Skip to Content

WoW Insider has the latest on the Mists of Pandaria!
  • Heathee
  • Member Since Jan 6th, 2006

Are you Heathee? If So, Login Here.

Joystiq2 Comments
TUAW.com5 Comments
Engadget9 Comments
AOL TV1 Comment
WoW15 Comments

Recent Comments:

WoW Insider's Cataclysm launch giveaway: J!NX $100 coupon {WoW}

Dec 6th 2010 7:00PM I hereby comment thou

WoW Insider's Cataclysm launch giveaway: Landros' Gift Box {WoW}

Dec 6th 2010 4:33PM no comment, well I guess that was a comment.

Win a thirty-day game card from WoW Insider {WoW}

Nov 23rd 2010 10:48AM I blame society for things

Win a Lil' K.T. from WoW Insider {WoW}

Nov 23rd 2010 10:47AM I hereby comment!

The Queue: /wave {WoW}

Oct 14th 2010 11:17AM If you're exalted with Orgrimmar in Cataclysm, can you refer to Garrosh Hellscream as Gary?

Guest Post: How to assemble a hot gaming rig for Cataclysm {WoW}

Sep 13th 2010 8:09PM Then just install and it works. These are Winders problems :D

iPhone users may soon be putting on their Google Goggles {}

Aug 25th 2010 7:35PM I get that you don't need a FaceTime phone for video calling. Clearly there have been front facing camera phones for years. The issue isn't whether it can be done, the issue is whether it can be done successfully.

Whether or not Apple is successful remains to be seen but what they are trying to do is create a standard by which all phones can use so that maybe 5 years down the road or so, the vast majority of phones on the market can offer a video chat option that actually is useful because it allows people to video chat with anyone else, whether they are Apple fanboys or not.

You statement that you don't need a FaceTime phone to do video calling touches on the fundamental difference between Apple and most other companies. Most companies focus their products on features. Apple focuses on benefits.

LG (or whoever) can offer a phone that features a front facing camera, a mic, a speaker, 3G, etc. Apple will offer a phone that gives you the benefit of video chat. The difference is that your average company is more than happy to put the hardware in their phone so they can claim it as a feature. Apple is a company that will try to offer it in a way that people will actually use it.

They don't always get it right, and sometimes they make bad choices, but this core value has been the driving factor that has made them a massive success in the past 10 years. It's also why they have been able to essentially introduce products that already exist and somehow still be the game changer.

The reason that FaceTime is so important is not because it's Apple and not because it has certain hardware. It's all about the beginning of a standardized format of video chat that will allow all of us to actually use it.

At it's core, the big deal about FaceTime is that it is a standard. It chooses a set codec, resolution, transfer rate, blah blah blah. This allows companies (like Apple) to build phones that are optimized for this exact format, making video chat possible without killing your battery or dropping video calls left right and centre.

FaceTime will definitely look a lot different in two years than it does today in terms of it's limitations but at the end of the day, The only two companies in the world that are in a position to make this happen as a standard are Apple and Google. And I'm glad it was Apple because they would have been cranky and slow to accept if it was Google. On the other hand, Google is likely to support the format as soon as they can which means that Android phones will get it, which means that Windows Mobile will have it 2 years later (as seems to be their strategy with every feature that exits) and we will have our video chat world that the future has always promised.

iPhone users may soon be putting on their Google Goggles {}

Aug 24th 2010 8:15PM @jigme If you truly think that all it takes to have a FaceTime phone is a front facing camera then there's no point talking to you any further. If you understand the concept of hardware and software standards then you're willing to look ignorant just to zing someone so again, there's no point talking to you any further.

@wygit my apologies. I was trying to localize the situation by saying AT&T. I live in Canada and get wifi only on our carriers too.

AT&T is one of many companies that are unable to support the standard at this time. My original point is the same: The tech outpaces the infastructure.

It's also a good sidenote that Apple would be unlikely to launch this service outside of the United States first, even if the option was on the table.

As for "still waiting." Tomorrow will be 2 months since the iPhone 4 was released. 2 months!

So, I get that you're upset because it's ALMOST been months since FaceTime has been out and it's still not open. I just think that's a silly opinion.

It's going to be at least a wait till next spring before we see competition in a position to bring this tech to market and that's very optimistic. And by then we'll be talking about iOS 5 and it will probably address all kinds of things that currently making you cranky.

Part of being on the bleeding edge with tech toys is you only get to play with the other kids that are there too. It's just too bad that some of us are whiners.

iPhone users may soon be putting on their Google Goggles {}

Aug 24th 2010 4:32PM On one hand it's silly to say to wait for Apple to do it right because the general consensus already is that this is a cool thing. So I'm looking forward to having it.

On the other hand I thing it was Wygit who felt like there was some sort of relevant reason to call out FaceTime in this thread as an example of Apple being too closed.

@wygit FaceTime needs wifi because Apple hasn't been able to get AT&T up to snuff to support it yet. The tech outpaces the infastructure.

And the reason you can only use this tech with an iPhone 4 user is because nobody else has made a FaceTime phone yet. Apple has stated clearly that the FaceTime format is open for competitors to use. So of all the options you had to choose from to comment on Apples closedness, that might be one of the worst choices.