The more I read about LTE, the more I get convinced that it is just a very weak technology because apparently it has such low bandwidth that it can't handle a reasonable amount of users at speeds greater than 64 kbps.
Why would anyone want LTE? - it can't handle useful data usage. What a tainted product...
The more I read about LTE, the more I get convinced that it is just a very weak technology because apparently it has such low bandwidth that it can't handle a reasonable amount of users at speeds greater than 64 kbps.
Why would anyone want LTE? - it can't handle useful data usage. What a tainted product...
I think you are mis-informed. Perhaps do some reading from reputable sites.
LTE is designed for high-bandwidth data rates - what people do with that and who pays is another matter.
Why, you don't like Microsoft Skype? It's such a lovely resource hog
I'm actually worried about the future of messaging. AIM is dead, their staff cut down to people who answer phones for support. So… when AOL decides to notice that they've been bankrupt for a decade and finally flip the switch off, what happens to all iChat users? Yes, by that time we'll all be using Messages, but that doesn't mean that ALL of my contacts can be reached via iMessage. A vast majority of them still use AIM via iChat. So will Apple buy up AIM/the underlying tech?
Because SOMETHING has to be done with it, otherwise you'll see Skype get 95% marketshare and it will be Internet Explorer all over again. iMessage won't be able to compete, despite it being identical to AIM via iChat in every way, minus multi-person videoconferencing and screen sharing, and despite it being on every iDevice. Plenty of people don't want to set up iCloud accounts for it; they just want their former AIM stuff (that they didn't have to know how it worked) to keep acting the same (even if it's now a variant of iMessage that they don't have to know how it works).
So the carriers are writing iOS are they? Or do you mean they requested Apple to nobble their products? If it is that latter then it is not carrier imposed, it is Apple enforcing the limitation.
Apple may have agreed to the limit but it was the carriers that demanded it. or they wouldn't carry the iPhone. Remember they have to 'protect' their other customers as well. That's why they do this kind of thing.
And really talk about a first world problem. It's video chat, you aren't going to die because you can't do it at the drop of a hat in your car in the middle of the desert etc.
Let's go with the simplest answer that was given by Steve Jobs back in 2010 and then build up to the real answer from there. Jobs said they had to work with the carriers and it wouldn't be ready in 2010. What jobs was saying is :It isn't included because it would have made FaceTime look bad thereby making Apple look bad.
Jobs was saying was what he said. They have to work with the carriers and it hadn't (and still hasn't) been worked out.
I hate how Apple keeps imposing these unnecessary limitations. It should be up to the user to decide if his or her connection is good enough and data plan can handle the traffic.
Apple has nothing to do with this, they would love to have FaceTime working everywhere. It is the carriers that are to blame.
Blame probably isn't the right word either as I don't believe the carriers have a choice. If FaceTime was freely available the networks would come to a screeching halt.
So you are saying that you cannot make video call from your iOS device using 3G or 4G because carriers restrictions?!
I really don't get it, this has been the case since day one, that is restrictions (not just FaceTime) have been place on iOS by the carriers. Why do you think that you can't download apps over a certain size for example. It is directly related to trying to maintain a uality of service for all customers.
For those that don't think congestion is a problem look closely at what happens to cell networks when a natural disaster hits or their is a major public event. The networks quickly become congested because it is only possible to support so much data in a given RF spectrum. It is physics more than anything that dictates how a network behaves under load.
I am surprised no one has mentioned Tango. It is a free app and pretty similar to facetime. I think the quality is better than Skype. Very quick set up and works on iOS, Android, and even Windows phones. I have had a few video chats on it over 3G and wifi with friends on various platforms and carriers and the quality was very good.
So for anyone looking to video chat on a 4S or an iPad for free over 3G or LTE and want a Facetime or Skype alternative check it out.
