Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Wireless Video Phone 46

Posted by CowboyNeal from the yet-another-cool-toy dept.
Switch writes "This article from CNN introduces the latest and greatest wireless technology. NEC is going to produce a "viewer" that includes a CCD camera, microphone, and 2" LCD display for wireless communication with video. And to make it cooler, the communication takes place via a radio link to your cell phone which could be in your pocket, briefcase, etc... " I don't even own a cell phone yet, but these look pretty cool.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wireless Video Phone More

Wireless Video Phone

Comments Filter:
  • There're a lot of questions about whether this video phone thing is practical enough to own. I think the more immediate question is if it'll ever make it to the U.S.

    The U.S. is just so pitifully behind in their digital cell phone services. Anyone ever try travelling around the U.S. with one? Whatever network you choose, it's far from all-encompassing. Now head over to Europe or Asia, and see just how much better their phones work. And how many more things you can do w/ it (pay bills, text-message, etc.).

    And the accessories that are available to phone users. Like the bland outer casings for them Nokia phones that are marketed here PALE in comparison to the smorgasbord of designs you can get in - of all places - the Philippines. (You'd be surprised at just how many people in this poly-island country have cell phones. And text-messaging is now part of the youth culture there.)

    Also a beef I have w/ the U.S. digital cell phone services is if you wanna switch companies, you have to buy a freakin' new phone for it. Because the phone you'd been using was meant to be used for just that one cell phone company. This explains why there're no longer long-term contracts like they had w/ the analog phones. This is how they getcha!

    Check this article out. It's entitled Why your cell phone stinks [pathfinder.com] from TIME. They blame the standards wars (CDMA, PCS, GSM) of years past to why the U.S. is behind.

  • Give me a 384 Kbps wireless link any day, but PLEASE don't make me go to the mall to use it.

    I don't like shopping much anyway, but malls are the pits...
  • Should be easy enough to morph your lip movements into a (video presentation of your choice).

    Make videos of yourself in different settings, suit and tie, boardroom in the background etc, be easy to do especially at this resolution.
    mmmmm (just don't mix up the themes)
  • Scenario: You call in to work sick so that you can go and hang out at the brand new Nudie bar that just opened up down the street. Your boss calls you on your Video Phone... Your at the nudie bar.... Not good... And what if you leave it at home? Boss will be suspicious... Definate bummer.. Unless your the boss
  • Edit the datastream to give you a shave, remove those bags from your eyes, comb your hair, draw on a shirt and tie. Think we can adapt the fortune generator to give you a daily tie?

    Zipwow
  • Have a look at this one : http://popularmechanics.com/popmech/elect/9909EFCO BM.html cyborg suit with lcd and assorted stuff [popularmechanics.com]
  • This is the link that never ends,
    it just goes on and on my friend,
    some people started clicking it not knowing what it was,
    and they'll continue clicking it forever just because this is the link that never ends. . .

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."

  • To continue on that line of thought, when are they going to start adding features to cell phones to make them safer.

    As a motorcyclist (and geek) I am constantly on guard against the morning commuter who feels the need to chat on the phone and check out something on their lap top, never mind what lane their Volvo just drifted into. Unfortunately, I think it will take a well loved celebrity being killed by one of these drivers to wake up the general population and have some changes made. I'm nomiating the Back Street Boys for this dubious honor.

    What they really need to do is make more voice operated phones that can tie into the cars speaker system so people can pay attention to the road and not the phone in their hand.

  • If you are in Japan and you want to try it out today (albeit for stills), you can get the Kyocera [kyocera.co.jp] PHS (Personal Handyphone System) phone. It send JPGs.

    PHS is kind of neat: The voice-only handsets are unbelievably tiny. PHS also has fixed-mobile intergration that works. You can get relatively inexpensive home base stations that enable you to use PHS handsets on your home wireline connection (and wireless PBX systems for work). PHS can move data at 64kbps, so it is adequate for mobile or in-building wireless Internet access. PHS also supports a widely used pocket e-mail terminal system in Japan.

    PHS is popular with kids in Japan for casual use. You can get handsets in sparkly pink colors. There are even "Hello Kitty" PHS phones. So I doubt the picture capability will be used to enhance business transactions.

  • Video phones are an old idea. Somehow, we all thought that by the Year 2000(tm), we'd all have video phones at home. And sure enough, the technology's here. You can get a nice webcam and off you go.

    But it hasn't picked up with the majority of the population, which is why it's something of the past. The reason is, the phone provides instantaneous communication. That's its fuction and purpose. The purpose is not to see the other, most of the times. Who would want to run out of the shower to answer an important call, then have to hide behind a sofa to speak on the phone?

