Well, I'm sure I'm not the only one thinking this. As you guys can imagine, FaceTime is going to be the new craze among iPhone 4 users. As much as I hate to say it, Apple will be the ones to make voice calling finally take off.
Qik is meh, and Skype video chat is still up in the air (no pun intended).
So that begs the question, would it be possible to make a device such as the Evo emulate FaceTime (with an iPhone 4 caller). Considering it's over WiFi, I don't see how it couldn't be possible.
They claim FaceTime is supposed to be an "open" standard, though I am a bit dubious to this considering H.264/AAC is involved.
Anyhow, all licensing and networking aside, I think we can agree that it is somewhat remotely possible and also really neat of an idea.
I know it's a bit early, but are there any teams talking about/working on this? I'm a developer (and learning the Android ropes at the moment) and would love to help contribute to something like this.
Comments, thoughts, and suggestions all welcome!
Yup, we'll see it eventually. As you said, FaceTime is an open standard and will probably be adopted on many different platforms. H.264 and AAC encoding's wont cause a problem, and will actually be beneficial due to it's compression versus quality ratio. Couple that together with the fact that the Evo already supports them out of the box, it's a no-brainer!
Eventually most likely all devices will connect somehow. This is a question though and would be more fit for the Q&A forum
The cool thing will be that we will likely be able to connect to FaceTime via 3G/4G and they will need Wifi because of Apple/ATT's control.
I would love to help out with this in any way I can, I can't do code but if you need graphics for the project, just pm me.
take it for what its worth, but Engadget did a test of facetime with mifi devices and the results were piss poor... we're probably better off using qik or some system that is designed for mobile networks.
R
RTessi said:
take it for what its worth, but Engadget did a test of facetime with mifi devices and the results were piss poor... we're probably better off using qik or some system that is designed for mobile networks.
R
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess that explains why it's WiFi-only. Typical Crapple.
gbm85 said:
Guess that explains why it's WiFi-only. Typical Crapple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
id factor it up more towards at&t not wanting the iphone users (apparently bandwidth hogs) taking up anymore of their resources.
this isdump. we have fring and qik which already work over 3g and 4g were facetime is only working over wifi....and its not even performing well with that....so what im trying to understand is...what is it that you are you expecting?
mastermayhm069 said:
this isdump. we have fring and qik which already work over 3g and 4g were facetime is only working over wifi....and its not even performing well with that....so what im trying to understand is...what is it that you are you expecting?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you.
I don't think we need someone on Android to implement FaceTime... I'd rather have Fring, Qik or Skype put 2-way chat on the iPhone 4. It's not like I'm going to be in a call with someone and be like, oh, lets switch over to video so we can see each other. I'm fine with using a dedicated client and I think most iPhone users would be too.
ViViDboarder said:
I agree with you.
I don't think we need someone on Android to implement FaceTime... I'd rather have Fring, Qik or Skype put 2-way chat on the iPhone 4. It's not like I'm going to be in a call with someone and be like, oh, lets switch over to video so we can see each other. I'm fine with using a dedicated client and I think most iPhone users would be too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed, most of that stuff is just a gimmick, you use it once and then nada. I personally haven't used video chat on my phone since i got it.
mrono said:
agreed, most of that stuff is just a gimmick, you use it once and then nada. I personally haven't used video chat on my phone since i got it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree somewhat. I've used it a couple times but the lack of quality makes it a gimmick. If it was higher quality and more people could connect, I would probably use it more and think it was less gimmicky.
gthing said:
I agree somewhat. I've used it a couple times but the lack of quality makes it a gimmick. If it was higher quality and more people could connect, I would probably use it more and think it was less gimmicky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the quality is why I haven't used it, it's like i'm broadcasting from a portal into LEGO world
Yeah, so far video chatting from phone to phone is such a gimmick. However, I see some potential for video chatting from evo to computer. There isn't many video chat enabled phones out there but plenty of people with computers to video chat with. I just haven't found the right softwares for the phone and computer to use.
fring on evo connected with skype on computer is flawless, sound and video...if you have strong 3g/4g/wifi signal
tecmu said:
Yeah, so far video chatting from phone to phone is such a gimmick. However, I see some potential for video chatting from evo to computer. There isn't many video chat enabled phones out there but plenty of people with computers to video chat with. I just haven't found the right softwares for the phone and computer to use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ChatRoulette for Android Especially since they are working on an algorithm to filter out all the wangs
itmustbejj said:
ChatRoulette for Android Especially since they are working on an algorithm to filter out all the wangs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your kiddin me hahahah filter out the wangs....thats hilarious.
