Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Didn't they just put an iSite in the new Cinema Displays (along with speakers)? I are pushing camera's to be in just about anything/everything. They also want FaceTime protocol to be an open standard so I can definitely see other apps integrating FaceTime features (IM clients, Online games, Office Suites for collaboration you name it....)
 
I don't think Apple is going to wait until 10.7 to make iChat be able to connect to iPhones. If they are going to make FaceTime connect to each other via e-mail address now, the deal's done. There's only very minor tweaking needed to make an iPhone "call" iChat or visa versa. This change may even come out with the next OS X update (on the day these new puppies are announced). Why would they wait any longer?

As for iChat coming to other platforms, we may see this happen. If they keep iChat on Macs, this may drive Mac sales. However, if they release it to PCs, this opens up the playing field big time. This will likely drive more iPhone sales. They can then throw iAds on there for even more revenue.
 
I'm calling it: you're wrong.
The bling in 10.7 will be a redesigned UI, aesthetically similar to iOS (just look at MobileMe's new Mail.) As I posted earlier, apple will want to take iChat away from OS X to help make FaceTime a standard.

If they move to unify the OS between mobile and non-mobile in 10.7, that's all the more reason to drop ichat in the next OS release and rename it Facetime. Either way, we'll just have to wait and see...
 
If Apple pushes this into all there devices like they're doing, we can eventually be done with the phone carriers.

I read the rest of your post as well, but I'm not quite sure what you mean here.

Mi-Fi still piggybacks on a wireless carrier. As of yet, wireless service off the cloud is tremendously impractical and dependent upon giving up privacy and network security.

A third party of one sort or another is needed, especially because while some major companies could conceivably set up wireless repeaters for their own private WAN's, it's very impractical, a waste of bandwidth and pretty much impossible for individuals to do point to point.

Whatever you want to call it, fundamentally some central carrier with a switched network will be part of the picture... until you can have cell phones that can transmit a signal to any point in the world under its own power without repeaters... and also not fry your brain cells with the dBm of signal output required to do so.

And then you've got carriers on the other side... If you're talking to some guy on his laptop via iChat, and he's not using a 3G or 4G card, he's sitting on a wireline network of another carrier... unless he strings up his own fiber network to talk to every conceivable person around the world that he wants to reach, or uses longwave radio with all the required operator licenses, he's stuck with a carrier.

What may change is the way carriers bill for access to the shared PSTN... i.e. soon, voice will no longer exist as a separate category and everything will be billed as data, either flat rate or by usage.

The unfortunate reality is that the regional carriers, while competitive, are still dependent upon the large switched networks of the Baby Bells... an infrastructure of billions upon billions of dollars that took many decades to build out to where it is now. For any enduser provider to not have to lease lines from an upstream, would pretty much require them duplicating the entire infrastructure.
 
maybe this will be a uber Jabber service, with links to AIM, Yahoo Chat....

Yes. Currently, you don't need a MobileMe account to use iChat (I use an aol account, example). And I can't really see Apple changing this stance. They maybe will charge for iChat-to-FaceTime or FaceTime-to-iChat, but not iChat-to-iChat. In fact, I can't see how they'll charge for anything, since we're a'ready paying for our internet connection (via WiFi or 3G).
 
If only Apple extends FaceTime to fallback to "voice only" calls for earlier iPhone models, iPod touch, and Macs (iChat).
 
Why not integrate it into iChat though. Seems like a no brainer.

Yes, iChat is not even part of iLfe. Why would Apple remove a free feature that comes already installed on every Mac and then throw it into a bundle you have to pay for and with a bunch of other applications that have nothing to do with video chatting. Doesn't make sense. Apple's just going to replace the iChat name with Facetime with the next OS X update. May even be as early as 10.6.5.
 
Props from a guy who can not speak.

I was about to type, "But you just did." Then I paused for a second.

facepalm.jpg
 
...The reason for the delay has to have been related to bandwidth issues and guaranteeing the user has an acceptable experience...

Or it might be that limiting it to iPhone 4 wi-fi users (for now) gives Apple a fairly small and manageable group of beta testers. :)

If they'd rolled it out to the whole Mac community on day 1, it would've be a nightmare to monitor performance and track trouble tickets. And, like you said, if bandwidth became scarce, the bad publicity would put folks off trying it in the first place (possibly denting iPhone 4 sales)
 
while the rape of the masses is horrendous...

for facetime to work,
1) I think you'll have to have a facetime supported device. No calling to a landline/non-apple smartphone over wifi or even 3G (4G? quite possible).
2) I'm thinking that we'll have to be linked to Apple in some way (minimally your email registered to the iTunes Store, most likely to me.com). But... still a cool feature for [current] 99/year (along with over the wifi sync, email, backups etc etc).

It's a P2P app t'isn't it? Doesn't the current method use the phone call (sync comm) to ping the other side to start an internet communication?... with email (normally async comm... smtp isn't timely enough for a true email connection to start it), you'll need to have a mediator [me.com,ITMS] to find that email addr and map it to a registered device... ping an IP address [does that mean that ITMS will always know where you are at in terms of IP?] with a 'will you accept an incoming call' and hand off the IP communications at that point?


Always curious about the '...and then a miracle occurs...' step in the process flow.

