9 ms·

FaceTime will be successful because you don't need an account

21 points by a4agarwal 16y ago

alex1 16y ago
It will be really successful when you can video chat with any device whether it's an iPhone, Mac, Windows, Android, anything. And when it works over 3G.
- a4agarwal 16y ago
  I agree, and it will do that eventually. They are making it an open standard so it can be integrated into other devices. And i'm confident the 3G limitation is temporary
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    They could of course have added support for the the existing standard that would have let them talk the the literally millions of exiting phones with this feature.
- henrikschroder 16y ago
  No it won't be successful this time either. The reason video calls aren't replacing voice calls has never been technical, it's always been social.
  - swombat 16y ago
    I make video calls all the time via Skype with both friends and family. The reasons I never picked up phone video calls was because 1) they rarely worked properly, 2) they required compatible handsets (see 1), 3) they were several times more expensive than normal voice calls. This solves all 3 of these problems. Almost everyone I care to talk to (other than my parents) has an iPhone and will be getting the iPhone 4.
    - henrikschroder 16y ago
      Video calls have their (limited) uses, but they will never be succesful, they will never overtake voice calls, and Apple has shown absolutely nothing that hasn't been available for years in Europe or Asia. We've had 3G video calls for years. Almost all cellphones except the bottom range have it, all carriers support it, there has been massive advertising campaigns and hype about it when it was introduced, it was the whole point of switching to 3G, and yet it's a massive flop. I'm sure you and your friends will be very happy getting it, there are always exceptions, but video calls will never surpass voice calls in mass-market popularity, they won't even come close.
      - swombat 16y ago
        Did anyone claim video calls would surpass voice calls? I don't think even Apple made such a claim.
Tichy 16y ago
"iPhones then create a direct peer to peer connection over the internet. The iPhones deal with all IP addresses, firewalls, NAT issues automatically." Isn't that impossible without an intermediate server? Edit: OK, thinking a bit, I never looked into the Skype trick much, but I would guess, send a request to a server (that doesn't respond). Then you have an open connection/port listening to the response from the server. If you can tell the other party about that "hole", it can send a packet across the firewall. While for Skype that is done by a server (if necessary), the iPhone could send the information via the phone line? As I said, no idea how the details work, just a rough idea. Or maybe they just use a server.
- swombat 16y ago
  Intermediate servers don't require an account.
  - Tichy 16y ago
    Sure - it's just that they said they will make it an open protocol. So will they provide the intermediate servers for everyone?
- alex1 16y ago
  If there is an intermediate server involved (probably a STUN server), it just helps set up the connection. The actual UDP packets don't go through any middle man. This is how residential VoIP services have been working without requiring any firewall/router configuration by the customer. It's also the same thing when you set up an iChat or Skype video call with both parties being behind a NAT.
  - astrange 16y ago
    Yes, it uses STUN - you can see it on the keynote slides when he listed the standards used. By the way, this article makes it sound like Posterous invented the concept of not having accounts? Even though it was obviously invented by 2channel.
car 16y ago
You do need an account, but it's with Apple.
- jolan 16y ago
  Right. They said they use SIP for this, which does require an account. I assume Apple/AT&T are automapping phone numbers to SIP accounts. SIP video phones have been on the market for years already.
  - ryanhuff 16y ago
    Can you share a link which explains the details of Apple using SIP for this?
    - jolan 16y ago
      I don't think there is one yet. Just this slide showing that they're using a bunch of VOIP protocols to implement it: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-wwdc-2010-384-rm-eng.jpg http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-...
gojomo 16y ago
I have a sneaky suspicion they might be pinging some switchboard with self-reported telephone numbers... and thus there could be some privacy blowback (mapping phone numbers to mobile IPs) or potential for phone-number impersonation (at least until you show your face) in FaceTime.
- ryanhuff 16y ago
  I don't see why you would suspect such a thing. All iphones already have a unique identifier, and the device is associated with your itunes account. So, Apple has all the information they need to authenticate you. I can see no evidence in the facts that they are following the model that you stated.
  - gojomo 16y ago
    A 'sneaky suspicion' means it's derived from my slightly-paranoid intuition, not extant facts. We'll see! (Maybe Gizmodo will get some jailbreak pro to make one of their phones selfidentify as Jonny Ive's, then crank-FaceTime Steve Jobs. Or maybe not.)
mixmax 16y ago
This is interesting because it shows how far behind the US is in the telecoms space. In Europe this has been a basic feature of all 3G phones for around five years. If you want to videochat you just press the button and call somebody up using their normal phonenumber. It was pretty hyped up, but it never really caught on because there simply aren't that many usecases where you want to videochat with people on the go. Especially as you have to hold out your phone in fromt of you in a somewhat awkward way. Now it's just old and tired.
- moe 16y ago
  Same in Asia.
- henrikschroder 16y ago
  Over WiFi instead of 3G is somewhat of a novelty though, but still, the problem with video conversations isn't technical, it's that most people do not want to do them. I remember six years ago when 3 launched over here and tried to convince everyone and their mother that video calls were the future. I had some colleagues who got their phones, and I saw them use the video call once, maybe twice, only for testing. I also remember seeing some people do video calls on the subway. It all quickly stopped though as soon as people realized the drawbacks of video calls for everyday conversations and now you never see it, even though all phones have the capability.
  - mixmax 16y ago
    Over WiFi is a novelty - but it's also a hack to get around the fact that the US carriers are way behind Europe and Asia.
    - henrikschroder 16y ago
      Oh, I just assumed the US went through the same cycle of consumer disinterest as the rest of us.
- gojomo 16y ago
  My arms got tired just watching all the people in the Apple video holding their phones for video calls.
callahad 16y ago
Hm, looks like the FaceTime button replaces the "Hold" button on the call screen. Is it still possible to place FaceTime-capable callers on hold?