Facetime application for Android
I switched from Apple to HTC EVO and I am very happy with HTC EVO. It is awesome. However if you look at the quality of video on face time it is amazing. The video and audio quality through Fring is no way comparable to facetime. Also people have connected using tethering through HTC EVO and connected two iphones with facetime. Excellent quality over 3G through HTC EVO. Summary, it will be nice to have an application like factime... Thanks
gbm85 said:
Guess that explains why it's WiFi-only. Typical Crapple.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is crap typical from Apple?
never really used facetime :/
Related
I am still a little torn between getting the Evo or the iPhone 4 when it comes out, but I am leaning towards the Evo at the moment because I just plain prefer Android (and dislike a lot of Apple's policies), not to mention it would save me about $30 a month on my phone bill. However, most of the people I know use iPhones. Has anyone heard anything about the Evo being compatible with Apple's FaceTime video chat? From what Apple said, it will "be available to any device that wants to make use of it" but I'm not sure if that meant it has to be built-in with hardware or if the software that runs it will be open-source and will (more than likely) be ported to Android. I'd hate to have that front-facing camera be more or less useless except for Skype.
There's probably not enough information out at this point to really answer this question, but I thought I'd try nonetheless.
Unrelated questions:
1. Is it true that you can use Verizon's 3G for free if it is present in an area where Sprint does not have service? I live close to the edge of Sprint's 3G coverage, but Verizon has excellent service here.
2. I had a Mytouch and couldn't stand the lag on the virtual keyboard compared to my iPhone 3G's pretty much instant input. Does the Evo suffer from the same problem or does the faster processor fix that?
Steve Jobs said that the FaceTime protocols will be open source, so I believe it will make its way to others in time (who can say how long). The caveat is that they only support it on WiFi, presumably because getting all the carriers to implement anything together would be next to impossible. I mean, look how long you had to wait for MMS on the iPhone!
skeene85 said:
Steve Jobs said that the FaceTime protocols will be open source, so I believe it will make its way to others in time (who can say how long). The caveat is that they only support it on WiFi, presumably because getting all the carriers to implement anything together would be next to impossible. I mean, look how long you had to wait for MMS on the iPhone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Open Standard...not open source (very important distinction). If facetime is just a protocol as Apple implies, anybody should be able to create an app that uses it (the wifi restriction should only apply to the Apple devices on ATT since it was suggested that it would not stay that way forever...I believe the phrase was "working with carriers on it").
IF it's as open as they imply, it should make it's way over. With Skype being around for so long and having a decent sized following, I see that catching on faster, honestly.
from my experiences with virtual keyboards, the evo takes the cake. especially with the hi res version of the htc keyboard.
Lee1733 said:
I am still a little torn between getting the Evo or the iPhone 4 when it comes out, but I am leaning towards the Evo at the moment because I just plain prefer Android (and dislike a lot of Apple's policies), not to mention it would save me about $30 a month on my phone bill. However, most of the people I know use iPhones. Has anyone heard anything about the Evo being compatible with Apple's FaceTime video chat? From what Apple said, it will "be available to any device that wants to make use of it" but I'm not sure if that meant it has to be built-in with hardware or if the software that runs it will be open-source and will (more than likely) be ported to Android. I'd hate to have that front-facing camera be more or less useless except for Skype.
There's probably not enough information out at this point to really answer this question, but I thought I'd try nonetheless.
Unrelated questions:
1. Is it true that you can use Verizon's 3G for free if it is present in an area where Sprint does not have service? I live close to the edge of Sprint's 3G coverage, but Verizon has excellent service here.
2. I had a Mytouch and couldn't stand the lag on the virtual keyboard compared to my iPhone 3G's pretty much instant input. Does the Evo suffer from the same problem or does the faster processor fix that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that the only time you can use Verizon's towers are if you are roaming, so it wouldn't be 3g.
2. There is a very very slight lag on the keyboard, but only if you have all of the spell correction/prediction active. If you have those features disabled, there really is no lag to speak of.
_Burst_ said:
from my experiences with virtual keyboards, the evo takes the cake. especially with the hi res version of the htc keyboard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's this "hi res" version you speak of? Please point me in the right direction.
thanks
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=701089
2....
