Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 16th Aug 2010 06:41 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless I've seen it so many times in the movies and TV: a person wakes up in this futuristic world, walks by his kitchen, and a computerized voice is telling him that someone is calling him. But instead of picking up a receiver, the call is actually a video-call, and his TV is used for the conversation. If you put 2 and 2 together, this is not really that futuristic. Having a camera attached on your TV, and a VoIP SIP or Skype connection with it, is not mad science. So why don't we already have this on our TVs?
Thread beginning with comment 437077
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by elektrik on Mon 16th Aug 2010 18:38 UTC in reply to "Comment by mtzmtulivu"
elektrik
Member since:
2006-04-18

The problem is not multiple protocols, the problem is bandwidth. How much up/down connection speed will it be necessary to have a smooth video chat with enought quality to look acceptable on a (big) tv?



The problem is most definitely *not* bandwidth in this day and age-that may have been true as early as 5 years ago, but with the wide availability of broadband, that's a non-issue. Most VoIP protocols have compression built-in...

As a former QA Engineer at a (now defunct)VoIP/video chat company, I believe it is mostly what people have been posting-they have no desire to be on 'tv'. There seems to be a stigma involved with getting on video (akin to making sure you are appropriately dressed to open the door when someone rings the bell)....

Reply Parent Score: 1