Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Is Working On a Video Chat Device (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Facebook Inc. is working on a video chat device for the home -- the first major hardware product from its experimental Building 8 lab. Featuring a laptop-sized touchscreen, the device represents a new product category and could be announced as soon as next spring's F8 developer conference, according to people familiar with the matter. They say the large screen and smart camera technology could help farflung people feel like they're in the same room, which aligns with Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg's mission of bringing Facebook users closer together. The device is in the prototype phase but is already being tested in people's homes. Geared to the living room, the video chat device will feature a wide-angle camera lens, microphones and speakers that are all powered by artificial intelligence to boost performance, the people said. A version of the device in testing includes a thin, vertical stand that holds a large touchscreen measuring between 13 and 15 inches diagonally, the people said. Facebook has considered running a version of the Android operating system on its device instead of building its own core operating system, according to the people. Facebook is testing a feature that would allow the camera to automatically scan for people in its range and lock onto them, one of the people said. Facebook is also working on a standalone smart speaker to compete with the Amazon Echo and Google Home, reports Bloomberg. The social media giant is "hiring Apple veterans to help create a Siri-style voice assistant that would run on both devices."

86 comments

  1. Re:I am so glad Trump won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Offtopic. Also repetitive and boring.

  2. Calling Ray Bradbury by Pseudonym · · Score: 0

    They should call it The Cousins.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  3. I don't even want by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To talk to people on the phone. Videoconferencing is even more annoying.

    Facebook video conferencing devices will be just another footnote in failure.

    1. Re:I don't even want by ls671 · · Score: 1

      You are forgetting the immense market for XXX chat; they even say they can "lock-on" to somebody when there is many participants...

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    2. Re:I don't even want by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      People have been trying to sell videophones for decades. They all failed for one reason - they're damn inconvenient. A videophone for the home - great - now I have to get dressed before I answer a call. No thanks. Also, do you really want your phone spying on you even more than it does now?

      What next - companies demanding that you have a Facebook account and leave Facebook video chat open when you're working from home? Even though studies show that people working from home tend to work more hours than they do in the office? And are generally more efficient because they aren't interrupted by office bs, and when they need a break to think or plan, they don't have to "look busy"?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    3. Re:I don't even want by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Why isn't WhatsApp, which is available for most phones, adequate? How does FaceBook plan to do the actual physical connection? Is it via Internet, sorta like Skype? Or is it via phones, like WhatsApp?

      Not talking about videoconferencing interviews here - but when I facetime w/ family, I walk b/w rooms, phone in hand, whenever I want to show them things around the house. This device sounds like it'll be stuck to ONE room!

    4. Re:I don't even want by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Is FaceBook doing this for business or personal use? Business - I'd agree w/ you. Personal - I like walking around the house, phone in hand and showing my niece what's in the fridge

    5. Re:I don't even want by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      With Facebook, it's never anything personal. It's always business. Same as the mafia.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    6. Re:I don't even want by Stinky+Cheese+Man · · Score: 1

      ob. Dilbert, working from home: http://dilbert.com/strip/1994-...

    7. Re:I don't even want by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "They all failed for one reason - they're damn inconvenient."

      No, they all failed because they needed expensive data lines. I've been to several B2B meetings where these things get inevitably shown. They all fail because of the need for bandwidth.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    8. Re:I don't even want by antdude · · Score: 1

      Ditto for me due to my disabilities. Lots of people hate using online communications without talking and hearing. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    9. Re:I don't even want by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Wrong. There were videophones that worked on 56k dial-up modem lines. They saw very limited sales because nobody wanted them.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  4. 1984 called by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They want licensee fees for their Telesceen.

    1. Re:1984 called by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1984 was better because the telescreen was FREE, and only mandatory for outer party members. (Inner party members could switch it off for a short time).

    2. Re:1984 called by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      With the lock-on feature, I'm thinking more the screens from the conference room in Demolition Man.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  5. "Lock onto them" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't know what I'm gonna do if I visit someone and their cams "lock onto me".

    Remember those glasshole bearers being beaten out of the pub?

    1. Re: "Lock onto them" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thought police have just detected that you will commit a crime in the near future and have been dispatched to arrest you. Please kneel down and interlock your hands behind your head until they arrive. Do not resist. Thank you for your cooperation.

    2. Re:"Lock onto them" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I don't want anything locking onto me. Ask any military pilot what a great feeling it is.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  6. "Geared to the Living Room" ? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2

    That'd be great, if this was 1997. But given the digital diaspora of small screens and the websites, games and apps created to accommodate these, families don't gravitate to the living room anymore. That's where my dogs go, because it has the cushiest chairs...

