Linux Skype 4.2 won't sign in

So basically these threads that you come up with every now and then are not a request for help but a public display of your derision of the system?

You have to face it sooner or later. Its not for you Phil

 

I know the feeling, and I want to scream 'It's not Linux, it's you!', but I know first-hand what a pain in the arse the linux version of skype can be... But that one's squarely on MS...

Unlike you I would [and do] recommend linux as an option, but it's not perfect, and it's not [and imo never will be] for everyone... I'm definitely not the linux evangelist Gareth is [or can come across as]...


Personally, For your needs i'd recommend a Ubuntu flavour of your choice [though not mint, for the afore-mentioned update issues], skype is still gonna be flaky as hell [the linux version always has been in my experience], but it'll be better than currently...

I'd avoid Fedora, skype does work on fedora, but getting it to work isn't as user-friendly as on ubuntu in my experience.


TL-DR:

Pick a linux back-end that you get on with, pick a UI/desktop you like and go from there...

 

I don't think he's an evangelist. He likes and uses linux but I never see him out converting the masses or getting into fan boy debates and the like.

 

Unfortunately I can't watch the video because... well, I'm on my laptop, and Firefox thinks Flash is out of date.

I didn't even bother trying to figure out how to update it. If you ask any linux user about this, they'll tell you package management will automagically solve everything. In reality, however...

And this is the problem. Everything's like this. Everything's a pain. It's all complicated, it's all difficult. People say "oh, it's usually much easier than this." But really, it isn't.

 

Flash probably is out of date as, officially, Adobe have binned standalone support for flash player on linux... Chrome [which has it embedded] is the only official way to get the latest version of Flash Player... there is a workaround to make the Chrome flash plugin work in Firefox and I can dig it up if you'd like. Otherwise direct your ire at Adobe.

As for the package manger, the repos are only as good as their last update... You're on an old release, so the repos are no longer updated, so no new[er] versions of Flash or Skype... support for most non LTS *buntu/mint releases is only ~6 months iirc as there's a new release every ~6 months... It used to be longer but sadly not any more...

It is usually easier than that, you just seem to have picked upon two of the worst examples [Skype and Flash]... Some of that is Mint's fault imo with their unwillingness to allow in-place release upgrades...

 

I had this flash problem. I ran an update. Package manager updated flash. I no longer had the flash problem.

Is there any particular reason why you are completely ignoring the part of the thread where people are telling you, you are running on an outdated version of mint? Is there any particular reason why you won't update your operating system to a supported version? Is there any particular reason why you are continuing to complain about issues which occur directly as a result of using the outdated operating system even though you know how to solve them? (Hint:

Spoiler

Update your operating system

)

Linux: It's not for you Phil

 

Yeah, that's what they always say. About everything. Then tell you to go to a different distro.

Exactly as has happened here.

It won't make any difference. People have been presenting various riffs on this argument for as long as linux has existed. No matter what I try, something will break, something won't work, and it'll always be yeah but no but yeah but no... it's microsoft, it's adobe, it's always someone else's fault, oh best try another distro...

At some point you have to accept that it does not work properly because it has not been done properly, because the principles underlying its development are hopelessly flawed, because the people who work on it don't have the ability to do it right.

Right now I have something that approximately works, in fact it's among the most-working linux installs I've ever had in that the wifi works every third boot and sometimes it's possible to play videos in the right aspect ratio without hacking a text file, so I'm a bit unwilling to break it.

But seriously. Throw out all the distros except one. Work on it until it is reliable. Release it. Jesus.

And the point is not that it isn't for me. It isn't for anyone other than computer scientists who want something to experiment with.

P

 

Really Phil you might have a point if you started the thread with items that are related to problems with Linux. Eg your wifi not working well. You are right not everything works well under linux. Linux is not my main O/S for this reason.

