iChat VideoConferencing, Java 1.4.1, and MPC7457

[MacRumors]

Various tidbits:

Motorola posts (http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MPC7457) further details about the MPC7457. The 7457 was previously discussed (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/02/20030205215116.shtml) and will be introduced at 1.3GHz with 512k of L2 cache and up to 2MB of L3 cache.

An Apple iChat update is in the works and the next revision will introduce Video Conferencing capabilities. An Apple Video Conferencing application was first hinted at (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020426232617.shtml) by Steve Jobs himself in April 2002 during a shareholder meeting. Microphone and Camera (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021121054129.shtml) icons were subsequently found in iChat's resource files, further hinting at future functionality.

An Apple software update will be appearing on March 3rd... but details are scarce. The most likely candidate appears to be Java 1.4.1 Final (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/02/20030225181353.shtml) which is rumored to be released on that same day, but hints at iMovie 3.0.2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/02/20030216203857.shtml) have also emerged.

[Dj Kioto]

keynote 1.01 is up too

[iJon]

well it shouldnt be too hard to get videoconfrencing into ichat, they already have quicktime broadcaster. how cool would it be to start having an optional itty bitty camera installed in the top of your studio display or any other mac for this, ah the wonders. dont think it will be that but i think apple will wow us.

iJon

[howard]

stupid motorola nobody cares about your damn chips anymore

[Kwyjibo]

I personally think video ocnferencing in iChat will be cool, It especially makes sense for apple to make further intergration like this since everything is already tied with the Address Book, I can jsut imagine Now Conferencing with "user", I hope theres a way to do it with non ichat ppl too tho atleast eventually.

[FelixDerKater]

Originally posted by howard
stupid motorola nobody cares about your damn chips anymore

Oh so true... They are just like duct tape, holding together Apple's hardware lines until the 970 arrives. Still, why don't they leave the L2 cache at 1MB instead of dropping it to 512K?

[TMJ1974]

Originally posted by FelixDerKater
Oh so true... They are just like duct tape, holding together Apple's hardware lines until the 970 arrives. Still, why don't they leave the L2 cache at 1MB instead of dropping it to 512K?

The L2 cache is currently at 256K, 1 or 2 MB is the L3 cache, so 512K L2 cache is an improvement.

[wsteineker]

I may be the only one who feels this way, but I for one am glad to see Motorola getting a little more concrete about the 7457. It's not like Apple is goint to debut the 970 in all of its machines at the same time, so we'll continue to need G4s to run the "i" series. PowerPC development, be it done by Motorola or IBM, will only benefit us in the long run. Still, we'll have to wait and see if they actually produce.

[law guy]

Originally posted by wsteineker
I may be the only one who feels this way, but I for one am glad to see Motorola getting a little more concrete about the 7457. It's not like Apple is goint to debut the 970 in all of its machines at the same time, so we'll continue to need G4s to run the "i" series. PowerPC development, be it done by Motorola or IBM, will only benefit us in the long run. Still, we'll have to wait and see if they actually produce.

It's probably already been suggested (a thousand times), but the 7457 specs (speed, pin compatable, 2mb L3) and the delay (no 1.42 dual G4s for four more weeks -early April) suggest that the new 1.42s are using the 7457. Is that correct?

[nickmcghie]

if/when apple does release the new version of iChat, will the videoconferencing abilities only be compatible with other users of iChat? is it possible that somehow it will be integrated with AIM? does AIM even support videoconferencing now?

[FredAkbar]

Originally posted by nickmcghie
if/when apple does release the new version of iChat, will the videoconferencing abilities only be compatible with other users of iChat? is it possible that somehow it will be integrated with AIM? does AIM even support videoconferencing now?

The latest AIM version for OS X doesn't have any video conferencing capabilties, and neither does the Windows version, as far as I know.

--Fred

[ChoMomma]

Maybe AOL will roll a new video conf feature out at that time... ??


it would be good if it required Quicktime to be installed : ) more Apple Quicktime users : ) !!!

World Domination is ours!!!!!!!

...sorry got carried away...

