PicturePhone: How Bell Telephone lost a half billion, but nearly created the internet

How Bell Telephone's PicturePhone, introduced in 1964, flopped yet nearly catalyzed the internet. Technically, it was an amazing achievement: Bell used the existing twisted-pair copper wire of the telephone network -- not broadband lines like today -- to produce black and white video on a screen about five inches square. And, amazingly for the time, it used a CCD-based-camera. It was meant to be the most revolutionary communication medium of the century, driving subscribers to purchase broadband lines, but failed miserably as a consumer product costing Bell a half billion dollars. This is one of three videos in a series on marketplace failures of technological objects. www.engineerguy.com/failure.

[@clayronso3932]

$1000 a month and $20 a minute. Why did this fail again?

[@epsleon]

+Clay Ronso Their memes were not dank enough.

[@mundotaku_org]

Actually that would have been cheaper than international long distance calls at the time.

[@I_am_a_cat_]

+Folse Prophet no one cares

[@erikmfoss9042]

Government intervention inflating the prices to this degree - he explains this (albeit briefly and in an offhand manner) in the vid

[@johnrobinson4445]

Not 'inflating' but requiring that costs be honestly reflected so as to AVOID KILLING NEW BUSINESSES. This was the right choice. Eventually, we got lots of new companies and the great tech world we live in...all thanks to the fact that one monopoly wasn't allowed to steamroll over everyone.

[@CrazyPetez]

As a former Bell guy, I can tell you the bandwidth required was enormous. At least one or more groups of L-carrier transmission equipment for one picture conversation. That meant one picture phone conversation used the facilities if at least 12 voice conversations.

[@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017]

That doesn't seem like a lot, but in terms of physical resources I guess it was.

[@protosspc]

@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 A picture is worth 1000 words or 12 conversations.

[@CoopyKat]

@CrazyPetez A PicturePhone is shown in the 1997 movie "Mother" and the video was GARBAGE. Very choppy and very low quality picture. I can't believe they even still existed in the 90s!

[@colleenforrest7936]

There was a social aspect too in the way people used telephones. You HAD to answer the phone when it rang because you didn't know who was on the other end. If it was someone you didn't want to talk to, you could make entertaining faces about the call to others in the room with you while the person on the phone jabbered on. And then there was your appearance. What if you just got out of the shower or out of bed and your hair was all over the place when the phone rang? No one wants to be prepared to meet the public 24\7 inside the privacy. We needed other features like CallerID, a call log and answering machines, and a cultural shift that took us from the suit to business casual to blue jeans to give the public a sense of control over this new technology that was invading our lives

[@engineerguyvideo]

I wanted to explore that more. It seems to me that until recently -- the last year or so -- video chat was by appointment only, unlike a text or phone call. I've noticed that my sister now sometimes just rings up on facetime, or I just call her on facetime without notice ....

[@steadyc9277]

Colleen Forrest My sentiments exactly. Very well put!

[@RobertPlattBell]

+Colleen Forrest You are correct. I used to do some Patent work for Bell Atlantic and this is what they told me - People simply didn't really want to see who was on the other end of the line or be "on stage" all the time. Remember answering machines? When they first came out, people had "stage fright" in recording their messages - and in leaving messages! It took a while for people to get over this. With picture phone, I think it never will take off in a big way, even though the technology is here today. When was the last time you were in a video conference? It was a human engineering problem, not an electrical engineering one.

[@RobertPlattBell]

+engineerguy With regard to video conferencing or even voice calls, I find the opposite from your experience. People today e-mail me asking if it is OK to voice call on the phone, often setting up phone calls days in advance. (!!) The days of simply calling and chatting seem to be long gone. The stereotypical cell phone user with the cell phone glued to their ear has been replaced by the stereotypical cell phone user obsessively texting. It seems we prefer to hide behind a wall of technology, perhaps?

