iPhone 4 FaceTime video calls won't use cell minutes

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 59
    misterkmisterk Posts: 18member
    It makes sense that it wouldn't use call minutes since it's over WiFi, it really is like using iChat on a home computer.



    It also makes sense that it's only available from iPhone 4 to iPhone 4 right now because Apple hasn't released their next version of iChat yet and FaceTime was their surprise for the launch of iPhone 4. I'm sure it will be able to call more devices now that they're releasing it as an open standard.



    It will only be over WiFi this year because the press would have a field day at AT&T breaking ever second. They can barely handle some of the bandwidth coming off the high iPhone usage as it is. Next year, after AT&T bolsters their towers or Apple goes to more providers, they'll do it over the cell network.



    No big surprises, but I am excited to give FaceTime a spin. I hope Rogers in Canada continues being as pro-active as they have been. I've actually been fairly happy with my carrier here. It'll be nice to see my wife and dogs' faces when I'm out of town.
  • Reply 22 of 59
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post


    The video-calling feature isn't really the news. Drop the video part of Facetime and simply make it wifi-to-wfi calling. I don't need to see your ugly mug, but I would love to not use minutes for a call.



    Skype.



    You're welcome.
  • Reply 23 of 59
    jerseymacjerseymac Posts: 408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jpcg View Post


    Stop bitching around.



    On this site? Never happen.
  • Reply 24 of 59
    mikedoemikedoe Posts: 1member
    all facetime calla are done over wi-fi but you do NEED a cell # to use facetime. The first

    time you use facetime on iPhone 4 apple sends a SMS message to the device

    to verify some things, so you have to have a cell number and a contract to do this. Afterthat it's all wi-fi. If you restore the device it needs to re-verify with a SMS again.
  • Reply 25 of 59
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Glockpop View Post


    Have you ever used iChat AV? Have you ever tried to maintain a video chat over Internet access equivalent to 3G? If mobile 3G were able to support high quality video chat, then people would actually be doing it.



    Yes, done them tonnes of times, they work great, and people actually do them.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Glockpop View Post


    Holy balls, the comments on this article are breathtakingly ignorant. The troll saying everyone's been doing mobile video chat for 7 years? no they haven't. Nokia's been enabling postage stamp video chat that is pretty much worthless, but costs up the ying-yang.



    Apart from implementing them, Nokia has nothing to do with the current standard for video calls, or the costs to do them.
  • Reply 26 of 59
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    That's good news for users with AT&T, as it means FaceTime won't be dependent upon the quality or continuity of a background 3G mobile connection. It's also good news for anyone who feared that the end of unlimited data plans would be lethal to the new FaceTime feature. At WWDC, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs noted that the new feature would initially be WiFi only, but that the company was working with providers to figure out how to accommodate calls over mobile networks in the future.



    Wondering if it would use cellular minutes has nothing to do with your cellular data plans and it is the best way to ensure real-time voice. Going to cellular data or WiFi easily introduces latency issues as routers aren't necessary going to route real-time data for FaceTime the way we'd like it to. If this does catch on, then we could see consumer routers with FaceTime protocols preset for QoS.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    Snooze alert. Video calling is nothing new. Been doing it since what, 2004 or 2005? Wake me when something interesting about video calling is reported. Unless it happens over 3G, it will be dead in the water. How many people just happen to be sitting under an access point just so they can make video calls? I mean come on. This is a non-story.



    You might want to wait to see the difference between 3GPP video chat and FaceTime. This service type has been commercialized since the 1980s and it's never been more than futuristic tech that has too many issues and little to no real world uses. Jetpacks are to transportation, as videocalling is to communication. Apple seems to be trying to change that, and I think they just might. Any talk of Nokia adopting FaceTime?





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post


    I don't understand why I can't make a facetime call to a computer. Why only to another iPhone?



    Remember, it's a free and open standard so there is nothing stopping anyone from making this work with Macs, Windows, Android, Symbian, Maemo, WP7, WebOS, etc. Apple choosing to focus it on its newest device and making sure it works over WiFi with iPhones before moving it to Macs and getting with carriers to allow all the needed protocols over cellular network types before





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    I think for competitive reasons, and to further the goal of increasing the number of iOS-enabled devices, the iPod touch will get a camera in 6 months. Device-to-device communication will solidify Apple's position as the pre-eminent communications device company.