Lee1733 said:
Does the Evo suffer from the same problem or does the faster processor fix that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry, i can only answer this one question...the evo shows no lag whatsoever, that i have noticed with the keyboard. plus, i have just experienced swype -i am blown away by the speed at which i can type...i doubt the iphone will ever get it, but who knows.
from my experiences with virtual keyboards, the evo takes the cake. especially with the hi res version of the htc keyboard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You haven't used the iPhone keyboard then.
Unfortunately the iPhone is still the king of the touch screen keyboard but the EVO is a better device.
The screen is king, the 30 dollars over a 24 month contract is huge. 4G isn't even an option on ATT. I could go on.
-------------------------------------
Sent via the XDA Tapatalk App
when you take pictuers on the HTC DESIRE
lets say when you take a picture holding the device on landscap - does it save the picture as landscap? i mean that does you have to do ROTATE to photos to save them on the computer?
is there any site i can see all the androind app now? so i can know what ill have and what i can't have..
or i have to check the market app only from a androind device?
thats it for now. still having problems deciding what phone to take - Desire or iPhone 4...
the bad thing that the desire have no front camera for future things like making video calls on fring or mesnnger...
p.s. sorry for my bad English.. hop you can help me! thanks!
Yes, if you take the picture in landscape, the picture will be saved in landscape. Same for portrait. In addition, you can edit the orientation of the photo in the photo viewer.
There is an official Android Market site. But it's not very helpful. You can't push applications to your device and the selections are not complete. Appbrain is a better alternative.
Btw, you should know that video calling is not a "future thing". That's what Apple wants you to believe. The front facing camera was so underutilized that manufacturers have since decided to abandon it. Once Apple adopted it, it's suppose to be the next big thing....sigh...
For finding all the available apps you can try http://www.androlib.com , but it might be a bit hard to find the things you want.
And regarding the videocalling, you can actually videocall with fring on your desire, but it obviously will use the rear facing camera. So it kind of depends on what you want to do, is it really i want to see someone when i call them or i want to show them what i am seeing at this moment.
well is there any HTC phone that is android with fron cam also? somthing like the desire.... ??
i think ill be using the fron camera a lot when i be abrod and want to make calls over fring with WIFI connection...
Quick question for you Amir...do you video call now? You say future things like you're expecting it to be the next big thing. It's been available for years. Why have you never thought to do it before but now seemingly would let it colour your purchasing decisions?
i had N95 for lots of time.. and i did use video call but by then it wans't possiple to use it over WIFI and with fring..
so i allways want that like this.
I had an N95 also and was able to use Fring to make Skype video calls a long time ago.
My question was basically , knowing that video calling is a requirement, why don't you stick with Nokia, who rarely leave out the front cam? Symbian is improving at a rapid pace to try and keep up.
amir84 said:
well is there any HTC phone that is android with fron cam also? somthing like the desire.... ??
i think ill be using the fron camera a lot when i be abrod and want to make calls over fring with WIFI connection...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There isnt no, the reason htc have left out the front camera is that its not supported by the os
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
so how is the galaxy S have a front cam and runing the same OS ?
AndroHero said:
There isnt no, the reason htc have left out the front camera is that its not supported by the os
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not 100% correct. The camera hardware is supported just fine...the protocol that is used to make 3G video calls is what I think is missing (someone correct me if I'm wrong) and so negated the inclusion of a front cam.
I had a E71 but never used video calling once. I had it for 3 years also.
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
atomfix said:
I had a E71 but never used video calling once. I had it for 3 years also
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/December2004/8825.htm
It's old tech but the carriers here in Europe REALLY thought it would take off. Obviously, Apple being Apple, people will start video calling like they've never done before.
Mp3 players were available before the iPod, but no one wanted them...until Apple did it. Mobile phones could install apps and surf the web before the iPhone...no one wanted to, until Apple did it. People have had cameras on their phones for years...but the dawn of the iPhone has seen it remain the most used camera of ANY kind in the world on Flickr since it was released. Tablet PC's wallowed in the wilderness of computing for 10 years before the iPad...now it's the hottest selling device this year.
Apple people tend to start doing things they had no inclination to do before Apple told them it was awesome to do said activity. Expect the same to happen to video calling.
To be honest right..... video calling is the thing of the ancient past. I'm sure the Pharaoh's used video calling in there time. But HD voice calling should be the future
Sent from my HTC Desire using XDA App
Anyone done it?
