Slashdot Mirror
Apple Planning Video-Call iPhone
An anonymous reader writes "The recently awarded iPhone patent contains hidden claims which indicate Apple is planning to bring video calling and recording features to the iPhone, according to InfoWeek blogger Alex Wolfe. Buried within the 'embodiments' section of patent number 7,479,949 is this: 'In some embodiments, the functions may include telephoning, video conferencing, e-mailing, instant messaging, blogging, digital photographing, digital videoing, web browsing, digital music playing, and/or digital video playing.' Wolfe also cites language indicating Apple is aware that having a rear-facing camera is an impediment towards video calls (and also taking pictures of yourself.): 'In some embodiments, an optical sensor is located on the front of the device so that the user's image may be obtained for videoconferencing while the user views the other video conference participants on the touch screen display.' Screen caps of the patent drawing are also available."
An iphone with a camera opposite the screen could display an image of what's on the other side of the phone, making it seem transparent. Useless, but it would be a cool effect.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Someone should write a video-sharing app for the current iPhone and also sell an iPhone Periscope attachment that lets the current camera look at the user.
After all, this really is one of those times where the iPhone devs must be hitting their heads and saying "Why didn't we think of that sooner?" It seems so obvious in retrospect. Other than the forward-facing camera, there is _nothing_ keeping the current generation of iPhones from having this capability. They've got the power, the robustness, the hardware, and the infrastructure.
Did the devs just have a brainfart when designing the iPhone or was it their intention all along to release such a great new feature that you couldn't upgrade to without upgrading the whole phone, thereby having to buy a new one?
Why is this news?
A 3G phone which can do video calls!? Omg!! ...
A phone which can use its camera for storing videos and which can play music? No shit!
I had assumed the iPhone could already do video-calls, kinda shitty the 3G one can't (if that's really so.)
Or, this is just Apple's attempt at filing a patent that is as broad as possible.
Someone can watch a video of my inner ear while listening to me
Nullius in verba
Wow, video in video - now that's something really new. Patents are bad, imagine a world in which story writers or scientists could claim patents for their ideas - there would be no imagination, no progress.Apart from this general rant, I see absolutely nothing new in here.
I'm a fairly libertarian guy, but wouldn't a whole mob of new video-callers be somewhat dangerous on the road? If you thought texting while driving was bad, just imagine ubiquitous video calling. There would almost have to be legislation against video calls while driving.
That they're reduced to reading through apple patent applications for predictions about "apple's new i-app"?
I find people digging through some hollywood star's trash less creepy.
This is great! Now, can we please have MMS and copy/paste like smartphones from 8 years ago?
It would seem like a majority of this work is already done as between iChat and Quicktime; most if not all of this functionality in OS X since at least 10.3 (maybe earlier). It would seem all they have to do as the poster said, would be to be able to capture the image on the front of the device or have some sort of add-on and code a front-end for the smaller screen.
I am not surprised Apple didn't release this on 1.x models under Edge and the weaker battery, but even on 3G at a low-scale, it would seem like it would be "good enough" for most applications. I wonder if their problem lies with the agreement with AT&T since they are working to prevent VoIP on the platform. It would be interesting if the carrier could detect packets on a protocol, or maintain the servers that connect the video-calls and charge wireless minutes for this kind of traffic. However, I think carriers ought to move away from the call-minutes model in favor of a flat-fee, as in most calling situations I am in (M2M or Nights/Weekends) that is effectively what they are doing. Though I am sure their two biggest cash cows are overages and SMS, which has been discussed before.
Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
The iPhone's screen points one way.
The iPhone's camera points in the opposite direction.
Kinda hard to have a video conference when you have to be on both sides of the device at once for it to work.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
The "video phones of the future" always assumed use while one was outside of the home or at a place of business. The concept broke down when it was realized that people don't want video feeds in their homes. (The "I just got out of the shower" example is often bandied about.) With a cell phone, the concept starts to make sense again. Like with the characters in TekWar, you're usually in an acceptable location and/or state of dress to take video calls on a cell phone.