[awulf]

Where can you see those iChat icons?

I really would like voice chat in iChat, but first I need a mic port. I think excluding mic ports was one of apples dumbes things.

[bidge]

Originally posted by awulf
Where can you see those iChat icons?

I really would like voice chat in iChat, but first I need a mic port. I think excluding mic ports was one of apples dumbes things.

remeber though that most of Apple's computers already have built in microphones.

[phampton81]

7457 rumors seem good on the outside, but scary on the inside. Good that we will at least have faster/better chips in our 'i' series macs if not 970's, scary because of the possibility the power lines will continue to use motorola for the next year or two. Oh the horror.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by phampton81
7457 rumors seem good on the outside, but scary on the inside. Good that we will at least have faster/better chips in our 'i' series macs if not 970's, scary because of the possibility the power lines will continue to use motorola for the next year or two. Oh the horror.

It's definitely a mixed blessing, to say the least. We can only hope that the trained chimps at Motorola have finally figured out how to run a production line.

[redAPPLE]

i hope the ichat would be compatible to AIM (it is cross-plattform right?).

i hope it can not only video conference, i hope it can voice conference too.

and did i mention, i hope it is cross-plattform?

[d46799]

Originally posted by iJon
how cool would it be to start having an optional itty bitty camera installed in the top of your studio display

Love it! I wonder if they could fit one at the top/middle of a powerbook screen.

On second thought, if cams were built in to computers as standard practice, the term 'spyware' might take on new meaning. 'Big Brother' comes to mind too.

[macgroove]

Can someone tell me whether it is possible already to chat with MSN Members in iChat......and better yet, does anyone anticipate VC'ing with MSN/users and users of polycom video conferencing software....?:D

[Dont Hurt Me]

Originally posted by law guy
It's probably already been suggested (a thousand times), but the 7457 specs (speed, pin compatable, 2mb L3) and the delay (no 1.42 dual G4s for four more weeks -early April) suggest that the new 1.42s are using the 7457. Is that correct? I dont think so since they had posted mass production was going to be in 4th qtr this year. Still makes you wonder where and how apple gets 1.25 and 1.42? and apple and motorola aint talking about this as far as i know.

[ozubahn]

Originally posted by d46799
On second thought, if cams were built in to computers as standard practice, the term 'spyware' might take on new meaning. 'Big Brother' comes to mind too.

That's definitely a concern, but I think there are easy ways to control that. For instance, putting a small LED next to the lens that glows when the camera is active would be simple, and it could be handled at a level of hardware far below the reach of spyware. The spyware could turn on your camera, but not without revealing its existence in the process. There are probably other more elegant approaches too, but that's a start.

I think a built in camera would be a good idea. All the monitors have internal USB connections anyway, so there is no cable issue (unless you want a firewire camera). And judging from the most recent crop of Japanese cellphones, Apple could fit all the cameras it wants into monitor frames, even in the PowerBook.

[matznentosh]

Originally posted by ozubahn
That's definitely a concern, but I think there are easy ways to control that. For instance, putting a small LED next to the lens that glows when the camera is active would be simple, and it could be handled at a level of hardware far below the reach of spyware. The spyware could turn on your camera, but not without revealing its existence in the process. There are probably other more elegant approaches too, but that's a start.

I think a built in camera would be a good idea. All the monitors have internal USB connections anyway, so there is no cable issue (unless you want a firewire camera). And judging from the most recent crop of Japanese cellphones, Apple could fit all the cameras it wants into monitor frames, even in the PowerBook.

Interesting idea. Could this turn into a practical version of an iPhone? As a Powerbook it wouldn't be a PDA or a phone, so it wouldn't contradict Steve Jobs' emphatic denial that Apple would make a PDA.

[BenRoethig]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
I dont think so since they had posted mass production was going to be in 4th qtr this year. Still makes you wonder where and how apple gets 1.25 and 1.42? and apple and motorola aint talking about this as far as i know.