[@DrSardonicus]

+Robert Bell Peoples anxiety issues will always stand in the way. I remember a girl who was incapable of simply calling for takeout food, she would completely break down if pushed, but seemed normal in person. Same deal if she was diverted to a machine, oh my lord she would be paralyzed, fumbling to try and hang up as soon as she could. On the other hand, there's old fashioned people like me that just don't like it, not due to anxiety, but more of an; I don't like talking to people at all in the best of times in any form. Especially if its not important, then I couldn't care less, go talk to your girlfriends. Got something important to communicate? Then say it in person, if you're too far away, then I'd rather it be written down and sent mail, email or text depending on the urgency. Also that way its more certain there won't be confusion or mistakes, as the instructions are written down. I'm a simple minded old fashioned person, I don't know the psychology behind my hatred toward speaking on the phone, I like technology a lot, but in my lifetime I'm tired of hearing lies and its a thousand times easier to bullshit someone over the phone and I'm not interested in that at all.

[@KingBobXVI]

I am looking at a screen that contains a window showing a video of a person with their cellphone displaying a picture of a videophone streaming the content.Neat.

[@ZnenTitan]

Electronic Russian nesting dolls.

[@Pudentame]

I remember seeing this at Disneyland in 1964. They had set up a demonstration that connected Disneyland to the New York Worlds Fair. You stood in line to talk for a few minutes to some random person who had stood in line on the other end. The reason it never went anywhere (aside from the cost) is that it was only available in the really big cities. If you lived in Podunk, you couldn't get this service. And even if you did, you couldn't call your relatives who still lived out in some one-horse town in the middle of the prairie.

[@YukariYakumo0]

John Sessoms If you think about it 4G had the same problem for quite some time but has now spread to nearly all of north america. Just like 4G phone service cities would be the first to support it then later on it would have become available everywhere... if it took off which it never did. I still don't make video calls except on very rare occasions so I guess just like people hide behind the internet today people hid behind their phones back then and wouldn't want to be seen every time they made a phone call (could you imagine working as a telemarketer if every phone call was accompanied by a video, nobody would be willing to be one no matter how broke they were). But If you think about social networking it appears that privacy may not be as concerning in the near future and yet it may become more concerning also (it all depends on what path the future takes).

[@RobertPlattBell]

+John Sessoms I remember it at the Wolds Fair, 1964, Flushing Meadows. A lot of what they promised then, didn't quite pan out the way we thought it would!

[@Pudentame]

+Robert Bell Yeah. My family visited Disneyland while the Worlds Fair was going on. The picture phones at Disneyland were an AT&T exhibit connected to the AT&T exhibit in New York When you got to the head line in California, you talked for a few minutes to whatever random person had reached the head of the line at the Worlds Fair. Maybe it was you & me. Nice talking to you again. 8^)

[@iamlotsafun]

I was in New York for the World's Fair in 1964. I was excited to use those phones. I wonder if we chatted??? lol

[@Pudentame]

@Nick Milligan Yeah, I guess it was similar, but you didn't have to PAY FOR IT at Disneyland (or at the NY Worlds Fair AFAIK) No admission charge other than the basic cost to get in the park. Didn't even have to use one of the tickets out of your ticket book. It was one of the "free" exhibits; essentially corporate propaganda about how great the future was going to be. There were a lot of those at Disneyland (and later at Disney World). Disney was a pioneer in corporate "sponsorship". It was just way ahead of the technology curve. We wouldn't even have personal computers (Apple II) for another 13 years, and earliest "smart" phones were another 25 years after THAT. It was a pretty kool thing for 1964.

[@gooseknack]

A failure is not always a failure. The picture phone is the perfect example. They produced and then aimed to create that which so many take for granted today.

[@Angie2343]

When I think of "picturephone" I think of the one from Pee-wee's Playhouse.