Of course, it will be interesting to see how many calls are answered in privacy mode. Will people even trust such a feature?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Welcome to the World of Tomorrow!
Why do I want the late-comer to the market when my phone does this perfectly today? You know the first version of it is going to be buggy as hell and probably not even work right. Look at the first iPhone that wasn't even 3G... and the "innovative" 3G version doesn't even work half the time and sucks battery like a cheap hooker.
*sigh*
Apple is hopelessly behind the mainstream of product development.
After all, this really is one of those times where the iPhone devs must be hitting their heads and saying "Why didn't we think of that sooner?"
Not really. You don't think 100000000 developers have already thought of this idea (here I am counting every single current iPhone developer and a whole bunch of outside developers)?
You can't do it now, because the SDK for the camera only takes stills, not video - even the grey areas you can use to capture video are pretty grey, and Apple probably would not accept the techniques used for entries in the store.
I'm sure we'll see that ability in the SDK eventually and as soon as we do, you'll see as many video conferencing apps as TODO lists. It's not from any lack of developer forethought or desire, I assure you.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Now, can we please have MMS..like smartphones from 8 years ago?
Should we bring back everything popular from eight years ago? How about floppy discs?
Some things should be left in the past. Emailing pictures to people is more sensible than MMS.
Copy & paste is a different matter, but even there you are not forward thinking...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
See the new Nintendo DSi for a good example:
- hi-res camera in the rear for taking pictures
- low-res camera in the front for video conferencing (given the resolution of the Nintendo DSi, even a 0.3 megapixel camera is completely overkill)
Or, this is just Apple's attempt at filing a patent that is as broad as possible.
...because if they don't, some joker will probably come along and patent the specific idea of using a "multi touch" interface for video conferencing, and in N years time when Apple are just about to launch the new video iPhone, up will pop the troll...
Remember, a lot of these patents are just there for mutual assured destruction - if they're ever rolled out, only the cockroaches will survive (unless some bastard has patented their genome).
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Sounds great! This should bring the iPhone battery life to a healthy 3 minutes, down from the current generations 3 hour battery life.
In all seriousness, why is this news? I would hope every communications company is planning for the future. The future of phone calls is video calls.
Lets sift through every companies patents and predict all of the wild ideas they are planning in the next 20 years...
claims which indicate Apple is planning to bring video calling and recording features to the iPhone
Of course we all know that a patent claim is an indication that a product is imminently coming to market. That's why patents work so well.
Mind you, it would be somewhat odd if Apple weren't working on these capabilities. They're so far ahead of the rest of the market in UI, it would be nice if they made some effort to catch up in features. Were there any claims in the patent for "a device for the recording of digital pictures that do not look bloody awful"?
Apple is aware that having a rear-facing camera is an impediment towards video calls
I don't think the rear-facing camera is a major worry. The more pressing problem is the lack of a front-facing camera.
Nokia phones did it for years.
But no, this is "THE IPHONE" we are talking about - that's BIG news, you know...
"In some embodiments, the functions may include..."
NB that use of the word "may include" implies a non-exhaustive list. So what other functions might exist?
What's that you say? Programming a flying car?
OMG PONIES APPLE ARE PLANNING TO MAKE A FLYING CAR QUICK BLOG ABOUT IT AND CALL SLASHDOT!!!!!!
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
I have this five years old sh*tty Nokia 6680 and it still has 3G, dual-cameras and can do video conferencing since day one.
You forget that the iPhone, like many of Apple's products, is designed to suck you into the vortex of Apple-world without looking back. We know that ATT is going to announce tethering with the iPhone. It stands to reason that you may use the iPhone to make a video call while tethered to your MAC and use it's iSight camera and other iChat goodies. I'm sure they'll add non-mac support for PC's running webcams and a Windows version of iChat that they'll launch the same time they announce this.
In patenting obvious use of computers with plain devices attached?
An iphone is nothing else then a computer with the capability to make calls.
Why then EVERYTHING the damned computer does has to get a brand new patent?