The 1.25, 1.33, and 1.42 are exclusive to Apple. They make too much heat to be used in the embedded market. Since Motorola does not plan to market these to other companies, they don't bother to list them on their website.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Thanks, i have wondered about this for a while and that sounds like a good explanation.

[Mr. MacPhisto]

Originally posted by wsteineker
I may be the only one who feels this way, but I for one am glad to see Motorola getting a little more concrete about the 7457. It's not like Apple is goint to debut the 970 in all of its machines at the same time, so we'll continue to need G4s to run the "i" series. PowerPC development, be it done by Motorola or IBM, will only benefit us in the long run. Still, we'll have to wait and see if they actually produce.

Unless IBM has another PPC chip they decide to switch over to.

It certainly would be wonderful if everything did go to the 970. There may be enough range in speed at the get go to do something like that. It's doubtful though. But IBM may offer an alternative that could upgrade the G3s.

I have a feeling the G4 will be about the same cost, if not more, as the 970. Why stick that in your lower end? Yet, it would be beneficial if you could get Altivec into all your machines. IBM can make chips cheaper and more efficiently - so a complete switch over could be possible.

[Blackcat]

Originally posted by d46799
Love it! I wonder if they could fit one at the top/middle of a powerbook screen.

On second thought, if cams were built in to computers as standard practice, the term 'spyware' might take on new meaning. 'Big Brother' comes to mind too.

I own a roll of insulating tape :D

[Blackcat]

Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Unless IBM has another PPC chip they decide to switch over to.

It certainly would be wonderful if everything did go to the 970. There may be enough range in speed at the get go to do something like that. It's doubtful though. But IBM may offer an alternative that could upgrade the G3s.

If indeed the 970 is all we believe, and prices of towers stay much the same, why would anybody spend $1300 on an iMac when $1500 gets you something maybe 3x faster?

A 1.8Ghz 970 is equivalent to a theoretical 3.6Ghz G4 in clockspeed. Moto are unlikely to reach 1.8Ghz before 2004, so they will be massively slower.

I'd like Apple to go:

1.2 - 1.6 Ghz 970 in iMac/iBook
1.8 - 2.5 Ghz 970 in PowerMac/Powerbook

This would mean every Mac could crush the equivalent PC in its class without breaking a sweat and all Macs would be 64bit - its a marketing wet dream!

[bikertwin]

I think people are getting caught up in a fantasy here.

Apple's goal is to sell hardware--high end hardware. People now whine (rightly) about the highest priced Power Macs not being that much faster than, say, a high end iMac.

So Apple will probably roll out the high-end and mid-range Power Macs with the 970, but will likely keep the low-end Power Mac with Motorola chips, at least initially.

They might do the same with the PowerBooks: give the 970 to the 17" (and, maybe, 15") and keep the 12" on Moto chips.

And it'll be a while before iMacs, eMacs, and iBooks ever see a 970 chip.

This isn't inside info, just an educated guess.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I like what blackcat said and i would like to see that to. I think the 970 will show in the powermacs and the g4 will keep getting its bumps for the imac line with the 7457 showing up in the imac late this year or early 2004. Still think 970's in every mac is the way to go.

[DharvaBinky]

"High-bandwidth" 133 MHz 64-bit MPX Bus/60x Bus

quotes are mine... ;)

Dharvabinky

[allpar]

The last time Apple had a substantial power advantage was with the G3, and that made it across the board pretty quickly. It was similar to the 970 in its ability to whomp on PCs of just about any magnitude, and the beige G3, while not cheap, was also not in the stratosphere where the current dual-1.4 G4 is. Fortunately this time around it seems Apple has had some advance engineering time and won't simply be shvoing 970s (or whatevers) into motherboards that aren't really suited for 'em. I do wish they'd get the bus speed up to state of the art, though. What kills me on the biege G3 is probably not so much the processor as the bus and hard drive access.

[bikeboy]

I'm looking for an ultraportable, durable machine with great battery life, excellent wireless range, and enough power to let OS X and the iApps shine. Something that's less expensive than the current 12" PB, and is slightly more future-proof than the current G3 iBooks. If they get 1+ GHz 7457 G4 into an iBook that runs on a mere 10W, I for one will run, not walk, to my local Mac retailer to get one.

