Originally Posted by JeffDM
Wasn't it like 2 frames per second with super expensive hardware and subscription service on top of a phone line?
I don't know. That's entirely possible, given the infrastructure of the time.
Do people really video conference like it's something useful to make up for the hassle? If anything, one can get camera add-ons. But it doesn't mean much without good software, which Apple didn't provide until FT.
I should think so! And I beg to differ; iChat's multi-person conferencing was (and is, since it still exists, silently) great! As well as iChat Theater. A former love interest and I viewed Monty Python and the Holy Grail over it once when we were apart!
The software to do it certainly has been pathetic. My grandma and uncle are the only people that I know that do video calls regularly, and they only got that working because I found some obscure setting that previously prevented it from working right. Too bad Apple backed off on publishing the FT spec.
Agreed. I want to see Skype kicked out. Or down or whatever the appropriate preposition is. They're owned by Microsoft now, right? It's nothing to do with that; I've disliked Skype since long before that. Their UI is horrible, they don't play well with Apple services, and their workflow hasn't yet stepped out of the late '90s. If Apple does with their video stuff what they did with WebKit (in a way appropriate for the medium, of course), I can see Apple's services being the premier way of doing whatever they're designed to do within five years (look at WebKit).
I figured if there was reason for the iMac to have it, I didn't see much reason for a TV to not have it. The posture thing doesn't seem like an actual show stopper, you just have to sit up if you're in a call. People are a mess in front of a TV, people are a mess in front of a computer.
A few game systems offered camera modules, so the idea might gain traction.
I see what you're saying, and that's a valid point to take on some issues. For example, I don't see why the iPad doesn't have dedicated Weather, Stocks, and Passbook apps when the iPhone and iPod touch do. And in reverse with Photo Booth. On the hardware side of things, I was always mystified why earlier iMacs had four USB ports while the Mac Mini had five. And why the Mac Pro only had as many as the Mac Mini and not more.
I guess when thinking of Apple in the television space, you have to come down on one side or another. Either it's "This is the simplest television ever created by the hand of man" or "This is the most feature-packed television ever created by the hand of man". Or external box, whatever your preference. And then from that you can build up a feature set. Either it's "what can we absolutely not do without" or "what have we always done without that we don't know we'd really like to have".
Interestingly enough, while Apple leans heavily toward the former, they always seem to be quite respectful of the latter. Again, and whichever your preference in what the device will be, their step out of the realm of hobby should be impressive.
Unless those rumors about "the cable companies liking what Apple's doing" is true. Then the whole thing is a wash.