am

While on a 1:1 audio call, users will see content that could spark additional topics of conversation that are relevant to Skype users and highlight unique and local brand experiences. So, you should think of Conversation Ads...
If you have to explain how your advertising works, it's already failed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mason Wheeler, 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:51am

Shouldn't come as any surprise.
Anyone remember HoTMaiL? The original webmail service, back in the late 90s? It was awesome. I was an early adopter, and really loved the service.

Then Microsoft bought them out, and within a couple months, it degenerated into a pile of unusable crap. Remember how for a couple of years there, you'd randomly receive 30 copies of an email that someone sent (once) from Hotmail? Remember how many times they "fixed" that bug, only for it to show up again a month or two later?

A friend of mine asked for some help after her Hotmail account got hacked (long story involving a jealous ex-boyfriend with a relative working at Microsoft) and she couldn't get into it after resetting the password. What I eventually found out after several hours of poking around at it, was that the default password it got automatically reset to did not meet Hotmail's password requirements (too short, IIRC) and so it was getting rejected even though it was technically correct. (Did Microsoft hire Joseph Heller to write the password reset code or something?)

So yeah. I'm not at all surprised to see that they bought the one VOIP/IM service that actually gets "just works" right and immediately turns it into crap. What would surprise me is if they'd actually found some way to improve it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rich Kulawiec, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:11am
  
  Re: Shouldn't come as any surprise.
  No, it doesn't. Hotmail is one of the leading sources of spam, phishing, fraud and abuse -- in part because attempts by far more responsible and professional network/email administrators to contact someone, anyone, there who actually reads and comprehends what's being said to them -- let alone acts on it in a timely manner -- have uniformly been met with responses reminiscent of crack monkeys. "Clueless" doesn't even begin to cover the level of hopeless ignorance that results in Hotmail staff repeatedly demonstrating that they are unable to recognize their own users, hostnames, and IP addresses even when they're explicitly pointed out to them.
  
  I'm certain that every abuser out there is very much enjoying the idea that Microsoft will now bring this level of profound and systemic incompetence to Skype.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:27pm
    
    Re: Re: Shouldn't come as any surprise.
    While I generally loathe MS/Hotmail and their technical people, I've (recently) had some generally good experiences with Hotmail's responses to spam/fraud.
    
    I was looking to buy a motorcycle recently, and responded to a few Kijiji ads for ones that piqued my interest. I got a couple of people who responded with obviously fraudulent responses (the "seller" was an "ebay top-rated seller" advertising in my town, but the bike was across the country, they wanted me to use ebay/wells-fargo/etc "guarantee protection", but they'd handle all the transactions for me, etc.)
    
    Alerts to Hotmail's abuse account were returned quickly, notifying me that they'd shut the offending account down - (usually within an hour). I was very impressed with the responses.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- silverscarcat (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:57pm
  
  Re: Shouldn't come as any surprise.
  I still use Hotmail.
  
  I was one of the earliest customers and I've enjoyed how Hotmail works.
  
  I just had to update passwords on my account a couple of times to keep out spam bots.
  
  Before anyone says anything...
  
  I use it to get email alerts from lots of websites.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Sherwood, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:48am
  
  Re: Shouldn't come as any surprise.
  I'll correct that. Hotmail was definitely not the 'ORIGINAL' webmail service. Hotmail was not even second.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Noah Callaway (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:00am

Great news for Google+Hangouts, or anyone else offering free/cheap video calling!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dan J., 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:01pm
  
  Re:
  That was my thought/question. Who's going to replace them? Someone will. There's Facebook video chat, but I suspect that a more general service will come along. And Skype will become the next latest, greatest thing to disappear into history, taking its place alongside ICQ, etc.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
E. Zachary Knight (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:01am

So, you should think of Conversation Ads as a way for Skype to generate fun interactivity between your circle of friends and family and the brands you care about.