So...I guess...all I have to do is wait....:mad:

[iBear]

.... Quote Oh so true... They are just like duct tape, holding together Apple's hardware lines until the 970 arrives. Still, why don't they leave the L2 cache at 1MB instead of dropping it to 512K? ....

Speaking of Duck Tape, it sure does hold my camera steady on the top of my active display.


It also keeps my Ducks from getting loose.

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by iBear
.... Quote Oh so true... They are just like duct tape, holding together Apple's hardware lines until the 970 arrives. Still, why don't they leave the L2 cache at 1MB instead of dropping it to 512K? ....

Speaking of Duck Tape, it sure does hold my camera steady on the top of my active display.


It also keeps my Ducks from getting loose.
You got your caches mixed up.
cache L1 L2 L3
7450 32K 256K 1MB, 2MB
7455 32K 256K 1MB, 2MB
7457 32K 512K 1MB, 2MB*

* - The MPC7457 supports up to 4 MB of L3 SRAM,
of which a maximum of 2 MB can be configured as cache memory;
the remaining 2 MB may be unused or configured as private memory.

[dstorey]

Originally posted by ozubahn
That's definitely a concern, but I

I think a built in camera would be a good idea. All the monitors have internal USB connections anyway, so there is no cable issue (unless you want a firewire camera). And judging from the most recent crop of Japanese cellphones, Apple could fit all the cameras it wants into monitor frames, even in the PowerBook.

I think the swivel cams in the likes of the sony laptop look pretty ugly, it'd be nice for apple to think of a way to ger free movement on a powerbook without looking out of lace. However on an iMac it would be ideal, just a small cam lens on the middle of the white border or along the screen edge that is stationary. Then any camera angle adjustments can be made by swiveling the monitor. A very elegant solution. Of course the cam would have to be set in the monitor to look at the apropriate angle so it will be aimed at the person sitting at the computer. With the iMac's neck it would be easy to say swing the monitor round to face someone else in the room or point it at something you want to show someone. It wouldeven look like your iMacs looking at the thing. The only thing is working out how to insert a lens in the screen without spoiling the clean lines. I suppose you can get tiny cam's but the resolution has to be at least half decent so everything doesn't blur and not be able to be used in artificial light conditions.

As for the spywear, you foget most spywear come in through in internet explorer bug in its help files system, a very famous example being the audio galexy one. Otherwise they come in via sharewear of free wear thats mostly written for windows. Most spywear makers aim for the largest audience which isn't Mac (yet) and/or they dunno how to write for mac. Not to say there isn't any for mac but surely there is good software to the equivilent to ad-aware.

As a few people mentioned cross platform is important. Not many business or people at home have all their partners or friends/family on mac. If it only works on iChat then it wont be a great deal of use, so support for Yahoo! and whatever msn uses is important but i would say unlikely. The best hope is Apple cut a deal with AOL to use the same voice/video codecs and services so iChat is as compatible with streaming media as it is with text messages. I guess this will likely be MPEG-4 as it is an open standard and Apple widely endorse it. Getting AOL AIM to use MPEG-4 would be an important boost for the standard with all those subscribers.

[vanillamike]

My eMac has a mic built in to the top left of the screen, I have never used it but I think it would be cool if it worked with the future video conferencing in iChat.

I am hoping that apple will release their own firewire web cam someday. With all this talk about the iShoot, an apple branded firewire web cam would be sweet!!! For now I use a Logitech quickcam zoom it is white and USB, and its ok but I want something that screams apple design.

Oh and about the spy ware I already have my head wrapped in tinfoil to keep the satellites from reading my brain waves :p

Mike

[rubikcube]

An Apple iChat update is in the works and the next revision will introduce Video Conferencing capabilities. An Apple Video Conferencing application was first hinted at (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020426232617.shtml) by Steve Jobs himself in April 2002 during a shareholder meeting. Microphone and Camera (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/11/20021121054129.shtml) icons were subsequently found in iChat's resource files, further hinting at future functionality.