[@deepfreezevideo]

I was one of the kids who got to actually USE a PicturePhone at the 1964 World's Fair while my parents looked on in disbelief. "We're all gonna have PicturePhones, right Dad?" 😂 Dad had serious doubts, but I promised my mother I would definitely get her a PicturePhone...someday! Fifty years later I sat my 86 year old mother down on the couch and let her talk to AND SEE her grandson as he Skype called from Iraq. Wasn't the Bell System, wasn't 20 bucks a minute and anyone with a laptop or a tablet could use it for free, but it was a promise I was able to keep.

[@Angie2343]

When I think of "picturephone" I think of the one from Pee-wee's Playhouse.

[@RobertPlattBell]

I met an Engineer from Bell Atlantic (remember that?) who told me the story of "Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line" as tested in Northern Virginia in the late 1980's to send movies-on-demand. The project was a failure, until someone realized that ADSL (later simply DSL) could be used for this newly popular "internet" thing. The rest, as they say, is history.... P.S. - the reason why the picturephone failed was that people really didn't want to see folks at the other end of the line. They still don't, which is why Skype is not as popular as you would think it would be. Today, people don't even TALK on the phone - they text! Great series! Great videos!

[@hrvstmn31]

+Robert Bell It's unfortunate that video is still not as popular as it could be. I love using Skype and Glide on my phone, because texting is slow and doesn't convey emotion or intent as well as tone of voice or facial cues.

[@RobertPlattBell]

hrvstmn31 I agree with you and it is interesting that this technology never took off. Most homes in America are wired with high-speed internet, and everyone has a camera on their laptop and/or a wall-screen television. It ain't hard to do this -even on your cell phone. But for some reason, no one wants to. Human Factors Engineering, I guess. People are camera-shy. Of course, we could use avatars (as in Second Life and in video games) instead of our real selves. And that sort of what gamers are doing - communicating visually in a virtual world). Maybe that is the answer - using technology to project the image of who we want to be, rather than who we are. Kind of sad, when you think about it. But isn't that what Facebook really is? Projecting a false image of ourselves? I dunno.

[@jvolstad]

True.

[@CrazyPetez]

I had the first DSL service in my neighborhood. It was reasonably fast and reliable. Then the Pandemic hit and speed went into the basement. So I joined the hated Comcast/Xfinity. Speed & service was top notch.

[@Melanittanigra]

I don't know how they expected to succeed with prices like that

[@mikkelbugge7299]

+Nathan P Put a sticker of a half-eaten apple on it, and people will sacrifice their grandmother to have one.

[@BuzzKirill3D]

+Nathan P ...I was gonna make an Apple joke but I see someone beat me to it. So yeah, Apple products is a good counter-example. It's all about marketing in the end.

[@ReanimareX]

+BuzzKill "beat" Don't you mean Beats? har har har har har har

[@BuzzKirill3D]

Remy Xu _was that a Dr. Dre headphones reference?_

[@ReanimareX]

Yus.

[@SprocketWatchclock]

To me the lesson is a completely different one: Never charge extra for an add-on service, especially one that requires new hardware. This lesson is one that needs to be learned by many MMO video game upstarts as too often they try to bite off more than they can chew by charging for both the game AND the service required to use it when whatever they've built just can't justify such greedy pricing. This almost always leads to their inevitable demise or switching to the free-to-play model which often leads to shoehorning free-to-play elements in a game not designed for them which just makes their demise slightly delayed but no less inevitable.

[@engineerguyvideo]

Interesting take. Thanks.

[@Lerkero]

I think charging for the monthly service would be equivalent to how phone companies charge monthly today. The phone company gives people a monthly allowance of data that goes through the phone line and charges monthly for it. Since people with PicturePhones would be using more data their monthly phone bill would reflect that. I think the real lesson is that if a company wants to release a service to average consumers they should make sure average consumers can actually afford the service (and that they want it). Innovative technology isn't always ready for market.

