Skype schematic sharing won't work

[Joerg]

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

...Jim Thompson

ISP: Wells-Fargo ?


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

 

[John S]

Folks,

An engineer in Southern California and I collaborate a lot using Skype.
Voice and video is fine (usually, considering that it's only $4.95 resp.
free). But ... when I want to show a drawing or schematic he can see it
trying to show but it never succeeds. After a while I get a message that
the Internet connection is not ok. Puzzles me because:

a. Still screens have almost no bandwidth.

b. Video works with very few freeze moments.

c. GoToMeeting always works, even with video plus screen.

It there a trick to make this work with Skype? We can use GoToMeeting,
of course, but one cannot simply initiate a one-button call. It's a
tedious login thing, only good for bigger meetings.

Right now I am on a 1.2Mbit/sec down and 256kbit/sec up link, similar
with the other engineer. Can't do much about it right now and it's
perfectly fine with GoToMeeting, Webex, and so on.

I assume that you are trying to use the "share screens" function, yes?

It always works for me and my partner but we both have a much higher
speed than you indicate. We occasionally get some jerky pics and that
may be a function of the loading on the Skype thingy. I think Skype is
carrying on multiple videos when you share, but I'm not sure. Maybe ask
them.

I'm sorry this doesn't address your problem. I feel your frustration.

John S

 

[Joerg]

Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

Yep. AT&T touts the very fast "UVerse" service where you can watch TV
via Internet but every time I ask they say not in our neigborhood yet :-(

 

[Joerg]

I assume that you are trying to use the "share screens" function, yes?

It always works for me and my partner but we both have a much higher
speed than you indicate. We occasionally get some jerky pics and that
may be a function of the loading on the Skype thingy. I think Skype is
carrying on multiple videos when you share, but I'm not sure. Maybe ask
them.

I'm sorry this doesn't address your problem. I feel your frustration.

Asking them has never resulted in any meaningful hints, so far. I don't
know what protocol they are using but it is obviously a lot less
efficient than the competiton. This was actually the reason why we
ditched the service for our start-up, in favor of GoToMeeting.

 

[Joerg]

The speeds you tout actually sound like dial-up.

Dial-up won't go past 56k.

I'm showing 3.3Mbit/sec Up and 10Mbit/sec Down, and this location
isn't even one that Cox touts as "high speed".

That is probably cable TV Internet.

 

[Joerg]

Yep.

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.

 

[miso]

Gack! That's awfully slow. What are you on, DSL?

...Jim Thompson

As Jeff L. has pointed out here more than once, you SHOULD be on DSL for
VOIP.

 

[Joerg]

We lose the TV occasional when a dust storm kills the satellite
down-link.

But Internet? Seconds while they swapped an amplifier.

That's good. Who needs TV?

No.

Wow. I'd get at least a dial-up number for them or see if a smart phone
can be used as backup. I've used the dial-up during a power outage.

Around here we have real streets and the cable is buried, 18" minimum.

We also have real street and cable is buried. But not the cable-TV. I've
seen them "trench and stuff" right here at our street. AFAICT the coax
is less then 2" under the road surface and then droops off into the
ditches on the sides. _No_ conduit whatsoever. All it takes is a truck
parking with a wheel off the pavement and ... squuuish ... no signal.

 

[Joerg]

Linux? Windoze? Mac? Android?

Windoze XP.

I don't know of any trick. Methinks the first step is to determine
which end of the connection is the problem. Find a 3rd location,
preferably with a much higher speed connection, and try "screen
sharing" from your location and from the location in Southern Calif.
If one works, but the other does not, then problem is located at the
end that doesn't work. If nothing works, then it's something odd with
Skype or possibly the limited bandwidth. I can help, but only after
Saturday, when I will be caught up, dead from overwork, or both.

The problem persists if the San Diego engineer works from home where he
has a 5M+ Internet link. It's probably my upload speed of 256k that
hampers things. But why are all other services happy with it?

The other services don't even blink if I send off an email while in the
conference and while sharing my screen. Sometimes I have to do that, for
example, if someone could only dial in from the road but wants a screen
shot emailed for later.

My guess(tm) is that something is screwed up with DirectX on one end.
Try: Start -> Run -> dxdiag <enter>
and see if it finds a problem. Also, run some video benchmark tests
to see if something is slowing the video.

Says "No problems found".

Skype adjusts the protocol and server topology depending on connection
speed. To the best of my limited knowledge, Skype is still
transitioning between topologies:
<http://arstechnica.com/business/201...ernodes-with-linux-boxes-hosted-by-microsoft/>

Microsoft installing Linux boxes? Wow! How did that get past Gates and
Ballmer?

