
Iphone 4.0 official video - sound
http://www.apple.com/iphone/design/#design-video
======
OoTheNigerian
You have to give it to Apple, they are the masters of marketing. It does not
matter if all these functionalities existed long before before, they make it
seem like a new invention.

Just like Mac books, the iPhone will have a small market share but will be
very profitable for Apple.

~~~
sp332
How many phones have 300+ DPI IPS screens?

~~~
warfangle
How many phones have a display with better than 800:1 contrast ratio[1]? All
the resolution in the world doesn't matter if you can't actually see it. The
Nexus One, in comparison, has a 100,000:1 contrast ratio[2].

1\. <http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html> 2\.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexus_One>

~~~
czhiddy
And yet, the Nexus One is the one that has visibility issues outdoors.

~~~
warfangle
Funny story: I'm typing this reply on my nexus one in direct sunlight.

------
mpk
Eh, requires Quicktime. Hooray for the Open Web.

I'll just take your word that it's really shiny.

~~~
ugh
They seem to be using the video-tag:
<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4073000/html5.png>

Don’t know what’s going on with QuickTime – maybe a fallback if your browser
won’t play h.264? Does it work on Chrome without QuickTime?

(– edit: Three people [who downvoted me] seem to think that formulating a
reasonable hypothesis and asking reasonable questions because of conflicting
information is already too much Apple love. Or maybe they just think I’m lazy
for not doing the research myself? Oh, well. Check out my other grandkid
comment in this thread to see how testing my hypothesis worked out.)

~~~
younata
I run midori [1] on a freebsd machine, it works somewhat well (audio problems)
with html5 video on youtube. Quicktime is not a fallback, it's still the
standard.

edit: forgot the link [1] <http://www.twotoasts.de/>

~~~
ugh
I fired up Chrome and here is what I saw:
<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4073000/chrome.png>

They seem to do some evil browser sniffing (I have no confirmation but that’s
how it looks) and indeed use QuickTime as a fallback if you use any other
browser than Safari.

Apple, listen: Thou Shalt Detect Features, Not Browsers! :)

~~~
younata
<http://i49.tinypic.com/ws0boj.png>

I have midori identifying as safari - it works well enough for google to at
least not give me crap for using something different, and I still see the "you
need quicktime to view this" stuff.

------
_flag
For those that reject quicktime: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVIxXBKesvg>

~~~
nailer
I don't reject Quicktime, it just doesn't work on Apple's website in OS X /
Chrome. Thanks.

------
aresant
I just walked into our office lunch room where a bunch of non-technical / non-
gadget people were talking about the video conferencing capabilities of the
new iphone . . .

I think that feature is going to be a monster commercial success that every
other phone immediately copies.

Will probably be the only point that we hear about on the local news / etc
rather than Steve's consolidated 8-points . . .

~~~
buster
I don't get it. Videoconferencing is insanely old and never took off. First
there was ISDN video conferencing.. apart from the job at a telco i did once
i've never actually seen one that was used.

Second, the first UMTS mobile i got had video conferencing, that's really a
long time ago (Motorola V980 btw.) and many UMTS phones shipped with the
second camera for years now. Yet, noone ever used it. Atleast i've never seen
or heard of someone, although technically i could have done that with most
people i know for years.

Is it that this feature was never available in the U.S.? Or why is this news
over there?

Also, i've probably overread some feature that distinguishes it from the old
UMTS way.

~~~
paul
The important feature is that on the iPhone it will actually work. Also, there
will be enough distribution to actually establish video calls on a regular
basis (because both ends have an iPhone).

~~~
trezor
Except you have to call first to verify that whoever you are calling is on
wifi.

In Europe where wifi is something you have to search for and 3G is something
which is everywhere, this renders the feature absolutely useless.

~~~
snom370
I don't have to search for wifi at home or in the office, and that's where I
spend most of the time.

Even so, I'm pretty sure Apple has thought this through, making it quick and
easy to discover if someone is online, and even invite them through push
notifications.

They did mention that they "had some details to work out" with the operators,
which means that we will probably see video calls on 3G at some point in the
future.