I don't understand why this is news. These iPhone articles are like reading some new mother's blog about their child, and every time the kid laughs or poops she thinks it's the first time any kid has ever done that.
Back in the 90's, I did some work for the Ontario Telepresence Project. We did lots of studies on videoconferencing, shared mediaspaces...
What strikes me given the relative lack of outcome of the project, compared to the ubiquity of today's camera phones, is that the Telepresence project had it wrong when it wanted to have people *face* each other during conversations.
It turns out, this is not what we want. Staring at your interlocutor's face is not what you do in a usual conversation, it's even embarassing. You look at a shared point of interest. Turning the camera the opposite side of the screen was the way to go. First, you could use the cell phone as a camera, and second, in a phone conversation, it's much more useful to say "look at this", than to offer a nice view of you're hairy nose.
Or, to put it like St. Exupery:
Life has taught us that love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward together in the same direction...
Why is this news?
A 3G phone which can do video calls!? Omg!! ...
Ah, to clarify, this isn't just any 3G phone that can do video calls. This is an iPhone. You know, from THE company? Led, by their beloved iSteve(TM)? The iOne? Also known as iYoda.
There's marketing, and then there's iMarketing. Let's hope for their sake their beloved iLeader is around for a while longer. Not sure how much longer they can keep up the 80%-fashion/20%-function blend across an entire product line, especially in this economy.
Am I the only one that doesn't really WANT video calls from a cell phone? Sure they have their place I suppose. A business meeting connecting two conference rooms with video/audio, but when I'm talking on a cell phone I just want to talk, I don't want to have to hold thing thing away from me so the camera can have just the right view, worrying about what's going on around me and if it'll show up on the screen or if I'm really in focus and all that. It's a cell phone. On average my cell calls are like 4 minutes tops. There's absolutely no point for video of me in some store as the wife tells me we need eggs too. Or for the people unlike me that talk in the car... as if they can hold the camera right, talk on the phone AND drive. A hands free thing isn't going to help that. These people can barely drive correctly in the first place.
I'd say that they could do this already with a bluetooth handset and the current 3G iPhone facing the other way (it's got a camera on the back, and when you're using bluetooth it doesn't matter what the phone orientation is.) but the iPhone camera doesn't work with video as it stands. Not sure if it's a software limitation, or a hardware limitation. I know of a few other phones that weren't able to do video until a few firmware/OS updates. Maybe they can just do that and be done with this so people like me can keep on NOT using it.
-=JML=-
You can do it now. You just have to go around the SDK.
Yes, that's what I said. The SDK precludes it. The solutions that work around the SDK are too grey for the app store (thus the need for Cydia).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Because, you know, no company ever files for a patent on something they come up with that they might want to use, but don't necessarily have plans to use.
With the number of patents Apple has and files for, I think it's more likely that this is a 'concept art' kind of patent, on an idea that they might pursue, or might not.
Video calling on cellphones has been available for years all over the world. Does anyone use it? No. Video phones have actually been available in various incarnations for almost 40 years. Many large corporations even had them implemented throughout the company. Were they ever used? No. Skype style video calling is available. How often is it used compared to voice only? Very little. So at what point do we finally agree that the experiment has been done, and repeated sufficiently so that we can conclude the simple fact: people do not want video calling. The better question is: why do companies insist on keeping this nonsense of video calling as the "next big thing" when it has been shown quite clearly to be something nobody wants? I'd love to get Slashdot's explanation of this. Please move this to Ask Slashdot perhaps.
This is just awful. Clearly without Steve Jobs at the helm Apple is spiraling out of control. Video calling? What's next? Some sort of device that allows you to listen to music on the phone? Mark my words. This is the beginning of the end.
