Michal Ždanský When Apple announced its own platform for FaceTime video calls at the launch of the iPhone 4, I was certainly not the only one who was skeptical. Video chatting is only accessible through a WiFi connection and can only be done on the latest iPhone and iPod touch so far. Apple calls it a milestone in video calling, but isn't it more of a "milestone"? Here's a little thought on the subject of video calling—not just on the iPhone.
Naive FaceTime
Introducing an alternative to any well-established service is quite often a lottery bet and in many cases it ends in failure. With its FaceTime, Apple is trying to create a hybrid between classic video calls and video chat. In the first case, it is a minimally used service. Almost every new mobile has a front-facing camera, and honestly, how many of you have ever used it to make a video call? The second case makes more sense. A free video will certainly attract more people than if they had to pay extra for it, but there are two major limitations:
- 1) Wi-Fi
- 2) Platform.
If we want to use FaceTime, we cannot do without a WiFi connection. At the time of the call, both parties must be connected to the wireless network, otherwise the call cannot be made. But that is almost a utopia nowadays. Americans, who have WiFi hotspots on every corner in big cities, may not be limited by this restriction, but it leaves us, the inhabitants of the not so over-technological rest of the world, a slim chance to connect with the person in question at the moment when we are both on WiFi. That is, unless we are both special with a connected router.
If you think back to some of the Apple ads promoting FaceTime, you might remember the shot of the doctor performing an ultrasound on the expectant mother, and the other party, a friend on the phone, has the opportunity to see his future offspring on the monitor. Now remember the last time you connected to WiFi at your doctor's office. Don't you remember? Try "never". And as we know – no WiFi, no FaceTime. The second point practically completely excludes the use of FaceTime. Video calls can only be made between devices iPhone 4 – iPod touch 4G – Mac – iPad 2 (at least this possibility is assumed). Now calculate how many of your friends/acquaintances/relatives own one of these devices and with whom you would like to make a video call. Are there not many of them? And honestly, are you surprised?
Dominant Skype
On the other side of the barricade is a service used by millions of people around the world every day. During its existence, Skype has become a kind of synonym and standard for video chat. Thanks to the dynamic list of contacts, you can immediately see who you can call, so you don't have to worry about whether the person in question is really connected to the wireless network. Another big advantage is that Skype is cross-platform. You can find it on all three operating systems (Windows/Mac/Linux) and slowly on every smartphone mobile platform.
It wasn't long ago that Skype made video calls available to iPhone users on the iPhone 4 using the Apple phone's front (and by extension, rear) camera. That may have put the final nail in FaceTime's coffin. It gives users a choice - to use a proven service that I and my friends use, or to venture into the unknown waters of pseudo-video calls on a protocol that practically no one uses? What will be your choice? FaceTime has nothing extra to offer against Skype, whereas Skype offers everything FaceTime does and a whole lot more.
In addition, sociology also records the Skype solution. People who use video chat in some form separate it from phone calls. Talking on the phone has become a normal routine for us, something we do with the device attached to our ear, while still being able to do a lot of other things – walk, iron, drive (but Jablíčkář is not responsible for the loss of driving points). On the other hand, video chat is a kind of symbol of peace. The thing that we sit down to at home, lie down and know that we won't be catching up to the subway within a minute. The idea of walking down the street with an outstretched hand holding a phone aimed so that the other party can at least see our face is quite comical and will only benefit petty street thieves. This is precisely why video calls are unlikely to take off as a common method of mobile communication anytime soon. As a final argument, I will state that video via Skype can also be transmitted over a mobile 3G network.
All that remains is to pronounce the final ortel and crown the winner. However, is it possible to talk about a winner when practically no fight took place? The Internet and the world of technology are full of ambitious projects, some of which succeed and many of which do not. Let's recall, for example, an older project from Apple - Opendoc or from Google – Wave a Buzz. The latter should have been, for example, an alternative to the established Twitter network. And what a Buzz he was. That's why I fear that sooner or later FaceTime will end up in the digital abyss of history, followed by another social experiment from Apple called Ping.
Solid article, much better argued than the recent one about PSP on Android, so point! ;)
I would just maybe put FT in a bigger context than just 'battles' with Skype. Apple has been ahead of its time many times in its history. Sometimes it ended badly (Newton), sometimes it was enough to wait a few years (iTunes + iPod). I've always had a reserved attitude towards video calls on my mobile phone, but it's a fact that if I have the option, it sometimes comes in handy. Apple provided it to me (with limitations), but I see it as a start. If it is developed further, it will offer developers an API, enable it to be operated via 3G, LTE,..., dynamically integrate the status into the contact, integrate it into the GameCenter... it may become a relatively important competitive advantage over time, even though it looks optimistic at the moment.
I am much happier that Apple does at least something in this area and uses it for promotion (FaceTime advertising) than if it were to be completely ignored and left in the hands of third parties.