    1. Re:"Geared to the Living Room" ? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's what this is really for: video-chatting with your dogs while you're at work.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:"Geared to the Living Room" ? by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2

      Damn! I'm there! Sold!!

    3. Re:"Geared to the Living Room" ? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      That'd be great, if this was 1997. But given the digital diaspora of small screens and the websites, games and apps created to accommodate these, families don't gravitate to the living room anymore. That's where my dogs go, because it has the cushiest chairs...

      Your dogs go on the chairs in the living room? Lazy bastard, maybe you should walk them for a change :-)

      Seriously, you're absolutely right. The only people who will want this are bosses so that they can "supervise" you by making sure you're logged in and running when you're working from home. After all, most of the justification for their jobs is the ability to count warm butts in seats.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    4. Re:"Geared to the Living Room" ? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      How would your dogs know how to accept the call?

  7. Willful Ignorance by geekmux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm certain that this won't be turned into yet another always listening device in the home, complete with the always watching bonus feature, right?

    Sometimes I wonder if vendors make products just to test the ignorance level of the masses.

    Then I remember that consumers don't care about privacy anymore, and somehow I feel better knowing it's willful ignorance.

    1. Re: Willful Ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember my father telling me as a child that no one ever went broke because they underestimated the intelligence of the American public. I know he was quoting someone, but I'm not sure who.

    2. Re:Willful Ignorance by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      They've been indoctrinated to the Nth degree that 'sharing everything about your life is NORMAL and NATURAL and SOCIALLY RIGHT, and that only CRIMINALS and TERRORISTS and DEVIANTS and other UNDESIRABLES want privacy!'. Of course that's complete and utter bullshit. Any child from about, what, the age of 8? NATURALLY WANTS PRIVACY in some situations. People have furthermore been indoctrinated that 'If you have NOTHING TO HIDE then you have NOTHING TO FEAR!', which is also bullshit. Therefore people say ridiculous nonsense like 'Why should I care if they listen in on me or are watching me on camera? I'm not doing anything wrong!' Yeah, sure. Until things reach the point where you have some half-assed excuse for an 'AI' collating and correlating all the audio and video recordings of you, your Internet usage history, what you watch on TV or Netflix or stream over the Internet, and 'decides' that you're a potential or current criminal and should be investigated.Or maybe you make some joke in what you THINK is the privacy of your own home.. only to have police show up because you said some word or phrase that triggered an alert. Thought Police much? If people don't wake the hell up that's the dystopia we're headed for.

  8. More intel gathering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give Facebook another avenue to spy on me, I think not. That should be the sole right of the government to spy on me without judicial review or due process.

    1. Re:More intel gathering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give Facebook another avenue to spy on me, I think not. That should be the sole right of the government to spy on me without judicial review or due process.

      All social media is essentially a government loophole to spy on citizens without judicial review or due process.

      Branding is merely a method to ensure the lemmings participate.

  9. So is it a cellphone or a computer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So facebook is coming out with their own computer?

    1. Re:So is it a cellphone or a computer? by randomErr · · Score: 1

      More like a competitor to the Chromebook. They're just pushing 'Facetime' as the premier app.

      --
      You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    2. Re: So is it a cellphone or a computer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll call mine facy mcfarcebook, and then kill it with fire.

    3. Re:So is it a cellphone or a computer? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Like Yahoo with a mic and webcam but now with social media.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  10. 'The people' have a lot to say about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But do we believe them?

  11. Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    feature a wide-angle camera lens, microphones and speakers that are all powered by artificial intelligence to boost performance

    Boost performance of the the "always on" personal data acquisition component? Shut up and take my personal data!...and sell it to the highest bidder!...and give it to any government officials that ask for it!

  12. Not a tablet? by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 2

    So, they're building a tablet but one intended to have fewer capabilities?

    1. Re:Not a tablet? by randomErr · · Score: 1

      I would say a tablet that works by voice command. Think Amazon Alexis with a camera based around Facebook's services. You know like those Android camera boxes you can everywhere for $30-50.

      --
      You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    2. Re:Not a tablet? by ljw1004 · · Score: 2

      I would pay $250 for a video-chat appliance in my house.

      Currently we Skype with grandparents on an ipad in protective kid case, or on our phones. My toddlers love to see them but fight over it, and paw at the screen pressing all the buttons and all the touch gestures, and they particularly love the red hang-up button. I have to spend an hour holding the thing up with one hand out of reach. I think it'd be better parenting to create an environment that gives them more independence, and makes it so their failure opportunities are triggered by things that they're in control of at their current age, vs things that are beyond their scope.