But how would that affect the network if all devices were allowed to have realtime 2-way QoS A/V streams? Things get hairier when you scale up, especially when you scale up from a fraction of a fraction of a percentage to 100% at once. If you can't do it in stages then you better be damn sure it can handle the load when you can or you end up, in this case, making the app/device look bad and the negatively affect everyone on that tower/network.
Quite the opposite. Verizon has already felt the crunch of the iPhone on their 3G network that by the time the iPhone 4S was coming out they were offering permanent double data for the same price for anyone that would sign up for a 4G-capable phone. Right now LTE is wide open.
I wouldn't have expected Apple would launch cellular FaceTime with the iPad first. While it could allow for a certain level of testing before releasing in the 6th gen iPhone it even if it failed miserably people would still expect, and even if it wasn't an issue it would not be a clue as to what would happen when the more popular device that is all cellular connected and connected when you leave the store.
I expect this is coming but I would expect it with iOS 6.0 and next iPhone.
Sure, let's not let a company decide what's best for their products, let's socialize all companies so it's up to the people to decide what is included.
LOLOLOL Trying to mimic my dysfunction when I am having major mental breakdown. I love it when tax payer makes fun of a VET who is so screwed up he cant type right. Thanks by the way for paying my bills every month. If it wasn't for your tax dollars I would most likely be homeless or dead. Tank you from the bottom of my heart.
Sure, which is why every other video service works just fine.
Exactly, what a joke facetime restrictions are!!! Now that you have paid extra to have LTE connectivity on your iPad and pay the carrier extra too, they tell you that you can't use the bandwidth you paid for how you want to. Friggin' sad.
Here's a solution -
"Buy two "new iPad" (the device formerly know as 'Prince'... I mean 'iPad 3') and tether the second to the first. Enjoy."
Yeah carry around two iPads so you can use facetime on one of them!!
Comments
Simply use Skype. You then can do video conferencing over LTE. Simple.
Maybe we don't want to use that. At all. Ever.
Why would anyone want LTE? - it can't handle useful data usage. What a tainted product...
The more I read about LTE, the more I get convinced that it is just a very weak technology because apparently it has such low bandwidth that it can't handle a reasonable amount of users at speeds greater than 64 kbps.
Why would anyone want LTE? - it can't handle useful data usage. What a tainted product...
I think you are mis-informed. Perhaps do some reading from reputable sites.
LTE is designed for high-bandwidth data rates - what people do with that and who pays is another matter.
Maybe we don't want to use that. At all. Ever.
Why, you don't like Microsoft Skype? It's such a lovely resource hog
Let's all sing: "Spider Pig, Spider Pig..." --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=714-Ioa4XQw
Why, you don't like Microsoft Skype? It's such a lovely resource hog
I'm actually worried about the future of messaging. AIM is dead, their staff cut down to people who answer phones for support. So… when AOL decides to notice that they've been bankrupt for a decade and finally flip the switch off, what happens to all iChat users? Yes, by that time we'll all be using Messages, but that doesn't mean that ALL of my contacts can be reached via iMessage. A vast majority of them still use AIM via iChat. So will Apple buy up AIM/the underlying tech?
Because SOMETHING has to be done with it, otherwise you'll see Skype get 95% marketshare and it will be Internet Explorer all over again. iMessage won't be able to compete, despite it being identical to AIM via iChat in every way, minus multi-person videoconferencing and screen sharing, and despite it being on every iDevice. Plenty of people don't want to set up iCloud accounts for it; they just want their former AIM stuff (that they didn't have to know how it worked) to keep acting the same (even if it's now a variant of iMessage that they don't have to know how it works).
This is not Apple - it's a carrier restriction.
Sure, which is why every other video service works just fine.
So the carriers are writing iOS are they? Or do you mean they requested Apple to nobble their products? If it is that latter then it is not carrier imposed, it is Apple enforcing the limitation.
Apple may have agreed to the limit but it was the carriers that demanded it. or they wouldn't carry the iPhone. Remember they have to 'protect' their other customers as well. That's why they do this kind of thing.