Nothing wrong with either Android or my Cappy, I just get bored with technology every few months and want something new
The Focus looks like the best Windows Phone offering on ATT. However the development section looks like it sucks.
I want to at least be able to
1) Get rid of the ATT stuff
2) WiFi tether (So I can use a WiFi Nook/iPad/Laptop/etc).
Are either possible?
Any comments on the switch?
yes, from desire to mozart. tehtering is not possible
Me!!! And i love it!
The Samsung Focus is the best performance/screen on AT&T, it just depends if you want a solid bar form, or slider ect. The screen alone makes it better than the other two imo, but it does only have 8GB of storage (rest are 16GB) if that is a factor for you. Personally I love my Focus.
You can remove anything you want including the AT&T apps. Just hold on the app, and uninstall.
Tethering through a dialup / usb cable is possible, but a pain. WiFi tethering is not possible (yet).
I moved from Android, and while this is a new OS with a lot of features missing that Android had, I would never go back. The UI is by far the best out there, and its a much more pleasing overall experience.
Tethering might be a big one. It means I can get data (I'm on an old unlimited plan) via my phone- on my laptop, or tablet... I don't have to have another $25/mo plan to get data on a tablet or something. I just Wifi tether that sucker.
USB cable would work on Windows but... On an Android tablet, let's say... Android wouldn't be able to tether with it on USB, I'm going to guess. (that's even if it's got a USB port)
The swap from android to WP7 was the best cellphone change I ever made...
I still carry my Nexus One around in my laptop bag just in case I need to use the tethering. Its the only reason I still have it.
If I'm out and about somewhere where no wifi is available and need to get something out to a client ect, I just swap the sim card.
You might want to look at the H7S on AT&T, if you dont mind AT&T slowness on updates. Its a 4.3 screen with a SLCD. I think it will be the best wp7 screen, better then the Samsung screens.
tfouto said:
You might want to look at the H7S on AT&T, if you dont mind AT&T slowness on updates. Its a 4.3 screen with a SLCD. I think it will be the best wp7 screen, better then the Samsung screens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not for WP7 because blacks suck on SLCD. Not to mention if it shares any qualities with the HD7 then the battery life is going to be dismal.
yeahtyeaht said:
yes, from desire to mozart. tehtering is not possible
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you can tether on the focus though and I don't think there is a mozart stateside...
Just did the other way around... And feel relieved.
z33dev33l said:
Not for WP7 because backs suck on SLCD. Not to mention if it shares any qualities with the HD7 then the battery life is going to be dismal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
backs suck on SLCD??? No way. Deep blacks.
tfouto said:
backs suck on SLCD??? No way. Deep blacks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*blacks* and they're nowhere near the blacks on a SAMOLED device. Considering how much of WP7 is black it's nowhere near as good... at least for this OS.
Just traded in the fascinate for the focus. Was going to hold off to see the hd7s first but after loking at the 4.3 droid with slcd i decided I couldn't leave amoled. I am so glad i switched. Only things I'missing is Google voice and maps. I would like tethoring but never really used it. I'm glad I now have a phone that I don't have to load custom roms every other day to make myself happy with it.
I will never go back to Android.
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
I had Desire, Desire Z and they are crap compared to Omnia7. WP7 rocks!!! I love the UI, games. No lags, no problems.
CDODGE said:
Just traded in the fascinate for the focus. Was going to hold off to see the hd7s first but after loking at the 4.3 droid with slcd i decided I couldn't leave amoled. I am so glad i switched. Only things I'missing is Google voice and maps. I would like tethoring but never really used it. I'm glad I now have a phone that I don't have to load custom roms every other day to make myself happy with it.
I will never go back to Android.
Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amen to ALL OF THAT!
Had three different Android phones, an iPhone, and now I'm using an LG Optimus 7. Best phone I've had, and the overall experience is way more pleasing than any Android device -- no about about it!
After seeing the video of MS holding a funeral procession for the iPhone late last year, I took a leap of faith and got the HD7. Then realized the funeral was actually for WP7 updates and Steve Ballmer is still the CEO of MS. So now I'm back on android and just got a Nexus S. The HD7 is safely back in it's coffin err I mean original box.
For the person that said they did vice versa and are now "relieved", why?
My main worries:
1) Google integration. Anyway my contacts can stay in sync with my Google account?