~~~
lutorm
At home and in the office are also exactly the places where I'm also at a
computer which runs skype and can already video chat. No compelling advantage
there.

~~~
snom370
It's a bit easier to move around your home with a phone, so I'm guessing this
is going to be used more frequently just because it's more convenient. Same
with Skype now that the iPhone supports multitasking.

------
davidmurphy
I love how Apple focuses on emotion -- those family FaceTime videos were so
moving. Intersection of Liberal Arts & Technology, indeed. Well done, Apple.

~~~
pxlpshr
They did that back in 2004 when iChat AV was introduced, and AV didn't disrupt
or shift habits away from traditional audio and text.

I think video conferencing is a great feature no doubt, but it's largely too
intrusive for most people. Certainly making it more accessible and
standardized will help some however, even amongst the most savvy early
adopters (and MM+ of college students with MacBooks), video chatting has
remained a niche.

~~~
adamesque
iChat AV has always had an interesting usability / interaction issue.

Because the camera is located on the display bezel, and not in the middle of
the screen where the video window sits, you can't ever make full eye contact
with the person you're talking to. It makes the entire conversation feel a
little "off".

I've always thought this was a subtle yet important reason computer-based
video chat never took off, and was super excited by patents that hinted that
Apple was going to put the camera behind the display.

Hopefully the new iPhone 4 camera is close enough to the display to make eye
contact possible.

~~~
nooneelse
Interesting bit there at the end. Just by being human I can say we are quite
capable of telling if someone is looking at a point a couple of inches from
our eyes from across a table (can usually tell which eye they are dominant in
and which of your eyes they are looking at). So if your face is in the middle
of other screen and they look down at that image instead of at the camera, the
question becomes will the resolution of your image of them be enough to tell?
I bet it will be easier to tell if they look back and forth between the camera
to the image. And better video quality and distances to the phones will, of
course, make it easier to see the lack of true eye-contact.

So, in addition to just holding your phone further away, maybe everyone can
aim their own phone's camera so that the image of them on the other phone has
their eyes as close to the camera as possible. One might just find that people
start gravitating to that "off center" camera aiming without thinking about it
(since it would minimize the other person's eye-jitter). Anybody reading this
done much hand-held video calling? Where are the thresholds on these
variables?

------
cwilson
Anyone else notice this in the FaceTime video?

<http://grab.by/4NSi>

Looks like the squared edges serve a purpose!

------
hn_aml
The way they have made this video it looks as if they had come up with the
definite cure to cancer, aids, etc ... I don't like it.

~~~
hawk
anybody else think its hilarious that this comment gets downvoted to oblivion?

~~~
nihilocrat
I was wondering the same.

Perhaps it's because it's a very obvious statement? Apple routinely purport
its products are perfect, that every detail is a facet of the best
craftsmanship on Earth, use gaping-mouth words ("sooo perfect") and giggles of
joy. Apple markets its products as technology beyond cutting-edge: they are
superhuman, perhaps built by aliens and bestowed upon us mortals, things that
change our lives and do more than technology is ever expected to do.

I am not trying to exaggerate here for cheap comedic effect. I seriously
believe anything less would be very not-Apple.

~~~
jbrennan
Why wouldn't you try to make your new product seem as "incredible" as
possible?

~~~
roryokane
Because cynics would realize you are exaggerating and perhaps think less of
your product for it – maybe your product can’t stand on its own, so you have
to exaggerate to make up for that. Apple is betting that most of its ad
watchers are not this type of cynic.

~~~
nooneelse
Like that "what is iPad" commercial that says "all the world's websites". They
made the best tablet going, so why do they still feel the need to cross the
line between touting and lying?

~~~
niekmaas
All the websites are available of course. Whether or not you can make use of
the Flash content is a different story. At least to Apple it's a different
story...