I had an experience with this exact phenomena this past Sunday. I was on a call with a podcast cohost and an ad popped up on his end. We then began talking about how Skype decided that we needed ads in our phone calls.

See. It got us talking, just not about whatever was in the ad that my friend saw but rather the presence of the ads themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joe Publius (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:28pm
  
  Re:
  The last thing an internet user needs is a conversation started from a targeted ad that was generated using browsing history.
  
  "Hey Tim, why do you need to buy a kitten in a kiddie pool, a cheerleader outfit, and a bottle of mustard?"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:45pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Y'know, I think this explains why MS only do minor security updates most weeks! They're too busy playing "Kitty mustard dunk" with the forfeit being to wear the cheerleader's outfit for the next week.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:04am

Why are you surprised?
We live in the advertising age of ultra-capitalism, where the top objective is to sell advertising. Advertising is the death-knell of any medium, because the advertising bastards just won't quit and they keep upping the ante until they kill the medium. Use of the medium eventually dies (look at television, radio, telephone, snail-mail, e-mail, etc.), but another comes along. And then it is corrupted by advertising, too. The WWW is already sinking under the weight of advertising. 99% all the loading data of most pages that is advertising. That's one of the main reasons why they load so slowly.

As long as people 'respond' to advertising (and people are too pitifully weak and easily brainwashed to resist), it will never quit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:32am
  
  Re: Why are you surprised?
  Advertisers can't really kill the web like they did radio and tv. Just some web properties that choose to let it go overboard.
  
  Anyone can start a web site with little investment. With modest advertising, or other revenue models, even donations, it can be grown.
  
  Groklaw for example, has never had ads, but received donations. It has won various awards and eventually the Library of Congress decided it should be archived for posterity.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:45am
  
  Re: Why are you surprised?
  wow, you are quite offensive, how about skype just cancel any non paid for account, allow only paying customers to use skype, then you don't have to feel bad about the program being free and all......some people's children
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:54am
  
  Re: Why are you surprised?
  I would link you to some coupons for tinfoil but...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:05am

Heh, telemarketing just took a new, unexpected twist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:06am

Dinner has provided a great service for years, keeping us connected with friends and family. But there's always been one thing missing�marketers interrupting meals with giant sales pitches.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PlagueSD (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:12am
  
  Re:
  No...You ever have a telemarketer call DURING dinner? That's the time they always seem to call!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:40am
    
    Re: Re:
    No...You ever have a telemarketer call DURING dinner? That's the time they always seem to call!!!
    
    Sure but do they sit at your table and hog the protiens?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The eejit (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:41pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No, they merely hog the protons your lights emit instead.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - ltlw0lf (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No, they merely hog the protons your lights emit instead.
        
        Believe the word you are looking for is photons.
        
        But the statement is correct despite the minor correction.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:00pm
    
    Re: Re:
    It might be a little cruel, but a good way to make sure they never call back would be to take the call while eating. Get them to hang up first for once.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mason Wheeler, 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:58pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Or you could prank them. Guy I know did this a few years back. He was just out of high school, enjoying summer vacation. The parents were gone, just him and his sister at home, and a telemarketer called.
      
      Apparently this was enough of a problem, that they'd worked out a plan for the next time this happened. He started talking with the guy, all amicable-like, and waved to his sister. Then she comes over and starts screaming at him. "You get off that %@#%&*^ phone and get up off your lazy ass and go out and find some work!"
      
      "Shut up, woman! I'm trying to talk here!"
      
      And so on. A 5-minute shouting match ensues, making it sound like a really obnoxious domestic dispute. Meanwhile, they're walking outside, grinning at each other through the "fight".
      
      He's into running track, and he has his own starter's pistol. So he finally yells at her to "SHUT UP!!!", holds the pistol up against the phone, and fires a shot in the air. She goes silent. Then he grabs the phone and starts panicking, "oh no, I--are you still there?" *click* Disconnected.
      
