Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Should Apple Let Competitors Use FaceTime? (cnet.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the more-the-merrier dept.

In 2010, Steve Jobs first introduced FaceTime and promised it would become an open industry standard that could be used by Apple's competitors -- not just Apple. Well, eight years later and that still hasn't happened. CNET's Sean Hollister provides a theory as to why that is: There's also an ongoing lawsuit to consider -- as Ars Technica documented in 2013, Apple was forced to majorly change how FaceTime works to avoid infringing on the patents of a company called VirnetX. Instead of letting phones communicate directly with each other, Apple added "relay servers" to help the phones connect. Presumably, someone would have to pay for those servers, and/or figure out a way for them to talk to Google or Microsoft or other third-party servers if FaceTime were going to be truly open. But that doesn't make a broken promise less frustrating. Particularly now that Apple could potentially fix annoying business video calls as well. A Skype-killing video chat service that worked on Mac, iOS *and* Windows, Android and the open web? That's something I bet companies would be happy to pay for, too.

9 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Re: Lesson learned by shitzu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Facetime is not an open standard.

    XMPP/jabber is, but even google whose Talk was originally based on Jabber, is moving away from it with Hangouts.

  2. Re:WhatsApp to the rescue by KixWooder · · Score: 3, Informative

    WhatsApp is owned and operated by Facebook. No thank you.

    --
    I hate fat people.
  3. Only two features... by HockeyPuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Facetime and iMessage are the only two features keeping me on the apple ecosystem.

    Mom and Dad can easily call their kids and with the touch of a button switch to facetime and see the grandkids.

    With android, I'm not sure if you're supposed to send messages with Messages, Allo, Hangouts....

  4. Re: Lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    VirnetX is the US intelligence communityâ(TM)s patent troll. The CIA/NSA sued Apple to keep them from offering encrypted, direct-to-client video chat between multiple people (the old iChat, far superior to FaceTime, let multiple people video chat on one call without routing through intermediate servers). Likewise Skype once used a decentralized network for routing calls, without any known hubs through which calls would be destined to pass, before Microsoft bought them. IChat was neutered into FaceTime and Skype was neutered by Microsoft in the same way and for the same reason: both started requiring calls to be routed through centralized hubs so the Feds could collect them easier for eavesdropping. Thatâ(TM)s why VirnetX sued Apple.

  5. Re:Just use Hangouts or Skype by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It does work, but it isn't an open standard. Same problem with Facetime, or WebEx.

    At my work, we have fancy Cisco teleconference systems. Which only work for WebEx. The vendor may be using Skype, so it will not work, an exec may call in on their iPhone (and doesn't have the WebEx or Skype app installed).

    Businesses who are strict on security are not so keen on having apps install that use the camera.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  6. Missed the most important thing by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The story fails to mention that Steve Jobs' announcement was also the first time any of the programming team at Apple had heard it.

    Since then, maybe they could have engineered a new solution that could be open, but Jobs basically made that point up on the spot and following through on that at the time really wasn't feasible. After the initial announcement window had passed, it'd be hard to believe that it would be worth their time.

  7. Re:A polite no thank you by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And I do not want any Facebook or Microsoft software on any of my devices.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  8. Re: Lesson learned by TheFakeTimCook · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like so many dipshits on Slashdot, you have completely missed the point. It would have become open were it not for douchebag patent trolls.

    This. This is THE reason. Yet TFS uses inflammatory language like "broken promises" to up the Click-Count, and yet calls "Virnext" the neutral-sounding term "Company", when they DESERVE the epithet "Patent Troll".

    But that doesn't up the Click-Count now, does it?

  9. Re: Lesson learned by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Informative

    Facetime is based on open standards:

    The FaceTime protocol is based on numerous open industry standards[9] although it is not interoperable with other videotelephony systems:

    H.264 and AAC-ELD â" video and audio codecs respectively.
    SIP â" IETF signaling protocol for VoIP.
    STUN, TURN and ICE â" IETF technologies for traversing firewalls and NAT.
    RTP and SRTP â" IETF standards for delivering real-time and encrypted media streams for VoIP.
    Upon the launch of the iPhone 4, Jobs stated that Apple would immediately start working with standards bodies to make the FaceTime protocol an "open industry standard". While the protocols are open standards, Apple's FaceTime service requires a client-side certificate.[10]

    FaceTime calls are protected by end-to-end encryption so that only the sender and receiver can access them. Apple cannot decrypt this data.[11]

    Compared to most SIP implementations, Facetime adds techniques that enhance performance at the cost of breaking interoperability:[12] port multiplexing, SDP minimization and SDP compression.

    See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.