The issues in video-conferencing, linking to virtual organizations are not I think, about one to one communications... The work from the '60's and '70's, pretty much established that video didn't add very much to the communications capabilities or the ordinary telephone (and now ordinary telephone supplemented by email, chat and so on). Rather, the "advance" if it is to be made would be in the area of multi-party communications and particularly multi-party multi-point communications.
This has been either enormously expensive or very "aesthetically" unappealing (CU-See-Me/Net Meeting). These types of meetings which are the base for much of the on-going collaborative, negotiative (?), inter-organizational communicative work of companies and other enterprises are where a lot of the costs are and where much of the resistance has been. The NYT has an article this morning (written by Hal Varian one of the leading economists tracking technology) talking about whether video-conferencing might or might not have reached critical mass/tipping point/sufficient network externalities to in fact become "normal" behaviour rather than "experimental". What normalization would mean is that rather than organizations turning to their travel agents to organize meetings, they would turn to their telecoms folks. The stocks of firms providing video-conferencing technologies are currently up 30% on the NYSE. We shall see, Mike Gurstein ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 3:53 AM Subject: Re: FWk: Internet videophone > Hi Pete, > > Firstly, my apologies for not replying to your message concerning technical > matters of HDTV, screen resolutions and so on. I was busy at the time, and > most of these were above my head anyway. > > Videoconferencing: > > You say that Michael didn't answer my original question as to why people > think that videoconferencing is tedious. I rather think that he circled > around an answer when he wrote: > > (MG) > <<<< > The latest buzz is about the use of Broadband with multiple cameras and thus > multiple perspectives being available (but of course, then you need a video > producer to manage your meetings!) or the re-creation in (virtual) three > dimensions of the folks sitting around the table as holograms/avatars able > to interact with each other in real-time--holodecks anyone--this is > available now in experimental form BTW... > >>>> > > This tends to support my original suggestion that videoconferencing -- so > far -- can't replicate the real situation where people are sitting near one > another and can observe others' behaviour pretty accurately and also -- > very importantly I think -- direct their gaze in a natural way when > speaking preferentially to one or other of the group. > > We, and our immediate primate forebears, have been living in small groups > for, what?, two million years or so, and we must have evolved all sorts of > subtle instinctive behaviours to maximise communication. And, in fact, to > observe that a communication to another has been successfully received and > understood. I think this could have become instinctive even before the > evolution of speech. > > Last night on BBC Newsnight I was observing a blind government minister, > Blunket, talking to others. For most of the time while he was speaking he > looked straight ahead of him but at the tale-end of a statement he always > flicked his gaze to look directly at the person to whom his remarks were > directed. This looked very much like instinctive behaviour to me. > > I remember reading about a fascinating research project some years ago > whereby deaf people were asked to rate the sincerity of statements made by > a politician (Reagan, if I remember exactly) on the TV screen. This was > highly subjective, of course, but apparently the instances they cited > coincided with those made by a control group with normal hearing -- and > with a few more besides! > > The whole matter of 'micro facial movements' (to use Ray Harrell's recent > phrase) and other subtle non-verbal behaviour is interesting and, probably, > extremely important in a group situation. For example, we are all probably > aware that when a (male) speaker's hand rises quickly to his head (usually > to be quickly deflected to scratching his nose or neck) then it's a sign of > insincerity or dishonesty -- a sign of disguised antipathy to what he's > heard or actual lying if he himself is speaking. We register all these > things instinctively, I think, when talking to others. > > To revert briefly to mobile videophones, I think that the defects of > videoconferencing will not be so evident in such 1:1 situations. There'll > be a certain amount of artificiality but not so great as to prevent it > being popular, particularly among teenagers -- as text and voicemail is > now. I have to report, however, that the DoCoMo mobilephone, which was > launched at the beginning of this week, is not due to have video facilities > until early 2002. > > Even so, other big telecoms firms, such as Orange and Vodafone, are > sceptical about the viability of videophones for several more years yet. > Also DoCoMo's videophone will cost about US$400 plus charges of about > US$100 per month and these prices seem too much for teenagers -- hitherto > the prime market for mobilephones. > > But there's another very fascinating aspect about videophones. This is that > because they are Net-linked all the time, then it is possible that the user > of one could be caught out in embarrassing situations when an unexpected > caller could see the background revealed by his (callee's) videophone > camera. I can foresee that the videophone will be the cause of many divorces! > > Keith > > ___________________________________________________________________ > > Keith Hudson, General Editor, Calus <http://www.calus.org> > 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England > Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ________________________________________________________________________ >
