Comments on: Skype Hardware the answer, Really? http://mrblog.org/2007/10/11/skype-hardware-the-answer-really/ Mr Blog. Very technical, or silly, sometimes absurd. Wed, 16 May 2012 18:11:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Aswath http://mrblog.org/2007/10/11/skype-hardware-the-answer-really/comment-page-1/#comment-764 Aswath Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:06:11 +0000 http://mrblog.televolution.net/?p=349#comment-764 I had argued two years back that it will not be very expensive for Skype to deploy all the supernodes with their own resources (http://www.mocaedu.com/mt/archives/000191.html). I believed then and believe it now that for communication between known individuals (as opposed to locating files in the wide Internet) does not benefit having P2P technology. Its use gave Skype the needed PR buzz.<br /> <br /> In the previous post you say in passing that "we don't need a "phone company" at all". I wish the industry bothers to explore that claim further. I had argued two years back that it will not be very expensive for Skype to deploy all the supernodes with their own resources (http://www.mocaedu.com/mt/archives/000191.html). I believed then and believe it now that for communication between known individuals (as opposed to locating files in the wide Internet) does not benefit having P2P technology. Its use gave Skype the needed PR buzz.

In the previous post you say in passing that "we don’t need a "phone company" at all". I wish the industry bothers to explore that claim further.

]]> By: MrBlog http://mrblog.org/2007/10/11/skype-hardware-the-answer-really/comment-page-1/#comment-763 MrBlog Fri, 12 Oct 2007 03:45:34 +0000 http://mrblog.televolution.net/?p=349#comment-763 Of course it's technically possible for a hardware device to become a supernode. However, I don't think in practice they do, today. Skype of course doesn't say, because it is a closed, undocumented protocol and they are a closed company, but those that have reverse engineered the protocol suggest that the only playform that has supernode capabilities today is Windows (not even Mac or Linux Skype nodes ever become supernodes).<br /> <br /> Another factor is cost for the hardware manufacturers. If they have to beef up the hardware to support supernode and relay capabilities, that adds cost, and given what hardware manufacturers will do to shave $.16 off of a product, we can imagine they would fight that pretty hard (since in fact it would reduce the performance of the product for their customer, the buyer). Of course it’s technically possible for a hardware device to become a supernode. However, I don’t think in practice they do, today. Skype of course doesn’t say, because it is a closed, undocumented protocol and they are a closed company, but those that have reverse engineered the protocol suggest that the only playform that has supernode capabilities today is Windows (not even Mac or Linux Skype nodes ever become supernodes).

Another factor is cost for the hardware manufacturers. If they have to beef up the hardware to support supernode and relay capabilities, that adds cost, and given what hardware manufacturers will do to shave $.16 off of a product, we can imagine they would fight that pretty hard (since in fact it would reduce the performance of the product for their customer, the buyer).

]]> By: Joseph http://mrblog.org/2007/10/11/skype-hardware-the-answer-really/comment-page-1/#comment-762 Joseph Fri, 12 Oct 2007 01:15:04 +0000 http://mrblog.televolution.net/?p=349#comment-762 Why would you think that a hardware based Skype client could not be a Supernode?<br /> <br /> I believe they CAN be Supernodes. Why would you think that a hardware based Skype client could not be a Supernode?

I believe they CAN be Supernodes.

]]>