21 points by a4agarwal 16y ago

alex1 16y ago

It will be really successful when you can video chat with any device whether it's an iPhone, Mac, Windows, Android, anything. And when it works over 3G.

a4agarwal 16y ago
I agree, and it will do that eventually. They are making it an open standard so it can be integrated into other devices. And i'm confident the 3G limitation is temporary
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  They could of course have added support for the the existing standard that would have let them talk the the literally millions of exiting phones with this feature.
henrikschroder 16y ago
No it won't be successful this time either. The reason video calls aren't replacing voice calls has never been technical, it's always been social.
- swombat 16y ago
  I make video calls all the time via Skype with both friends and family. The reasons I never picked up phone video calls was because 1) they rarely worked properly, 2) they required compatible handsets (see 1), 3) they were several times more expensive than normal voice calls. This solves all 3 of these problems. Almost everyone I care to talk to (other than my parents) has an iPhone and will be getting the iPhone 4.
  - henrikschroder 16y ago
    Video calls have their (limited) uses, but they will never be succesful, they will never overtake voice calls, and Apple has shown absolutely nothing that hasn't been available for years in Europe or Asia. We've had 3G video calls for years. Almost all cellphones except the bottom range have it, all carriers support it, there has been massive advertising campaigns and hype about it when it was introduced, it was the whole point of switching to 3G, and yet it's a massive flop. I'm sure you and your friends will be very happy getting it, there are always exceptions, but video calls will never surpass voice calls in mass-market popularity, they won't even come close.
    - swombat 16y ago
      Did anyone claim video calls would surpass voice calls? I don't think even Apple made such a claim.