------
SkyMarshal
Is it just me, or is Jonathan Ive the only Apple exec able to convincingly
recreate Job's reality distortion field?

Every time one of these videos comes out, a bunch of guys are paraded out,
each one trying to imp Job's style, vocabulary, and delivery, but each one
coming across as some guy trying to copy someone else, rather than exude their
own sense of style and originality.

To be even less charitable and more cynical, it comes across as a bunch of
corporate suits with succession on their minds, all believing that Job's
unique style and power of persuasion are necessary to sustain Apple when he
eventually steps down, and that the most likely candidate to succeed him will
be someone who most effectively recreates those traits as CEO.

But if so, they miss the mark, in that those traits can't be copied. They
can't exist if they're not authentic, if they don't originate from the
strength of a unique individual's vision, passion, and frame. You don't get
those by mimicking someone else in the hope of increasing your odds in the
corporate succession game.

Without looking them all up on Wikipedia, I'm sure they are all highly
accomplished in their own rights, driven and passionate about what they do,
thankful to have amazing jobs at the coolest company in the universe (Google
excepted; not taking sides, but that's a debate for another thread), and have
even contributed to and influenced Steve Jobs' vision and direction at times.

But none of them is Steve Jobs, and never will be, and the harder they try the
more obvious that is. Only Ive comes across as someone with as strong a sense
of individuality and frame as Jobs, and that's because of all the execs, he
tries the least to mimic Steve, if at all.

He has nothing to prove, having lead designed practically all of Apple's
products since Steve returned to Apple, and acts like it. The difference is
subtle, but to me, very apparent in videos like this.

EDIT: To unharsh on those guys a bit, they're much more successful than I, and
probably 99% of all other human beings are at this point. So /salute to them
for that.

But that makes me wonder even more why they seem to feel the need to try to
recreate Jobs' style, instead of developing their own. Surely, to get where
they are, they have an abundance of talent and a wealth of experience, all of
which should contribute to a strong frame, and the lack of a need to copy
someone else's.

To reduce Jobs down to the essentials, I think it's really his frame, and his
ability to frame Apple's products, that is the crux of his RDF and marketing
ability. But there are equally effective ways to accomplish that without aping
his vocabulary (pro tip - only Jobs can use the word 'exciting' to describe
Baudrillardian consumer products without a hint of irony or corporate BS
jargon; no one else should even attempt it).

I wish these guys would realize that and find their own path, be their own
person.

~~~
ugh
I had this strange idea today when I read that Jobs invited Ive to the stage
at the end of the keynote when he introduced video chat.

Is Ive a possible future CEO of Apple? Job’s successor? Is that at all
plausible or possible? He doesn’t get much time on stage, in fact I can’t even
remember when and if he ever was on stage last.

Pretty much everyone else you see in those videos is on stage quite often.
They are doing ok, better than many execs of other companies would, but I
think you are quite right: they are all pretty bland. Except Ive, that is.

Is that a totally stupid idea? Does it make any sense at all? Ive is obviously
‘only’ a hardware guy – but would that matter?

~~~
SkyMarshal
Yeah, I think everyone wonders that too. I have no idea what Ive's other
skills are.

Maybe he is best left as Apple's lead industrial designer, and maybe that's
what he loves and wants to do more than anything else.

Or maybe he also has the leadership skills, communication skills, vision,
judgement, and business sense to succeed Jobs. I have no idea, and honestly
don't ever expect to until years after the succession actually occurs.