It's about freakin time. iChat is the only iApp I don't use. They did a really crappy job with it when it was released the first time. Maybe they will do better this time. I am wanting group support and the ability to read someone's away message. Being in college, our away messages can get pretty long.

[applejilted]

Originally posted by Blackcat
If indeed the 970 is all we believe, and prices of towers stay much the same, why would anybody spend $1300 on an iMac when $1500 gets you something maybe 3x faster?

A 1.8Ghz 970 is equivalent to a theoretical 3.6Ghz G4 in clockspeed. Moto are unlikely to reach 1.8Ghz before 2004, so they will be massively slower.

I'd like Apple to go:

1.2 - 1.6 Ghz 970 in iMac/iBook
1.8 - 2.5 Ghz 970 in PowerMac/Powerbook

This would mean every Mac could crush the equivalent PC in its class without breaking a sweat and all Macs would be 64bit - its a marketing wet dream!

I couldn't agree with you more....for the prices Apple charges it's inexcusable to be stuck with subpar performance in even their consumer line computers. Besides, when you're the underdog you have to sometimes offer premium products (re PPC 970) to attract buyers. Apple has to make a bold statemet (take no prisoners) in their new line ...

[jethroted]

This ancient chip is gonna be the death of apple. They have got to adapt a whole new way of looking at their products, and come out back on top. If people are to pay a premium for a pc, then it should have premium performance. Something that stomps p4's or possibly the upcomming p5 into the ground, and leaves them for dead. Charging way more for a computer that is falling behind is getting old fast.

[type_r503]

The chip is for embedded use.

MOT no longer develops PPC chips for the desktop.

MOT will be getting bought or going bankrupt soon anyway.

F MOT

[Sonofhaig]

Originally posted by iBear

Speaking of Duck Tape, it sure does hold my camera steady on the top of my active display.
It also keeps my Ducks from getting loose.

Since "Homeland Security" issued the ORANGE alert, I've duck taped myself in. :D

[Sonofhaig]

Originally posted by rubikcube
I am wanting group support and the ability to read someone's away message. Being in college, our away messages can get pretty long.

You are so right about that! Very good point!!!

[totally_fly]

who cares

i want iTunes update
i want iPod update

mp4 rules!!!

[hvfsl]

A company is already going to sell a nice ipod type device with a tft colour screen for video and a 20Gb HD, all for £250 ($400). I think it is Intel or something, I am going to get one of these if Apple doesn't release a video ipod, but I would prefer Apple's. The good thing about the Intel one is that the screen takes up the whole of one side of the device, not a small window like most other devices. So it looks a bit like a small tablet.

[sparkleytone]

a newer, faster, higher tech rev of the G4 is nothing but good news for laptops made by apple. the g4 is hands down the laptop processor to beat, pc or mac.

[psxndc]

A couple things:

It's not "Duck" tape, it's duct tape. Tape to seal piping ducts. Sorry but I've seen it called this 800 times since we went orange and I had to say something.

iChat is only so-so. They really need an app like Trillian. I just paid for and downloaded Trillian Pro and it is the one app that I think there is no comparable product on the mac. Not iChat, not proteus, not fire. Trillian is amazing and the iChat team really needs to learn from them. They support just about every protocol (though no Jabber), they have a modular design that lets you plugin all sorts of stuff if you want (rss client, control winamp) and they even have an SDK available if you want to add your own plugins. Video chat is cool, but only 30% of the US (sorry Europeans, I'm American so I can only speak for us) has broadband. They should implement other features like protocol support before worrying about a feature no one will have the bandwidth to support.

-p

[hvfsl]

Originally posted by psxndc
Video chat is cool, but only 30% of the US (sorry Europeans, I'm American so I can only speak for us) has broadband. They should implement other features like protocol support before worrying about a feature no one will have the bandwidth to support.

-p

In the EU countries 10% have broadband.

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Originally posted by hvfsl
In the EU countries 10% have broadband.
Well... Here in Denmark its about 40-50%.