      About 10 minutes later, the police showed up at their place. He had the sister come out first, showing how she was just fine, and they explained it to the officers, had them laughing their heads off by the time they were done. And never got another telemarketing call for months.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - ComputerAddict (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 5:43am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Hilarious, and a good way to get shot by today's Empty the Clip first, ask questions later cops.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sehlat (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:06am

Do "corporates" ever ASK the critical question?
How would anybody in our family react to something like this?

Ideas like this would promptly be dropped in the midst of visions of being driven from one's own home by an armed mob ... of one's own wife/husband and children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:10pm
  
  Re: Do "corporates" ever ASK the critical question?
  How would anybody in our family react to something like this?
  
  Yes, they do ask this question. And they get one of two answers back:
  
  1. "Great idea boss! People will love this!"
  (In which case the idea gets implemented.)
  
  2. "Umm, people generally don't like having their conversations interrupted."
  (In which case the boss says "Nonsense - I'm a marketing expert and I can tell you people *love* having their conversations interrupted - otherwise telemarketers would be out of business! Clean out your desk, you're incompetent and don't have a place here". Then the idea gets implemented.)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - sehlat (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:23pm
    
    Re: Re: Do "corporates" ever ASK the critical question?
    You're right. I didn't start reading Dilbert until recently, so I'm not quite up to speed.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:07am

Hmm...so how is this being implemented? I thought Skype was a direct connection from person to person, and the fact that governments constantly complain about being unable to monitor Skype calls seems to reinforce this notion. How are they tracking views (not that views matter, but it's odd for advertisers not to ask for a number)? Is this just something rolled into an update to the Skype client (and if so does that mean Linux users are going to remain ad free? Last I checked the linux skype client was a bit behind the times...)? Does this affect the security of the call?

Just a couple thoughts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Forge, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:41am
  
  Re:
  No, no, Microsoft HAS just updated the Skype client! They had to, you see. Otherwise those poor deluded Linux bastards couldn't view the ads!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:46am
    
    Re: Re:
    Thanks Techdirt, I was about to do an update!
    
    Mental note: Add exception to portage to never update Skype.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:57am
    
    Re: Re:
    good thing there is Google+Hangouts
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:43pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I just updated the Skype client in my own Linux computer, but I haven't had a chance to test it out yet. Thanks for this story.
    
    First time I see an add pop up during a phone call, I'm going back to the old Skype version--or better yet, G+ hangouts.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Kaega (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 12:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    "These new display ad units will appear within the calling window of users who do not have Skype Credit or subscriptions when they're making 1:1 Skype-to-Skype audio calls using Skype for Windows."
    
    I would take from that statement this is something Linux and Mac users won't have to deal with.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rekrul, 20 Jun 2012 @ 1:52am
  
  Re:
  How do you think you're able to just click on a name and Skype connects to that person (assuming they're online), despite the fact that some people have dynamically assigned IP addresses?
  
  It's because Skype connects to a central database to look up what IP address 'Bob157' is using at the moment and then tries to connect to him. So the main servers know every call you make.
  
  If Skype allowed you to input an IP address directly, you could theoretically bypass the Skype servers, but then only about .001% of people would know how to use Skype, since virtually no average user knows what an IP address is, let alone how to check what one they're using.
  
  You'd be surprised at how many programs today 'phone home' unless you block them with your firewall.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kaega (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 12:03pm
  
  Re:
  From reading the article, the ad comes in as a third caller. Skype already has the ability to do three way calling. So some computer dials into your convo, and that computer would basically record that it connected correctly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
GMacGuffin (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:08am

Um... I can't click to play your game right now; I'm in the middle of a freaking phone call!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:32am

I have to laugh at their comment. When is the last time you and your friends have "sparked a conversation" about an ad that just poped in your face? If anything, you'll talk about how you hate it and want to block it. Great job Microsoft!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 2:38pm
  
  Re:
  Smith and Wesson should be able to advertise somewhere.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 1:23am
  
