Seriously? You can't think of a more useful and efficient way to communicate over computing device when your not in front of something other than a video chat doing sign language? How about this remarkably useful medium called writing. I bet i can write an SMS message to someone much faster and easier than making a phone call, then connecting a video call, then pulling the phone away to do a one-handed sign language to the other party. How can anyone see that as more efficient that writing?
1) An SMS only works if your message happens to be less than <160 characters (this is called a "Tweet", not a conversation)
2) Why do people talk at all, if they can text and email each other? Because it is natural, fast, emotive, and 100 other things.
3) As you can see in the video, the iPhone 4 can stand vertically. Someone who is hard of hearing could easily initiate a FaceTime call, set it down and begin signing. Have you ever seen someone sign before? It is many times faster than typing a text message.
What?! Sign language to video chat with people on a computing device? I have to give FaceTime a FacePalm if you think that is going to be common use.
Sign language between deaf people using an iPhone? Brilliant bit of marketing. That's an untapped market I hadn't even thought of before, and that was the part of the FaceTime video that actually got me choked up.
Crow ... THIS proved my point! Apple DID NOT make any mention of Safari at the Steve Jobs keynote... It wasn't pertinent to the important points Steve wanted to GET OUT to the public.
He did exactly that!
The OP was PO'd because Steve didn't intro about a dozen of the rumored things Apple is said to be working on.. and I said he was wrong to think Steve would ever have a WWDC keynote that was a random mishmash of aTV and macmini and ipods and laptops and desktops and magicpads and safari 5 and etc etc etc. I told the OP that Steve generally likes to have very focused keynotes whenever possible and not throw something in when he could have... Safaris 'post keynote' announcement all but made my point.
- it was ready
- it didn't fit nicely with the rest of the keynote (all about iOS and the new iPhone)
- it didn't get any mention at all from Steve
- yet it was still released with little more than a PR and maybe now a mention on the homepage
1) An SMS only works if your message happens to be less than <160 characters (this is called a "Tweet", not a conversation)
2) Why do people talk at all, if they can text and email each other? Because it is natural, fast, emotive, and 100 other things.
3) As you can see in the video, the iPhone 4 can stand vertically. Someone who is hard of hearing could easily initiate a FaceTime call, set it down and begin signing. Have you ever seen someone sign before? It is many times faster than typing a text message.
1) SMS isn't limited to 160 characters on modern phones, at least not in the US.
2) Sign language isn't vocal speech and holding a phone with one hand to sing with the other hand is not not as efficient as typing, hence, this won't be much like that.
3) If you think people are going to sit their phone down vertically, after setting up a video chat just do the simplest and most mundane conversation then you are gravely mistaken. It's like all video chat has ever been.
It's a novelty that limited use. It's to see people you haven't seen for awhile (note: to see them, not to communicate vasts amount of data with your face or hand(s).
The exception are things you can't quickly express into words, like an event happening that would require the backside camera, not the novelty, front-facing camera. This tech has been around since the 1980s and has been a staple of computers for years now and still isn't the most common way everyone communicates with other.
It's a novelty that limited use. It's to see people you haven't seen for awhile (note: to see them, not to communicate vasts amount of data with your face or hand(s).
Novelty or no, if people like it and use it once in a while, it's a good feature. Who cares if it gets into "common use" (whatever that means).
Ironically, this newest phone might be the one I jailbreak because you know someone is going to figure out how to make video chatting universal on all Apple machines and devices. To be able to video chat with my Mum in Canada from where ever I am here in Japan will be golden.
I love it how everybody has been whining about not having a front-facing camera specifically for video chat, and now that Apple's given it to them, they're all "OMG video chat is teh stoopid." Whatever.
previously the quality of "video calls" was hugely suspect, on top of which the cost of data for said calls was ridiculous to the point of being prohibitive - why bother to pay over the top for rubbish quality? With FaceTime as it's on wi-fi, it's free, and the quality of the feed on a decent screen makes it a much more attractive function. I have to agree with Predrag:
Quote:
However, what Apple did is make video calling as simple as ordinary phone calls.