[@engineerguyvideo]

Lerkero From what I understood from some histories of the PicturePhone -- and I would be happy to direct you to an article by a historian of technology on this -- Bell worried greatly about anti-trust/monopoly action. So, I don't think they could bundle like this. They had to at least appear to be charging a real, market value for it. These kinds of laws, or better said perhaps their interpretation and implementation, vary from decade to decade. Perhaps if Bell were around today they would not worry. I recall the break up of the Bell System: It was astonishing and unbelievable. I mean Ma Bell was big, bad and powerful!

[@Lerkero]

It would be interesting to compare anti-trust law enforcement in the past to how it is being enforced today. Though AT&T has some competition, it seems as if the company is nearly the same as it was when the monopoly was broken up. I am aware that they had to charge a real market value, but I would assume that it would be easy to prove to the FCC or FTC how much it actually cost to manufacture the phones and maintain the infrastructure. If Bell would have put in the infrastructure and let others use it then I think that would have allowed reasonable competition. I don't know a lot about anti-trust law though.

[@SprocketWatchclock]

Lerkero Except that's not how the lines worked. I really wish people would stop using the hose analogy for electric wiring because it leads to this kind of factually incorrect thinking that the ISP's and phone companies prey on to artificially keep prices high and illogical tier fees in effect. The fact is, the wire running to your house has a set amount of electrical signals that it can send through. It's going to be using that amount whenever there's electricity flowing through no matter what bandwidth caps you have in place. Especially with an analog phone, whenever it's on, there's X amount of electricity that can move through that wire and that doesn't change. Adding bandwidth caps merely says "you're not allowed to move electricity after X arbitrary units" It doesn't get used up, it's just a randomly enacted administrative rule. Now when you're talking about packet switched networks things get a little more complicated, though not as complicated as ISP's want you to think, but when we're talking about these old analog systems, Whenever you make a call it doesn't matter if there's data going through that line from a modem or a VideoPhone or voice, the same amount of electricity is flowing through that wire and that capacity doesn't change. You still need the same amount of trunk lines for VideoPhone calls as standard calls. They didn't have to charge extra for that video phone, they just wanted to force all that development cost onto their consumers right up front. That's a mistake that will almost guarantee a dead product. What you need to do is distribute that cost along a much longer amount of time that way you can make the technology cheap and enticing for new customers.

[@MikeAndrews]

I was one of the kids who used the demo PicturePhone booth at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry. It was just "Hi. What's your name?" to similar kids at Disneyland in California. We KNEW that we'd all have PicturePhones in just a few years. The legend was that nobody wanted one because they didn't want to lose their privacy by being seen at home.

[@jackamelar1455]

Same here. AT&T had quite the display at the Chicago Museum in the 60s. As a kid, I was wowed by the "future" showing someone in a boat in a lake talking on a wireless phone. I too had a brief conversation with someone at Disneyland at the PicturePhone booth.

[@scottswan9292]

It also required 3 twisted pairs of phone lines, along with amplifiers every mile to work. That's a lot of copper.

[@sc0tte1-416]

In those days it was..these days the average home has 2-3 pairs of copper going to them compared to one, most of them not even in use, but now companies are using pair-bonding to give very fast VDSL service. Times have changed lol

[@kd1s]

But the reality is it's the grandfather of DSL. All that required was removing the bridge taps from the lines and no fancy amplifiers.

[@sc0tte1-416]

kd1s Yes, you are correct, bridge-taps are horrible for DSL/VDSL (echo) and it's costly to go and remove them without disrupting service to people especially when assignments aren't correct. In an urban setting there shouldn't be bridge taps though, but these lines were created before data was a 'thing' lol

[@kd1s]

sc0tte1 Yup - I know. Here in the urban area I live in there are tons of bridge taps. Probably the result of us getting phone service shortly after the invention of the phone than other areas of the country. From what I understand the bridge taps cause reflection of the signal. The same principle applies in radio - if you pin a coaxial cable you can say goodbye to the signal. Bridges are the same.