2) App support. Facebook, Netflix, Google- nobody else supports this it seems the only entity that does is Microsoft. ?? Microsoft wrote the Facebook app and apparently their Netflix app doesn't even stream videos (it would've been a plus over Android)
That said it does everything else... Equally well I think (Email, messaging, browsing, etc). The Office integration would be a huge plus for me.
All in all, what are the Pros/Cons for this over Android? Not only Android but the Captivate?
How's battery life (real-world) actually compare?
f1restarter said:
After seeing the video of MS holding a funeral procession for the iPhone late last year, I took a leap of faith and got the HD7. Then realized the funeral was actually for WP7 updates and Steve Ballmer is still the CEO of MS. So now I'm back on android and just got a Nexus S. The HD7 is safely back in it's coffin err I mean original box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I looked it up and it appears they updated it in March so not sure what the complaint is? Every few months is still better than what the Android folks are doing.
In fact I'd say the official Microsoft updates are about the same frequency as the unofficial upgrades in the Android world.
TexUs said:
For the person that said they did vice versa and are now "relieved", why?
My main worries:
1) Google integration. Anyway my contacts can stay in sync with my Google account?
2) App support. Facebook, Netflix, Google- nobody else supports this it seems the only entity that does is Microsoft. ?? Microsoft wrote the Facebook app and apparently their Netflix app doesn't even stream videos (it would've been a plus over Android)
That said it does everything else... Equally well I think (Email, messaging, browsing, etc). The Office integration would be a huge plus for me.
All in all, what are the Pros/Cons for this over Android? Not only Android but the Captivate?
How's battery life (real-world) actually compare?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait... who told you WP7 Netflix doesnt stream? I watch movies on it all day at work... Battery life is better than android but no smartphone has great battery life. The UI isn't laggy like android, it's actually got good original games, zune pass is freakin amazing, the keyboard is better, just everything is a better quality. The guy who said he did the reverse and was glad has been trolling the WP7 forums for months trying to turn people away.
with skype video calls coming to wp7 is there any hope for the current phones to do video chat?
i remember seeing a picture of something that connects to the camera lens on the cell phones and sits at the top of the phone to let u do video chats on phones without a front facing camera...is this real or was i seeing something photoshopped?
because after mix 2011...it seems like it might be best to wait til the newer mango ready phones with possibly a front facing camera comes out to go wp7.
Just wish they add FFC in newer devices.
Well, if the API for camera access is open, at least if you need to show the person on the other side something using your camera, you should be able to. That is what I expect. Video chatting isn't only useful for seeing the other side's face.
You can stream out of the back camera if the app allows it (Tango on Android does this), and while I do have uses for that use case I don't know how exactly you're going to "Video Chat" without a FFC, TBQH...
I don't use Skype, though. Their Windows software is just too terrible for me to suffer though. It's in the same category as iTunes now. Need a decent WLM client with VoIP, File Transfer, and Video Chatting support... More people I know use that. No one I know uses Skype. They'll just tell me to text them instead, if I try to get them to install it.
I like how everyone now wants video chat since Apple "reinvented" it with Facetime. I had already had video chat years ago on my Nokia and couldn't care less. Same for many people in Europe I presume.
To the original question: The phones we have now won't be able to do some things, that's just the way it is and it's the same with the iPhone. You can still get a new phone after Mango is released to have full functionality. To announce video calls, they first need to announce new chassis with front facing camera which they haven't done (yet?).
Peew971 said:
I like how everyone now wants video chat since Apple "reinvented" it with Facetime. I had already had video chat years ago on my Nokia and couldn't care less. Same for many people in Europe I presume.
To the original question: The phones we have now won't be able to do some things, that's just the way it is and it's the same with the iPhone. You can still get a new phone after Mango is released to have full functionality. To announce video calls, they first need to announce new chassis with front facing camera which they haven't done (yet?).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a bit to do with Apple and a bit of other factors.
I remember 3G video calling here in the UK it sucked, didn't work very well, was pointless and never took off.
However, with wifi enabled phones and bigger screens its now higher quality, I assume as if you're using a PC. Skype will also allow you to video call people who are sitting at their desks etc.
Peew971 said:
I like how everyone now wants video chat since Apple "reinvented" it with Facetime. I had already had video chat years ago on my Nokia and couldn't care less. Same for many people in Europe I presume.
