Yeah, my mom's already threatening to call me everyday using this. I think for her it's a big selling point honestly.
Me... I just threatened her that maybe I won't buy a new iphone then 😀
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces FaceTime for iPhone 4 Video Calls
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, my mom's already threatening to call me everyday using this. I think for her it's a big selling point honestly.
Me... I just threatened her that maybe I won't buy a new iphone then 😀
johnnyjibbs
macrumors 68030
Only Apple can come to a party a few years late and then call it revolutionary, but it looks like a nice (and simple) implementation. Nothing that revolutionary about it - we've had iChat video for years and it's kinda funny to hear them talk about this amazing feature on the video that you can "take anywhere you go....... where there's Wi-Fi". But at least you don't have to pay 40p/min for a very crappy quality video call.
What's also interesting in Apple's promotional video is a mysterious laptop device around 1:10 into the video:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/facetime.html#facetime-video
If that's not an as-yet unreleased Mac laptop, why didn't they just show an iPad?
What's also interesting in Apple's promotional video is a mysterious laptop device around 1:10 into the video:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/facetime.html#facetime-video
If that's not an as-yet unreleased Mac laptop, why didn't they just show an iPad?
entropys
macrumors 65816
Facetime is crippleware:
it
For these reasons this 'feature' will fail. In fact, it annoys me so much, I will be keeping my 3G iphone for another year, and not upgrading until these problems are resolved.
it
- uses a phone number. Why couldn't it use mobileme, skype etc instead? Obviously Apple is still locked into an AT&T only contract. This sucks for everyone.
- it is only iphone4 to iphone4. What, no ichat with my macs at home? imagine a webcam set up over the TV. It would be fabulous to talk to the kids while travelling. Either AT&T insisted on this, or Apple are being pricks.
- No 3G. I understand that US networks suck bigtime, but what about the rest of the world? Even if the iphone went verizon the problem would not be solved, as verizon is slower.
- Wifi only. Unlike the US mobile networks, the US has pretty good wifi coverage. The rest of the world does not.
For these reasons this 'feature' will fail. In fact, it annoys me so much, I will be keeping my 3G iphone for another year, and not upgrading until these problems are resolved.
It's good to know that the per-minute charging model is "normal" in other countries (there was a lot of talk before the keynote about video calls using up your data allocation and I was wondering where that idea came from). The price does need to drop though!
pcp_ip
macrumors regular
aliensporebomb
macrumors 68000
I can see it now...
I can picture it now:
Jobs: We're adding holographic technology in the next iphone. Over your network.
AT&T: Stop it Steve, you're killing our network, reducing it to its knees.
Jobs: We're adding supra infra holographic technology. Uses 10x more bandwidth than the basic holographic tech.
AT&T: Steve, stop, we can't support all of this data.
Jobs: We're introducing our own holographic network.
AT&T: Ulp. OK. Supra infrared holographic ... on our network....
I can picture it now:
Jobs: We're adding holographic technology in the next iphone. Over your network.
AT&T: Stop it Steve, you're killing our network, reducing it to its knees.
Jobs: We're adding supra infra holographic technology. Uses 10x more bandwidth than the basic holographic tech.
AT&T: Steve, stop, we can't support all of this data.
Jobs: We're introducing our own holographic network.
AT&T: Ulp. OK. Supra infrared holographic ... on our network....
mambodancer
macrumors 6502
Agreed. The way the statement was phrased seems to indicate that your assumption might be right. Otherwise why not just say iPhones?
I think we probably got a hint of a feature of OS 10.7 iChat with FaceTime for Macs and you nailed it on the updates to the iPod Touch and iPads.
Video chat over wifi will be one of the next things Apple manages to get right when others have stumbled over this but can you imagine this feature over 3G? No wonder ATT changed the plans. If Apple makes FaceTime easy (as does a future version of Skype) this just kills the 2GB bandwidth limit on 3G.
