All About Symbian - Nokia (S60) and Sony Ericsson (UIQ) smartphones unwrapped

Go Back   All About Symbian Forums > News and Comments > Symbian OS News

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

  #16  
Old 14-06-2010, 03:42 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I think this article misses the biggest drawback from this new "open standard": One is only likely to use video calling if one can be sure the recipient can receive the call. Right now people able to receive Facetime calls is limited to some Apple employees.

At the same time we have this huge mass of people video already video calling each other with Skype. Why is Apple's invention better than implementing Skype video calling (to other handsets and to the millions of existing PC/Mac users) on handsets? From Apple's point of view the only drawback of Skype is that it's successful service run by someone other than Apple themselves.

As an example there's a Skype client on N900, which by the way, supports video calling with 3G in addition to Wifi today?
Ads

  #17  
Old 14-06-2010, 05:30 AM
jfanning jfanning is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6
jfanning is on a distinguished road
Price has nothing to do with it

I can get a package in Finland that includes 3000 minutes and 3000 minutes video calls as standard.

No one uses video calls except to try it out.

I just read a couple of days ago that less than 1% of all calls are video and it is so bad most operators stopped even reporting any statistics.

I can't see how Apples attempt improves on 3G video calls in any way at all except better quality. There is absolutely no usability improvement because 3G video calls were dead simple to make anyway. And the WiFi limitation makes it likely that all calls will be done from home anyway and there I have a much better system in my PC/mac and Skype.

  #18  
Old 14-06-2010, 05:36 AM
malerocks's Avatar
malerocks malerocks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 644
malerocks is on a distinguished road
I find video calling fun, even though I admit that I have not used it too frequently. And here in India, where we still do not have 3G implemented properly, I have been using it mostly on fring.

Fring I believe has implemented the video calling well and even though the video gets a bit choppy at times (due to connection speed).Like many people here have commented, fring allows video over both wifi and 3G. However, there is a limitation that you have to be on fring to initiate the call - like there is on iphone that both people have to be on iphone 4.

I hope this feature evolves. IMO this is just a fun feature and will never be mainstream, but I want it to stay and not die like MMS.

  #19  
Old 14-06-2010, 06:17 AM
kalel17
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
video call cost

here in Jamaica a video call cost the same as a conventional voice call on claro's network, 7 JMD or about 10c USD per minute so its pretty cheap. Plus the quality is ok so its not all that bad.

  #20  
Old 14-06-2010, 06:46 AM
Lobotomik
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

So it seems that only americans have been left out of the 3G videocall 'revolution', and that's why it's only some of them who think it is something new and/or desirable. Meanwhile, the rest of the world agrees: it is tired and useless.

Being locked to gullible Apple's customers is the only strength of this FaceTime thing, for sure.

It is so sad, having waited for so long for the future to arrive, only to realize how silly the whole idea was. But let's move on to something shinier. What could be next? 3D displays sound suitably stupid.

  #21  
Old 14-06-2010, 07:26 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I find that if you are in the position where you are out and need to show somebody something (like shopping), I can get a much better quality image to them if I photograph it and email the photo.

  #22  
Old 14-06-2010, 10:50 AM
malerocks's Avatar
malerocks malerocks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 644
malerocks is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
I find that if you are in the position where you are out and need to show somebody something (like shopping), I can get a much better quality image to them if I photograph it and email the photo.
That is true, but with video calling you can show images live and get immediate feedback. With the way you suggested, you click, attach to email, email, call other person tell him u emailed, wait for him/ her to download and then re-call (or be on hold till then) to discuss.

Also many stores do not allow you to photograph their merchandise. But... maybe that will apply to sharing over a video call as well.

  #23  
Old 14-06-2010, 11:08 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by wampyre View Post
I am quite well aware that there are songs that are DRM free on iTunes. At least the last time I checked you could still choose between DRM'd music or not (The latter one being tiny wee bit more expensive.)
Wrong again. ALL iTunes music is DRM free. The more expensive songs have a higher bit rate and are also part of a tiered pricing structure.

Quote:
You do have a good point in how the "multitasking" in Apple may be better for the battery but for the sake of argument why did Apple decide to have "real multitasking" implemented partially then?
The thing is that people do and want to do several things at once e.g. listening to Pandora while surfing the web. This can't be done by the iPhone today.
Real multi/tasking as in pre-emptive multi-tasking? I could be wrong but Symbian does not do real pre-emptive multi-tasking but moves apps to and from the foreground. Apple could have done this from the very beginning but chose not to. The main reason being that it could harm battery life as well as the user experience and everyone knows, Apple does like to manage risk and user experience risk. By the way, it can be done (not real or pre-emptive multi-tasking but in a similar fashion as Android, and Symbian) if you bother to jailbreak your phone. The new iOS4 has multi-tasking because I am using it right now.