Unfortunately you have started a thread where the problem is you. You are using an unsupported operating system. You are experiencing problems because you are using an unsupported operating system. You are refusing to update your system. You don't actually want to solve any problems you only want to moan. These are all you problems.

Have you tried the latest version on a live disc? Have you verified any of the issues you are currently having (apart from constant moaning and an inability to listen) exist across versions? Probably not because that would involve actually doing something that doesn't involve baiting people who are trying to help you.

 

Quois?

For the most part there often is just one. Or two. (from your posts I can tell that will be red flag to a bull)

RedHat or Debian.

My friend is a plumber, with no degree in computer science. I am a not a computer scientist. I say things to him about how "computery" things work, and his eyes glaze over; "WTF are you talking about Lawrence?" Yet he has been living on Ubuntu for nearly ten years to my knowledge without the need for my assistance.

What is his secret?

It is frustrating, because you shouldn't be having these issues. Doubly so as, I can tell you, I run vanilla Debian Wheezy on my system with Gnome 3, and have made zero significant config changes; I do not experience these issues. Admittedly, I use Google Chrome (as it keeps my browser experience across many devices the same) and I don't Skype anyone.

There really shouldn't be any fear in running apt-get update|upgrade commands.

Where I have had frustrations in the past are particular Desktop Environments, such as xfce & lxde. Or using a tiling window manager such as xmonad, where I had to write my own scripts to show things like wifi strength & battery statuses. But these are decisions I have made & it was fun to work around certain problems.

 

one hundred times this.

 

Oh, you callow youth! That's not Linux's fault! That's Broadcom's fault! Or at least, that's what I was told at the time.

Nothing is ever linux's fault!

P

PS - keep 'em coming, guys, this is hilarious!

 

I don't understand. No one has to do anything for Linux. Broadcom is a company. Much as Volkswagen don't have to support Toyota fuel injectors. But if Toyota made fuel injectors for Volkswagen, who has responsibility, ultimately, that they work in a Volkswagen? (I am aware a third party usually makes the injectors) If your answer is different to mine, then clearly we've already reached a point where you should just use the device the product was actually intended for.

 

So far, in one forum thread, we've found out that Skype doesn't work properly because Microsoft suck, that wifi doesn't work properly because Broadcom suck, Flash doesn't work properly because Adobe suck, and Mint's package management system doesn't work properly because I suck.

I could also bring up the oft-repeated plaint that h.264 doesn't work properly because MPEG-LA suck, DVD playback doesn't work properly because the DVD Association sucks, graphics hardware doesn't work properly because nvidia and ATI suck (and who can blame them).

Windows does all of these things very easily with no undue messing about.

We can continue this all night, but at some point you need to accept that there is an underlying problem here.

The more people try to deny all this, the longer it will take to fix.

 

Yes, the problem is none of those things were made by companies whose driving factor was making things that work with Linux at the forefront for profit.

Windows works. Everything is made with it in mind. Get over it. We're not trying to deny it. You are trying to tell us that we are denying it.

Phil, do you like problem solving? Do you see a crossword, or Sudoku, and think, I want to do that? Because the problem here is you don't like using Linux, for a plethora of reasons; functional, environmental, yadda yadda yadda. How are you going to solve that Phil?

 

Finally.

Yes, you (and various other people) are, except when you're backed into a corner and finally have to admit it.

And that's just culled from this page of the thread.

In short, and to respond directly, we know that it is not usually easier than that, we know that package management doesn't work very well, and we know these issues are entirely normal.

So this is basically just lying, right? In order to make linux look good? When in fact it is, er, what's the word? Bad?

Edit - Well done, Gareth! How on earth long did that take you, and how much C did you write? And how much time did you spend researching exactly what hardware works? And I mean works this week; next week, someone will decide something isn't worth supporting anymore and... and... I could go on...

What we're talking about here is a reliability problem. The fact that it can occasionally and temporarily be made to work does not dispel that problem.

 

That's enough of that I think - off topic thread is off topic...