  Re:
  What do you expect from a company who thought it to be a good idea to release this abomination of a commercial?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
evilned, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:42am

Microsoft marketting
There is nothing wrong with Microsoft that machine-gunning the advertising and marketing department won't fix. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:45pm
  
  Re: Microsoft marketting
  "There is nothing wrong with Microsoft that machine-gunning the advertising and marketing department won't fix. ;) "
  
  But then there won't be anything left of Microsoft (not necessarily a bad thing, mind you).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:48pm
  
  Re: Microsoft marketting
  "There is nothing wrong with Microsoft that machine-gunning the advertising and marketing department won't fix. ;) "
  
  But then there won't be anything left of Microsoft (not necessarily a bad thing, mind you).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:43am

Nice example image. Looks like a pedo's dashboard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:52am

Did anyone else catch this tidbit of information: "Users can avoid the ads by simply minimizing the call window."

Really? That's all it takes? And how long till a more permanent workaround is created? I give it till next Monday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AC, 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:53am

Yes, just imagine how fun it will be to have that stupid insurance gecko pop up in the middle of your conversation with grandma!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike P (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:56am

Ads were in the works long before MS came by.
Skype has been in the process of trying figure out how to better monetize their product well before Microsoft purchased them. They were even already testing out video ads on a small percentage of their users. I recall at one point Skype was thinking about popping up full screen ads on you. Glad that didn't happen.

While Microsoft could have stopped the idea of advertising, you can't say they bought Skype and changed the entire direction of the company's view on ads.

Second, it's not nearly as bad as the article brings it out to be. It's first of all only on voice calls, so it's not interrupting your video chat. Are you really staring at the picture of your friend or their avatar when you voice chat with them? They also aren't going to insert audio messages inside of the middle of your conversations. Don't want to see some ads... minimize the program and be done with it. I don't see where the "interrupting" idea is coming in.

Skype also has a free "business" version. I haven't heard if that is getting ads, but I would guess that they probably aren't going to put it in that version (could be wrong though).

About the only thing I agree with is that ads do not add to the experience, which obviously is where the guys at Skype are quite off their rockers. The people using their service aren't looking to purchase anything, so there are no "relevant" ads. They are looking to communicate. If anything, they should try selling headsets and other items related to voice and video chat. It would also be smart to put a checkbox in the options menu to disable ads completely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mesonoxian Eve (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 11:59am

At least it wasn't an ad telling you how exciting Skype is with Kinect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Randy Lubin, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:06pm

Ad Free Alternative
If you're looking to jump ship - try Meetings.io

We're aiming for an effortless user experience:
-No Ads
-No Downloads
-No Fees
-No login necessary

http://meetings.io

(Hope this was okay to share - it's relevant to the post)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:00pm
  
  Re: Ad Free Alternative
  According to their website' privacy policy they provide your information to advertising partners for a "more relevant" advertising experience.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
pr, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:12pm

How this can spark conversation
Ring!
"Hi, mom. What's up?"
"Oh, nothing, I don't have anything to talk about, I just wanted to use some bandwidth."
"Um, well, OK."

"Wait, mom, did you know that Viagra is the number one treatment for erectile dysfunction?"
(Sparkling conversation follows, leading to closer bonds of maternal affection.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Phil Wolff (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:13pm

Skype is now ad-supported, not freemium
I've heard someone call Skype ad recipients freeloaders, justifying the adverts. I don't think "free-loader" applies to Skype users that don't hand Skype money.

Skype's value proposition comes from the number of people connected to its network, the number of customers with dialtone. Without all those indirectly monetized customers, Skype wouldn't be growing, would be only a fraction of its size (ten million active users instead of a quarter billion?) and be no threat or much value to anyone.

Aside from how in-call ads butcher user experience and Skype's brand, this looks like a patient management decision.

Imagine the conversation. Skype's integration team is meeting one week with the Microsoft advertising folks, looking for surfaces where ads can flow.