[@sc0tte1-416]

kd1s Yeah, and they're hard to find too...but have you ever used the newer meter that will map out all the bridge-taps/endcaps? It's not totally accurate distance-wise but it tells you they're there! I did cable-grooming for a year and a half for our telecom here in Canada (Bell). What a mess everything is....:S!! Good talkin to ya kd1s :)

[@allyourcode]

If only they thought of transmitting cat pictures!

[@sim61642]

allyourcode Or mems.

[@lancecombes]

they didn't know da wae!

[@iwanaGoFast2010]

WITH A WIDE ANGLE LENS!!!!!

[@clairfayne]

…or porn!

[@Lerkero]

It's great to see Engineer Guy videos again. I was introduced to the channel when I bought the last book and was disappointed that videos didn't occur more regularly. I think one of the problems with the videophone is that Bell wanted to use a product to justify infrastructure improvements rather than use infrastructure improvements to justify a product. If it were the other way around Bell could have had competitors in the market and wouldn't be accused of monopolizing. Infrastructure improvements are always needed, but like many large corporations, Bell wanted to focus first on profit and market share rather than customer service. Even today AT&T only makes improvements to customer service if they can guarantee they will control more of the market. Great video, but it would be even better if you would be able to make a video detailing how videophones worked in the 1960s.

[@B3Band]

$1,000 per month?!?! Can I live in it? Will it blow me?

[@eIucidate]

It will blow you away with its cost.

[@erikmfoss9042]

That's anti-trust and government intervention for you! They protect us by making it insanely expensive and postponing awesome tech about 40 years.

[@TheGkmasta]

That's greedy corporations for you. They could have licensed the technology to competitors to avoid monopoly claims and further lower the price.

[@johnrobinson4445]

Erik: WRONG! They prevented a monopolist from killing new young businesses.

[@phantomsoldier497]

That's the contrary perhaps. Bell was left to dominate the market without any regulation by the govt. Result? Overpriced tech and monopoly over the market.

[@williamreymond2669]

I964 US average income: $6,080 - that could explain part of the problem.

[@williamreymond2669]

Samurai Shampoo No, that is an unadjusted number - which is what makes it so significant. BTW my father was an MTS [member of technical staff] at Bell Labs [Whippany, NJ] at the time [working on other things].

[@Figaroblue]

One of the best videos I have ever seen on youtube... Fantastic! Way to sum up so much about life in a single example.

[@radiorob7543]

I surprised/disappointed YT didn't recommend this to me sooner. Excellent work. I'm going to watch this again.

[@ComputerExplodes]

This guy has soothing voice and a way of narration which still keeps one interested. I've subscribed, look forward to watching some more videos.

[@jerrygundecker743]

These videos are fascinating, glad I stumbled onto the channel.

[@cshung]

Thanks a lot for sharing these stories. History often repeats - and failure in the past is definitely good to know so as to not to repeat them.

[@XINN1X]

Fascinating videos. Great job Engineerguy

[@bearsfan110]

Congrats on the new videos, incredibly interesting stuff. Love the signoff :)

[@josaxtvc]

This series is fantastic! I look forward to the next videos.

[@andrestiankardoes8103]

I love how engineerguy presents this material!

[@sgvpotter]

i just discovered these videos and plan to show several of them to my classes, especially my environmental science class. Thank you for the great work you are doing!!!

[@not_riley]

I can’t stop watching your videos. Hands down the best engineering education channel, and one of the absolute best youtube channels of all time.

[@edwinombac]

Love your videos, so informative, interesting and well done.

[@danielbidien1929]

Love to see exemples of how market regulates itself. The example comes from the human errors made upon bad decisions related to the market.The idea, the evolution itself keeps waiting for its time to come. And when it comes it comes through smarter ways. Really nice to see these examples. Love the video.

[@krzyxbne]

Where have you been! Please dont leave us again

[@currymeiser]

I work in the EngineerGuy studio, we have LOTS of great content coming out soon! Stay tuned and thanks for the support!

