FaceTime is an open standard so if Google feels brave enough to adopt it then anyone can call any one. I guess now we'll really see if Google real is open standards lead.
@arrgh Actually, FaceTime is NOT an Open Standard. It uses H.264 as a video standard, and any developer who wants to incorporate H.264 has to pay for that right (to a company called MPEG LA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_LA). That's the opposite of an Open Standard, despite what His Steveness might have used as a marketing bullet point.
Thus no one is likely to develop a free, legal FaceTime-compatible app for other platforms, since they'd lose money in the process. Steve knows this, but pretends not to because it's part of his anti-Flash campaign, too.
That's because google doesn't care about the end users experience. All that matters to them is getting their os on as many devices as they can so they can make their money from advertising. android is the greatest undercover ad information gathering ploy in history and you drones are sucking it up all because you guys are so cool and not mainstream and it's not made by the "evil" Apple.
You obviously don't understand what open means. Open means anybody can use it - REGARDLESS if there is a licensing fee or not. Open does not mean free, free does not mean open. The flash plug-in is free, and it's 100% closed.
Furthermore, you appear to be ignoring all the products out there that are free to end users that incorporate not only H.264 but all kind of other varieties of MPEG compression that are under licensing fees. This is absolutely a non-issue. If anybody wants to develop something to work with facetime, they will. And believe me, lots of developers are going to want to get in on this.
@arrgh For starters, how much proof do you need? Google been promoting open standards and allowing competition based on those standards for years!
Also, it's not about Google responding to FaceTime in some way - as if they were expected to now pronounce upon sort of video would be allowed on Android. There can and will be multiple solutions available on Android. Google doesn't control their platform like a little fiefdom designed to extract money from their users.
Following the commercial success (and technical disappointment) of the original Wildfire -- which featured a miserly 528MHz CPU and QVGA display -- HTC has returned with the Wildfire S.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
But will apple allow you to call an android phone with video phone capability's?
Or nokia's that have had it for years?
@stabbytheicepic
FaceTime is an open standard so if Google feels brave enough to adopt it then anyone can call any one. I guess now we'll really see if Google real is open standards lead.
@arrgh google doesn't care. They will let app makers make the app.
@arrgh, @arrgh, Uh... Google owns the company that created the video engine used by Skype. Google already displayed their smartness. ;)
@arrgh Actually, FaceTime is NOT an Open Standard. It uses H.264 as a video standard, and any developer who wants to incorporate H.264 has to pay for that right (to a company called MPEG LA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_LA). That's the opposite of an Open Standard, despite what His Steveness might have used as a marketing bullet point.
Thus no one is likely to develop a free, legal FaceTime-compatible app for other platforms, since they'd lose money in the process. Steve knows this, but pretends not to because it's part of his anti-Flash campaign, too.
@stabbytheicepic
That's because google doesn't care about the end users experience. All that matters to them is getting their os on as many devices as they can so they can make their money from advertising. android is the greatest undercover ad information gathering ploy in history and you drones are sucking it up all because you guys are so cool and not mainstream and it's not made by the "evil" Apple.
@High
QFT.
@High Man these people's opinions are really affecting you, huh?
@Brad Hubbard
You obviously don't understand what open means. Open means anybody can use it - REGARDLESS if there is a licensing fee or not. Open does not mean free, free does not mean open. The flash plug-in is free, and it's 100% closed.
Furthermore, you appear to be ignoring all the products out there that are free to end users that incorporate not only H.264 but all kind of other varieties of MPEG compression that are under licensing fees. This is absolutely a non-issue. If anybody wants to develop something to work with facetime, they will. And believe me, lots of developers are going to want to get in on this.
@stabbytheicepic if that were true the devs would have already done that, time will show
@arrgh
For starters, how much proof do you need? Google been promoting open standards and allowing competition based on those standards for years!
Also, it's not about Google responding to FaceTime in some way - as if they were expected to now pronounce upon sort of video would be allowed on Android. There can and will be multiple solutions available on Android. Google doesn't control their platform like a little fiefdom designed to extract money from their users.
@Brad Hubbard
Not so fast:
"On February 2, 2010 MPEG LA announced that H.264-encoded Internet Video that is free to end users would continue to be exempt from royalty fees until at least December 31, 2015" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing
Of course that depends on what their definition of Internet Video is...
@stabbytheicepic I sure hope that's the case, I don't see the conflict in interest in this matter.