Also, you might want to grab some connection statistics from Skype,
which might produce some useful information.
Skype => Tools => Options => Advanced => Connection
Click on the "Display technical call info during calls" and Save.
During a call, drag thy mouse unto the "blank" area in the Skype
box and the connection quality statistics will be displayed.
Oops. Never mind. I forgot that this is now Microsoft, where you
don't really need to know such things. The feature was dumbed down in
version 5.5
<https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA10415/can-i-see-how-much-bandwidth-a-video-call-is-using>
and removed in 6.x. However, you might be able to extract something
out of the log files:
<https://support.skype.com/en/faq/FA12321/how-do-i-create-log-files>
but as I vaguely recall, they don't include connection quality
information.

Yeah, that's so customary these days. All you get is a check engine
light with next to nothing in terms of information.

Oh well, we'll just sign into GoToMeeting then for any hardcore tech
discussions. I always have to go in with user name, password, formally
set up a meeting, send the link to the other engineer, then he can log
in. That process is clumsy but I'd rather take that than an unreliable link.

 

[Joerg]

Joerg wrote:


Our Cable internet is 30 MBPS down and I think 4 MBPS up, that
is their LOWEST tier of service.

In the big city that is similar here but we live out in the hills.
However, people have other amenties instead if they want to, for example
a runway in the middle of town from where they can taxi their Cessna
right into their driveway.

 

[[email protected]]

What's the up-time of that over the years? Got a back-up in case it goes
down? Out here they often just slobber the cables across the flower
beds. Occasionally some four-legged folks come and chomp down on that.

How is that any different than DSL? My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

 

[Joerg]

How is that any different than DSL? ...

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

... My only reasonable Internet
option is DSL, too. It's expensive ($50/mo) and slow (3Mb). I'd love
to have cable so I could ditch both DSL and satellite TV.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

My backup is 4G (but it isn't at all reliable here, either).

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

 

[[email protected]]

DSL has a much more professional infrastructure.

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.

DSL: 4ft under ground, goes to a very professional looking stainless
steel cabinet which is securely locked, always clean, even has a
maintained defensible space around it so fires won't lick right up to it.

Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

Cable TV: Coaxes slobbering across flower beds and soil, rocks. Boxes
often have their lid off kilter, no locks attached, one got crushed
quite a bit in an accident a few months ago and they left it that way.
Many boxes in tall dry grass and weeds. Cables under road surfaces are
often 2" below surfcae or less. Often exposed in the ditch.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.

To me this is a day and night difference. A new neighbor learned this as
well. The cable guys couldn't get his Internet going for over a month so
he took the slower DSL.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.

$38 here but only 1.2Mbit/sec.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

I don't have a smart phone yet. Maybe some day.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

 

[Joerg]

The oldest profession has a "professional infrastructure", too. Hmm,
there is a similarity.


Wrong. Mine was less than 4" underground. My shovel found it while I
was putting in brick edging around the flower bed.

That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

DSL/phone is no different anymore.

Out here it is. There's standards for those.

There isn't a difference in residential installation.

There is here.

I only got .7Mb in my other house - $30.

I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

Now that I have one, I wouldn't be without it. I use it at work all
the time (so I don't use their infrastructure for personal business).
It turns out that it's useful for getting my work done, too, when IT
screws things up (so much for "professional infrastructure").

A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

 

[Joerg]

Ok, now that we've established the blame, we can precede towards a
solution.


Good questions. It would be interesting to know how much of your
upstream each of the other services are consuming. If Skype consumes
less bandwidth than the others, then Skype is adapting to its limited
bandwidth rather badly, while the others are using all the bandwidth
they can grab.

It must adapt badly because every time after canning the screen-share I
get a notice that the Internet connection between me and the other
engineer in insufficient. The typical dumbed-down message with zero meat
in there.

On the other foot, it might be the same problem, but backwards. If
Skype is grabbing all the outgoing bandwidth, with nothing reserved
for ACK's, any other traffic (i.e. email, web, ftp) is going to appear
constipated because the other end of the link is not getting timely
ACK's. Skype might be failing to reserve some bandwidth (usually
about 10%) for ACK's, while the others are doing it right.

Right now I don't have any tools to gauge that, other than the LED on
the modem. It doesn't indicate a much different amount of data per
second between, for example, GoToMeeting and Skype. Yet GoToMeeting
works reliably and Skype doesn't.

It might also be a matter of QoS. You may have QoS configured in your
router to give SIP packets, or whatever the other programs are using
priority, while Skype has to fight it out with web and email traffic.

The router doesn't have any QoS on there.

