[email protected] wrote:Personally I think this is great idea, but we should ask ourselves why don't we already have it? Many cell phones these days already have video. Quite a few businesses today use video conferencing. Why, in some form, is it not already in the home?
The reason we don't have something like the business "telepresence" systems in the home is that they are priced in the tens of thousands of dollars. Also, it requires an IT department and separate hardware. Skype on your TV requires nothing more than a wireless network in your home. Think back to when the personal computer arrived; up until then, computing required on-staff wizards and investments of $100,000 or more. Of course, nobody expected computing in the home at that point, except maybe through a terminal to a mainframe somewhere. Then the personal computer arrived, and now we think nothing of carrying the equivalent of a supercomputer in our pockets.
I would buy your wife's reaction if the question was "would you like to make all your phone calls on the television?" I expect the answer would be different if you asked "Would you like to be able to see and interact with your toddler grandchild when you want?" It's like DVRs; people -- and often women -- don't get what they can do for you until they use one, and then they wonder why they waited so long to get it. It happened with TiVo, and I believe it will happen with Skype on your TV.
Have you seen Microsoft's demo on this subject? Their answer to this question seems to be to leap ahead with a more sophisticated idea, more like telepresence than just 2-way video. Reading between the lines, I suspect that offering services that are a hybrid between voice communication and advanced concepts like speech recognition, AI-driven virtual helpers etc. is a way to extend their video game technology into the arena of communication. Their demo is really jaw-dropping. In one scenario, a real person hands a piece of paper to a virtual animated character on the screen who is able to read it. (!) (One of those things you have to see to believe.)
This, of course, was just a demo, not a product. But with the popularity of video games these days, something like this might just succeed. It might be a good thing for what you're talking about since it would get people used to thinking about their TV as a communication device, shifting the paradigm so to speak.
I have not seen Microsoft's demo, and I've no doubt that it is more sophisticated and powerful than Skype. But that's the point. Skype is free. And it is not great, but it works well enough most of the time. And it's easy to use.
There is time enough for "better" down the road, but right now, Skype has the right feature set at the right price. It will be like the original slow, heavy desktop PC that created the demand that has led to netbooks that slip into your coat pocket. It's a very important first step that will change people's expectations of what you do with a "television". (Which, by the way, means "see at a long distance", which covers Skype video calls pretty well, I'd say.)
Does anybody remember Zenith TV's providing phone service 2-3 decades ago on their top of the line models? Had a phone jack on the back you plug the line into, the phone would ring and an incoming phone call message appeared on screen. Pushed a button and viola, you were having a phone conversation via your TV. Few owners actually used it.
I thought one of the satellite companies had a service that told you the phone was ringing but don't recall if it allowed actual communication.
I don't see the video phone and this Skype feature being a big deal but it might be a viable product to produce provided enough want it. A video phone tied to a display may very well be perceived like a phone with a cord - loss of mobility.
One thing is clear with each passing decade; the choices available for spending money just keep increasing exponentially.