[@lexinaut]

Sahil Patel You produce wonderful stuff! If you haven't seen this recent TED talk (see link), it features splendid, elegant, yet simple engineering for a good cause. You might want to consider a series covering the engineering of medical devices. Have a great summer! www.ted.com/talks/nikolai_begg_a_tool_to_fix_one_of_the_most_dangerous_moments_in_surgery

[@currymeiser]

lexinaut I'll take a look, thanks for the ideas - that's the hardest part!

[@lexinaut]

You are certainly welcome! We need great engineering in service to humanity! Have a great week!

[@ChamanConTenis]

Sahil Patel The Betamax vs VHS jsut popped up randomly on my feed today and now I'm subscribed and hooked. Keep the good work!

[@ChristiannMacAuley]

Thanks for these videos, I love your analysis of technology history!

[@fischX]

Well, now it's free... still not unsing it.

[@KawaiiHD]

fischX and also don't know anyone who does.

[@Elround4]

fischX I use it occasionally to communicate with family members across the pond. ^^ I also see it being frequently used for publicly accessible discussions between people via Google Hangout, usually discussing something academic.

[@lukey666lukey]

@@KawaiiHD how about now?

[@ajsim]

Very well produced video! Thank you!

[@halonothing1]

You know, normally I don't bother buying books. But I'm going to make a point of buying a copy of your book next chance I get. I love these videos and if anyone deserves the revenue, it's somebody who puts as much time and effort into their work as you do.

[@steve25782]

I used an ergonomic (Kinesis) keyboard with a Dvorak key layout for years, eliminating carpal-tunnel problems I'd had, until a stroke deprived me of most of the use of my left hand. So now keyboard layout is irrelevant to me, but I still remember and appreciate Dvorak keyboards with the most popular vowels as home keys for the left hand and the most popular consonants as home keys for the right hand, giving lots of fast and stress-reducing back-and-forth between the two hands for all those people lucky enough to have two fully functional hands. Gee, I want use of my left hand back!

[@CharlesTheClumsy]

I've been waiting a long time for this.

[@diggerpete9334]

Another well made and informative video. I am subscribing.

[@MrSteve280]

I joined Bell Atlantic/Verizon just before the break-up of AT&T and spent over 26 years there. Many of the engineers I first worked with started their careers in the 50s and 60s and were involved with the network engineering and marketing of the PicturePhone effort. According to them, the real death nail in the coffin as to why the residential/consumer market didn't take off was due to the discomfort people had being on camera (no hair curlers, no multi-tasking). And, while expense was an issue, you have to remember that even your basic, plain-vanilla long distance call during this time was $100+ for a 3 minute international LD call and $15+ for interstate LD call to grandma (adjusted for inflation). I see their point. COVID and the related Zoom calls have convinced me for a multitude of reasons that I don't want to see people when I'm talking (or listening) to someone.

[@DarthHater100]

Awesome channel. Just wish the videos were longer and more in depth.

[@f.hababorbitz]

The same twisted pair wiring from pre 1960's is what DSL is operating on today. There is no new broad band wires, other then fiber optic links were installed to feed bandwidth to the antiquated wires.

[@foto21]

Love the final qupte about finding success in failure. The key to moving forward and enjoying life.

[@MaximumBan]

Amazing piece of info! Thanks!

[@mrmagoo8956]

I love how this was shot🎥

[@Saxfin063]

i only subscribbed to this channel half an hour ago. best thing ever

[@Melissa0774]

I actually have an old Staten Island phone book from, I think, 1970, that my grandmother saved all these years from when she moved from there. I went through it one day and I was surprised to find an ad in there for a service where you could actually do long distance video calls from one or two phone company offices in Manhattan. I never knew they had that back then. I just assumed it didn't catch on because it was ridiculously expensive and people didn't see the need to go to the city and have to pay all that money. I wonder if many deaf people got behind it and were disappointed when it didn't catch on?

