|
|
|
|
|
|
by danbmil99
5158 days ago
|
|
|
If you don't want to be compatible with Skype, you don't need their codecs. There are plenty of good voice codecs around, freely licensable. The issue is how to tap into the existing Skype userbase -- receive and make calls to Skype clients -- from an open-source client. |
|
|
But all VOIP codecs are not created equal. Skype's success is not due to NAT piercing. Even though Skype easy to use, maybe easier than previous SIP alternatives, if calls sounded terrible, people would not use it. Skype's success is due to being usable and having decent sound quality. They did not use the decades old codecs other softphones used. They wrote new ones. And anyone can use them.
Using the same codec as Skype uses should not in any way bind you to their network. It has nothing to do with compatibility. It has to due with getting Skype-level sound quality. Quality that the older codecs have failed to deliver.
It's easy to get people to sign up for free voice and video calls. The key word is "free". You do not have to find inroads into the "Skype user base". Skype spread by word of mouth. If people learn about another client that works as well or better (same sound quality), and it's easy to use, they will almost certainly try it.
Forgive me if I have misunderstood what you were trying to say in your comment. But I do not understand your reasoning.