Well, I don't know if you tried skype video? The transmission and quality of the video call is incomparable to FaceTime. The video is delayed, honey, but I can't see it. I use FaceTime every day, regardless of calling on the computer. I have FT knights.
Exactly. I deliberately compared FT with a Skype video call. The quality cannot be compared! While I only occasionally registered some image tearing in FT-me, Skype was almost unusable. And the FT only offers one fixed resolution, whereas with Skype I had about half a window, even so it was terrible. I note that in both cases the call was on laptops and on Wi-Fi.
Apple has a bit of a problem with promoting its products and services outside the US. Then it's difficult... the world is not only the USA, even though I understand that it is a very lucrative market!
I would probably be careful. Similar judgments were handed down over iPod and iTunes. Then Apple opened Windows to the world and there was a bombshell. I think Apple still has some FaceTime surprises up its sleeve. And in addition: a direct comparison of FT as a novelty and old Skype is also not completely equal.
Next time, before the author writes a long article about how someone's service is actually completely worthless, I highly recommend re-studying all the available information and preferably the keynote at which facetime was presented.
Jobs mentioned one very important detail there, which the author somehow forgot to mention, and that is that facetime is basically just a public beta and in time (roughly within a year) facetime should be accessible via 3G and they will release it as an open format , which will be cross-platform…
So then I somehow stop seeing the advantages of Skype, which are mentioned here, because instead of finding the application, I will have all these features integrated directly in the phone and linked to the list of contacts...
Good luck in writing and especially in reading ;)
As reader Ondra writes, I was mainly interested in capturing the current situation of video calls. I saw the keynote and I'm aware that Steve reported releasing the protocol as an open format. However, this has not happened so far and in order not to end up losing interest in FaceTime before it is released.
I would like to point out that this is my own opinion, which is inherently subjective. This is how I see the situation, although the reality may be different.
As for the transmission quality, we are preparing a separate comparison.
I would allow myself to slightly disagree with Kryton. I understood the author's intention as a comparison of the current situation in video calls. And for me, just like in the article, the winner is Skype.. I have never had a problem with transmission and I use Skype relatively often... Unfortunately, I can't compare with FT because no one from my neighborhood is very fond of Apple, so I don't condemn the comparison here in the comments... Me skype he added what I can't have on FT at the moment and to a degree with which I am more than satisfied.
I use Skype on my iPod and it has its uses (children, grandmothers, friends, etc.). I wonder if it can be used on 3G, I can't imagine (data plan, speed).
I agree with the author that the FT is useless to most people today. But I wish it would break through - to get skype competition. And I think it has a chance if it is of good quality, easy to control and perfectly functional. Skype has flies, at least mine does.
For a short time, Apple also made FaceTime available on 3G, but the operators could have messed up, so he had to turn it off again.
As for Ping, it's a wonderful tool for me when browsing the iTunes Store. I go through a lot of music, and if I just want to note it and not buy it yet, thanks to Ping I click on Like and it is saved to my profile. Later, I can comfortably return to what I have covered. This makes me think that Ping will not go away. I even started to miss it in the AppStore. Bookmark and come back to buy later - simple, functional, great.
You can add applications to the Wishlist in the App Store. Just click on the triangle next to the price and select "Add to Wishlist" Unfortunately, this only works with the App Store for iOS
That's right, that's how I use it.
Otherwise great article. Of course, the discussion complements it in an interesting way, and that's good, but some debaters could tame their passions or pride or whatever you want to call it, it's unnecessary.
Thanks. :-) (I hope I'm not the passionate debater. :-))
I also compared FT with Skype and I also have to say that I liked the quality of FT more.
Anyway, Skype is not bad either, and yes, I am one of those people who shortens the trip to Prague by calling my husband and son at home and showing them a Skype camera and thus shortening my journey from work. I enjoy it and find it quite nice see the counterparty anytime and almost anywhere..
I wouldn't push it. It's just a nice extra thing. At home I have Face Time on my Mac and on my iPhone. We can look at each other with a woman :-) At least one thing is better than Skype, and that is user simplicity. As is the case with Apple
The author could think, and not write, that maybe FT will disappear because we don't have WiFi in the office. We don't have that. But as the author aptly noted, in the USA there is wifi on every corner and the iOS platform is much more widespread there as well. In America, FT is useful because its two biggest negatives are not there. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SOMEONE CAN WRITE SUCH NONSENSE THAT FT WILL DISAPPEAR LIKE GOOGLE BUZZ. That's like saying that if the iTunes Store opened here and music wouldn't be sold, the iTunes Store will be canceled because it has no use in the Czech Republic. FT has no use here either. So what? Let the author of the article realize that the Czech Republic is not the whole world and that the FT will not be canceled because of us.
Agreement.