[@Whaliam]

According to an old Harvard Business Review article, Standard Oil of New Jersey (now Exxon) had them and used them in the mid-1960s. The company viewed the phones as replacing in-person meeting, and thereby saved money on travel costs.

[@nopes5387]

Job I used to work at had these weird Cisco video phones that nobody liked to use in video mode. Or at least I think they were Cisco, they looked a lot like modern Cisco network phones but with a full color display and little built-in camera

[@dleeper47]

I worked at Bell Labs in New Jersey back in 1969, fresh out of college. Picturephones were given to the big bosses to use. The surprise was that users really didn't *want* to be seen! They didn't want to have to worry about their appearance while talking. The unit *did* have a high-quality speakerphone embedded in it, and the execs used it for hands-free telephone communication. But that's about all.

[@HugoMasters]

O MY GOD!! I almost lost my hope that this channel will back

[@jerryg50]

Back in 1967 I saw the BELL video phone at a technology show about telephone systems. It was an amazing phone for its time. Very expensive to use. It was targeted to corporations, universities, and research organizations. The cost of this technology was very expensive.

[@k8nyonyoutube487]

Was a cable placer (lineman) for NY Telephone in Manhattan when AT&T decided to install a Showroom Picture Phone exhibit and functioning system at Grand Central Terminal in 1964. Myself and 3 other cable placers installed the coax cable to the exhibit. Worked bringing the cable up from the 5th subbasement below. An excerpt from Today's Engineer (Feb 2014) stated in part: "In a second 1964 trial, AT&T opened public Picturephone rooms in New York, Chicago, and Washington, that June; any two of these rooms could be rented by interested customers at rates from $16 to $27 for the first three minutes of conversation. Just 71 calls were made in the next six months, and the number declined from there; while the rooms remained through 1970, no calls were made in the final year." Was great to be a part of history

[@1EternalSoul1]

As an entrepreneur, that last closing tidbit was very helpful. Thanks.

[@dieterplaetinck4431]

thanks engineerguy, very interesting. do you happen to know much about the design exercises (later called "idealized design" by Russel Ackoff) that are rumored to have been the key for bell labs to correct course after decades of stagnation, and supposedly brought them to a serious of innovations, reinventing the phone system? (at least that's my limited understanding of it, would love to learn more)

[@KustomFu]

I wouldn't pay $1,000 a month for video chat, or even internet. No duh it failed XD

[@Thx1138sober]

The picture phone cost $160 a month in 1965. For about the same price in 1965 you could have made the car payments on 2 brand new Cadillac's and still had money left over.

[@davidtovardelalama9105]

Fantastic video!

[@victoraps]

Really good. We want more.

[@pondwhale]

This is great! I'm only commenting to help push up search rankings!

[@clairfayne]

Normie

[@MichaelVinci]

Great videos keep up the good work

[@williamthethespian]

I first saw a demonstration at the Seattle World's Fair in '64. Comments at the time included " What if I just got out of a bath?" "What if I was still in bed?" Cost (though obviously frightening) was secondary to personal embarrassment. 😄

[@beatleknut]

I remember trying the video phone at The Seattle Worlds Fair. But the fair actually took place from April 21, 1962, to October 21, 1962.

[@carslover3509]

great report

[@A3Kr0n]

I remember that at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago when I was a kid. Also those weird phones with buttons instead of a rotary dial. Boop beep boop. Crazy!

[@MattDarez]

Nice. I missed your videos

[@fermainjackson2899]

I'd say it was way ahead of his time.... Great invention after all...

[@just2good]

Very interesting stuff!

[@RemiScutlet]

suddenly... you.

[@MinkytheMinkY]

This needs a behind the scenes, how did u get Bill on the screen?

[@Cheezwizzz]

Look carefully at the details.....love that

[@movetherunner]

First saw this picture phone at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago in 1965. Had a picture phone conversation with a girl in Dallas. It was pretty cool.