[Rustus Maximus]

Well, beyond all of these 'badly needed' ;) updates...how about they work on getting us Quicksliver Dual Processor users back to the future?

Rustus

[acj]

Actually, it really was originally called "Duck" tape. The army used it, and it got that name because they used it to help keep water out of equipment. Then someone realized how well it worked on duct work. Some company started making it in silver instead of Army green, and they called it duct tape. However there still is a "Duck" brand duct tape.

We in Alaska take duct tape very seriously. We use it for anything from holding partially wrecked airplanes together (to get to the salvage shop only) to child care.

[Sonofhaig]

Originally posted by acj
We in Alaska take duct tape very seriously. We use it for anything from holding partially wrecked airplanes together (to get to the salvage shop only) to child care.

You funny! :D
Actually, I hear it is a wart remover as well.
No kidding either!

Child care? Do they play Duct Duct Goose.
and now back to the subject.............

[psxndc]

Originally posted by acj
Actually, it really was originally called "Duck" tape...

acj, I stand corrected:

http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/duckvsduct.html

Thank you for enlightening me.

-p

[groovebuster]

Hmm... I ask myself all the time why people wet their pants about that video conferencing thing???:confused:

It may have been a nice toy back then, when computers started to have enough power to manage a video-stream with a few fps and chatting started to become popular.

These days it is just nice when you can do it, but who is really using that stuff? I don't find it very exciting to see the other person sitting at the computer just like me, staring at the screen and fiddling with the keyboard...

What's the point? I never used that kind of stuff for business anyway, even though it was declared THE big thing back then. There was just no need for it. NEVER. And I also don't know anybody else in my environment who ever used it for more than just "playing with his computer toy" a little bit, no matter if private or for business.

So it's nice when iChat will be capable of doing such stuff (keeping the developers busy ;) ), but it's far from being a killer feature everybody should be excited about.

Does anybody in here have a need for that feature? I am just curious... so tell me guys! :)

Just my 0.02 €.

groovebuster

[FatTony]

Originally posted by groovebuster
Does anybody in here have a need for that feature? I am just curious... so tell me guys! :)

Back in the day, about 4 years ago, my wife worked in one county and I worked in the next. It was a long distance call for both of us, so we set up AIM accounts and used their voice chat feature. She had a PC at work and I had a Mac and it worked great.

Now, I work from home and my office is about a 3.5 or 4 hour drive. I would like to be able to use iChat for voice chat to the office to replace long-distance phone calls. A video portion could potentially be useful for team meetings so I could see a white board or notes on an easel. I would rather not let them see me as I rarely comb my hair, now!

[Kid Red]

Originally posted by bidge
remeber though that most of Apple's computers already have built in microphones.

I've owned 5 macs in the past 7 years and NONE have had a built in mic. My wife has owned 2 iMacs and the orginal one had a built in mic. Care to explain where 'most' comes into play?

[groovebuster]

Originally posted by FatTony
Back in the day, about 4 years ago, my wife worked in one county and I worked in the next. It was a long distance call for both of us, so we set up AIM accounts and used their voice chat feature. She had a PC at work and I had a Mac and it worked great.

When my wife was still living in Canada (I am from Germany) we tried that stuff too. But the delay and the drop outs were so bad that we gave up on it after a few tries. Maybe it was because she only had a 56k dial-up connection. But even without the drop outs the latency was givin us a delay of about 2 seconds and more sometimes. So it was kinda unusable.

Originally posted by FatTony
Now, I work from home and my office is about a 3.5 or 4 hour drive. I would like to be able to use iChat for voice chat to the office to replace long-distance phone calls.

I also work from home most of the time, but still nothing beats the real phone in sound quality and reliability. From my experience...

Originally posted by FatTony
A video portion could potentially be useful for team meetings so I could see a white board or notes on an easel. I would rather not let them see me as I rarely comb my hair, now!