However, what Apple did is make video calling as simple as ordinary phone calls. Once they get their way (i.e. majority of people end up with iPhone 4 or newer), it will be that simple. Most people in your iPhone address book will have iPhones (with FaceTime), so you'll be able to call them on video just like making a regular call. And I'm sure there will be frequent situations where people will be video calling rather than audio-only.
Ahem, that's how it's been done for the last 7 years on 3GPP (i.e. open standards) compatible phones. iOS4 may use open standard protocols, but it's currently an implementation that is incompatible with the rest of the world. Propably for a very commercial reason.
Making video calls so far has been as simple as selecting "video call" (or internet call for that matter) when selecting a contact to call instead of just pressing the green button. Practically all phones with front facing cameras have the feature.
However very few people actually use it due to reasons stated before (lowish bitrate, difficulty in holding the phone so others can see you etc.).
It will likely not be the hit many here envision, but with the Apple momentum going, there may be new apps and a new "try" for video chat. Who knows.
Ahem, that's how it's been done for the last 7 years on 3GPP (i.e. open standards) compatible phones. iOS4 may use open standard protocols, but it's currently an implementation that is incompatible with the rest of the world. Propably for a very commercial reason.
Making video calls so far has been as simple as selecting "video call" (or internet call for that matter) when selecting a contact to call instead of just pressing the green button. Practically all phones with front facing cameras have the feature.
However very few people actually use it due to reasons stated before (lowish bitrate, difficulty in holding the phone so others can see you etc.).
It will likely not be the hit many here envision, but with the Apple momentum going, there may be new apps and a new "try" for video chat. Who knows.
we all know it's been available for years. however, we all know that it has sucked b@lls for years and costs a boatload. it's all about the implementation.
we all know it's been available for years. however, we all know that it has sucked b@lls for years and costs a boatload. it's all about the implementation.
I don't see how Apple's implementation solves the biggest issue - the problem with holding the phone at the right distance/angle for long periods of time.
Having to hold the phone with one hand makes it useless for (British) sign language too.
Maybe we'll see an accessory that attaches your iPhone to your head via a pole. That would solve the problem.
I don't see how Apple's implementation solves the biggest issue - the problem with holding the phone at the right distance/angle for long periods of time.
Having to hold the phone with one hand makes it useless for (British) sign language too.
Maybe we'll see an accessory that attaches your iPhone to your head via a pole. That would solve the problem.
i don't see how this has been the biggest issue for video calling. besides, an iPhone dock solves that quite simply, if it's a problem for you.
Here in New Zealand we've been able to do video calling since about 2003-2004 (with Vodafone). Never caught on though, I never use it.
Yeah I have never used it here as I don't know anyone with a video capable phone and like Sennen said above, the picture was always small and crappy.
I used to sell phones over in Ireland and it was a great hook for getting people to buy them at the end of the sales process but I never saw anyone use them in the wild there either because the screen quality was bollocks and the software kinda buggy, but the potential was there.
In fact the only time I have seen it in use was in the movie "Sione's Wedding"
If Apple can make it easier to do then people will use it. However they need to get other manufacturers behind them to make it more ubiquitous and cross platform. I can't imagine Skype will get behind it as they are all about closed, proprietary protocols and they will see this as competition, however I bet they are trying to use the front camera API's as we speak for their own app.
I can't see people using it for everyday conversation (a 'get some bread from the dairy on your way home' conversation), but like on the commercial it is great for long distance stuff with people you don't see very often.
One of the things I was looking forward to most was this feature, as I hoped it would allow me to video chat with my kids at home. They are 30 months and 11 months, so they interact much better when it is video than just a phone call.
I am in the same situation. Good stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Core2
Actually its integrated into the phone, it was mentioned that you just dial the phone number and if it is to another iPhone you get video, you don't have to do anything to implement, that's what has me interested, no application to launch, or have to be logged into a client to use.
Need some technical information before I make my decision on this one.