I'm not an Apple investor either, so it's all academic to me anyway.

~~~
cstross
I note Jobs' discourse on Apple being at the intersection of engineering and
liberal arts, with an emphasis on industrial design. This is very unusual in
the computer business, and I think it's a key indicator as to where Jobs wants
to see his company going after he leaves the helm.

Ives is clearly the Chief Designer. And he's being called out for _something_.

My guess is that in the absence of Jobs 2.0, Jobs 1.0 is trying to inculcate a
design-led culture within Apple, and sees Ives as the most likely successor to
keep his particular design aesthetic front-and-centre. In this scenario, it
doesn't matter too much who handles the business of marketing, manufacturing,
and developing the products -- as long as they continue to be design-led and
follow the same basic aesthetic goals. Which is not simply to make high-end
PCs or smartphones, but to make stuff that is _pretty_ and _pleasant to use_.

(Here on HN, we're mostly technophiles. It's important to remember that most
of the public are _not_ \-- and they prefer beautiful objects to ugly but
functional ones. Beauty is an important market, as Apple's market cap
demonstrates ...)

------
fjania
I won't put quicktime on this machine, so I haven't seen the video. Do they
mention the speed of the processor in the video? I'm suspicious of the actual
processor speed since it wasn't mentioned in the coverage I saw of the event,
and it's not mentioned here: <http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html>

~~~
masklinn
They don't mention the frequency at any point, only that it's an A4. Notice
that they don't say anything about RAM either.

~~~
angusgr
Have Apple ever revealed those specifics publicly, for any revision of the
iPhone?

I'm not sure if they even revealed the previous iPhones were ARM-based in
their marketing materials.

~~~
spicyj
On the tech specs page, it says that the A4 in the iPad runs at 1GHz.

------
sbaqai
Apple's competitive advantage has always been hardware-software integration,
and user experience. In all of apple's products, I've always notice they try
to widen the moat with their hardware and design capabilities (ie:
reengineering of the MBP batteries, unibody chassis, multi-touch screens on
phone/tablet, a4 chip, etc).

And if you look at Apple's iPhone Design page, it is devoted to mainly
hardware upgrades and the marketing focuses on user-experience benefits of
such upgrades. And these improvements just so happen to be in areas that
aren't easily replicable by competitors like Google (because their expertise
is in software).

------
dmn001
Exceptional marketing and advertising strategy as usual. They talk in the
advert like they invented video calls. Even my old phone has both front and
back cameras. Now that the resolution and technology has caught up with wifi
and whatnot, it definitely looks more usable now though, no lag at all and
full quality video in the advert.

I wonder about the contract terms of this device, otherwise for $200 it is
affordable, and I will be upgrading.

------
oliveoil
Non-quicktime video URL, anyone? heh, perhaps one in flash?

~~~
adolph
Engadget seems to have them in a flash wrapper of some sort. YMMV.

[http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/07/apples-iphone-4-promo-
vid...](http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/07/apples-iphone-4-promo-videos-and-
sam-mendes-video-calling-ad/)

------
elblanco
I was really hoping the hardware we "accidentally" saw wasn't the final phone
case. Maybe I have to see it in person, but the original iPhone design looks
far more elegant. All the bands, square seams and panels in this design really
seem more HTC than Apple.

~~~
astine
I like it better than the older iPhone designs. Then again, don't generally
like Apple's product designs.

------
sman
They just might have killed the Flip device with the HD video. Now I do not
need to carry a device to do HD video.

~~~
pclark
everyone must have seen this coming though

------
kingkawn
amuse anyone else that an iphone with video chat is debuted days after AT&T
announces limits on data plans?

------
felix_387
Direct link to video:
[http://movies.apple.com/media/us/iphone/2010/tours/apple-
iph...](http://movies.apple.com/media/us/iphone/2010/tours/apple-
iphone4-design_video-us-20100607_848x480.mov)

------
100k
The people in this video gushing how they can't believe video chat REALLY
exists!!! should try Skype.

I mean, yeah, it's cool that it's on a phone and everything but they are
acting like Apple invented it.

------
sound
just wondering why video is not in HTML-5, or am i missing something?

~~~
jherdman
HTML5 is a documentation spec, not a video encoder. I think you knew that, but
language is surprisingly precise, so before commenting I wanted to ensure that
we were talking about the same thing.