When (or if) the predicted iPod Touches with front facing cameras ship, I want to test using it as a primary phone over wifi networks with either or both of a Skype and GoogleVoice accounts and see how well this will work. If the caller is able to leave a message (and I am pretty sure that with the proper plan they can do this now) when I am off network, this becomes a viable alternative to a carrier attached phone especially as free wifi access become ubiquitous.
DylanLikesPorn
macrumors 6502
FaceTime should really be relabeled PussyTime because I know what I'll be using that feature for.
mambodancer
macrumors 6502
How do you know it can't? Perhaps Facetime API's can be used by other applications?
entropys
macrumors 65816
So Apple will allow other apps to be better than a flagship app? hah ahh hahaha. thanks for that.
What the deliberate crippling of this app tells me is that Apple is stuck with AT&T for a fair while yet.
Honestly I could care less about VCalls over 3G it's useless anyway the onlything 3G is good for is regular calls IF that. The whole point is that we are looking at a move completely away from cellular as far as I am concerned. 4G will be what the next version of this phone is I am sure.
You are correct Nuvi the US has been completely behind in this area for a long time. Hopefully we will see more carriers using WiMax for their wireless devices soon.
The bottom line is not so much which connection it uses to do video calls, but the fact that it is only able to be used with Apples software. Why not iChat at the VERY least?!? 😕
You are correct Nuvi the US has been completely behind in this area for a long time. Hopefully we will see more carriers using WiMax for their wireless devices soon.
The bottom line is not so much which connection it uses to do video calls, but the fact that it is only able to be used with Apples software. Why not iChat at the VERY least?!? 😕
One alternative idea is that Apple is just TRYING to overload ATT's network so they will want to breach the contract prior to the 2012 date. MAYBE?
Question on face to face
I understand calling using wifi, from only the news of today I have a question maybe someone knows the answer. I live in the foothills of Mt. Diablo where sadly I get no reception with any service provider, well you can get lucky and say a few words before a dropped call, only text really works. So I can't make cell calls from my house. I'm curious how this will work with face to face, I have the wifi but very limited cell towers, I'm sure I will not use the feature much, but like everything I learn to love something new, so who knows.
I wish I knew a way using wifi to create a call and receive a call. I know about Skype, but have no idea how that effects calls coming in. Anyway my real question is using the face option with limited to know cell service...if there was a simple way make calls via wifi in "system preferences" that would be great.
More excited about HD video, 5mp camera, folders, battery, and the rest over the face option, though I like to understand how everything works. Thanks
, I know we won't know all the answers till the end of the month.
If the calls are 100% wifi then I get how it all works.
Thanks again, I am waiting to watch the keynote so my answer is most likely there.
I understand calling using wifi, from only the news of today I have a question maybe someone knows the answer. I live in the foothills of Mt. Diablo where sadly I get no reception with any service provider, well you can get lucky and say a few words before a dropped call, only text really works. So I can't make cell calls from my house. I'm curious how this will work with face to face, I have the wifi but very limited cell towers, I'm sure I will not use the feature much, but like everything I learn to love something new, so who knows.
I wish I knew a way using wifi to create a call and receive a call. I know about Skype, but have no idea how that effects calls coming in. Anyway my real question is using the face option with limited to know cell service...if there was a simple way make calls via wifi in "system preferences" that would be great.
More excited about HD video, 5mp camera, folders, battery, and the rest over the face option, though I like to understand how everything works. Thanks
, I know we won't know all the answers till the end of the month.
If the calls are 100% wifi then I get how it all works.
Thanks again, I am waiting to watch the keynote so my answer is most likely there.
CJYetman
macrumors newbie
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
Well that speech from Mike Lazaridis about data consumption demand exceeding wireless cellular provider supply of the bandwidth was not a marketing ploy/joke after all.
ODD how the excuse of - we need to work with providers a bit more - was given when Providers in the UK such as Orange/T-Mobile, Vodafone, O2, and several others have had support for 7.2Mbps Down/5Mbps UP for several months now. hmmm.