I have nothing compelling to say
The "Description of the Embodiments" section is neither hidden nor a claim (in fact, with a patent, nothing is hidden---by definition). More importantly, it is not necessarily an indication of where Apple is going to take the market. When I write a patent for a client, I fill the description with every variation, combination, and permutation we can think up, just to make sure we have everything covered. And there's a fair probability that a particular embodiment is of my own contrivance. I just throw it in, and the first time the client sees it is when I send him the patent for review. It doesn't commit the client to make it that way or even indicate that he himself thought of it. It just gives the client the option of claiming it that way if he needs to. The patent won't issue for several years. The landscape could change in the meantime, and that "silly" embodiment could be the next big thing. Descriptions should almost always err on the side of verbosity. Having too much stuff in the written description will not hurt your claims. Not having enough stuff can be fatal to the claims. So if you can think of it, throw it in, even if you can't think of any real-life reason you would ever actually do it.
If you want to know what a company is really doing, see if they have a picture claim. This is usually a fairly long, detailed claim with lots of elements. It's hard to infringe unless you do exactly what they are doing, but that also makes it easy to get allowed. Basically, it's an easy way to get protection from people just outright copying your product. Does this patent have a picture claim? In this case, 18 may be a picture claim. But I'm not going to take the time to read it closely and figure it out for real.
Of course, this is NOT legal advice, and I don't represent you.
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
Flash logo shown in browser as "inline multimedia content":
http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/showImage.jhtml?galleryID=297&imageID=33&articleID=202103424
Video recording capability and camera timer:
http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/showImage.jhtml?galleryID=297&imageID=10&articleID=202103424
Strange skunk-like hand hitting touchscreen:
http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/showImage.jhtml?galleryID=297&imageID=42&articleID=202103424
Now we will be stuck having no Driving and Video Chatting laws while in the car. Hands free too since it will be mounted on the dash inplace of the GPS. You know it will happen sometime that a person will be video chatting and get in an accident. Then the other end of the chat will see the person die and have PTSD and sue Apple.
Video Calling would be good (as I've used it on my old Nokia for a few years) but CUT COPY PASTE and MMS would be MORE USEFUL.
I apologise for shouting, in mitigation I can only offer that being ignored is sooo Apple/frustrating.
Regards Sinesurfer A Nerd is someone who lives for technology, A Geek is someone who lives for technology and loves it
The new Google phone is supposed to have this feature as well. They've been talking about it for some time. It was supposed to be out January 29th, but it was going to be for T-Mobile only. However, the latest rumor is that Sprint and Verizon will both offer the G2 under another name. HTC's CEO said the phone should be out in April now.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I'd think that the availability of Microsoft Portrait (now at version 3.1) for Windows Mobile phones would count as prior art.
Da Blog
If the iPhone 3G was a Microsoft product and they have missed to add the second cam releasing yet another model for people to buy just to get it headline would read something like:
"Microsoft finally admit and somewhat fix their poor excuse for a 3G phone.", with additional "haha" tags and what not.
Not sure how much longer they can keep up the 80%-fashion/20%-function blend across an entire product line, especially in this economy.
Yeah, the user interfaces are good and the case designs is ok to (though they mess up to, toilet lid iBook? iPod Nano fat?)
But I could had designed the hardware specs and help them improve the software functionality much better than whatever people do it now.
The camera points right up your nose.
Seriously, unless you hold the phone up over your forehead pointing down, the people on the other end get the most unflattering view right up your nose.
THE MAGIC WORDS ARE SQUEAMISH OSSIFRAGE
If the privacy mode switch is a physical shield that covers the lens, it's foolproof.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Now I can put my memories and experiences into storage without having to visit the Data Memory in person!
Have Apple invented this yet? Last I checked the iPhone 3G didn't have it which is frankly ridiculous.
At this rate the iPhone should be a pretty decent phone in about three or four revisions. As it stands it's just a very fancy PDA (killer interface, as usual for Apple) with some phone features and even its functionality as a PDA is limited by being locked into the Apple store.
OK, I didn't want to get flamed by Apple fanbois for being ignorant so I Googled for iPhone 3G MMS and got this page where some fanboi is raving about how awesome the App store is for letting people pay extra for functionality included as standard in every other phone you can buy. The iPhone is such a joke!
Nick
Video conferencing is nothing new. It's been on cell phones for a while. Heck my Nokia E71 supports it. Just because Apple intends to get it to its phones doesn't mean they are coming out with this super duper new technology.
