• eatyourglory@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    141
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was because Skype’s file transfer was Peer-to-peer, so it wasn’t Skype itself hosting the files. While discord is actually hosting the files, which is much more costly.

      • ratamacue@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        But discord supports sending messages to people who are offline. It kind of breaks the paradigm if certain features require full synchronous communication. Maybe supporting p2p transfers during a video / voice chat would work though.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You say it as if not allowing people to send large files at all is somehow better than only allowing it sometimes.

        • Helluin@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It kind of breaks the paradigm if certain features require full synchronous communication.

          you mean like voice/video chat?

          • ratamacue@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Actually yeah. It feels like voice / videos were kind of tacked on. There isn’t a really good web based chat tool that doesn’t require some sign in and configuration. File transfer isn’t like that and people can easily drop links to third party services in any chat.