This is the future... http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=EC5sbdvnvQM
On Jan 29, 11:17 pm, Eric Winter <[email protected]> wrote: > If it were something we were used to I think that it would be a good > technique. The way it is we find it disconcerting and awkward. My > preschool boys love video chatting with Grandma so I think perhaps > they could grow up not thinking it was odd. I think this could be > solved with time as the generations turn. > > Also, I think it is odd to us in the same way that near reality movies > are weird. They are to close to real to be dismissed but not real > enough to fool our pre-cognitive brain into believing. With better > quality perhaps the second point could be resolved. > > There are definitely good situations for video calls (as I'm sure all > would agree) but unlike Reinier I think that it could gain mass > acceptance. > > On Jan 29, 5:39 am, Christian Catchpole <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Aren't you worried more by a video call where the other party has a > > funny look on their face and one of their shoulders is moving? > > > On Jan 29, 7:17 am, Hairless_ape <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ohhhh this definitely warrants Dick Wall room punishment. > > > > You cannot question Dick Wall's predictions. He said make it so, > > > why aren't you out there making it work? Shame on you! > > > > "We don't need video because it is far too restrictive" > > > > Actually we do. I'm quite uncomfortable with the fact that > > > people I talk to could in theory be wanking! How many times > > > have you talked to someone only to have this nagging feeling > > > of their mind being somewhere else(think of Thor Norbye and his > > > suppossed "coding" during podcasts). > > > Well with video all that goes away and once again you can have a > > > normal conversation. > > > > On Jan 28, 9:48 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Dick suggested that there will be an iPhone gadget to bend the light > > > > around to the camera in #227. Was that a joke? That is completely > > > > ridiculous. > > > > > Nobody cares about video calling. Here in the Netherlands it worked > > > > technically, it didn't have any extra costs (other than, at the time, > > > > a relatively expensive phone), and I had one, and so did a few of my > > > > friends. We never video called. They never video called. There was > > > > some research that asked everyone with a video phone if they even > > > > cared. Nobody did (had the phone for the nice big display, not for the > > > > video calling feature). > > > > > This makes sense: We're all used to the concept of a phone call. We > > > > don't need video because it is far too restrictive (have to LOOK at > > > > it, which, even if everyone walked around with a headset or the > > > > quality of speakerphones was -phenomenally good-, is still annoying. > > > > People call while walking, etcetera) for the meager benefits (attempt > > > > to see emotion through pixellated grainy laggy video, joy!). In > > > > particular, the main thing it tries to solve (convey emotion) is > > > > already done quite adequately by voice. We already subconsciously > > > > exaggerate our voice-based emotional cues when we make a phone call - > > > > we (modern man) has interned the ability completely already. > > > > > A video conference call is somewhat different - you're really sitting > > > > down for that one, and you are prepared. Therein lies the key: With > > > > notebooks and subnotebooks already near ubiquitous, and the notebook > > > > data revolution coming any day now (for you iPhone owners that did the > > > > right thing and you jailbroke it - welcome to the revolution! Just > > > > download pdanet and you're on your way!) - that's the future of video > > > > calling. > > > > > Mark my words: Video calling using mobile phones is a solution in > > > > search of a problem. It'll never become popular. > > > > > I'm not sure if apple has consciously decided that video calling is a > > > > crock when they designed the iPhone, or if they went for the slightly > > > > less definitive 'meh, we'll wait until someone else makes this work'. > > > > Note also how absolutely nobody is complaining that iPhones have no > > > > front cam. > > > > > Either way, using glass or plastic to warp the camera around would > > > > require a giant and very expensive widget, whereas your average simple > > > > webcam costs maybe 5 bucks. Assuming you can pump the video data into > > > > the iPod connector and the restrictive iPhone SDK allows you to get at > > > > this data, a cheap dongle that contains its own camera would be far > > > > more likely. That's presuming that people care about video calling - > > > > which they don't. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
