FaceTime and Why Apple’s Massive Integration Advantage is Just Beginning

TechCrunch ^ | Jul 3, 2010 | Steve Cheney

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Talk is cheap."

Your point being...?

[tacticalogic]

Your point being...?

Can you tell us what the name of this company is, the name of the VP you got this information from, or any available documentation that would corraborate the claims that they're converting their operation to a Mac infrastructure?

[PugetSoundSoldier]

But according to your "logic" Nokia is nowhere in the smartphone market.

What part of that graph above do you not understand? Nokia simply owns the smartphone market - they have about the same share of market as the next THREE combined.

Talk all you want about what could happen in the future with 6 months old articles; the REALITY is that Nokia totally dominates the smartphone market. You're completely wrong.

You'll never admit it because not only would be be admitting your own error, you'd be admitting that I was right. And how can the GD EVIL LIAR, the enemy of all things Apple, be right, and you be so very, very wrong? But that is the case - you are flat-out wrong, and - once again - I am right.

[Richard Kimball]

I use Skype all the time on my HTC Touch Pro2 on Verizon; VOIP does rock, especially internationally!

Skype's available for the iPhone also, so I'm not sure I understand your points. Okay, you said if you're not on wifi you can't use Facetime, but then follow by talking about how Skype rocks on the HTC and you use it all the time. The other live video streaming application you touted, Qik, also has an application for the iPhone. Fring also has an app for both devices.

So, what you imply are advantages for the HTC were also available on the iPhone. Despite the fact that all these features were already available on the iPhone, Apple decided to develop Facetime. Usually, when Apple develops something like this, it's because they believe they can add value to the technology. This added value is usually in the area of the interface and usability.

Several people have speculated that this is going to go over big. I'm curious as to why. Video calling has been around in one form or another since around 2003. Several people think Facetime is what will move it to prime time. Their points are that you don't have to launch a different application or sign up for an account to use it.

This gets into the area where Apple has had great success. MP3 players existed before the iPod, but Apple made them accessible to the average person. Dittos for several other areas. I know that studies on web site shopping carts indicate that something like 30% of prospective customers drop the purchasing process for every additional screen they have to click on to complete their purchase. This is an indication of what most studies show. One or two clicks makes a big difference in whether a feature is used or not.

If Apple can integrate the video call so that it is as seamless as a phone call, no apps, no new accounts, no different sign ins, no third party capturing and storing your video chats on the internet for others to see, it could be a big deal.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Can you tell us what the name of this company is, the name of the VP you got this information from, or any available documentation that would corraborate the claims that they're converting their operation to a Mac infrastructure?"

Ah. I see your point. No, I cannot do that. But you'll see it soon enough. And I didn't say they were "converting their operation to a Mac infrastructure." Windows is here for a while yet. They are, however, adding iDevice and OS X systems where none existed before, in particular deploying iPads in revolutionary ways that spun my head around.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Skype's available for the iPhone also, so I'm not sure I understand your points.

Well, I've been using Skype on my WinMo phone since 2007; Apple refused to allow Skype on the iPhone until the middle of last year (even though Skype wanted on earlier). Not to mention the Google VOIP restriction by Apple that was finally lifted earlier this year.

Apple has been VERY slow to allow VOIP applications on their phone, because they really do not offer a VOIP app. It's turning over a core function to a 3rd party, and that is very un-Apple like.

Okay, you said if you're not on wifi you can't use Facetime, but then follow by talking about how Skype rocks on the HTC and you use it all the time.

I use Skype all the time on my HTC, and it's not via WIFI. It's via 3G. In fact, I can't remember the last time I connected my HTC phone to a WIFI network; I've use it as a hotspot all the time, but never connect to other WIFI networks. I can do anything over 3G that I can do over WIFI. That's the big difference. Likewise with the other video conferencing apps - they run over 3G, not just WIFI like FaceTime. BIG difference in when you can use the application.

Several people have speculated that this is going to go over big. I'm curious as to why. Video calling has been around in one form or another since around 2003.

I agree; rarely do I want someone to see me when I'm talking on the phone! And since it's been around for 7 years, and on the biggest Smartphone market share provider (Nokia) and still not taken off, I don't think it really will be as big of an issue as being touted. Especially with the WIFI-only restriction.

MP3 players existed before the iPod

But earlier in this thread we were told that Apple invented all this stuff, surely you must be wrong! ;)

I don't deny that Apple is very good at marketing what they make; that's never been challenged, and I've never denied it. They're a marketing monster, fabulous at that. But they take ideas from others, pretty them up, and then sell it out as "brand new, totally invented by Apple" and most of their loyal buyers completely swallow it - hook, line, and sinker.

If Apple can integrate the video call so that it is as seamless as a phone call, no apps, no new accounts, no different sign ins, no third party capturing and storing your video chats on the internet for others to see, it could be a big deal.

My point is that has absolutely zero chance of happening as long as FaceTime is restricted to WIFI only. Apple will first need to get it working with 3G connections, and then figure out how to play with the other established networks (MSN, Google, Yahoo). Otherwise you're stuck in the small end of the market, especially when it comes to the desktop/laptop side of things.