And really talk about a first world problem. It's video chat, you aren't going to die because you can't do it at the drop of a hat in your car in the middle of the desert etc.
Let's go with the simplest answer that was given by Steve Jobs back in 2010 and then build up to the real answer from there. Jobs said they had to work with the carriers and it wouldn't be ready in 2010. What jobs was saying is :It isn't included because it would have made FaceTime look bad thereby making Apple look bad.
Jobs was saying was what he said. They have to work with the carriers and it hadn't (and still hasn't) been worked out.
Sure, which is why every other video service works just fine.
Because Skype didn't have to sign a contract with the carriers in order to sell their phones?
I hate how Apple keeps imposing these unnecessary limitations. It should be up to the user to decide if his or her connection is good enough and data plan can handle the traffic.
Apple has nothing to do with this, they would love to have FaceTime working everywhere. It is the carriers that are to blame.
Blame probably isn't the right word either as I don't believe the carriers have a choice. If FaceTime was freely available the networks would come to a screeching halt.
So you are saying that you cannot make video call from your iOS device using 3G or 4G because carriers restrictions?!
I really don't get it, this has been the case since day one, that is restrictions (not just FaceTime) have been place on iOS by the carriers. Why do you think that you can't download apps over a certain size for example. It is directly related to trying to maintain a uality of service for all customers.
For those that don't think congestion is a problem look closely at what happens to cell networks when a natural disaster hits or their is a major public event. The networks quickly become congested because it is only possible to support so much data in a given RF spectrum. It is physics more than anything that dictates how a network behaves under load.
Apple has nothing to do with this, they would love to have FaceTime working everywhere. It is the carriers that are to blame.
And that's the key. There's absolutely no logical reason why Apple would be the one behind this limitation. It had to have come from the carriers.
Nice Apple //c in the background.
I noticed that right away too. I couldn't tell what model though. I thought it was an SI.
Lovely shade of yellow.
So for anyone looking to video chat on a 4S or an iPad for free over 3G or LTE and want a Facetime or Skype alternative check it out.
Good question.
But how would that affect the network if all devices were allowed to have realtime 2-way QoS A/V streams? Things get hairier when you scale up, especially when you scale up from a fraction of a fraction of a percentage to 100% at once. If you can't do it in stages then you better be damn sure it can handle the load when you can or you end up, in this case, making the app/device look bad and the negatively affect everyone on that tower/network.
Quite the opposite. Verizon has already felt the crunch of the iPhone on their 3G network that by the time the iPhone 4S was coming out they were offering permanent double data for the same price for anyone that would sign up for a 4G-capable phone. Right now LTE is wide open.
I wouldn't have expected Apple would launch cellular FaceTime with the iPad first. While it could allow for a certain level of testing before releasing in the 6th gen iPhone it even if it failed miserably people would still expect, and even if it wasn't an issue it would not be a clue as to what would happen when the more popular device that is all cellular connected and connected when you leave the store.
I expect this is coming but I would expect it with iOS 6.0 and next iPhone.
Sure, let's not let a company decide what's best for their products, let's socialize all companies so it's up to the people to decide what is included.
LOLOLOL Trying to mimic my dysfunction when I am having major mental breakdown. I love it when tax payer makes fun of a VET who is so screwed up he cant type right. Thanks by the way for paying my bills every month. If it wasn't for your tax dollars I would most likely be homeless or dead. Tank you from the bottom of my heart.
Sure, which is why every other video service works just fine.
Exactly, what a joke facetime restrictions are!!! Now that you have paid extra to have LTE connectivity on your iPad and pay the carrier extra too, they tell you that you can't use the bandwidth you paid for how you want to. Friggin' sad.
Here's a solution -
"Buy two "new iPad" (the device formerly know as 'Prince'... I mean 'iPad 3') and tether the second to the first. Enjoy."
Yeah carry around two iPads so you can use facetime on one of them!!