But that's the point... is the resolution good enough to really see things written on a white board? In most of cases you can just guess what's on it. My experience again... Without having a broadband connection it renders pretty useless. And important meetings you normally do in person anyway. Neither a customer was asking for a video conference in the past, nor I was able to convince them to use a video conferencing solution as a substitute for a real life meeting. I tried a few times a while ago but always was looked funny at when I asked for it...

groovebuster

[groovebuster]

Originally posted by Kid Red
I've owned 5 macs in the past 7 years and NONE have had a built in mic. My wife has owned 2 iMacs and the orginal one had a built in mic. Care to explain where 'most' comes into play?

He probably means that most of the Macs had a built in mike OR were delivered with one that you were able to use right away.

All the PowerBooks always had a built in microphone right from the beginning.

The Performas also always had one (built in or delivered with) as well as the iMacs.

The only Macs that never had a mike right away were the pro Macs (like Centris, Quadra, PoweMac, etc...)

So let's just say that Consumer Macs and PowerBooks always had a "built in" mike and it is right then.

By the way, I was always pissed back then, that I paid a premium for my pro Macs and they were never coming with a mike. A similar story like the AppleWorks issue...

groovebuster

[FatTony]

Originally posted by groovebuster
Maybe it was because she only had a 56k dial-up connection.

Good point. I've either been in an office with a fast LAN or at home with dsl.

Although I do remember one meeting where about 3 of us on the east coast of the US met with about 3-5 people on the west coast. We went to a dedicated facility for video conferencing. The facility had a camera on us, my mac's video out, a 35mm slide projector, a document scanner (pretty much just a hi-res camera mounted so that it could read printed documents) all accessible so that we could switch what the others were viewing. It worked really well, it wouldn't have been any smoother in person. Actually, being separated had its benefits. Anyway, it would be nice if you could use iChat to share your desktop in real time. I know there are other apps that can do this, but if you are voice or video chatting in a business situation desktop sharing would be an added bonus.

[groovebuster]

Those pro scenarios are maybe "sexy" in some situations and I never said it is totally useless at all. I just questioned if a feature like that is useful for the majority. A set up like you described costs a fortune and is only senseful in a pro environment when there is really the need to have conferences with people in totally different locations. Normally only interesting for big companies with branches and customers all over the planet.

And don't forget that iChat is an iApp... it is somehow the MacOS X version of the AIM. I don't think that it is aimed at the users that need a pro video conferencing solution.

I used CUseeme back then! It was pretty cool and was originally developed for the Mac. A pity that they only continued to develop for the PC later on. It had all the capabilities for pro users they needed. A virtual white board, file sharing and multi-channel video conferencing. I just never was in the situation to actually use it seriously. iChat is far from that... as I said before, just the AIM for Mac OS X. That's why I was curious if anybody would actually use iChat for audio and/or video because I can't imagine it...

Have a nice day. :)

groovebuster

[Trimix]

You all seem to be experts on the subject of video conferencing -
Maybe you can help me -
I run my office from home in Switzerland and have colleagues in Easteuropean cities (all on i-macs - my influence) - the phone bills eat us alive and it would be nice to set up our macs to speak to each other and maybe see one another too via the internet, holding up samples or just seeing visitors in the offices I seldom go to.
What would be needed to get going as soon as possible ?
We are all on broadband and pay a monthly flat rate - yup it exists over here ;)
Good ideas from you all would be appreicated.
Thank you

[groovebuster]

Check out SquidCam.

Currently it is the only "cheap" VC solution that works with Mac OS X. It's shareware.

The next version will be also H.232 compatible so that you can connect to people using Netmeeting.

http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=15974&db=mac

It's worth the money (25 US$), since you are not forced to join something like ICQ or AIM to make it work.

And the dollar is low, so now is the time! ;)

Besides that you just need a microphone and a USB camera. I am not sure if you can just use a DV camera at the FireWire port. You have to check that yourself, if needed...

Grüße aus Berlin,

groovebuster

P.S.: To use something like that for audio as a telephone substitute it is very helpful to use a headset.

[groovebuster]

I totally forgot... if you are still using OS9 there is Videolink Pro. But it costs 40 US$. Advantage: it supports H.232 connections. Disadvantage: No Mac OS X version so far...

groovebuster