To the original question: The phones we have now won't be able to do some things, that's just the way it is and it's the same with the iPhone. You can still get a new phone after Mango is released to have full functionality. To announce video calls, they first need to announce new chassis with front facing camera which they haven't done (yet?).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not totally true. Outside of Symbian (not a factor in NA) no other smartphone really had the capabilities. A few rarities, but nothing really big.
What Apple did was a "Me First move." They went first and tested out a capability that had been largely untested in this market and it was a hit.
Also, Desktop video chat software has also gotten better. Services like Yahoo! and Windows Live now support High Definition Video Chatting, and Skype now supports Video Conferencing. There is software like WebEx for Business Users to conference with, as well (we use that at work, there is an Android App for it in the marketplace).
Couple that with the fact that the smartphone market is growing at a nice rate, as well.
As businesses and consumers alike become more and more mobile, and began to drop netbooks/laptops for Smartphones and Tablets, they will ultimately want some of that portability on their devices. One of the most obvious things that smartphones were missing... are webcams i.e. Front-Facing Cameras.
That being said, Skype Video Chat has been proven a ridiculous battery Hog on the iPhone (something like 10% battery for < 30 minutes of video chatting - you're running the camera and streaming tons of data OTA). I think the market needs to focus a bit on battery tech. Hardware in smartphones is good enough that they don't need to be pushing the envelope as much as they are now. They're treating smartphones like their desktop gaming cards or something...
N8ter said:
That's not totally true. Outside of Symbian (not a factor in NA) no other smartphone really had the capabilities. A few rarities, but nothing really big.
What Apple did was a "Me First move." They went first and tested out a capability that had been largely untested in this market and it was a hit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh in the US Maybe, but in the UK video calling was everywhere. Infact we have a network that is dedicated to 3G only phones, ALL of which in the beginning were capable of Video Calls. I think only one of them was a Symbian Phone, the N70.
We had plenty handsets in the UK and Europe capable of Video Chat but it never really kicked off. However, from your post I now realise why Apple are plugging it as much as they are, it hasn't been done properly in the US (and now technology is more advanced anyway).
Remember the European/Asian market is bigger than the US one (This is probably the ONLY industry where Europe technically comes first) so it probably didn't kick off originally in the US because manufacturers were seeing their Video Call phones do poorly in the UK/Europe and just didn't bother with the US because of it (Aside from Nokia who arguably, at that time, were big enough to pull it off).
I think Nokia may do it first.
http://m.engadget.com/default/artic...ows-phone-models/&category=classic&postPage=1
Concept, prototype, don't know.
brummiesteven said:
Ahh in the US Maybe, but in the UK video calling was everywhere. Infact we have a network that is dedicated to 3G only phones, ALL of which in the beginning were capable of Video Calls. I think only one of them was a Symbian Phone, the N70.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I bought my Sony Ericsson V600 Vodafone gave me another for free, which I gave to my wife... we had a blast on video calls.
To some people on the internet, Nokia's lack of a front-facing camera is a deal breaker. But tell me why? It has yet become common-use and people, for the most part only use it a few times for novelty purposes. I would understand not getting the lumia 800 because the screen is too small, but stop talking about FFC unless you can see a practical and consistent use for it.
Besides, Nokia compensates in other ways. It has Nokia Maps and its suppose to be the best built-in maps. No competition. Now that has a practical use. It's has a top-notch camera as well. Dual-LED with Carl Zeiss Tessar lens. However, I heard it's not on par with the Titan though.
It's a nice feature to have (e.g. seeing gf/wife/kids while on the road, etc) but yeah many people don't need it.
However, it's a check-the-box kind of feature. When your main competitors in the iPhone and the Android superphones have it, you better damn well make sure your flagship Windows Phone has it
Aerik said:
To some people on the internet, Nokia's lack of a front-facing camera is a deal breaker. But tell me why? It has yet become common-use and people, for the most part only use it a few times for novelty purposes. I would understand not getting the lumia 800 because the screen is too small, but stop talking about FFC unless you can see a practical and consistent use for it.