    I think we'll see an iPod Touch with at least a front-facing camera in the Fall event, which should just be 3 months away.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post


    My guess is that Apple simply ran out of time to include additional functionality. They are minimal staffed and probably didn't have the resources (people) to get a computer-based FaceTime application working.



    I believe Jobs mentioned that some of the needed protocols, like SIP, tend to blocked by cellular networks. These need to be opened up to help ensure the best real-time audio and video over the data networks. Choppy A/V will not make this service usable.



    Also, wan't this the last feature of the new iPhone they demoed? If they would have been working with carriers "secretly" over the last year on these features it may have leaked out.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Glockpop View Post


    FaceTime isn't restricted from using 3G because of some artificial boundary Apple erected. It's because mobile 3G doesn't deliver the bandwidth and latency necessary to host a quality video chat.



    I think you are dead on. Jobs did say no cellular in 2010 so it does seem like they will work with carriers to make this a viable service for all who wish to implement it, including other vendors.



    The only questions I have about FaceTime regard how it resolves you are using a "FaceTime capable device". In other words, if you are calling an iPhone 4 -and- both are using WiFI the FaceTime icon will be accessible for video chat. How does it know this?



    It seems to me it works much like Back to My Mac and other services that notify a centralized server with then reports on your IP address and that you're on WiFi chatting with someone using a FaceTime capable device, which it then informs each device that FaceTime will function. Maybe it also tests bandwidth, latency and protocols before sending the go ahead. From there, you then choose the FaceTime option which sends the request directly to the other user, bypassing the server, which the other user then accepts and the video then starts after the handshake is finished.
  • Reply 27 of 59
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    Snooze alert. Video calling is nothing new. Been doing it since what, 2004 or 2005? Wake me when something interesting about video calling is reported. Unless it happens over 3G, it will be dead in the water. How many people just happen to be sitting under an access point just so they can make video calls? I mean come on. This is a non-story.



    Did you HAVE to quote the whole bloody article, or in your somnambulant state your finger slipped and you couldn't help it?



    But on the other hand you are welcome to sleep thru any and all other innovations Apple trots out...



  • Reply 28 of 59
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bonklers View Post


    one more reason to jailbreak.



    i'm sure that ANY iphone will have facetime, once its jailbroken. even factime over 3g will probably be do-able with a jailbreak.



    do that exactly? Do you know how it's been implemented?? Wait er, no. I mean far be it from me to pooh-pooh jail-breaking - it keeps a lot of my friends happily occupied. But until you have one in hand just tossing jail-breaking at it as comment seems silly. Unless of course you are going to say *Adopting a sinister and vaguely threatening voice* "Ha! I scoff at Apple and their tired attempts to prevent us from rightly claiming what was never ours to begin with! We shall prevail! And the gates of Cupertino shall not prevent us! Bwa-ha-ha-ha!"

  • Reply 29 of 59
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bonklers View Post


    one more reason to jailbreak.



    i'm sure that ANY iphone will have facetime, once its jailbroken. even factime over 3g will probably be do-able with a jailbreak.



    Why jailbreak? If it's an open and free standard using known protocols then Skype, Fringe, et al. can just add it to their apps. Since Apple is trying to push this service in the hopes of popularizing it I think it's unlikely they'd deny it for "duplicating functionality". Are there developer APIs to connecting to FaceTime on iPhone 4?
  • Reply 30 of 59
    boeyc15boeyc15 Posts: 986member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    Snooze alert. Video calling is nothing new. Been doing it since what, 2004 or 2005? Wake me when something interesting about video calling is reported. Unless it happens over 3G, it will be dead in the water. How many people just happen to be sitting under an access point just so they can make video calls? I mean come on. This is a non-story.



    Just because you say it does not make it so.

    Please explain what you mean. Enlighten us mere mortals.



    Also, even though facetime is just wifi, can you suggest any other phone OS's that has the (apparent) ease of use that facetime has? Seriously, I don't know. I've read that the new evo's video calls are a pain to set up and barely work



    As for me, video chat would be used very little. But I do see the potential for multiple uses.
  • Reply 31 of 59
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by boeyc15 View Post


    Also, even though facetime is just wifi, can you suggest any other phone OS's that has the (apparent) ease of use that facetime has? Seriously, I don't know. I've read that the new evo's video calls are a pain to set up and barely work



    Well with my three year old phone, you go to the phone book, select someones name, and choose video call, not sure where the pain comes in?
  • Reply 32 of 59
    Give me a break. How on the earth would a WiFi only call be counting cellular minutes?