PatentlyApple showed a patent a few months back which Apple had for opening a data connection during a phone call. Both phones, connected only by the phone call, could send some sort of data between them. This would be the method they use to open up a video connection between the phones.
This could open up lots of other possibilities too. Generally, this open standard could enable any sort of data sharing between phones - either encoded into the audio stream for very low bandwidth, or more likely using that encoded data to open other bigger data connections (whether 3G or wifi or whatever).
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
They specifically stated it was iPhone 4 to iPhone 4. I see nothing that would prevent them from using the technology in iChat for this, but so far it's not mentioned, which I think means it's just not ready at this point for connecting to PCs. Perhaps they want to do it through MobileMe to utilize Wide-Area Bonjour that is found in Back to My Mac for zero config connections. They might also want it to go live on Windows at the same time.
I'm worried about what we've seen.
Is there any evidence that the original phone call was ever disconnected?
I mean - in "FaceTime" - is the audio routed through the regular cell network, while the video goes through wifi? They could add a small delay to audio to match video, and get great audio quality via the cell network while adding video to whatever quality is possible. It bypasses any problems with home QoS setups etc.
BUT... it means that instead of calling my parents for 20 minutes on a landline or Skype, I am actually using my mobile phone minutes. That is a show stopper.
On the other hand - if it uses it to make the connection and then drops the cell call entirely, it's a nice way to have guaranteed connections to whoever I'm calling, and switch to no-charge if we're both on wifi. We don't even need video.
edit:
Asked another way - I don't have access to the keynote stream - when the video was choppy due to the wifi problems, did the audio ever miss a beat?
I doubt FaceTime will be such a big deal. It's been around in Sweden ( and many other countries) for a very long time, since 2003 I believe. Funny how Apple makes it look like a "new thing". As one analytic said "the interest for video calls are microscopic". But with the Apple way of doing things and that fact that the market might have matured it could be more than microscopic.
Comments
Seriously? You can't think of a more useful and efficient way to communicate over computing device when your not in front of something other than a video chat doing sign language? How about this remarkably useful medium called writing. I bet i can write an SMS message to someone much faster and easier than making a phone call, then connecting a video call, then pulling the phone away to do a one-handed sign language to the other party. How can anyone see that as more efficient that writing?
1) An SMS only works if your message happens to be less than <160 characters (this is called a "Tweet", not a conversation)
2) Why do people talk at all, if they can text and email each other? Because it is natural, fast, emotive, and 100 other things.
3) As you can see in the video, the iPhone 4 can stand vertically. Someone who is hard of hearing could easily initiate a FaceTime call, set it down and begin signing. Have you ever seen someone sign before? It is many times faster than typing a text message.
What?! Sign language to video chat with people on a computing device? I have to give FaceTime a FacePalm if you think that is going to be common use.
Sign language between deaf people using an iPhone? Brilliant bit of marketing. That's an untapped market I hadn't even thought of before, and that was the part of the FaceTime video that actually got me choked up.
...except that Apple just now announced Safari 5.
How's that crow taste?
And there may be more, it's only monday...
Crow ... THIS proved my point! Apple DID NOT make any mention of Safari at the Steve Jobs keynote... It wasn't pertinent to the important points Steve wanted to GET OUT to the public.
He did exactly that!
The OP was PO'd because Steve didn't intro about a dozen of the rumored things Apple is said to be working on.. and I said he was wrong to think Steve would ever have a WWDC keynote that was a random mishmash of aTV and macmini and ipods and laptops and desktops and magicpads and safari 5 and etc etc etc. I told the OP that Steve generally likes to have very focused keynotes whenever possible and not throw something in when he could have... Safaris 'post keynote' announcement all but made my point.
- it was ready
- it didn't fit nicely with the rest of the keynote (all about iOS and the new iPhone)
- it didn't get any mention at all from Steve
- yet it was still released with little more than a PR and maybe now a mention on the homepage
1) An SMS only works if your message happens to be less than <160 characters (this is called a "Tweet", not a conversation)
2) Why do people talk at all, if they can text and email each other? Because it is natural, fast, emotive, and 100 other things.