Besides, Nokia compensates in other ways. It has Nokia Maps and its suppose to be the best built-in maps. No competition. Now that has a practical use. It's has a top-notch camera as well. Dual-LED with Carl Zeiss Tessar lens. However, I heard it's not on par with the Titan though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that it's a nice feature to have. It's a must for video calling, though.
it all comes down to features that are important to the end user, while i'm in the FFC is not all that important camp, there are others who might use it a lot on their current phone, or have a need and use for it, and to them, the loss of the FFC is a deal breaker.
the part that perplexes me is that the N9 has one, which makes the virtually identical 800 not having one irritating.
personally, i'm pretty let down by the 800, aside from the great industrial design, the rest of the phone seems pretty mediocre to me, but again, it's the stuff that the focus s and titan have that more fall into line with what i care about in my next phone which makes them better.
as far as why FFC could be a big deal, common reasons are long distance relationships (apple exploits the armed forces in their iphone4 ads, but it could also be people who travel a lot for business, in which a phone might be a more convenient way to see your loved ones when a laptop can be unweildly) the here and there instances when you need to show someone something, and a call or text won't do, etc.
It's not a big deal. I'm sure most people have complained about the screen size and storage, not the FFC. It's a case of ok if it's there, doesn't really matter if it's not.
Because some people what to video chat with loved ones, or it could be anybody really.
My last phone had one but I never used it. my new phone doesn't have one and I want one now and im not buying another phone without one now that most of my family has them
Just because its not important to you doesnt mean it isnt to other people and really I dont see why they took the ffc out to begin with, even HTC is adding them to their phones.
I think it's because people like to hold Microsoft to a higher standard. Apple and Google can mess up all they want but as soon as Microsoft does all the haters jump at it. The lack of FFC and dual core situation is no different.
Sent from my T7575 using Board Express
JustinTV773 said:
I think it's because people like to hold Microsoft to a higher standard. Apple and Google can mess up all they want but as soon as Microsoft does all the haters jump at it. The lack of FFC and dual core situation is no different.
Sent from my T7575 using Board Express
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The attitude like this sparks the flame wars.
As for the OP: I am using ffc occasionally to gtalk with people when I am not near my laptop.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
lqaddict said:
The attitude like this sparks the flame wars.
As for the OP: I am using ffc occasionally to gtalk with people when I am not near my laptop.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
who said I was getting an attitude?
Sent from my T7575 using Board Express
Features, quite simply. While you, and admittedly I, do not use it (I don't, at all) we just acknowledge that many see this as a necessary - and at this point standard feature - that from here on out it should be present on any legitimately "high-end" phone. No questions, it should just be there. When Android phones started using it (and I'm aware they were around long before) people questioned it and their overall usefulness. It's obviously a well requested feature and should be as standard as an opposite facing camera, given the greater leaps made in video conferencing / chatting as of recent time.
Its not so much that it's a huge deal, but something that should just be standard.
Sent from m-IUI
Aerik said:
To some people on the internet, Nokia's lack of a front-facing camera is a deal breaker. But tell me why? It has yet become common-use and people, for the most part only use it a few times for novelty purposes. I would understand not getting the lumia 800 because the screen is too small, but stop talking about FFC unless you can see a practical and consistent use for it.
Besides, Nokia compensates in other ways. It has Nokia Maps and its suppose to be the best built-in maps. No competition. Now that has a practical use. It's has a top-notch camera as well. Dual-LED with Carl Zeiss Tessar lens. However, I heard it's not on par with the Titan though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's mostly a gimmick IMO. People want it because it exists in other high end devices, so it makes their devices look worse without it.
I had 2 cell phones with front cameras and I only used that feature one time to test it for fun. I believe that not many people would want to hold their phone like a mirror and talk to their contacts with everyone around looking at their personal video calling.
It reminds me of personal assistants like Siri on the iPhone. Everybody likes them, but in the end they get used only inside the house for fun and sometimes away from other family members.
Front Cameras also raise the cost of a device without offering a great functionality.
Never-Ever used front Cam on mobiles i had..
Sent from my Cm7-I9000 using Tapatalk
3-d and thinness are seen in standard high-end Tvs but that doesnt mean it's a deal breaker. Sure, it's a great to have, but some things can easily compensate. I'd say, in the way I use my phones, that Nokia maps easily well and over compensates for the lack of FFC. However, I do wish the screen was 4inches ...
also a nice feature for checking your hair
those of you saying it's no big deal.. you are quite ignorant. again, i'm one who would not use it (currently). but i know many who video chat all the time on their phone. if they currently are used to always video chatting, why would they get a phone without one. its very simple to see why many wouldn't even consider a phone without a FFC. it's all opinion guys.. just because you don't see the point in something doesn't mean it's pointless.