    "WiFi only + iPhone / iPhone only" is really bad for marketing. Average Joe will soon ask why they can't make a video call over the cellular network. It would be better if Apple did not coin such a beautiful name "FaceTime" for video call -- most consumers know what a video call is. And btw, there are many much better carriers in countries other than the US, so why to block the whole world's right to use video call just because of the crappy AT&T?



    Of course this won't stop iPhone 4 sales as there are so many other exciting features on the new iPhone, but FaceTime is (at least for now) definitely a point for Apple haters to laugh at besides the word "magical" for the iPad.



    :-)
  • Reply 33 of 59
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfanning View Post


    Well with my three year old phone, you go to the phone book, select someones name, and choose video call, not sure where the pain comes in?



    Now your 3 year old phone is the EVO is mentions in his post.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by haruhiko View Post


    Give me a break. How on the earth would a WiFi only call be counting cellular minutes?



    It doesn't, hence the article. It was previously brought into question as to what parts were done over WiFi and if the cellular call demoed remained active for real time voice, only streaming the video part over FaceTime. That would have used your minutes. Of course, a look into the protocols used indicate that voice was going to be routed over WiFi, too.



    Quote:

    "WiFi only + iPhone / iPhone only" is really bad for marketing. Average Joe will soon ask why they can't make a video call over the cellular network.



    Quite the contrary, it's great for marketing. You focus on your product working in a certain way while working to expand its uses across more OSes, apps and network types. You don't start by supporting everything poorly and then scratch your head after it fails you build from a solid foundation up.



    To even think Apple has bad marketing should make you reassess your position because if there is one thing Apple excels at over everything else in its diverse bag of tricks, it's marketing.



    Quote:

    It would be better if Apple did not coin such a beautiful name "FaceTime" for video call -- most consumers know what a video call is.



    Anything Apple could ever produce has been done before at some level. Technology is about advancements, not about creating something entirely new. If you don't market it then you have no brand to associate with it and Apple clearly thinks they have a winner with FaceTime which is why they are trying to get carriers and SW devs to support it.



    More importantly, in this instance, a great marketing name is required if you want to turn around a product or technology that has been a marketing failure. What Apple has proposed is not proprietary in any way. It uses IP data networks and protocols so it will work on desktop and notebook PCs, CMDA, 3GSM and TD-SCDMA networks. Anywhere you have IP networks this has the potential of working with no intervention from the user of the app developer.



    Quote:

    And btw, there are many much better carriers in countries other than the US, so why to block the whole world's right to use video call just because of the crappy AT&T?



    Where is your proof that all the carriers except for AT&T allow for all the protocols used for FaceTime. I seem to recall Jobs stating that was the issue. I can't imagine such an issue was only AT&T so to make such a claim requires some proof.



    As for why Apple is so close to AT&T you have to understand that Apple sells far more iPhones in the US than any other country. That is not likely to change for awhile.
  • Reply 34 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Now your 3 year old phone is the EVO is mentions in his post.







    It doesn't, hence the article. It was previously brought into question as to what parts were done over WiFi and if the cellular call demoed remained active for real time voice, only streaming the video part over FaceTime. That would have used your minutes. Of course, a look into the protocols used indicate that voice was going to be routed over WiFi, too.





    Quite the contrary, it's great for marketing. You focus on your product working in a certain way while working to expand its uses across more OSes, apps and network types. You don't start by supporting everything poorly and then scratch your head after it fails you build from a solid foundation up.



    To even think Apple has bad marketing should make you reassess your position because if there is one thing Apple excels at over everything else in its diverse bag of tricks, it's marketing.





    Anything Apple could ever produce has been done before at some level. Technology is about advancements, not about creating something entirely new. If you don't market it then you have no brand to associate with it and Apple clearly thinks they have a winner with FaceTime which is why they are trying to get carriers and SW devs to support it.



    More importantly, in this instance, a great marketing name is required if you want to turn around a product or technology that has been a marketing failure. What Apple has proposed is not proprietary in any way. It uses IP data networks and protocols so it will work on desktop and notebook PCs, CMDA, 3GSM and TD-SCDMA networks. Anywhere you have IP networks this has the potential of working with no intervention from the user of the app developer.