3) As you can see in the video, the iPhone 4 can stand vertically. Someone who is hard of hearing could easily initiate a FaceTime call, set it down and begin signing. Have you ever seen someone sign before? It is many times faster than typing a text message.
1) SMS isn't limited to 160 characters on modern phones, at least not in the US.
2) Sign language isn't vocal speech and holding a phone with one hand to sing with the other hand is not not as efficient as typing, hence, this won't be much like that.
3) If you think people are going to sit their phone down vertically, after setting up a video chat just do the simplest and most mundane conversation then you are gravely mistaken. It's like all video chat has ever been.
It's a novelty that limited use. It's to see people you haven't seen for awhile (note: to see them, not to communicate vasts amount of data with your face or hand(s).
The exception are things you can't quickly express into words, like an event happening that would require the backside camera, not the novelty, front-facing camera. This tech has been around since the 1980s and has been a staple of computers for years now and still isn't the most common way everyone communicates with other.
It's a novelty that limited use. It's to see people you haven't seen for awhile (note: to see them, not to communicate vasts amount of data with your face or hand(s).
Novelty or no, if people like it and use it once in a while, it's a good feature. Who cares if it gets into "common use" (whatever that means).
iMovie will revolutionize INSTANT AND REAL WORLD PORN...
The San Fernando Valley will love iPhone 4.
Anyways... I'm definitely getting it June 24.
deleted
I love it how everybody has been whining about not having a front-facing camera specifically for video chat, and now that Apple's given it to them, they're all "OMG video chat is teh stoopid." Whatever.
previously the quality of "video calls" was hugely suspect, on top of which the cost of data for said calls was ridiculous to the point of being prohibitive - why bother to pay over the top for rubbish quality? With FaceTime as it's on wi-fi, it's free, and the quality of the feed on a decent screen makes it a much more attractive function. I have to agree with Predrag:
However, what Apple did is make video calling as simple as ordinary phone calls.
I don't think Face Time is just a cute name. Face Time / Facebook..... I smell something brewing.
Hmmmm
I don't think Face Time is just a cute name. Face Time / Facebook..... I smell something brewing.
FaceTime comes from the commonly used phrase... for example, "Let's spend some facetime going over these final details on the house before we demo."
According to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facetime
FaceTime comes from the commonly used phrase... for example, "Let's spend some facetime going over these final details on the house before we demo."
According to Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facetime
You have to give me a Wiki link for that? LOL I thought the history behind the use of Face Time was obvious.
I'm saying I don't think it's a coincidinkle.
However, what Apple did is make video calling as simple as ordinary phone calls. Once they get their way (i.e. majority of people end up with iPhone 4 or newer), it will be that simple. Most people in your iPhone address book will have iPhones (with FaceTime), so you'll be able to call them on video just like making a regular call. And I'm sure there will be frequent situations where people will be video calling rather than audio-only.
Ahem, that's how it's been done for the last 7 years on 3GPP (i.e. open standards) compatible phones. iOS4 may use open standard protocols, but it's currently an implementation that is incompatible with the rest of the world. Propably for a very commercial reason.
Making video calls so far has been as simple as selecting "video call" (or internet call for that matter) when selecting a contact to call instead of just pressing the green button. Practically all phones with front facing cameras have the feature.
However very few people actually use it due to reasons stated before (lowish bitrate, difficulty in holding the phone so others can see you etc.).
It will likely not be the hit many here envision, but with the Apple momentum going, there may be new apps and a new "try" for video chat. Who knows.
Ahem, that's how it's been done for the last 7 years on 3GPP (i.e. open standards) compatible phones. iOS4 may use open standard protocols, but it's currently an implementation that is incompatible with the rest of the world. Propably for a very commercial reason.
Making video calls so far has been as simple as selecting "video call" (or internet call for that matter) when selecting a contact to call instead of just pressing the green button. Practically all phones with front facing cameras have the feature.
However very few people actually use it due to reasons stated before (lowish bitrate, difficulty in holding the phone so others can see you etc.).