    So, this gadget will only be bought by senior management who somehow manage to bull$hi7 the accounting department into saying this is useful. Sure, on the off-chance that you're stuck in the bathroom (heh, little AY2K joke) for an important video conference call, it's gonna be great. Other than that, I think very few people will actually bother with it.

    Yeah, it's cool. So that leaves senior management and geeks to buy it. :)

    "There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than to contaminate it with the facts."

  • I work at a distributed company, we have sites all over the world, and teams working on projects at multiple sites.

    That said, I can say with authority that phone conferencing does NOT work. It's a pain in the ass. You never know if someone is there on the other line, or if they've left the room, or if they even showed up to the meeting in the first place. That's just one minor issue. Then you don't get facial expression, so people don't bother trying to make jokes, so meetings consequently end up very boring, then there are times when knowing who said what is very important. Being able to connect a face to a voice, and by association, a name, distinguishes the content of what they said. Over a speakerphone, half the time you have no idea who's saying what.

    So, for personal use, I think videophones probably have no future, but for business use, I don't see how we're going to survive without this technology, as the trend towards globalization and mega-mergers continues.

    "The number of suckers born each minute doubles every 18 months."
  • Actually, almost all cellphone models I've seen have some sort of "hands free" car kit. I've even been hearing commercials for GTE's new "wildfire" system that adds voice recognition/receptionist to that. Too bad nobody seems to use them.

    I'm glad I live in an area where three lanes in one direction is something pretty darn unusual.
  • If you read the article carefully, you might have noted that the device is for the 3G network - not CDMA. They are using the WCDMA until the 3G network is up and running. The 3G network is supposed to have some amazing bandwidth. The article mentions some of the slower rates.

    The mess you are referring to (CDMA vs GSM vs PCS) is being resolved in the 3GPP committee. 3GPP is the next generation cell phone consortium. All the major players of devices are supporting this, as are most of the service providers. If you are really having trouble sleeping, check out http://www.3gpp.org/ ^_^

    Lots of fun stuff coming up in that network. You'll have a lot more capability than the limited stuff in GSM or CDMA. I'm still learning all the bells and whistles they are putting in...just need more coffee to get through some of the documentation.

  • I'm glad MPEG4 is finally being implemented. I've been waiting for somebody to do something with it. Now if only a good AAC codec would come out, we could drop MP3 (it has a lot of backwards-compatibility cruft) for the better technology.
  • I think my grandfather could have set his calendar by it too.

    Wasn't it the 1939 world fair when these video phones were demonstrated for the first time? Or maybe it was 1960. Or maybe it was another year entirely.

    In any case, the prospect of video phones being just around the corner has become almost an urban legend.

  • We're getting there quickly. Timex's new Beepwear Pro has combined the features of both the Beepwear watches (alphanumeric nationwide paging) and the Timex DataLink. The thing is a bit bulky, isn't too waterproof, and can only display one line of text at a time, but it does allow for data to be paged directly to your watch.

    But it is still very important. Once a major company introduces a product onto the market, other companies will try and refine the concept in order to steal some of the action. So it's a matter of time before someone slims it down, adds a color screen, and throws in a cellular modem and TCP/IP layer [drool, drool....]

  • The postage stamp picture of your wife might not do much for you, but she might like to see the full size picture of you if she's at home. Or maybe you have some of those virtual display goggles in your pocket (another $2,500 - but what the hell!) that you plug into your cellphone/PDA.

    As far as pizza guys/bathrobes, etc, I see the video portion of a call being off by default. So you're at home watching TV, the phone rings and you pick it up on the cordless phone and retire back to the couch.. It's the gf/wife - or someone else you care to see - so you hit the video button, and the picture pops up on the TV via the set top box interface (Bluetooth wireless connection again, perhaps). You could switch it to speaker phone too, if you wanted.

    BTW, 300K bps is actually pretty good for MPEG-4 or H.264. The older Picturetel video conferencing setups used 128K, and were OK, even using what was probably worse compression.
  • I've been giving a lot of thought to this - what with Orange (I've been a customer of theirs for 3 years now) launching a PDA cum hands free phone cum digital camera cum video phone cum wireless net access terminal next year.

    The videophone is a great gimmick - I'll be able to see my otherhalf on the phone - probably no-one else because not that many people will buy them.

    However it's not the main reason I'd buy one - my palm pilot makes a great organiser - but it cant connect to the net without a phone connected by a lead or pointing directly at it. Yeah bluetooth would be nice but it's a fair while off yet.

    I want a machine that will give me information when I want it - not stuff I've already filed away or synced with the device - but anything I want. Train times when I go visit my mum, travel information if I'm stuck in a traffic jam, a street map when I'm on my way to a friends. Yeah the display will be small but I'll still be able to make sense of the information.