Tichy 16y ago

"iPhones then create a direct peer to peer connection over the internet. The iPhones deal with all IP addresses, firewalls, NAT issues automatically." Isn't that impossible without an intermediate server? Edit: OK, thinking a bit, I never looked into the Skype trick much, but I would guess, send a request to a server (that doesn't respond). Then you have an open connection/port listening to the response from the server. If you can tell the other party about that "hole", it can send a packet across the firewall. While for Skype that is done by a server (if necessary), the iPhone could send the information via the phone line? As I said, no idea how the details work, just a rough idea. Or maybe they just use a server.

swombat 16y ago
Intermediate servers don't require an account.
- Tichy 16y ago
  Sure - it's just that they said they will make it an open protocol. So will they provide the intermediate servers for everyone?
alex1 16y ago
If there is an intermediate server involved (probably a STUN server), it just helps set up the connection. The actual UDP packets don't go through any middle man. This is how residential VoIP services have been working without requiring any firewall/router configuration by the customer. It's also the same thing when you set up an iChat or Skype video call with both parties being behind a NAT.
- astrange 16y ago
  Yes, it uses STUN - you can see it on the keynote slides when he listed the standards used. By the way, this article makes it sound like Posterous invented the concept of not having accounts? Even though it was obviously invented by 2channel.

car 16y ago

You do need an account, but it's with Apple.

jolan 16y ago
Right. They said they use SIP for this, which does require an account. I assume Apple/AT&T are automapping phone numbers to SIP accounts. SIP video phones have been on the market for years already.
- ryanhuff 16y ago
  Can you share a link which explains the details of Apple using SIP for this?
  - jolan 16y ago
    I don't think there is one yet. Just this slide showing that they're using a bunch of VOIP protocols to implement it: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-wwdc-2010-384-rm-eng.jpg http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/06/apple-...

gojomo 16y ago

I have a sneaky suspicion they might be pinging some switchboard with self-reported telephone numbers... and thus there could be some privacy blowback (mapping phone numbers to mobile IPs) or potential for phone-number impersonation (at least until you show your face) in FaceTime.

ryanhuff 16y ago
I don't see why you would suspect such a thing. All iphones already have a unique identifier, and the device is associated with your itunes account. So, Apple has all the information they need to authenticate you. I can see no evidence in the facts that they are following the model that you stated.
- gojomo 16y ago
  A 'sneaky suspicion' means it's derived from my slightly-paranoid intuition, not extant facts. We'll see! (Maybe Gizmodo will get some jailbreak pro to make one of their phones selfidentify as Jonny Ive's, then crank-FaceTime Steve Jobs. Or maybe not.)

mixmax 16y ago

This is interesting because it shows how far behind the US is in the telecoms space. In Europe this has been a basic feature of all 3G phones for around five years. If you want to videochat you just press the button and call somebody up using their normal phonenumber. It was pretty hyped up, but it never really caught on because there simply aren't that many usecases where you want to videochat with people on the go. Especially as you have to hold out your phone in fromt of you in a somewhat awkward way. Now it's just old and tired.

moe 16y ago
Same in Asia.
henrikschroder 16y ago
Over WiFi instead of 3G is somewhat of a novelty though, but still, the problem with video conversations isn't technical, it's that most people do not want to do them. I remember six years ago when 3 launched over here and tried to convince everyone and their mother that video calls were the future. I had some colleagues who got their phones, and I saw them use the video call once, maybe twice, only for testing. I also remember seeing some people do video calls on the subway. It all quickly stopped though as soon as people realized the drawbacks of video calls for everyday conversations and now you never see it, even though all phones have the capability.
- mixmax 16y ago
  Over WiFi is a novelty - but it's also a hack to get around the fact that the US carriers are way behind Europe and Asia.
  - henrikschroder 16y ago
    Oh, I just assumed the US went through the same cycle of consumer disinterest as the rest of us.
gojomo 16y ago
My arms got tired just watching all the people in the Apple video holding their phones for video calls.

callahad 16y ago

Hm, looks like the FaceTime button replaces the "Hold" button on the call screen. Is it still possible to place FaceTime-capable callers on hold?