It will likely not be the hit many here envision, but with the Apple momentum going, there may be new apps and a new "try" for video chat. Who knows.
we all know it's been available for years. however, we all know that it has sucked b@lls for years and costs a boatload. it's all about the implementation.
we all know it's been available for years. however, we all know that it has sucked b@lls for years and costs a boatload. it's all about the implementation.
I don't see how Apple's implementation solves the biggest issue - the problem with holding the phone at the right distance/angle for long periods of time.
Having to hold the phone with one hand makes it useless for (British) sign language too.
Maybe we'll see an accessory that attaches your iPhone to your head via a pole. That would solve the problem.
As I said before, I will try this:
I don't see how Apple's implementation solves the biggest issue - the problem with holding the phone at the right distance/angle for long periods of time.
Having to hold the phone with one hand makes it useless for (British) sign language too.
Maybe we'll see an accessory that attaches your iPhone to your head via a pole. That would solve the problem.
i don't see how this has been the biggest issue for video calling. besides, an iPhone dock solves that quite simply, if it's a problem for you.
Here in New Zealand we've been able to do video calling since about 2003-2004 (with Vodafone). Never caught on though, I never use it.
Yeah I have never used it here as I don't know anyone with a video capable phone and like Sennen said above, the picture was always small and crappy.
I used to sell phones over in Ireland and it was a great hook for getting people to buy them at the end of the sales process but I never saw anyone use them in the wild there either because the screen quality was bollocks and the software kinda buggy, but the potential was there.
In fact the only time I have seen it in use was in the movie "Sione's Wedding"
If Apple can make it easier to do then people will use it. However they need to get other manufacturers behind them to make it more ubiquitous and cross platform. I can't imagine Skype will get behind it as they are all about closed, proprietary protocols and they will see this as competition, however I bet they are trying to use the front camera API's as we speak for their own app.
I can't see people using it for everyday conversation (a 'get some bread from the dairy on your way home' conversation), but like on the commercial it is great for long distance stuff with people you don't see very often.
One of the things I was looking forward to most was this feature, as I hoped it would allow me to video chat with my kids at home. They are 30 months and 11 months, so they interact much better when it is video than just a phone call.
I am in the same situation. Good stuff.
Actually its integrated into the phone, it was mentioned that you just dial the phone number and if it is to another iPhone you get video, you don't have to do anything to implement, that's what has me interested, no application to launch, or have to be logged into a client to use.
Need some technical information before I make my decision on this one.
PatentlyApple showed a patent a few months back which Apple had for opening a data connection during a phone call. Both phones, connected only by the phone call, could send some sort of data between them. This would be the method they use to open up a video connection between the phones.
This could open up lots of other possibilities too. Generally, this open standard could enable any sort of data sharing between phones - either encoded into the audio stream for very low bandwidth, or more likely using that encoded data to open other bigger data connections (whether 3G or wifi or whatever).
They specifically stated it was iPhone 4 to iPhone 4. I see nothing that would prevent them from using the technology in iChat for this, but so far it's not mentioned, which I think means it's just not ready at this point for connecting to PCs. Perhaps they want to do it through MobileMe to utilize Wide-Area Bonjour that is found in Back to My Mac for zero config connections. They might also want it to go live on Windows at the same time.
I'm worried about what we've seen.
Is there any evidence that the original phone call was ever disconnected?
I mean - in "FaceTime" - is the audio routed through the regular cell network, while the video goes through wifi? They could add a small delay to audio to match video, and get great audio quality via the cell network while adding video to whatever quality is possible. It bypasses any problems with home QoS setups etc.
BUT... it means that instead of calling my parents for 20 minutes on a landline or Skype, I am actually using my mobile phone minutes. That is a show stopper.
On the other hand - if it uses it to make the connection and then drops the cell call entirely, it's a nice way to have guaranteed connections to whoever I'm calling, and switch to no-charge if we're both on wifi. We don't even need video.
edit:
Asked another way - I don't have access to the keynote stream - when the video was choppy due to the wifi problems, did the audio ever miss a beat?