    Where is your proof that all the carriers except for AT&T allow for all the protocols used for FaceTime. I seem to recall Jobs stating that was the issue. I can't imagine such an issue was only AT&T so to make such a claim requires some proof.



    As for why Apple is so close to AT&T you have to understand that Apple sells far more iPhones in the US than any other country. That is not likely to change for awhile.



    Thanks for clarifying the issues. I really hope that FaceTime will work across different platforms, at least to other mobile phones and Mac computers. Anyway I'm definitely getting the iPhone 4, since video call is the least concern of mine, I'm more excited about the high-res display and having 512MB RAM on iOS, this is gonna beat every competitor in terms of performance.
  • Reply 35 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by radster360 View Post


    First of all, I don't think iTouch purchases would offset iPhone customer like you say, even if iTouch is same featured as iPhone - the phone. BTW, iTouch will always be generate behind. Secondly, remember Apple doesn't sell subsidized phone (carriers are eating that cost), so to them it is practically same.



    With the way that most people complain about AT&T service, i'm pretty sure they would hurt the iPhone sale. That's a vast majority of them, sadly to say. But either way, Apple would have to make a few software changes in order to make the FaceTime available through wi-fi only, without having to make a call first.
  • Reply 36 of 59
    Ummm Duhh!!!! When the video phone call stops going over wireless and starts going over wifi, its NOT USING WIRELESS any more so they cant charge you for time you are not using.



    Only Appleinsider could try to spin this BS. Apple is not going to force some new standard with this. iOS 5 or whatever they will call it will support it over 3G on the next iPhone and iPad, just like other vendors do today. Just like how they had to use MMS after the fact.



    They must hand out really good drugs at Appleinsider. Video phone calling on the new iPhone is the biggest "So What" of the launch. You need iPhone 4.0's and wifi before it even works. Way to many limitations out of the gate.
  • Reply 37 of 59
    Umm, did anybody else notice the 4th paragraph starts with the phrase "Dong so"? Or am I the only perverse mind here?
  • Reply 38 of 59
    Well.. cos the iPhone 4's FaceTime, at least initially, will be Wi-Fi only... then would it mean that one could have international FaceTime calls too!?!?!



    WOW that would be amazing... coming to think of it... if iPod Touches (obviously the newer ones) get this stuff... then there is no need of an iPhone (4 or above) i guess, except for its beefy hardware... cos if a pictures speaks volumes than words, then i guess a video speaks several more than a picture does... :P









    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    An Apple representative has clarified that the new FaceTime video calls won't use up carrier minutes, even when a video chat is originated during a phone call.

    .....



  • Reply 39 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    Snooze alert. Video calling is nothing new. Been doing it since what, 2004 or 2005? Wake me when something interesting about video calling is reported. Unless it happens over 3G, it will be dead in the water. How many people just happen to be sitting under an access point just so they can make video calls? I mean come on. This is a non-story.



    Maybe it's because I live in the US, but I've never owned a phone with video chat. I've never known anyone who has a phone that has video chat. And I've certainly never met anyone whose phone has easy-to-use, elegantly interfaced video chat.



    Regarding Wi-Fi limitations, cellular networks obviously cover more area than Wi-Fi networks. But, I'm probably not gonna use it while I'm walking or driving. Maybe it would be fun while on public transportation (?) but even that would be kind of obnoxious and lacking privacy. If I'm having a FaceTime chat, it's probably with my girlfriend, my parents, or a close friend and we're probably at home or at school. It'd obviously be useful in more situations to have 3G FaceTime, but I wouldn't call it "dead in the water". For 95% of people, this will just be fun, intimate, and easy to use in limited situations.
  • Reply 40 of 59
    avidfcpavidfcp Posts: 381member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by alexhasfun28 View Post


    I don't believe Apple will introduce FaceTime with the iPod Touch, any time soon. It's probably best just to keep on their phones for now, if they really wanna be selling iPhones. I may believe a 3.2 or 5 megapixel camera, but not the front facing camera on the iPod Touch. Either way, Apple will have to redesign the FaceTime software because in order to make a FaceTime call, don't you first need to go through the cellular process? Call>FaceTime>Drop the network>Chat? I don't even think Apple will do a cellular deviced iPod Touch just for FaceTime.



    Google has it, iChat, aim. Only a matter of time not if but time when younwill be able to call out on your computer. Then someday, phone to chat. Ala computer.
Sign In or Register to comment.