Comments on: Gmail video lands; What if it was a Gear?

By: preor

preor — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 14:28:00 +0000

thank you

By: Alyysa

Alyysa — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:41:03 +0000

Thanks for the great post, I started my career in nursing after finishing a associate degree in nursing from associate degree nursing schools

By: Stop Smoking

Stop Smoking — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:35:00 +0000

This is great! And video chat does not get any easier than that.

By: sachin

sachin — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:12:54 +0000

“third-party applications and networks can choose to interoperate with Gmail voice and video chat. ” ….This is what I think is awesome feature.

By: thegeniusfiles

thegeniusfiles — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 04:18:09 +0000

Ugh, patents. Let’s hope GOOG rethinks that issue. Open standards should be the way to go.. or can a patent be licensed as open source? Anyway, we need an API which can plug into as many apps as possible. Everyone benefits.

By: Edwin Khodabakchian

Edwin Khodabakchian — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 01:58:12 +0000

Rafael, Dion: you would still need to have a way to manage the contact list and online/video enabled status too no? Rebuilding that part of the UI as part of every application seems hard. But you are right: this is the types of integration that next generation mashups need to enable. May be with some tooling support from Dion :-)

By: Sander

Sander — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:01:39 +0000

When downloading, I get this notice:
“Gmail voice and video chat incorporates Vidyo technology which is covered under pending U.S. and foreign patent applications.”
(http://mail.google.com/videochat/thankyou.html)

So I guess the plugin cannot be distributed with the open source Gears.

By: Tiago

Tiago — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:57:00 +0000

See http://www.theora.org/

By: dion

dion — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:01:18 +0000

Rafael,

You could use the video/audio support in new browsers, and even *shock horror* shim and have it work in Flash for those that don’t support that yet, but give the same programmatic API :)

Daniel,

They could brand it to look like the Gmail plugin and people wouldn’t even have to know (not in a bad way…).

Cheers,

Dion

By: Daniel Shaw

Daniel Shaw — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:17:04 +0000

Maybe they thought they could get better penetration with it being separate. Video (and on the Mac, audio) is something that I’ve wanted for some time. By having it a distinct service they don’t have to worry about people turning away when they are directed to Gears instead of THE Gmail video plugin.

That said, I totally agree that it would be better placed as a module inside Gears. I personally want less not more plugins.