Ballmer is retiring not soon enough, and Gates is busy giving away his
money. Today, Linux isn't the enemy. It's VMware.
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/25/windows_server_2012_cloud_love/>

For your amusement...
<http://www.mslinux.org>

Aha, that's where the toilet paper shortage came from

 

[Joerg]

That's REALLY bad. That message is triggered when the network stack
detects too many retransmissions, a symptom of a really constipated
network route. Try:
Start -> run -> cmd <enter.
netstat -S
and look for errors and retransmissions.

Segments Received : 3466547
Segments Sent : 3065758
Segments Retransmitted: 2500

That doesn't look too bad to me.

Right click on the Windoze "Task Bar" (bottom of screen) and select
"Task Manager". Click on the "Networking" tab. Not the best monitor
but it should give you a clue as to the total network traffic.

I've used that sometimes but it doesn't really tell you how close things
are to a limit on the DSL side. It only reads a percentage, whatever
that means.

For something better, try:
<http://miechu.pl/freemeter/>
<http://download.cnet.com/NET-Traffic-Meter/3000-2651_4-10630187.html>
<http://www.pcwintech.com/simple-internet-meter-lite>
etc... Google for "XP network traffic meter".

Hoping they are safe to download

I am always careful when not knowing sites.

Buy a router with QoS. Enable QoS for Skype and SIP.
<http://stores.ebay.com/Linksys-Official-Store>
I've been buying EA2700 (refurbished) routers with good results, after
downgrading the supplied firmware to remove Cisco cloud services.
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/300875198122> $40.

I think I'll first see if there is any way to increase the DSL speed
here. I like my router because it has an LPT port which makes a 2nd
laser printer available on the LAN as backup. Also, QoS probably won't
help much because when I use Skype there is typically nobody else using
the Internet here. So all the available bandwidth is available to Skype.

 

[[email protected]]

That's shoddy work. When we called Digalert before building a fence I
was surprised about the depth. IIRC the woman who came out for the phone
company said they are required to maintain 2ft.

This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

Out here it is. There's standards for those.

Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.

There is here.

I highly doubt it.

I think DSL has had its day. The price for a given bandwidth just isn't
competitive with cable TV providers anymore. The downside with cable is
that they usually want to sell bundles, Internet/TV/phone. We wouldn't
want that. Plus that jacks up the price to easily $100 or more a month.

What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).

A lot of our friends say the same, that they wouldn't want to miss it.
Other than looking up a road or contact information, right now I
couldn't imagine what I'd use it for. But I guess that comes with ...
using it

Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."

Pricing is high though. Most of them out here have family plans and
those are north of $200/mo, and only with contracts.

It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).

Virgin has a plan for $35/mo with 300 phone minutes but "unlimited" for
web, except it slows down if you get past 2.5GB/mo. Only one of their
phones has 4G though. My dream phone would be one where I can also run
Windows programs such as LTSpice or Eagle (just for simple stuff).

That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.

 

[Martin Riddle]

This ain't your father's phone company. This is now the norm for
residential phone service. Basically, they just "stitch" the wire
into the sod and call it a day.

Such a quaint concept. I'll bet new subdivisions aren't buried. It's
too expensive.

I highly doubt it.

What they want isn't necessarily what they get. Even the phone
company doesn't require phone service, anymore. They still charge
like it, though.

My satellite, alone, is $170/mo. DSL is another $50 (and mobile
another $150 - going to $170, I think).


Exactly. "You gota pass it to find out how bad it really is."


It's cheaper without a contract, though you have to purchase the phone
at "full price". Unless you live where there is only one company
covering the area, it's quite a competitive market, now. Even where
there is only one company (in my case, Verizon is the only one with
towers within "sight"), there are many resellers that are
substantially cheaper than the big-guys. I'll be seriously looking
when my contract is up in January. I should be able to drop my bill
to something under $100 (two smart phones).


That's a good deal. I'll have to take a look at it (don't know who
they use as a carrier). 2.5GB is a lot (I have a 6GB plan but never
use more than 1GB), unless you do streaming. A phone is too small for
any of that stuff. A windows tablet, either 4G or WiFi thought the
phone, would be better. Don't forget that computers suck for "real
work" without a keyboard and mouse, though.

Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Cheers

 

[[email protected]]

Virgin piggy back's on the Sprint network.

Thanks. Their coverage map shows me right at the edge of "fair" and
"off-network roaming". My Verizon coverage isn't anything to write
home about but I don't want to be roaming (which is probably Verizon).
Sounds like it's not an option for me.

I was seriously looking into Page Plus Cellular. They have an
unlimited talk/text plan with 2GB data for $55. It's $70 with 5GB.
Page Plus uses the Verizon network. Since Verizon is raising my price
in the middle of the contract, I'll probably switch in January.