    Orange are promising to make fast and easy wirefree internet access a reality - they should, within the next two years, be able to bill based on data throughput - untill then they're offering uncompressed speed of 28.8kbps wirefree - faster than my first modem - heck even GSM's basic 9.6kbps is faster than my first modem.

    I think that with the right design and spin these devices will become powerfull tooles - enabling people to get things done quicker and easier without reliance on data collation before the event - this is what is going to revolutionise internet access.

    M@t :o)
  • You can almost set your calendar by it; every year since 1975 I've seen a story about videophones and how they're just around the corner. It's a bit like deorbiting Mir; everyone expects it to happen any day now but it just keeps being put off.
    The difference? This time it looks like it might actually happen.
    And if it actually does work at 384kbps... coolness epitomised.
  • Although I'm sure it would be easier to tell what the heck the other person is saying over a crackly cellphone connection when you can see their lips move, everybody around would be in on the conversation.. and could you imagine people /driving/ while trying to use one of these things? Soccer moms in their SUV's are bad enough even when they're not watching little Jordan over their cell/video phone.

  • Old hat... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is nothing new. Japan has been building the wireless network interface for which this device was originally built for a long time, and introduced this very device many moons ago. It seems that they couldn't settle on a standard, like the rest of the world, so they're trying to support multiple standards. I think that's the story, anyway. Either way, I know someone who worked on the network in Japan... Bad news: the code ain't pretty. :) Naturally, the US version of this phone probably won't work as well, considering that we have half of the bandwidth of Japan's wirless networks. Of course, all of the current standards will be eclipsed pretty soon anyway. Can you say wireless T1? Drat... I think that I missed the first post deadline...
  • I wonder who really needs a 2-inch video screen attached to their cell phone? What *I* want is the 3G cell phone tech that allows me to be connected to the net at 384 kbps while walking around town. I've never once desired a video phone, but I'd kill for a universal, mobile, high-speed internet connection...
  • I have a friend who is an internet entrepreneur. He works from home producing the back end of a bodybuilding supplement company. (shameless plug: www.massquantities.com>) [massquantities.com]

    I was talking to him the other day about his work habits. Generally, he crawls out of bed early in the morning in his underwear, teleconferences with some people on the east coast, then maybe shaves, maybe showers, and most definitely sits down to a day of work. His most amusing comment was, "Thank god I don't have videoconferencing"

    Personally I agree. I'd love to work at home, but most of the benefits come from being a slob in privacy. I personally work better that way. Videoconferencing has a nasty way of spoiling things.

    'Course, if its only from the neck up, I guess he could throw on a tie and still sit around in his underwear... :-)

    -konstant
  • ....to see what kind of kick-ass PDA's come out that I can't affort, yet still lust after.
  • It'll cause deaths; no doubt about that. But that's no reason to hold back on it. All we can do is hope that when it's some asshole's time to go, s/he doesn't take too many passers by with him/^H^Her.
    Theres no (no) technology that can't be misused to the extremely prejudicial detriment of the hapless luser. I'm willing to bet some moron accidently killed himself by choking on cotton balls.
  • While far from the 400Kbps needed for VCR quality, video on the handset is smoother than the world's first video phone, Kyocera's 165-gram VisualPhone, according to the NEC representative. The Kyocera phone retails for around 40,000 yen (US$385) and broadcasts data at 32Kbps, or about 2 images per second.
    Why don't they just save money and put a Tamagochi that synchs up with the users voice for that rate. I believe that most internet phones over a 56k like have at least 6 fps, possibly more. IMHO 2 fps is too jerky to cause me to go out and buy this technology that could quite possibly go the way of Beta and Divx.

    I hope that the new phones are at least in the 10 to 15 fps range

    As usual all opinions are probably wrong.

  • So do we care more about the vid phone option or being able to get 384kbps while walking through the mall?

    I don't really see the use for a cellular vidphone. Maybe nice to prove the capabilities of the WCDMA, but come on now. Can you imagine someone driving down the road with one of these? I'm not joking. They'll do it.

    I could see the use for business people (the old seeing-your-opponent-while-making-the-deal thing), but other than that this is *definitely* within the realms of Cyberclysm.

    Although it would be usefull to be driving down the road, see an accident, and be able to show it to the police before they get there. Maybe get a doctor on the other end in case there is a major injury?

    In that case, I'm wrong.

    So is it, or is it not cyberclysm-ish?

  • One fundamental issue that has always confused me is, "why do we need video phones?". I can understand the increase in the feeling of intimacy, since you could see your significant other as well as speak with them. What I fail to see is just how this would improve our lives. I know there are many subtle clues that facial expressions give us about the emotional state of the speaker, but I find it hard to believe that a 300 kbs+ video phone with a 2 inch screen is going to be able to convey them. Seeing a little postage stamp of my wife isn't really going to add much to the experience of communicating with her.