Skype.com? Check; lots of visits, a top site worldwide. We can sell it like we do MSN.

Premium listings in Skype's directory search results? Skype did that in the past and we can try it again; let's add that to the development queue and see if we can pair that with Bing local search.

How about the Skype home tab seen when you start the client? Check; but very few people see this and click throughs are sub-par.

Can we place ads in the main window, where the screen real estate is precious and is on display all day? No; test users showed massive resistance and it interfered with basic use of the app. Yes, we know Windows Live Messenger (right, not Live anymore) has ads; why do you think we Messenger is a second-tier IM client?

How about ads in the calls themselves? Can we have intro announcements before the call connects? This delays the gratification between hitting the 'call' button and talking with someone; we have high abandonment.

OK, how about if we just show a display ad during a call? They can't close the window; they are stuck in a call, looking at the ad. And forget banner blindness; it's right next to the faces of the people they are calling, so we can almost guarantee the ad gets seen. If they don't like it they can click on a tiny 'close this ad' space; some will miss and we'll get a click; others will close it and we'll have even more proof they saw the ad. Right!

And if that doesn't work we can sell branded ringtones so this month millions of Skype clients ring to the KFC jingle.

Meanwhile, in another room...

Look, we all know the real money isn't in in-client advertising. But Skype for Azure won't be ready as a platform until next summer. Same with our Bing click-to-call service, our enterprise UC console, our Hangouts killer, and our talk-along-with-Netflix app. So let them have their monstrous ads; we'll measure the hell out of it and come back with hard data later this year. Meanwhile, smile, be supportive and make this whole we're-friends-with-the-suits thing work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hozo1, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:14pm

Why MS fails at everything
did the term "1:1 audio call" completely elude the brainiacs in Redmond ... appearantly ... this is exactly why their new tablet is DOOMED
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hozo1, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:15pm

Why MS fails at everything
did the term "1:1 audio call" completely elude the brainiacs in Redmond ... appearantly ... this is exactly why their new tablet is DOOMED
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:31pm
  
  Re: Why MS fails at everything
  If MS failed at everything they probably wouldn't be once of the richest tech companies in the world. Surface is generating buzz about a Microsoft product that hasn't been seen since Win95 came out, it will hardly fail. On top of that, it's actually a good idea to fill a void no other company has with a tablet so far.
  
  Skype ads - who cares? It's their service if they want to annoy their users who happen to use it for free with giant ads it's no different than what many other companies out there do. They have to try and make money off it somehow and since it's likely no one is paying to use the service they're stuck using a free ad-based version to make people pony up to remove the ads or find an alternative.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 2:13pm
    
    Re: Re: Why MS fails at everything
    Except that free users actually add value to the service. Who would pay a subscription to Skype if all the free users weren't there?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim O (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:26pm

I used to be a PAYING Skype customer but I quit giving them money when they crippled their software on smart-phones.

Now they are attempting to drive away their free customers too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 9:12pm
  
  Re:
  I hadn't heard that they "crippled" their smartphone software
  The skype app on my iphone works really great.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:32pm

apart from Apple, if ever there was a company that could quickly fuck up a previously working program, then you can trust Microsoft. i used to like and used Incredimail. i wonder how many people stopped using it once Microsoft bought it? it seems to be a favourite concept. 'oh, that works well. gotta have it. now we've got it, what can we do to improve (screw it) it?'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:06pm
  
  Re:
  Google sends me ads to my inbox based on what my emails are about...All the big companies out there do it...ALL OF THEM.
  Nothing is private.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shmerl, 19 Jun 2012 @ 12:56pm

That's good.
It might convince more people to dump Skype, and use normal protocols like XMPP, with any publicly available server.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:05pm

All the more reason to use the regular old phone. They sure do over-complicate phones anymore.

Some of us actually like simplicity and hate being on the phone, lol.