      If I could get Skype or Messenger working on FireTV that'd be great. But that doesn't seem possible. (apparently you can screenshare your phone's video display to the FireTV, but that way you don't get video or microphone).

      I want something that looks like a piece of furniture, hung up on the wall, so its physical nature makes it clear it's not for toddler hands to grab hold of. I want it to have a camera that can take in enough of the room to focus on the kids as they wander around so I don't have to keep pointing it in the right direction. I want it big enough so that it's out-of-height positioning doesn't make it too small.

      Failing that, I'd pay $25 for an ipad video-chat app which isn't so touch-enabled that toddlers mess it up. There should be a difficult touch-gesture (e.g. ten fingers stretched over the screen and held there for five seconds) to unlock the controls.

    3. Re:Not a tablet? by pnutjam · · Score: 2

      https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008...

      Although it might fail on the "not attractive to toddlers" front.

    4. Re:Not a tablet? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " I'd pay $25 for an ipad video-chat app which isn't so touch-enabled that toddlers mess it up"

      So just get Camfrog.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    5. Re:Not a tablet? by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      " I'd pay $25 for an ipad video-chat app which isn't so touch-enabled that toddlers mess it up"

      So just get Camfrog.

      I'm not sure how that would help? It looks like the iOS version of Camfrog still uses touch ubiquitously for its UI? And it has the added complexity that I'd have to install and maintain it on my parents' computer, and train+support them in how to use it.

    6. Re:Not a tablet? by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008... Although it might fail on the "not attractive to toddlers" front.

      Yeah, I'd been looking at that one. This route would be to buy this for $220, buy a cheap laptop or headless computer to plug it into, buy a flat TV, mount them all together out of reach. Then I'd power on the computer, use a mouse to launch skype (or set up an init script to launch Skype automatically).

      I think the standalone webcam+android set-top boxes looked more convenient and a lot cheaper. But for some reason all the ones I saw had amazon reviews that said they have poor wifi. I'm also very reluctant to trust privacy of my home to a company whom I don't trust to write secure devices or to offer updates to their version of Android, especially for a device whose only function is to connect to the internet. "The 'S' in IOT stands for Security."

    7. Re:Not a tablet? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      You've apparently not downloaded and used the application and evaluated its full set of features (not all are advertised) either on mobile or desktop. Otherwise, you'd realize just how wrong you are on almost every single point.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    8. Re:Not a tablet? by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Sorenson makes a video chat device that works well, there is a version by D-link. However, you have to know the IP you are connecting to. I think Sorenson uses some sort of DDNS to track people, the dlink version doesn't have that.
      The Sorenson one is marketed to deaf people, I'm not sure if you can buy one. They give them out free to Deaf people through some sort of program, it allows them to sign to each other.

  13. 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And suddenly 1984s telescreen manifests into reality !

    You would have to be brain dead to put such a device in your home.

    I expect they'll sell millions :)

  14. ChromeBook? FaceTimeBook? by randomErr · · Score: 2

    It sounds like a Chromebook with a touche screen. Can't you get a Windows 10 or Android tablet now that does that? Are they just re-inventing the 'internet appliance for the late 80's to early 90's'? I'm getting so tired of rehashing the same old concepts.

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    1. Re:ChromeBook? FaceTimeBook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touche?

      I think you mean Touch.

      Touché !

  15. Did /. break? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    is it posting stories from 1999?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Did /. break? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      is it posting stories from 1999?

      No, that's what Facebook's users do. Post Amber Alerts from years ago, conspiracy theories from decades ago, flat earth propaganda from centuries ago ... it's because Facebook users are devolving.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Did /. break? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never knew that a phone could be hacked without having physical access with it,all this hacker asked for were a few info
      rmation on my partner and he showed me proof immediately he got into the phone. I immediately paid him and got everything
      that my fiance had been hiding..he was having an affair with two other women which was sickening i must say. We had a long
      talk on phone and he agreed to help me.
      I will be nice enough to give u this hacker's details but remember to mention leslie reffered u!! Have fun finding out the
      truth!
      contact: charlescyberwiz@gmail.com. +18705130365.

  16. feels appropriate by Escogido · · Score: 1
  17. We need more Facebook news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...while your at it, more Trump stuff too.

    We need to know every fart Facebook and Trump drum up from the bottoms of their crap piles.

    Thanks Sla$hdot for improving this site!

  18. More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I kept telling all you people this shit was going to happen. You kept scoffing at me, mocking me, ignoring me, insisting it'll never happen. "LOL, nobody is going to put cameras and microphones in my home! You're a crazy person!" you all said to me.