    Likewise, for routine conversation/communication, a video connection seems undesirable. I don't want to see the pizza guy's face, and frankly I probably don't want him to see mine. Just the idea of hearing the phone ring and saying, "oh crap, it's the phone, let me put something on" is revolting. In the case of obscene/malicious calls, the added video stream could actually put people in danger. (oh, I see that you are home alone). Single women would probably need to switch off the video inputs of their phones just for safety purposes.

    Fundamentally, it seems like a big can of worms, and not the tasty gummy kind either.
  • The arguments are well stated, so from that perspective I'm not just sitting here looking for something to disagree with...

    But the proverbial "they" said the same types of things about the horseless carriage, electricity, html framesets, and pretty much every new technology to come along.

    In the course of human events I'm sure the videophone will find its place, grow in size, and be useful for at least half of the things it proponents advocate.

  • I don't care about video phone crap. What I want is a huge honkin server on the web at home which will respond to queries containing pictures of people with a DB lookup. It can then return info (in quasi-real time) about the person to whom I am speaking. In addition i want to be able to take notes and have them instantly sent back to the server so I can load the pda type device up with more crap. The way I see it is a tiny front end to a massively distributed system would the greatest use for this. Composing music on the PDA and having it dumped back to the server, converted into actual mp3 or someodd format and then streamed back to the PDA. Hello awesome! The coffee shop would be my office. A nice long bike ride and then a picnic out in the middle of no where, do some work and then ride back. I can't wait for the future. g
  • Nope. This technology has been hyped like the convergence between computers and TV. Neither of those technologies is going to be anywhere near as popular as everyone has said they will be. Can you imagine how fast your batteries would be drained? Even if there's a breakthrough in battery tech, can you imagine how much bandwidth you'd use? I can't see wasting that much bandwidth just to see the person you're talking to. In fact, the only place I see this being useful is before a blind date. Other than that, it's a little too frivolous to become standard, and without it being standard, you can only do the "vid thing" with other people with your kind of phone.
    Can you say vaporware?
  • Also check out http://www.uk.orange.net/news/index.html There is an article for a device Orange is developing for release next year. Of course it runs on Windows CE so I wonder how they are going to fit start menu of such a small screen :)
  • What would be cool is gps and a map build in instead of video. then you could find you friends or girlfriend in a mall...
  • I'm pretty sure it will happen, only different.
    UMTS is supposed to show up in 2-3 years (at least here in Europe, don't know about the states). It will offer 384kbps (up to 2 Mbit theoretical max), data services included. Wireless videoconferencing on the Internet. Cool? Yes.

    However the question is: will the cost/benefit make it attractive?

    Radio bandwith is a scarce resource for a wireless network operator. When you have sufficient subscribers (which is the case with GSM in almost every country), would you rather serve one guy at 384 kbps (video) or 24 subscribers at 16kbps (audio)?

    That means you can expect your video call to cost 24 times as much as a normal phone call. I doubt that people find each others face that attractive...

    It would be cool to use the higher bandwith together with devices like the Sony Vaio C1, where I can record and edit pictures and videos, combine them with documents, etc.
    How much more interesting than a videophone...

  • For me, I care more about being able to get 384kbps while walking through the mall.

    It would also be a big risk to hand these devices to most people. I already get freaked out when I am driving and I see a minivan with mom driving while talking on her phone and telling the kids in the back to be quiet. Does she or any other driver really need another visual thing to worry about?

    Give me that 384kbps connection while I am walking through the mall, I would love that.

    --[Patryn]
  • > One fundamental issue that has always confused me is, "why do we need video phones?".

    Anyone remember what happened cu-seeme, and later on, micros~1 NetMeeting?

    The first application of any new technology is almost always pornography. (grinning, ducking, and running)

  • I don't think convergence between computers and TV is for everyone, and I think the only company that's done it right is WorldGate (settop box requires 0.5% of a PC to run, and communication is entirely over two-way cable instead of the WebTV type telephone connection solution, generally priced between $4-$15/month, depending on the cable system)

    Just realize though that while everyone on /. has the money to pay for "real" computers and internet access, $5/month, with no additional equipment neccessary looks REALLY good compared to a $600 computer, plus $20/month internet access, and then it'll block your phone line unless you spend another $20-$30 for a dedicated line.

    I do however agree that videophones are overhyped technology at it's finest. Anybody who can afford one of these can afford a computer and a cam for it which is a TON safer considering your average soccer mom doesn't know how to hook up a laptop into her car, etc etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

PURGE COMPLETE.

Close