And since businesses are overwhelmingly not-OSX, and businesses are the monster-user of video conferencing, Apple will be functionally locked out of that market completely.

But when you have people swearing up and down that Nokia is a bit-player in the smartphone market and the Apple dominates mobile devices, I guess any position is possible!

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"But according to your 'logic' Nokia is nowhere in the smartphone market."

Yup. Dead in the water and sinking fast, stubbornly clinging to outdated strategies and faded glory. Your own table attests to that.

An ex-smartphone leader. Deceased. Pining for the fjords. Doesn't seem to know it yet, though. Did you even read the article I posted?

Oh, and by the way, I suspect the beautiful plumage of that 44% market share in 1Q10 seems to not be just Nokia. Symbian has many licensees, including Samsung, LG, Fujitsu, Sony Ericsson... a regular rogues' gallery of smartphone dust-eaters. So it's kind of like Android in that respect, in that the aggregate number represents the combined efforts of a bunch of entrants, including some doomed and feeble ones. But, ironically, Symbian is like Microsoft in that it has lots to lose from the Android OS, which after all is given away without license fees.

Which raises the issue of cui bono? And on that point, IMHO anyone who trusts yet another aspect of their life to the voracious data-maw that is Google is nuts.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Why are they using the 3rd place player in the smartphone market?

[DBrow]

“MP3 players existed before the iPod, but Apple made them accessible to the average person.”

lol I had, still have, a Rio. The Rio was the icebreaker, there was a big court case as to whether the Rio violated copyright laws (this was before DCMA), and the court decided it was OK.

Came with 32 meg, you could get a card to insert extending it to 64 meg.

Considerably before iPod.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Apple has been VERY slow to allow VOIP applications on their phone"

Another uninformed statement. There's more to VOIP than Skype, y'know. I've had TruPhone, downloaded from the iTunes App Store, on my 3G since the second day I owned it, and then iCall.

The reasons for Skype's tardy entry into the fray is a mystery to everybody but Skype and Apple. There are many reasons an app can be blocked or delayed, including misuse of user information, failure to abide by user interface guidelines, crashiness, etc. But it's here, and it's operative on 3G now too, not just WiFi.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Why are they using the 3rd place player in the smartphone market?"

Because it's the best? [grin]

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Are you seriously that deranged? You simply cannot admit that I am right, and you are wrong.

FACT: Nokia dominates the smartphone world.

FACT: Blackberry is second place in the smartphone world.

FACT: Apple is in a distant 3rd place.

It’s OK, everyone reading this thread sees your steadfast refusal of facts for what they are: hyper-fanboi belief and of course a dread to admit that I - the great Satan of all things Apple at FR - am 100% right.

You should commiserate with BunnySlippers about how - even though reality is 100% different from your claims, somehow you are still ‘right’. Because it just must be.

You can admit I’m correct at any time. Or not. But deep on your heart, you know I am...;)

[PugetSoundSoldier]

So you admit they’re 3rd place? ;)

[BunnySlippers]

Well, I would love to know: Why do the articles say that Nokia is floundering because their only phone that can compete with the iPhone 4 won’t be out for months?

What’s up with that? Nokia is clearly the leader? But they don’t have a phone to compete with iPhone?

Are they putting out crud? What are they selling?

[BunnySlippers]

Well, I would love to know: Why do the articles say that Nokia is floundering because their only phone that can compete with the iPhone 4 won’t be out for months?

What’s up with that? Nokia is clearly the leader? But they don’t have a phone to compete with iPhone?

Are they putting out crud? What are they selling?

[tacticalogic]

Ah. I see your point. No, I cannot do that. But you'll see it soon enough. And I didn't say they were "converting their operation to a Mac infrastructure." Windows is here for a while yet. They are, however, adding iDevice and OS X systems where none existed before, in particular deploying iPads in revolutionary ways that spun my head around.

Apple seems to have gotten the pad computer right ahead of the competition, but adoption seems to be more a consequence of it being a unique type of interface that fits some tasks better than others. The "more secure and cheaper to support" drumbeat starts to sound like marketing spin when it gets thrown out as a "big deal" even in deployments where it wasn't really an issue to start with.

[MichiganMan]

How many music players and tablets has Android sold?

Wait, you're implying Market Share equals superiority...?

Have you heard of Windows?? 

I don't use it myself, but I don't think this is a path you want to take your argument down...

[PugetSoundSoldier]

The articles say Nokia is floundering because it’s hip right now to jump on the iPhone bandwagon. Having a 40+% share of the market is hardly what I’d call floundering...

[BunnySlippers]

In fact, what the Windoz-bots don’t understand is that it is about innovation design and interface.

They’ve hitched their wagons to a Goron!

[PugetSoundSoldier]

I don't use it myself, but I don't think this is a path you want to take your argument down...

Keep reading, she goes right down that path and ends up in a twisted, mangled pile at the end. Even gets joined later by another person who crumbles into the same wreck!