Let alone the awkwardness of getting the iPad into your jeans pocket.
purse/bag
3G VOIP Phone Calls Allowed on iPad Too, Skype Imminent
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
purse/bag
hitekalex
macrumors 68000
Push works great for IMs, but won't cut it for VoIP calls. It takes too long for push notification to come through, get acknowledged, auto-launch client, establish connection, accept a call. Most of your calls will end up going to voicemail.
Need proper multi-tasking support for VoIP to be useful.
This proves you never used any VOIP software on the iphone or ipod touch in wifi mode. It opens it with plenty of time to spare.
DMann
macrumors 601
Now I suppose we will see a lot more man purses if men are going to start carrying this around as a phone. I can see it now...
"Just give me a second while I grab my Pad out of my murse!"
"It's not a purse... It's European!"
Surely
Guest
3G VoIP on iPad is sorta pointless assuming user has a WiFi at home. I highly doubt anybody who uses iPad will not have WiFi at home.
The real winner is iPhone users. with 3G and Push Notification coming, I will have 5400 rollover minutes by next year. (450 x 12 months)
This probably kills any hope for 3G on iTouch, however. Can you imagine having a similar plan for AT&T and 3G built into Touch? If 3G is built in, it basically turns it into a phone. That will kill iPhone sales.
The real winner is iPhone users. with 3G and Push Notification coming, I will have 5400 rollover minutes by next year. (450 x 12 months)
This probably kills any hope for 3G on iTouch, however. Can you imagine having a similar plan for AT&T and 3G built into Touch? If 3G is built in, it basically turns it into a phone. That will kill iPhone sales.
I briefly wondered if AT&T insisted that they not have a camera, because all the extra data used up by video chat over 3G networks by the 4 million or more projected iPad owners would make AT&T's network suck even more.
But that can't be it, because AT&T's network could not possibly suck more.
They could've made video chat available for Wifi only.
sassenach74
macrumors 65816
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
Unless you only ever call skype to skype you still gotta pay for skype credit.
syklee26 said:
Unless you only ever call skype to skype you still gotta pay for skype credit.
ThisIsNotMe
Suspended
Looks like someone (ATT) wanted to keep the iPhone/iPad off Verizon.
Belt clip.
Are we going back to this now?:
Why are people trying to turn the iPad into a phone? Apple already produce one of those.
It's almost laughable that people are having such a hard time accepting a new product category. This is a lightweight pad for information consumption while sat on your couch listening to music, it's not a computer replacement, a phone or a 'netbook'.
4.0 looks like the real iPad OS.
Hour by hour it looks like iPhone OS 4.0 will be very impressive and is likely to be the first OS to fully exploit the iPad hardware. Hopefullly that means multitasking which this tablet needs badly.
Multitasking is needed to do manythings well and VoIP is one of them. In any event it looks like Apple is having a significant impact on AT&T and their policies. This to me is the most impressive thing about this product debut. Think about it an UNLOCKED 3G device that is being introduced with low cost data plans. That to me is impressive and likely will enable all sorts of network savey features beyound VoIP.
People may complain about AT&T but this is one serious change in policy. It would be nice to have more carriers to go with in the USA but it looks like Apple used a bit of arm twisting to get these deals.
The story is actually bigger than iPad which is just a single platform. Rather the big story is that iPhone OS 4.0 is going to be very interesting. Second we are on the verge of seeing a transition to low cost mobile web access with far fewer restrictions.
Dave
Hour by hour it looks like iPhone OS 4.0 will be very impressive and is likely to be the first OS to fully exploit the iPad hardware. Hopefullly that means multitasking which this tablet needs badly.
Multitasking is needed to do manythings well and VoIP is one of them. In any event it looks like Apple is having a significant impact on AT&T and their policies. This to me is the most impressive thing about this product debut. Think about it an UNLOCKED 3G device that is being introduced with low cost data plans. That to me is impressive and likely will enable all sorts of network savey features beyound VoIP.
People may complain about AT&T but this is one serious change in policy. It would be nice to have more carriers to go with in the USA but it looks like Apple used a bit of arm twisting to get these deals.
The story is actually bigger than iPad which is just a single platform. Rather the big story is that iPhone OS 4.0 is going to be very interesting. Second we are on the verge of seeing a transition to low cost mobile web access with far fewer restrictions.
Dave
ChazUK
macrumors 603
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERD79) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)
iPhone OS lacking features - People complain why its missing them.
iPhone OS gets extra features - People still complain.
Amazing. Look at what iPhone OS has evolved from to what it is now. Apple have added some hefty updates and I'm sure even more is on the way.
iPhone OS lacking features - People complain why its missing them.
iPhone OS gets extra features - People still complain.
Amazing. Look at what iPhone OS has evolved from to what it is now. Apple have added some hefty updates and I'm sure even more is on the way.
Why?