I am trying to get away from Apple as far as possible. I got a 2G ipod nano. Liked it and so I also got a JBL onStage II ($80) for it. After 2 years, it just died on me. Believe me... I really take care of my electronic devices. So I was thinking of getting the newer 4th generation... but guess what... it's not compatibly with my JBL onStage II. They decided to screw consumers forcing them to upgrade all their accessories.
Luckily for me I now use my Nokia E71 to listen to music. As for my car... my BMW has a USB port and so I now copy my music to a USB drive and plug it into the cars USB port. Since I buy my music from Amazon, I do not have to worry about their DRM.
-- Never will buy anything from Apple again consumer.
The thing is huge, look at the size of the person's hand: http://www.informationweek.com/galleries/showImage.jhtml?galleryID=297&imageID=2&articleID=202103424
I'd feel weird about using a (audio only) phone in the lav, too, but I can't think of any reason why I should.
Pumping Gas is just silly, what could possibly be your objection there? You're outside, there's plenty of white noise, and other people aren't exactly right next to you, and ignition danger is an old wives' tale.
Grocery stores are pretty loud, and the lines are spread out a bit. I know I don't care if the person in front of me is chatting on a cell.
What's with this stick in your craw? Try thinking about why you don't like something rather than just not liking it and then looking for a reason.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Dick Tracey.
99.9% of the time, I don't need a video phone. However, there have been a few situations where it's been very useful, and a voice phone wouldn't do:
Video calling may be a feature I rarely use, but it doesn't hurt to have it there in case I want it.
I've got a 3G phone that has two cameras in it -- one high-resolution camera for taking photographs on the back side, and one low-resolution camera in the face where the screen is. That way, I can look at the screen and get video of myself. I'm sure there must be a number of 3G phones with this layout, but I'm not a cell-phone junkie so I don't keep track of all of the features out there. Unfortunately, I'm on a carrier that has 3G, but on the wrong frequency band, so I'm stuck with EDGE...
In order to develop apps for the store, you have to (electronically) sign a document that says you will not use undocumented functions.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/27/024242 Yup, nobody noticed then they were actually patenting video conferencing.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
This is pretty obvious, because:
1) original iPhone camera is so bad it is just a placeholder ... when Apple does this, the next step is to "leap-frog" everyone else with the best camera in the industry plus a novel new feature nobody else has that "just works" even for the non-technical user
2) the one communication thing the Mac still does way better than iPhone is videoconferencing, so this can be considered an iPhone feature in waiting, all the iPhone has to do is steal it, it's got about 5 years of maturity on the Mac
3) iSight camera in the MacBook Air is housed in only a few millimeters of thickness ... it's obvious one can fit into an iPhone
4) jailbreakers have found the iPhone hardware is video-ready
my last two european nokia phones have had forward facing cameras for video calls - if only my US cell provider supported them...
oohh yay! they will finally catch up to my several years old $100 Samsung phone that also has "TV Call". And my newer Sharp phone. Seriously, this has been available in Japan for many years on most phones from several carriers. The sad thing is that Apple will probably implement it in some non-compatible way.
I've been able to do video calling for the last few years on the last few phones I've had, this isn't new.
If this is true, the only thing preventing me from having gesture support is software.
Truth. Synaptics recently upgraded many of its Windows trackpads to multitouch (works on a 3-year-old Acer)
Da Blog
How does this mean Apple are planning it?
They've just shoved every idea into the patent so if anyone tries to go one better on the iPhone with a competitive product that DOES video conferencing, it will turn out they have to license the Apple Patent to do it. Apple wins!
Which is the whole point of patenting it really. Apple won't allow video calling; it would cripple the carrier data networks. The same way they don't allow Skype; it would cripple the ability for the carrier to make money on calls. The only concession they have made is instant messaging rather than SMS, and given the cost of SMS these days (compared to AIM on an unlimited data plan) that's a seller for the phone (and any smart-ish phone that comes with some form of AIM or MSN client etc. - pretty much all of them since 2003 by my reckoning). But that's because instant messaging doesn't throw about half a megabit of data in both directions for a 30 minute stretch..