Red Grenadine said:
It's a nice feature to have (e.g. seeing gf/wife/kids while on the road, etc) but yeah many people don't need it.
However, it's a check-the-box kind of feature. When your main competitors in the iPhone and the Android superphones have it, you better damn well make sure your flagship Windows Phone has it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best answer in the thread.
cgibsong002 said:
also a nice feature for checking your hair
those of you saying it's no big deal.. you are quite ignorant. again, i'm one who would not use it (currently). but i know many who video chat all the time on their phone. if they currently are used to always video chatting, why would they get a phone without one. its very simple to see why many wouldn't even consider a phone without a FFC. it's all opinion guys.. just because you don't see the point in something doesn't mean it's pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not only that but MS just bought Skype video chat will be integrated at an OS level we want phones that will be ready for the inevitable.
I honestly only used the FFC for checking for boogers
Aerik said:
3-d and thinness are seen in standard high-end Tvs but that doesnt mean it's a deal breaker. Sure, it's a great to have, but some things can easily compensate. I'd say, in the way I use my phones, that Nokia maps easily well and over compensates for the lack of FFC. However, I do wish the screen was 4inches ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think comparing a camera to a display type is fair. I'm sure one could make the argument for both, why one is would seem of more use, but one is obviously a stronger mobile standard than the other and offers more legitimate use. One being directed more toward media intake, albeit in a smaller demographic, while the other appeals and offers to a larger demographic. I have rarely used mine, but it is entrely more productive than some display tech. Especially considering when you consider a form that doesn't fill a scale such as HD output does. That's exactly why 3D TVs haven't made that jump yet.
Sent from m-IUI
Aerik said:
3-d and thinness are seen in standard high-end Tvs but that doesnt mean it's a deal breaker. Sure, it's a great to have, but some things can easily compensate. I'd say, in the way I use my phones, that Nokia maps easily well and over compensates for the lack of FFC. However, I do wish the screen was 4inches ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't compensate that. Its a missing hardware component. Its not like using opera mobile because a stock browser is missing hardware acceleration. If its not there its not there.
All Tablets, higher iOS/WP/Android devices, high end Pmps (galaxy player/ITouch) have it. Most mid range phones are now shipping with vga front cams. Not putting it there is denying your users a whole means of communicating and making your phones less useful to business users who need stuff like WebEx.
However go ahead and downplay it.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
Beside video calling it is also great if you want to take pictures with yourself in the picture because you can actually see on the screen what you are shooting.
Anyway, right now I think it is not so important because there is no skype app available, but if Skype gets integrated like Facebook the FFC could really become a deal breaker on the Nokia 800.
In my own case, I would find FFC to be really useful. I may be in the minority, but I was using video-calling over 3g with my old Touch Diamond2. In addition to using it with a mobile, I quite often use Skype to stay in touch with family, both extended family and my own family when I'm working away.
I recently had to travel for work, and due to corporate software policy, was unable to have Skype on my work laptop. This mean I carried an additional (old and bulky) laptop with me on my travels. I personally would have found it so much more convenient to simply be able to make the call on my mobile.
I simply assumed that with MS purchasing Skype, and Nokia buying into WP7, there'd be no question of FFC missing from the latest batch of phones. I was about to go with Nokia for past history of good quality hardware, good cameras etc. And then I found out that the memory would still be limited (I didn't realise how much of the 8Gb on my current Omnia 7 is reserved for the OS/apps, etc) *and* FFC was missing.
Now, in the grand scheme of things, these might not matter to the majority of users. But I miss having my favourite albums on tap, and the ability to video call on those occasions I wish to do so. And sadly, I've not ordered the new Nokia phones and have decided to hang on to the Omnia 7 until next year, when Nokia are due to release more handsets.
Slightly off topic - but regarding the memory, I used to have a 2Gb SD card in my TD2. This was more than enough for me to carry around my albums, but now I have less albums on an 8Gb Omnia 7! (Mind you, I have far more photos due to the ease of use of taking pictures ) I don't fully understand why MS decided to control the use of expandable memory in such a way. I can see why, but in my mind, I keep asking why people aren't allowed to add memory to suit their own needs.
Nonetheless, apart from the two issues mentioned above, I'm really happy with my phone, quite often demonstrating it to my iPhone/Android-toting work buddies. I'd just really like to be able to tell them one day that it also has Flash player support, expandable memory and video calling built in