If i receive a notification that someone is talking to me, then in a single 'click' I'm instantly in that application, with what I was currently doing in the background then that's all I need. When the conversation is finished, one click, and I return to what I was doing.
The 'pad isn't big enough to show two usable windows side by side, and only has the one keyboard, so I can't physically interact with two apps at once. Furthermore, I can keep my music playing in the background, so between running the OS, running the music app and typing on skype, I think that's pretty much multitasking.
Sounds like people are complaining about the way in which apple are controlling drain on the processor rather than a lack of 'multitasking', which this device and the iPhone clearly have.
sassenach74
macrumors 65816
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
But Skype is more about the voice calls than the text chatting. Also remember it's also impossible to use a desktop keyboard to interact with two applications at the same time, you need simply switch to whatever application you need to interact with, the same could be done with iPhone OS is what many are asking for. I'm also fairly confident you could have two open apps on screen at one time if made possible or the very least a smaller pop up window and one app.
But Skype is more about the voice calls than the text chatting. Also remember it's also impossible to use a desktop keyboard to interact with two applications at the same time, you need simply switch to whatever application you need to interact with, the same could be done with iPhone OS is what many are asking for. I'm also fairly confident you could have two open apps on screen at one time if made possible or the very least a smaller pop up window and one app.
Yes, there's a device for making voice calls, it's called a phone. The iPad is not a phone. Skype will be a nice bonus, but apple are not marketing this as a phone - they already have a product for that. If it means that you have to launch skype, use it exclusively to make/receive voice calls before moving on to something else, then so be it.
Apple can hardly be criticised for this device not doing something that it's not intended to do, software developers will add all sorts of toys and functionality, but the limitations of this device are set by what it's meant to achieve (web, music, photos, email, light content creation), not the potential of what future iterations may achieve.
sassenach74
macrumors 65816
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
Firstly I'm not criticising anything. Everything I typed is fact, secondly why does skype even exist and have millions of users if mobile phones could be used instead?
Desktop computers are not advertised as replacements to phones so your argument is baseless. You're seeing what I originally typed as another person trying to ridicule the iPad but that simply isn't the case, I shall be buying one as soon as it is available.
Firstly I'm not criticising anything. Everything I typed is fact, secondly why does skype even exist and have millions of users if mobile phones could be used instead?
Desktop computers are not advertised as replacements to phones so your argument is baseless. You're seeing what I originally typed as another person trying to ridicule the iPad but that simply isn't the case, I shall be buying one as soon as it is available.
Simple: Skype is cheap. Especially for international calls. And many people use Skype on a desktop or laptop.
An iPad is not a phone. An iPad is not a laptop. Think different.
Well, I'll just stick with Google Voice for now. With Google voice, I don't have to worry about this as it uses the regular minutes. GV's international rate is as cheap as Skype. Even better, since you're using the native phone app during calls, you can "multi-task" while on the phone. With Skype, you're stuck in the Skype app.
SFStateStudent
macrumors 604
Take your time SKYPE, I'm waiting for the $830 iPad to be released....
As I said in another post, I'm hoping that the lack of pre-emptive multitasking is a positive sign that they're trying to develop a lazy multitasking system.
Pre-emptive multitasking (like most desktop OSs now use) has the operating system divide up processor time between multiple processes, handling the context shifts and ensuring processes do not starve. The problem is that the processes in GUI applications are typically running in a tight loop that handles events from the UI and operating system. This is fine when an application is frequently getting events (such as from the UI when it is on screen) but otherwise it simply wastes cycles polling. An alternative is on-demand, or lazy, multitasking where the application process only is given CPU time when there is an event to process. This is probably not worthwhile when the application is on screen, but when 'backgrounded' it could work well. I see hope for this because 'recent' Apple developments with Grand Central Dispatch and launchd enable and explore the same solution space. If they implemented traditional multitasking, it would be very hard to switch to a lazy model.
DakotaGuy
macrumors 601
If it is not a replacement for any of those why does anyone need one? What can the iPad do that those other things can't do? I think that is the biggest issue here. Some fanboys are jumping up and down in excitement claiming everyone in the world will be carrying these things in addition to everything else, but I see this as a niche device at best.
This device is like an Apple TV. People who purchase one will have to talk themselves into it. I don't see it selling at the same rate as iPods or iPhones even though some diehard Apple fans are claiming it will sell in those numbers.
Eriamjh1138@DAN
macrumors 65816
If I were AT&T I would be moving to all data (3G) and no voice.
The iPhone is the new iPad mini.
Is that in iPad in your pants or do you have a flat ass?
Apple will likely develop the iPhone and iPad capabilities so that they are complimentary, not competing. Apple wants you to own both.
The iPhone is the new iPad mini.
Is that in iPad in your pants or do you have a flat ass?
Apple will likely develop the iPhone and iPad capabilities so that they are complimentary, not competing. Apple wants you to own both.