The claims of the patent are all about their multitouch implementation. It's typical for patent applications to contain way more embodiments than the scope of the claims themselves because attorneys often reuse all or most of the detailed description for other applications related to that invention. No Apple is not patenting video conferencing.
A bunch of obsessives with nothing else to do have sunk to the digital equivalent of rooting through someone's trash, and found out that Apple may, possibly, be considering an idea that's been implemented a thousand different ways since the sixities or earlier, and has universally failed because it is a bad idea because nobody wants to worry about how they look on the phone. Nobody wants to worry about answering the phone if they just got out of the shower, just got out of bed, are having a bad hair day, really shouldn't have worn that shirt today, lied to the boss/girlfriend/buddy/ex about where you are and why you can't see them right now.
Those, and many others, have been the traditional reasons against videophones -- and they've been very good ones. Being able to see a talking head on the other side has never, in the history of this technology, been useful to anyone.
And now here comes a new reason for thinking it's stupid. Can you imagine trying to keep a damned hand-held unit still enough to not make the other person nauseated? Most people I know have enough difficulty holding that phone still long enough to take a photograph without looking like they're suffering from some neurological disorder. I really don't want to suffer through a video conference with someone holding up a phone as it shakes and shimmies all over the place.
Sure, you could put it in some kind of iHolder which keeps it iSteady on your iDesk, but why bother? Of what possible benefit is this? What does this bring to the conversation that couldn't be accomplished by voice alone?
If any other company were considering this, it would be roundly panned as being a silly idea that's failed for three or four decades, but god forbid we deride anything the almighty Apple might do.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
doing that since last year on my e71
duh
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
The parent may have extreme sarcasm, and true facts, but troll?
Virtually ALL 3G phones in the UK, Europe and pretty much the world have a forward facing camera, or on some cases a camera that swivels to face the front (SonyEricsson Z1010).
Both the iPhone 3G and the Android G1 stand out for not having either, and preventing 3G video calling.
Have a nice day!
A bunch of obsessives with nothing else to do have sunk to the digital equivalent of rooting through someone's trash, and found out that Apple may, possibly, be considering an idea that's been implemented a thousand different ways since the sixities or earlier, and has universally failed because it is a bad idea because nobody wants to worry about how they look on the phone.
And yet this bad idea (and I agree it's a bad idea) is so important to them that they dropped the separate iSight product and replaced it with a camera in every new Mac that is basically useless for any purpose OTHER than video calls through iChat.
This is a bad idea that has its memetic claws deep in Apple's psyche.
god forbid we deride anything the almighty Apple might do.
Oh, I'll deride it alright, what I won't do is discount it. I've been burned too many times underestimating Apple's pigheadedness.
Now all the beautiful people can finally see eachother!
Open Source: Eroding the Digital Divide
Anything disclosed but not claimed in the claims is dedicated to the public. I am a patent attorney.
genecavanaugh@gmail.com
I couldn't find the /. version of the story, but a couple years ago there was a filing for a patent for an LCD panel with thousands of built in image sensors. Perhaps they are finally using it.
Here's the New Scientist article. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9059
My bet is that included with video conferencing, they add video mail to their voice mail...and not add MMS support.
This criticism is fair, albeit stated a bit hyperbolically (they are guilty from time to time, but it's not really their normal pattern). There definitely exist examples of things that have suffered mightily from lack of attention, after the initial promising release. iChat AV is one such. It's a great video chat client, except for it being nearly unusable, due to extremely poor handling of the network connections that large numbers of users find themselves on. If you can get a connection, it works great, but good luck getting that connection. Since other chat clients have figured this out, clearly iChat AV could be improved to handle most of these things which used to be considered "edge cases", too, but in several years, it has not yet been.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
I know everyone has their own grips about what iPhone does and doesn't do (cut and paste is pretty popular, not enough landscape support in typing apps is my favorite) but they are thinking this without doing straight MMS? Weird priorities.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death