    Ho, what's this? 'Amazon Alexa' and the like? 'Videoconferencing' courtesy of Facebook, one of the biggest surveillance and data collection apparatus on the planet? If you do not see what is happening then you a either BLIND or a FOOL.

    Eschew this technology. Eschew FACEBOOK. Don't give up the last few square feet of 'private space' you have in your lives! Or do you want to live like convicts in a prison, being watched 24/7/365? Are you going to continue to scoff at and ignore me? OR ARE YOU GOING TO START LISTENING TO ME!?

    1. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by amalcolm · · Score: 0

      Paranoid much. If you don't want, don't buy. Job done.

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    2. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by gillbates · · Score: 1

      So you don't have one. Fine. But what will you do when every other house has one? When your private conversations are recorded when you visit friends and relatives, or worse - they bring it along when they visit yours.

      I was on vacation recently, and lo and behold, the brother in law brought along Alexa to the remote cabin in the mountains.

      The problem isn't that you won't buy one, it's that they'll be ubiquitous. That private conversation regarding politics or religion or whatever will be monitored by someone else's device.

      --
      The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    3. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On second thought maybe I've been too concerned. Life is too short for this.

      So, after much thought I've decided to change my view. I think we should all support Facebook in this.

      In fact, I've just purchased a 'Amazon Alexa' for my home and will use it sparingly but most assuredly. Oh, damn, I've even created a Facebook account and liked several of my favorite books. At least I'm relaxing now. I've stopped yelling and using bold text for no apparent reason. Which is good because my blood pressure is now calm!

    4. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. At some point we're going to have to start regulating data capture - it's just not good enough to let the 'market' decide because you can't control your own surroundings given how many devices exist and how easy they are to have around. Every smartphone could be a capture device and who doesn't have one of those now? It's not too many years away where processing all that data will be realistic.

      We're in a new world now, one different from all of human history, so we're going to have to adapt and treat personal data as property.

    5. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      Problem is - if you're friends *are* on Facebook then you're already there, your face is already in their photos and a great deal of info can be gleaned from your associated presence. It's not down to you anymore, we're going to need more than individual action.

    6. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      I agree up to a point. My home is sacrosanct, I can do what I want there. I can choose my friends carefully, sadly I'm stuck with the family I have, so if I was worried by this I would have to make a conscious decision. I totally agree that ubiquity will be a problem though. Political discussion will have to take place in the garden :)

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    7. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      BLIND FOOL detected.

    8. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I'm not on Facebook and people I know on Facebook know not to post photos of me there. They get excommunicated from my life if they disrespect my wishes in the matter.

    9. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by jareth-0205 · · Score: 1

      I'm not on Facebook and people I know on Facebook know not to post photos of me there. They get excommunicated from my life if they disrespect my wishes in the matter.

      Cool - but you must admit that's quite an extreme position to take, you have to be very sure to lay down such strong rules away-from-the-norm on your friends. Most people do not have such a tight control of their friends' actions. Nor do you actually know if your friends are actually following your wishes, since you're not on Facebook you can't check, therefore they may be posting and not telling you. Which brings us back to the original problem, of what companies are allowed to do with the information they collect, not just preventing the collection in the first place which in many ways is impractical.

    10. Re:More gods-be-damned SURVEILLANCE TECH by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      I'm a non-standard person and I have non-standard friends; they understand. If they didn't I wouldn't have them as friends.

      There needs to be more precise laws regarding such, yes, but in the current socio-political climate, you're accused of being a terrorist sympathizer or and out-and-out extremist yourself if you suggest that there be LESS surveillance and data collection, regardless of the fact that none of it is making anyone 'safer', it's just taking away more and more of people's freedom.

  19. Not "standalone" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Facebook is also working on a standalone smart speaker to compete with the Amazon Echo and Google Home"

    Standalone - you keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Every device that needs an internet connection to work at all is, by definition, not "standalone".

    I couldn't be assed to have such a thing in my living room, let alone buying one. If at all, FB should be paying me for letting such a device intrude my home.

  20. Yeah, Um by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    We could have done that years, turns out no one wants it. Everyone would rather text. It's getting to the point where they're dictating a text to siri and having her read it back to them. When you start seeing people do that, it's pretty clear they'll go out of their way to not actually have to talk to some one.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  21. Who do you trust the least? by ukoda · · Score: 1

    Ok so we now have Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and Facebook doing technology to listen to what is happening in our homes. Not sure I really trust any of them with that level of access to my private life, but Facebook would be way down that list if I was to sort them from most trusted to least trusted.

    Sounds like a good idea for a Slashdot poll.

