[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Skype access cancelled for Debian versions before 7



On 03/08/2014, Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> wrote:
> Bret Busby <bret.busby@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 03/08/2014, Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>> On 3/08/2014 4:39 AM, Brian wrote:
>>>> On Sun 03 Aug 2014 at 01:29:57 +0800, Bret Busby wrote:

<snip>

>
> At least that you've noticed. (-: A persistently irritating problem with
> both Skype and Google Hangouts, at least for me, is that they have
> consistently worked far better and more reliably than any of the
> open-source alternatives! However, Skype don't even seem to bother
> offering amd64 packages so, as with acroread, I run it from a 32-bit
> chroot -- I thus guess that their interest in supporting Linux is
> minimal. (I am also irritated with how Google's package sneakily adds
> its own /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ file.)
>

<snip>

There's an interesting point - from what I understand, Skype (at
least, Skype for Linux - I am not sure about Skype for Windows, and, I
regard MS Windows to be too risky to connect to the Internet) is not
available, now, in a 64 bit version - that it has to be installed as a
32 bit system, with 32 bit stuff needing to be installed to run it.

I guess that it is a matter of Microsft needing to maintain its
reputation, as a World Leader In Failing To Keep Up With Technology.

>From memory, when the 80486 CPU was released into production, we (it
might have been at university, I think - it was so many years ago,
now) were told that the available version of Microsoft Windows, that
came with 486 computers, was unable to make proper use of the 486
technology - that to make full use of the 486 technology, UNIX was
required. From memory, it was to do with multi-threading, where MS
Windows 95 (I think that that was the version of MS Windows, that was
supplied in the Wintel 486 systems) could only run a single task at a
time, and, whilst UNIX had previously used pre-emptive multitasking;
switching between tasks, to enable multitasking, with the capability
of the 80486 CPU, multithreading was available, and, MS Windows simply
did not provide for it, whereas, from memory, UNIX did. I remember
seeing a video of a presentation, to do with the Mach kernel, which
enalbled mutithreadiung, from memory, the Mach kernel coming from
Cornell University, from memory, and, I think that this might have
been when (I could have the timeline a bit wrong, but, it is as I
remember it) Linux (before version 1) had just had a patch released,
that allowed it to run on the 80386 CPU.

As I said, the timeline, to do with the 0.9x version of Linux, could
be wrong, but I distinctly remember being told, that Microsoft
Windows, as available in the Wintel 486 systems, was unable to fully
use the capacity of the 80486 CPU, and, was a little bit like running
MS -DOS 6 (which may have been the version of DOS, that was
ioncorporated in MS Windows 95), on an 80486 CPU.

So, I believe that Skype for Linux, is not available as a 64 bit
version, and, I believe that Skype For Linux, is not as easily
installable as Skype 2.2.0.x (mine is 2.2.0.35), which I have as
skype-debian_2.2.0.35-1_amd64.deb , which, from memory, simply needed
to be downloaded and, then installed, using a package manager such as
Synaptic, and, so, I believe that this is simply indicative of the
premise that Microsoft is simply working to maintain its reuttation as
a World Leader In Failing To Keep Up With Technology (I wonder whether
an award exists, for that), as the version of Skype that I have, which
worked, before being banned by Microsoft, due to it being something
that worked, was from before Microsoft took over Skype, I believe.

-- 
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is,
 you'll know what the answer means."
- Deep Thought,
 Chapter 28 of Book 1 of
 "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
 A Trilogy In Four Parts",
 written by Douglas Adams,
 published by Pan Books, 1992

....................................................


Reply to: