With relatively little fanfare yesterday, AT&T launched their cell phone Video Share service in nearly 160 markets. Sure the iPhone has brought in a lot of buzz not to mention revenue for AT&T (more on AT&T earnings later), but in the long run, the launch of video sharing is a bigger deal.
Years ago I worked with Motorola on the launch of the ill-fated Ojo video phone. There are many reasons why Motorola discontinued the product, but for me, the Ojo still has an important place in my living room. My almost-two-year-old talks to her grandparents on it several times a week, and has almost since she was born.
One of these days, video phones will hit the mainstream, and AT&T has found a way to ease people into the idea. Text messaging and photo messaging are common now, and video on a cell phone is simply the next logical step. I even think that sending a video clip versus talking via live video is a smart way to start with the concept. People are vaguely uncomfortable about sharing themselves live on video (think Jane Jetson’s morning face mask), but taking a quick clip of something and sharing it is as comfortable as posting something on YouTube. And on a cell phone it’s much easier, immediate, and more relevant.
All of that said, the AT&T Video Share service has several limitations as Marguerite Reardon points out over on CNET. For example, both the video sender and receiver need AT&T’s service and one of the few compatible handsets. I doubt Video Share will take off like gangbusters, but it’s the start of an interesting trend.
One other note, AT&T is billing Video Share as its first commercial IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) application. IMS has been long in the works as a system for offering converged IP services. AT&T has made a firm commitment to IP everything, as evidenced by Uverse, its small but growing IPTV service.