Quote:
I'm not going to go into details about being locked to one platform, but if you really are interested you can search for the topic plus EU regulations. (To be fair Microsoft also have done this more or less).
The point is that you have to e.g. activate your iPhone through iTunes which seems ridiculous in my eyes.
(I will and do give credit to Apple for making iTunes so userfriendly.)
Other things that make me dislike Apple in general is how they do things.
Example 1 and Example 2

Yes, I did mean that operators can't benefit of FaceTime if it's wifi only. This of course is because Apple products have the "cool factor" and hence can allow themselves to just do as they want and let others apply to their rules.
I can agree with you here and Apple is getting investigated and if they are guilty, I hope they get slammed, just like if it was Nokia or Android or anyone else. The thing is, everyone is trying to protect their little slice of the pie anyway they can. Activating via iTunes is just one way however, there are other library managers now so iTunes is the only game in town. The iPad is an example of Apple moving away from a "tethered" device approach. Once activated and registered via iTunes you can literally only use iTunes just for OS upgrades.

  #24  
Old 14-06-2010, 11:25 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
>> I could be wrong but Symbian does not do real pre-emptive multi-tasking

You are.

>> apps to and from the foreground

You can move apps to and from the foreground. They carry on running when they are moved to the background. The application gets a message from the operating system when it has been moved to the background. It can carry on doing things if it wants to or it can go to sleep. If it goes to sleep (as most will) it won't impact battery life.

  #25  
Old 14-06-2010, 11:34 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
>> I could be wrong but Symbian does not do real pre-emptive multi-tasking

You are.

>> apps to and from the foreground

You can move apps to and from the foreground. They carry on running when they are moved to the background. The application gets a message from the operating system when it has been moved to the background. It can carry on doing things if it wants to or it can go to sleep. If it goes to sleep (as most will) it won't impact battery life.
Right. Then this is pretty much what the new iPhone OS will do. Correct? So in terms of multi-tasking there is no discernible difference other than Apple decided to implement it when they felt the time was right rather than rushing a half-baked idea out the door. Either way, multi-tasking will be taken off the list for some of the Symbian zealots to knock Apple for.

  #26  
Old 14-06-2010, 11:40 AM
Biggles Biggles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 32
Biggles is on a distinguished road
O2 do/did include video calling as normal minutes on their contracts. When I was on O2, I used video calling fairly frequently when I was with them as a result. And let's face it, if the quality was a bit better, video calling would be hugely popular as an alternative to sexting.

Apple will popularise it, that's for sure. But the future isn't wi-fi only and it isn't using just Apple's tech.

  #27  
Old 14-06-2010, 11:42 AM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles View Post
O2 do/did include video calling as normal minutes on their contracts. When I was on O2, I used video calling fairly frequently when I was with them as a result. And let's face it, if the quality was a bit better, video calling would be hugely popular as an alternative to sexting.

Apple will popularise it, that's for sure. But the future isn't wi-fi only and it isn't using just Apple's tech.
Did you miss the part about the standards being open? That would make it a technology agnostic application. It will run on Nokia, Android, etc... if they choose to implement it.

  #28  
Old 14-06-2010, 02:02 PM
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by wampyre View Post
Yes, I did mean that operators can't benefit of FaceTime if it's wifi only. This of course is because Apple products have the "cool factor" and hence can allow themselves to just do as they want and let others apply to their rules.
Sheesh, I didn't realize we are still living in 2004. I can't believe we're still bringing up the myth that Wifi-based features on the phone screws operators over. It's like saying ppl using the PC screw mobile operators over. If the carrier isn't ready to handle video traffic, then limiting the video call feature to Wifi only and still make ppl lock in on the carrier is GOOD for them, not bad!!

-Gene

  #29  
Old 14-06-2010, 02:07 PM
buster buster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 350
buster is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
The standards for FaceTime are open. Meaning anyone can use them. It is up to the other phone manufacturers to decide if they want to join in. So yes initially FT will be limited to the iPhone but Nokia can play along if they can finally figure out how to stop making craptastic software.
Fair point. Still think the whole thing will fail though...

  #30  
Old 14-06-2010, 02:12 PM
buster buster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 350
buster is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Right. Then this is pretty much what the new iPhone OS will do. Correct? So in terms of multi-tasking there is no discernible difference other than Apple decided to implement it when they felt the time was right rather than rushing a half-baked idea out the door. Either way, multi-tasking will be taken off the list for some of the Symbian zealots to knock Apple for.
Not true. Each Symbian app can be designed to do what the programmers chooses when sent to the background. If it is convenient for the app to continue doing what it was doing when in the foreground, then that's just what it does, without being prevented from doing so by the OS. I agree that the iOS4 approach is an improvement on no multi-tasking at all, but it still fails to do something that Symbian has been doing for, well, forever really.

I'm sure that there will be numerous use cases where the iOS4 approach is still too limited; this is not being a zealot, it's being realistic....
 

Bookmarks

Tags
brilliant, calling, facetime, forward, pitch, terrible, video

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 02:39 AM.


vBulletin skins developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Notes || Contact Us || Privacy Policy