    1. Re:Who do you trust the least? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      But you know your boss is going to demand you use it 24/7 at some point "because email is too hard."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  22. Video Phone again by havana9 · · Score: 1

    AT&T offered the first comercial Video phone system in 1964 and telecom industries have tried to sell the service for years, but didn't catch up, and for sure wowadays you could have a personal computer with a wecam or a smetphone with an application and make cheap video calls.
    But nobody is interested: voice calls are a bit in decline, but the main proble with video calls is that people don't like to be seen in shorts and the old tattered t-shirt because they were cleaning the oven while the video call arrived.
    Video conferences are a really niche market and I suppose that isn't the Facebook target.

    1. Re:Video Phone again by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Not at all suitable for 'Work from home' roles. Fine in offices, particularly in conference rooms, when you have 2 groups of people talking to each other. That's the only use case that I can think of where it has any value

  23. facebook video sex chat only $4.99/min by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    facebook video sex chat only $4.99/min

  24. A large screen is 13 or 15 inches???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a 55 inch TV in my living room, and among my friends, it is on the small size.

    An ipad pro (12.9 inch screen) with facetime is a decent video chat device today.

    I think a device similar to a Kinect connected to a regular TV would be a better option.

  25. Congrats Mr. Z... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've reinvented Skype and/or Facetime. Bravo.

    1. Re:Congrats Mr. Z... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      He already owns WhatsApp, which includes FaceTime capabilities

  26. One man's paranoia is another's feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mark is reinventing the wheel. Go to any UK street corner. That Bug Brother shit is everywhere.

  27. Video chat tablet by spinitch · · Score: 1

    Seems like a general tablet with enhancemed mic system , speaker and a nice wide angle camera might be worth an OEM offering. The mic system might be better as a detachable base as charger and extended battery for distance use. The current small mic and standard speaker in tablets would suffice for close use like on lap or nearby table. Guessing the voice assistant apps migh work better with a tailored hardware & software kit but at the cost of user flexibility. Android seems best with maybe a Fire OS option. Amazon has their look but pairing with a display device that can run Android or Fire would be more flexible.

  28. Just think of the possibilities... by Samurai+Nigel · · Score: 1

    ...for playing dungeons & dragons!

    Seriously, I know I could already do this, but an "tech-light" way of getting a bunch of people together in a video-conferencing space without having to prop a phone or fins space for a laptop would be pretty cool.

  29. Xbone and Kinect by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

    My Kinect on my Xbone does this with Skype. It auto zooms, pans around, it's great.

  30. Is video chat a thing people want? by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

    Anti social asshole here, so forgive me my ignorance... ...but is video chat something people want? I'm talking actually want, not "oooo, gimmicky, I'll take two and then it ends up in the closet never to be used again"? Like smart phone "want". Notably, I don't actually use my phone to vocally talk to people, so that's probably a bad example.

    Seems like 3D movie tech to me; neat idea, nobody actually wants it except the company producing it.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re: Is video chat a thing people want? by spinitch · · Score: 1

      Video chat widespread popularized mainly with Skype many years ago but now many Apps, WhatsApp, FaceTime , Hangouts etc... What is changing is voice activation with digital assistants and more focused devices with improved mics, speakers and cameras . Amazon Alexa variations like Echo, Dot, Look seem to be the prototypes others want to get in on with their own variation of UX plus better integration with their App. BSO - bright shiny object syndrome. Latest fad . Ooh we need in on that too.

    2. Re:Is video chat a thing people want? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I like it w/ family - that's the only reason I got an iPhone - FaceTime. Don't particularly care about it for work purposes

    3. Re: Is video chat a thing people want? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "Video chat widespread popularized mainly with Skype many years ago"

      Try again, much earlier - Yahoo was THE video chat place (until they cut all that out.)

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  31. Facebook is over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, Zuck. We don't want to give you more free data.

    No, Zuck. We don't want to submit to your rule by divine right.

    No, Zuck. You aren't an authentically received, "grassroots" campaign, no matter how many homes you abuse your social media data mining to drop in on.

    "No Zuck."

  32. Should be something inexpensive by wafflemonger · · Score: 1

    You can just market a stand for your pocket video phone. That way you can have a video chat and not have the phone in your hand.

  33. Too old fashioned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do people really go to the landline phone anymore to make routine calls? And what advantage does this provide over buying a $60 Kindle Fire and setting that up to do the exact same thing and more? Even in 2000 when they were pushing so called "thin clients", those devices were not reall successes.

  34. Tanberg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So something like http://www.graysonline.com/lot/0002-2166570/computers-and-it-equipment/tandberg-t150-ttc7-10-150mxp-personal-video-conference-voip-phone?spr=true

    Or the newer E20