Group FaceTime

Discussion in 'iOS 12' started by eoblaed, Jun 4, 2018.

  1. eoblaed macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #1
    Really pumped to see what this looks like on the 12.9" iPad Pro. :cool:
     
  2. Apple blogger macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    #2
    32 people is a really stupid idea. I think they did it out of spite and shut preople down. “Hey Apple get group chat, other apps can do upto 8 or 10 or 16.

    Apples reply “ ok, you know what, here’s 32, now I hope you keep quiet for the next ten years”
     
  3. eoblaed, Jun 4, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2018

    eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #3
    Well, given that it keeps silent participants’ feeds 'sidelined', and only active participants are in the foreground, I don't think having a large number of people will be all that unwieldy. Unless it's a chaotic shouting match, in which case you get what you get. But, having the option, for people that can be relatively ordered, to have more is never bad.
     
  4. TMRJIJ macrumors 68030

    TMRJIJ

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2011
    Location:
    South Carolina, United States
    #4
    I think it's rather hilarious. My Group Conversations were lit on Facebook Messages already.
     
  5. scottct1 macrumors regular

    scottct1

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut USA
    #5
    Reading the beta notes, it appears Group FaceTime only works on iPhone 7's and above.
     
  6. bchery21 macrumors 6502a

    bchery21

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #6
    Not sure how it’s a stupid idea, having up to 32 people, so as long as the app doesn’t get laggy with more people on the FT call...
     
  7. C DM macrumors Sandy Bridge

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    #7
    Just because there's some upper limit that's high doesn't mean it needs to be used. The main idea here is that group chat is there and supports enough people for the need of the vast majority.
     
  8. Apple blogger macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    #8
    FaceTime depends on the Internet speeds. It barely works in areas where there isn’t good speeds. Even 1 person convos cannot go through properly. Also, it gets difficult to see a person when the number of people in the group chat increases more than 4 also, on the iPad it’s okay. Also, in the new FaceTime , since more people can come in, your internet speeds will determine whether you can use FaceTime with so many people, or even 2 people or not.

    Also, it’s next to impossible to look at so many people. Anything more than 4 will be unintuitive on an iPhone. Anything more than 6 on an iPad.

    Apple first needs to improve the quality of FaceTime for 1-1 calls, and then go on to handle group chat.
     
  9. kappaknight macrumors 68000

    kappaknight

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2009
    #9
    I actually thought 32 was brilliant. Perfect for classroom use.
     
  10. macduke macrumors G3

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #10
    I have a hard time believing that many simultaneous video feeds is going to have decent quality. The auto-switching is cool though but will it detect people who are using sign language and put them in the foreground? My deaf mother in law is visiting right now and she was wondering about that. Hopefully Apple’s focus on accessibility will have some ML to pick up on that.
     
  11. acctman macrumors 65816

    acctman

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Location:
    Georgia
    #11
    I'm glad they set limitation if not some one with an iPhone 4 would launch a class action lawsuit because group chat is slow on their phone
     
  12. C DM macrumors Sandy Bridge

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2011
    #12
    They could easily start one because they are deprived of such a feature.
     
  13. cmaier macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #13
    Why is it stupid? Will be fantastic for businesses, classes, etc.
     
  14. eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #14
    The majority of the time, FaceTime works just fine for me.

    And it's so unnecessarily pointless for Apple to put a low, arbitrary limit on the number of people that can do something like Group FaceTime just because not everyone can realistically live in places that support that kind of bandwidth. If that were the case, we'd all still be using tin cans and strings to communicate.

    The reality is, there are quite a few people that can benefit from/use a Group FaceTime with a large number of participants, why tell them "no. you can't. there are some people that might find the bandwidth use onerous, so we're not going to give you the option"?
     
  15. souko, Jun 6, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2018

    souko macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    #15
    Which are supported iPads?

    Is it A10 and above?
     
  16. TheSkywalker77 macrumors 6502a

    TheSkywalker77

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2017
    Location:
    Florida
    #16
    I’m excited to use it... but not with up to 32 people... that’s just too much Apple.
     
  17. eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #17
    So... don't use it with 32 people?

    I can think of a bunch of use cases where 32 would be helpful. Why put an arbitrary limit on it if you can make it larger so people that want it can use it that way?
     
  18. urkel macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    #18
    Im testing iOS12 on an iPad Pro12, iPad Mini4 and iPhoneSE. The Mini4 and SE were unable to use the feature.

    Its a shame because such high system requirements will block a whole lot of families and business users from making FaceTime their default Group Video client.
     
  19. eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #19
    I imagine if they're using older devices as a whole, they don't really have a default group video client to begin with, and probably weren't shopping for one anyway. Like any other 'new' tech (mobile group video chat, for example), it'll start with the more capable devices, and as today's top end hardware becomes tomorrow's budget hardware, that same tech will enjoy wider adoption.
     
  20. minimo3 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #20
    Us ‘older tech’ folks have already been using WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger for group video calling for ages. No big deal if FaceTime isn’t supporting us, it would’ve been just another option in a sea of others
     
  21. batting1000 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Location:
    Florida
    #21
    I can see a use case for 32 people...maybe like a company meeting or something. It's not like it's something that will never happen. If you don't want to use it with 32 people, no one is telling you you have to. But the ability is there for those who may want it.
     
  22. eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #22
    Well, a year and a half max with Facebook, and about a month with WhatsApp.

    It’ll be interesting to compare the features/call quality/etc between them once iOS 12 gets ready for launch (I’d be hesitant to do those sorts of comparisons with the first beta release).
     
  23. sik08amg macrumors regular

    sik08amg

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
  24. Abazigal macrumors G4

    Abazigal

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Location:
    Singapore
    #24
    Who is the target market for a 32-way FaceTime call again?
     
  25. eoblaed thread starter macrumors 68020

    eoblaed

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    #25
    It doesn’t matter.

    The software and hardware is capable of it, and it doesn’t confuse the UI for those that are just going to do 3 or 4 way FaceTime, so why cap it unnecessarily just because someone else can’t come up with a scenario for it?
     

Share This Page