Great looking phone and I praise Apple for the manufacturing ... what remains to be seen is if this new A4 chip can handle all duties.
This is one thing I like about their implementation. The use of phone numbers. It makes it more streamlined and casually easy for phone to phone video calls. No setup required, no middle man, just your existing phone number. We've had video chat capable phones forever now but it never took off. I think this method will bring cell phone video chat to the mainstream like no other phones could.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
Thats because you're missing the big picture -
No it isn't. You're going to WANT to have video calling sorry video chat wherever you are ... its on a smarphone (not a desktop) and by definition SHOULD be available wherever you are.
So you're going to run the nearest Starbuks just to video chat? Maybe in California its on every block like Tim Horton's is in Hamilton ON but its NOT the same outside of the USA or Seattle for that matter.
"We're bringing video chat to the world!" Yeah right as if this didn't exist on other smartphones or providers around the world for the past 3years. Oh and their NOT restricted to specific phone models or specific data medium. This is the MOST required feature that needs to be updated this Fall/Winter - but until AT&T gets off their collective asses nothing will come of it.
Apple said BASED on open standards and their approaching bodies to make their implementation an open standard; currently its not.
Besides the "lets sue AT&T" part this is THE smartest post I've read today thus far for the lack of this feature for a smartphone.
Apple prides themselves on accessibility options on OS X. However with over 6 Million USA citizens who are considered "legally" deaf (some 85% or higher?) and with several hundred high-schools dedicated to the hearing impaired this is a BIG deal!
However you need to consider the following:
AT&T's network blows chunks even for voice quality!
- remember AllThingsDigital 8; that iPhone 3GS user that cannot complete 1min of call time without being dropped in Arizona?!?? OUCH.
Can you really sign efficiently & effectively with 1 hand? (I don't know).
Lastly, at least your not stuck on the Sidekick, the ghetto BlackBerry! 😱
😉 🙄
I made several calls over one hour each in scottsdale and Phoenix just a week ago, I also made dozens of shorter calls. Not even one call was dropped. Anecdotes are so...anecdotal.
rjohnstone
macrumors 68040
Nothing wrong with AT&T in AZ... there are dead spots in Scottsdale and Glendale... big deal.
Every network has dead spots.
Verizon has a huge dead spot in my neighborhood and I'm 1/4 of a mile from a large mall.
Can't even place a call without having to go outside.
The FaceTime piece is a gimmick, but not practical.
Proprietary protocol that only works with one model of phone and no cell network capability = dead/useless tech.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
Especially when you look at threads right on this very sight about poor voice quality especially with various headset use. Sorry but 1 voice doesn't drown out many that have publicly stated by devote iPhone users.
Don't get me wrong I actually LIKE the iPhone and its paradigm shifts ... just that these new features appeal to you - they do for me - yet its the core PIM that needs serious improvements. Its called the "iPhone" and all but 1 letter in its name NEEDs improvement. Also 1 week ago ... which model and how LONG have you NOT had any issues during your iphone calls to those that do NOT own one. 🙄
iPhone 4 to iPhone 4 WiFi only??? What was the point? Having a feature with the potential to be a huge benefit is now extremely disappointing....and useless🙁
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
Yes EVERY network has dead spots. But you cannot deny that AT&T has been like a lazy Gorilla in properly implementing upgrades on their network. Heck Rogers Wireless improved network quality & bandwidth long before AT&T has with feature customers (corporate & consumer alike) and with fewer revenues, profits, and virtually the same expenses if not MORE due to lower revenue intake. AT&T is simply lazy and they REALLY need to step up their game. Oh & its not the iPhone alone that has had quality issues on AT&T - which is too common.
rjohnstone
macrumors 68040
Poor comparison.
Rodgers only has to cover 33 million customers.
AT&T has to cover close to 300 million.
AT&T has spent close to 30 million just in AZ alone on network upgrades.
The iPhone is the culprit in many of these cases.
It has a piss poor antennae design.
My Nokia work phone never drops calls on AT&T