Comment Re:To stave off the obvious... (Score 1) 349
Tru dat.
Back when 3G first came about in the UK, video calling was going to be the new big thing. The first 3G network, Three, was pushing video calling in its ads, all of its phones had front-facing cameras (I had a Motorola C975, which was a budget phone and even that had a front facing camera) and it was touted as one of the biggest features on the network, with dedicated buttons and everything on their launch phones.
And now...? Fuck all. It didn't interest anyone. There are very few scenarios in which video calling is a good idea compared to voice calling or text messaging, and even they don't justify the ridiculous cost (51p per minute, right now. Not at launch, now. I just looked up the prices now.). That was when it even worked, which it rarely did, and when it did it had appalling picture quality. They don't even mention it on their website now.
Apple have made some inroads into the market with FaceTime, and it's a valiant effort, but that's WiFi only and frankly I don't hear about people FaceTiming each other all that often.
Video calling makes sense when you're in front of a computer or another terminal. That's why Skype, Windows Live Messenger and to a certain extent iChat have been very well used. When you're out and about, not so much. Three learned this the hard (and very expensive) way.