Having got that out of the way, the HTML5 spec for the VIDEO tag is a bit
tenuous at the moment. Though the API is laid out in full, there are
essentially three competing encodings vying for the default: Ogg/Vorbis,
MPEG-4, and VP8. Only Mozilla supports Ogg as other parties feel uncertain
about its defensibility in a patent war against MPEG-LA. MPEG-4 is not F/OSS,
ergo Mozilla isn't supporting it. Google has purchased and opened VP8 in hopes
that it will become the open standard, thereby assuaging Mozilla's and the
F/OSS' community's fears, though Apple has yet to be sold on VP8's
defensibility again MPEG-LA.

To wrap this up, if you do a little digging you'll find that Apple used the
MOV container to hold an MPEG-4 video. This is just fine and dandy in the
current state of the spec, though it would have been nice for Apple to use a
different container format.

~~~
kinetik
_Only Mozilla supports Ogg_

Chrome/Chromium and Opera also support Ogg Theora/Vorbis out of the box.

~~~
jherdman
Many thanks. I hadn't realized that.

------
tomerico
Youtube link:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJYoj3HVTd4&feature=playe...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJYoj3HVTd4&feature=player_embedded)

------
MikeCapone
Apple's videos always look so good, and yet don't seem to take much more
bandwidth.. Wish everybody encoded videos online this carefully.

~~~
staunch
That video is 122 MB. Not exactly small for a 6 minute video. Your average
dvdrip is ~3-7 MB/minute and this is ~20 MB/minute.

I think you're noticing their production quality more than anything to do with
encoding.

~~~
MikeCapone
That might be right. Another factor might be that they often have videos with
a lot of solid white/black space, which makes is easier for the encoder to
allocate the bits to the parts of the picture that the viewer is focusing on.

------
tzury
Dear Apple, is there a reason why this video is not delivered as HTML5 video?

------
hackermom
The advert is in its entirety incredibly cheesy and pretentious to the point I
could barely sit through some passages, but fact remains: what they mention
about the phone is real and actual; it's an ace product, inside out, and no
doubt the technically finest, most sound and solid smartphone available on the
planet. Metal frame and glass cover - good lord!

------
mkramlich
I wonder how long it will take for a Chatroulette-like app to come out, using
these new video call features? Assuming they expose it through an API.

------
dgreensp
Incredible.

------
detcader
Hm, it's fuzzy for me.

Also, there's no indication to when this video will end...

------
yread
If I made a parody clip for an Iphone it would look just like this!

------
disposable
> _Chemically strengthened to be 20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than
> plastic, the glass is ultradurable._

... though the battery is still non-removable, so the ultradurability of the
glass is really a moot point.

~~~
solutionyogi
Jeez. Why do you think that ultra-durability is to make it easy to change the
batteries? Ultra-durability is for the situations when I drop my phone by
accident and instead of breaking it, it survives the drop.

And I don't understand certain folks' obsession with changeable batteries. You
need to have those stupid opening compartment for batteries which always
breaks down. I also remember that when my Blackberry used to hang, I would
have no choice but to remove the batteries so that I can reset it. The on/off
switch has always worked if my iPhone gets stuck up. Says a lot about how
solid iOS is.

~~~
disposable
> _Why do you think that ultra-durability is to make it easy to change the
> batteries?_

What? Why do you think I think that?

~~~
yanowitz
Because that's the only way to parse the durability of glass being mooted by
the fixedness of the battery. Maybe you meant "until I can swap the battery, I
don't care what changes they make to the case" or something similar? It's
genuinely a confusing point as currently phrased.

~~~
freakwit
I parsed it as "The overall lifetime of a phone is generally limited by the
death of it's battery rather than the glass. If the battery could be replaced,
the durability of components would be more of an issue."

~~~
lincolnq
That's how I parsed it. Not sure why you are being downvoted, except perhaps
people being annoyed because the inability to replace the iPhone battery is an
old complaint that they've all heard before. But I think it's a legitimate
point.

~~~
nailer
I downvoted him because I couldn't understand him. You're a lot easier to
parse.

