Talk:Skype: Difference between revisions
imported>Pat Palmer (trying to improve my explanation) |
imported>Ganggang Hu |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Voice over IP== | |||
Nice beginning to this article--thank you. However, I would not classify Skype as an IM software, but rather as a VOIP software (a ''different'' technology). The underlying technology for "voice over IP" (often shortened to VOIP) is considerably more complex than for chat or text-based instant messaging. The article would benefit by carefully delineating this difference. VOIP, for example, first has to digitize (sample) the analog voice signals (which are around 3000Hz analog). Sampling yields a digital bandwidth of around 128Kbps, too high for real-time use over the internet, so the digital bandwidth has to be compressed into relatively small bitstreams (around 15Kbps might be typical). Some of the good compression algorithms that reach these small digital bandwidths were not, last time I checked, free; instead, there were rather expensive license fees for them. This meant that small companies could not afford to move into this arena as easily. VOIP services also typically need to connect with the Public Switched Telephone Network so that callers can reach some places where VOIP might not be available. I think that VOIP deserves an article of its own, and it should not be directly equated or treated in the article with text-based chat (even if Skype provides that service). The point is, that text-based chat is really a ''different'' technology than VOIP, and text-based IM is considerably easier to implement than VOIP.[[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] 07:16, 19 July 2008 (CDT) | |||
:I'm actually agreeing with Pat; while Skype ''may'' feature text-based communication functionality similar to Instant Messaging services, it is not an "IM Service". --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 09:10, 19 July 2008 (CDT) | |||
:Thank you very much Pat! You help me clearfy the difference between IM and VOIP. --[[User:Ganggang Hu|Ganggang Hu]] 10:49, 19 July 2008 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:49, 19 July 2008
Voice over IP
Nice beginning to this article--thank you. However, I would not classify Skype as an IM software, but rather as a VOIP software (a different technology). The underlying technology for "voice over IP" (often shortened to VOIP) is considerably more complex than for chat or text-based instant messaging. The article would benefit by carefully delineating this difference. VOIP, for example, first has to digitize (sample) the analog voice signals (which are around 3000Hz analog). Sampling yields a digital bandwidth of around 128Kbps, too high for real-time use over the internet, so the digital bandwidth has to be compressed into relatively small bitstreams (around 15Kbps might be typical). Some of the good compression algorithms that reach these small digital bandwidths were not, last time I checked, free; instead, there were rather expensive license fees for them. This meant that small companies could not afford to move into this arena as easily. VOIP services also typically need to connect with the Public Switched Telephone Network so that callers can reach some places where VOIP might not be available. I think that VOIP deserves an article of its own, and it should not be directly equated or treated in the article with text-based chat (even if Skype provides that service). The point is, that text-based chat is really a different technology than VOIP, and text-based IM is considerably easier to implement than VOIP.Pat Palmer 07:16, 19 July 2008 (CDT)
- I'm actually agreeing with Pat; while Skype may feature text-based communication functionality similar to Instant Messaging services, it is not an "IM Service". --Robert W King 09:10, 19 July 2008 (CDT)
- Thank you very much Pat! You help me clearfy the difference between IM and VOIP. --Ganggang Hu 10:49, 19 July 2008 (CDT)