I'm thinking it'll piggyback on notifications, but I could certainly be wrong.
It could just be a specially formatted email with a facetime:// protocol.
 
Or it might be that limiting it to iPhone 4 wi-fi users (for now) gives Apple a fairly small and manageable group of beta testers. :)

If they'd rolled it out to the whole Mac community on day 1, it would've be a nightmare to monitor performance and track trouble tickets. And, like you said, if bandwidth became scarce, the bad publicity would put folks off trying it in the first place (possibly denting iPhone 4 sales)

Keep in mind too... new customers pay for MB's in data bandwidth... can you imagine how quickly you'd burn up 250MBs of data using Facetime on 3G?

For now, I'm good with it on WiFi only... but making it so it can hook into iChat or even other Chat services would be really cool!
 
Yes, iChat is not even part of iLfe. Why would Apple remove a free feature that comes already installed on every Mac and then throw it into a bundle you have to pay for and with a bunch of other applications that have nothing to do with video chatting. Doesn't make sense. Apple's just going to replace the iChat name with Facetime with the next OS X update. May even be as early as 10.6.5.

iLife comes for free on every new Mac. The first taste is free. It's not a stretch to move iChat to iLife (they did that with iPhoto and iTunes... iLife V1 'absorbed' the two apps.... eventually unbundling iTunes back to a standalone app).

I'm pondering whether or not Facetime will be an iLife sort of app or a Mac OS X app. iChat for nerds, Facetime 'for the rest of us'. Doesn't make sense.

The key is to have some sort of integration between the two services. As noted in other threads, the key issue is NATed firewall negotiation, coupled with a 'who's online' service (that's all that Skype really provides).

3rd option... iLife suppling iOS emulation libraries for Mac OS X, with FaceTime and a few other applications ported to a Mac, including AppStore. So... all these iPadish apps become Mac apps automagically.
 
I'm thinking it'll piggyback on notifications, but I could certainly be wrong.
It could just be a specially formatted email with a facetime:// protocol.

You really don't understand RFC822 do you? Email is right out.

Notifications is the right solution, but how does notifications work on an device that isn't connected/registered to a server someplace?
 
Observation...

I see that a lot of people seem to think the new Touch will be based on the old design... it would seem that like before, it would be easier and quicker for Apple to slim down the current iPhone4 design then they wouldn't have to retool a new board, but just tweak some things and remove the phone.

I'm guessing the iPod Touch will be based on the current iPhone4 case... why not... no "death grip"! Bumpers options! :D :)
 
while the rape of the masses is horrendous...

for facetime to work,
1) I think you'll have to have a facetime supported device. No calling to a landline/non-apple smartphone over wifi or even 3G (4G? quite possible).
2) I'm thinking that we'll have to be linked to Apple in some way (minimally your email registered to the iTunes Store, most likely to me.com). But... still a cool feature for [current] 99/year (along with over the wifi sync, email, backups etc etc).

It's a P2P app t'isn't it? Doesn't the current method use the phone call (sync comm) to ping the other side to start an internet communication?... with email (normally async comm... smtp isn't timely enough for a true email connection to start it), you'll need to have a mediator [me.com,ITMS] to find that email addr and map it to a registered device... ping an IP address [does that mean that ITMS will always know where you are at in terms of IP?] with a 'will you accept an incoming call' and hand off the IP communications at that point?


Always curious about the '...and then a miracle occurs...' step in the process flow.

Actually you don't need to use any phone calls or smtp protocols. Basically the phone number and/or email addresses are just unqiue ids in a table somewhere so they can look up your device. (here comes the privacy freaks)

I'm not surprised if they keep a persistent connection (like push notification) to update your current network address.

The handoff from circuit switched to packet switched was done by Apple to show how u can seamlessly do that, it is not a requirement (and imagine, if they showed off a faceTime app rather than thru the dialer, people would think its just another chatting/skype like app)

Given that the user who initiates the call knows (has the ability to find) the recipient, then a faceTime "invite" or message is no more than a simple link. (see below, specifically *REGISTER: Used by a UA to notify its current IP address and the URLs for which it would like to receive calls.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_Initiation_Protocol
 
Actually you don't need to use any phone calls or smtp protocols.

what I said.

Basically the phone number and/or email addresses are just unqiue ids in a table somewhere so they can look up your device. (here comes the privacy freaks)

And the question is... where is this registered. It has to be an opt-in sort of thing, so where do you put your email address (and your current IP address) so you can get push notifications.

again... it's all about '...and then a miracle occurs...'

I'm not surprised if they keep a persistent connection (like push notification) to update your current network address.

your logic is circular... how do you initiate the push? where is it 'pushed' to?
Is this going to be a network/security/privacy setting on your Mac,pod,pad,phone etc? [enable receipt of facetime calls?... you're email and IP location will be pushed to a central server under the control of apple...]

Given that the user who initiates the call knows (has the ability to find) the recipient,

"....Given the ability of the user to initiate a miracle and find an NATted iPod address out of thin air..."


You really haven't added much to this conversation, have you?


Where will I find who in my contacts is currently online? How do I publish myself as online? How do I limit my privacy to only those who I have in my contact list/address book? Inquiring minds want to know.

to your point, who is the SIP registrar? me.com, or ITMS, or Other?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.