Digium has an excellent post today titled The Rumors of Our Death discussing Skype for Asterisk (SFA) and the recently launched (beta) SkypeforSIP (SFS). There has been much discussion on the blogosphere, twitter, and elsewhere if SFS means the death of SFA. Some were even seen carting Skype for Asterisk away into the trashbin of other failed software endeavors, as seen here:

It's not a pretty sight when people write you off for dead when you're really not. But wait just a second. Digium's Steve Sokol explains late today that SFA is not dead. He writes:

With Skype's recent announcement of Skype For SIP there has been a great deal of pontification on the impending death of the not-yet-released Skype For Asterisk.  I'd like to take a moment to explain why Skype For SIP (SFS) does not spell the end for Skype For Asterisk (SFA), and why Skype For Asterisk is still in beta.

First, the key differences between Skype For SIP and Skype For Asterisk:

• SFA can handle incoming Skype calls from any user on the Skype network.  SFS can receive incoming calls from Skype users only by statically mapping a Skype name to a SIP account.
• SFA can place calls to any user on the Skype network.  SFS cannot place calls to Skype users.
• SFA includes support for Skype presence information.  SFS has no support for presence.
• SFA includes buddy list management.  SFS has no buddy list management features.

Steve lists more differences, but I don't want to steal his thunder. Go read his post. I knew there were key advantages in SFA over SFS and there was so much confusion out there, I was tempted to write a comparative chart, but was too busy. In any event, it's nice to see Digium clarifying the advantages of Skype for Asterisk. Any questions?