I really don't want the web while I'm at the store, I don't need the web waiting in the doc's office. Not for what you pay for the data plans and the phones, along with the hassles.

When I'm 'away' from my computer - I like to be just that - away from the computer.

Microsoft's recent moves make me want to go out and short their stock - that's quite tempting you know...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:23pm

"Conversation Ads" sounds like a name that Aperture Science would come up with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PRMan, 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:29pm

Skype is NOT missing intrusive advertising
I finally installed it for the first time for work (never needed it because I've had Vonage forever).

Man, I would gladly pay $20 a month not to have all those inane ads shoved in my face! And this was 2-3 months ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:09pm
  
  Re: Skype is NOT missing intrusive advertising
  I pay $60 per year for a phone#,unlimited incoming and outgoing calls in North America on Skype and I don't receive any ads.(not yet anyway)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 1:30pm

No Worries
Not a problem for me. I use google talk, which works quite nicely on all my devices (except iPad which has no camera, anyway).

And when I travel in the states, my nexus S phone automatically connects with my US google voice seamlessly. No ads. No worries :)

You'd think companies would be concerned about the negative impact of annoying people like that. Not the ad companies, of course. They're not even human, so I wouldn't expect them to understand. I'm talking about the companies IN the ads.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TtfnJohn (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 4:24pm

I don't need no "conversation starters"
Most of the time I use Skype it's to talk to my partner when she's out of town on business.

We don't need ads to start our conversations. After we get the normal stuff out of the way like the weather, how the cats are, when I need to cut the lawn again and all that we spend the next 58 minutes of our talk on other things.

Cold water we don't need. And, of course, the display ads will autostart at a volume that airports can't match.

Need it or not a shared cold shower we'll get.

Conversation ender will be more like it.

Just what is it ad people can't get it through their thick, thick skulls that an ad is an ad not something else. And that there are times people just don't want to see, hear, watch them.

Text ad we could live with. Hear that Skype?

Good thing there's an alternative.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ian (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 11:02pm
  
  Re: I don't need no "conversation starters"
  Where did you hear that the Ad's will interupt your call. They are displayed nothing more, no sound, no interuption. Sometime I read these comments and wonder of people actually read the Article or just skim it and jump on the bits they don't like.
  
  The Ad's are only a graphic or text at the moment.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fb39ca4 (profile), 19 Jun 2012 @ 4:38pm

Can't you just minimize the window?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 8:54pm

Microsoft buys Skype, Skype turns into garbage. LINUX FTW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2012 @ 10:15pm

There needs to be a National Do Not Send Me Ads Registry similar to the Do Not Call Registry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave Miller (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 1:30am

Am I really the only one who thought...
..."Magnum: Pleasure Hunt 2" was a condom ad?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim Van Damme (profile), 20 Jun 2012 @ 12:27pm

SIP is better
...and open source, with many clients. I use Ekiga, on Linux.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 May 2013 @ 12:35pm

Try oovoo, don't think ms has bought that yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 May 2013 @ 12:36pm

Try oovoo, don't think ms has bought that yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 1:28pm

I have been using skype for a long time and love the quality of call very clear and love to be able to send photos and music, vidoes or what ever very easy...It has untill now been super user friendly...
HOWEVER, I dont care for the ads in general, I have never, and will never ever buy something from someone just because they put it in front of me..infact even if I needed a product or service...thowring it in my face..is a sure way that I will never buy it...
I dont like Forced advertizment.....Never the less even with the adds they make you look at ..that I just ignore BTW..I was still using skype and just minmizing the chat so didt have to see there adds..
However NOW they just Started this VIDEO Crap...that just start playing on its own right ion the middle of call...thats just totally rude..and very unprofesional...they advertize to use group call and conference for your work...just what I want in the middle of my Skype Meeting is some Dumb Ass Add Playing...
So as of now if they dont stop this video crap I for one and hopefully lots others just stop using them...there are others out there already that I already use sometimes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]