[@livestrong456]

Fascinating. Though, I was looking through the comments to see exactly how copper wire can create a picture signal for the device's installed camera.

[@WarriorofCathar]

Oh my God. Did you just use the phrase More Important, rather than the erroneous "More Importantly"? Take my like!

[@happydappyman]

AAAH you explain it in the end. The entire time I was just thinking, Why wouldn't they just sell the first phones at cost!!!

[@gregcampwriter]

The concept does get featured in Seven Days in May and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

[@bobd5119]

Ah yes! You bring back a memory of the call to the little girl who wanted a telephone and a bush baby. Remember the phone booth on the space station? (Does the ISS have a link to the cell phone network?)

[@gregcampwriter]

I can only imagine the charges for dialing the ISS--would that be an international call, or is there an interplanetary rate?

[@diana8259]

Amazing !!!! Video conferencia in the sixties .wow. ..

[@Padoinky]

I remember seeing one of these back in 1985 at the Xerox PARC labs facility, in Palo Alto CA

[@ZadakLeader]

YES NEW VIDEOS !

[@franciscoferreiracarmo4397]

Very good, thanks!

[@johntracy72]

My parents' 1970 Merit Students Encyclopedia has this in their article about telephones.

[@jeffreyalme6480]

Now we’re on average paying $100 a month. I just came across the aluminum can video, and I enjoy your narratives, thank you.

[@edlightman4936]

I remember listing to wjas radio 1320 in Pittsburgh pa in the early 1970s . wjas was an all talk radio station and they used the picture phone you could talk to the talk show host from the kaufmans department store they had a picture phone on display .

[@lolyermad]

"But it does remind us, that when looking at failure, to look carefully at the details. Because in them is often the path to the future." Deep af

[@d46512]

Top notch work! Where else can you find a reasoned in depth analysis in video form? No cutsey sound bites here.

[@dactylntrochee]

Short and sweet, just like I like 'em. I remember them from the World's Fair. I still rarely use video chat, though.

[@RichardAllenSB]

Fascinating!

[@OldIronShops]

I'd like to see a video like this on the mini disk audio format

[@lioraselby5328]

hey, starting at 3:50 the "Other Videos in this Series" but doesn't have links to those videos

[@LethalJizzle]

There's just something off putting about video calling. During normal conversation you can be looking around, fiddling with something, eating, or generally doing what you like. Video calling tasks you with giving 100 percent attention to the other person, staring right at them, which is something we rarely actually do. Phone calls are slightly less different as you can wander about, stare out of the window etc. Not something you often catch yourself doing, but it's common to not be completely focused on the person you are talking to.

[@ChairmanMeow1]

I had absolutely no idea this existed in the 60s!!

[@lolyermad]

It's amazing how professional this guy is, it feels like I'm watching the History Channel or Nat Geo.

[@user-ur9to8rs4b]

Hopefully not the _History Channel_.

[@achangedman20]

​@@user-ur9to8rs4b hh brother

[@Matowix]

Very interesting, I remember seeing some other picture phones about 15 years ago, about $300 each using standard copper twisted pair, low quality small picture, people didnt take to them, people generally dont like showing facial expression when talking to others by phone.

[@diana8259]

Germans in the 30s already had black and white video calls, you had to go to a post office and arrange the video call, until 1944 it was used but it was very expensive, they also had missiles guided by closed circuit television cameras and yoistic....

[@YunProductionCanada]

I want more vid like this. Thank you

[@k8nyonyoutube487]

Just FYI engineer guy, was a coax cable. I installed it in NYC, see below.

[@tutunmayan]

When this will be available?

[@halonothing1]

Wait a minute. CCDs existed in the 60's? I didn't think metal oxide semiconductors came along for at least another decade.

[@cyclenut]

I always felt the bulletin board systems 1980s somehow played a role for the internet, too. They both used phone lines, the BBS used the new personal computers.

[@Nunocesarsa]

Ouf you are my new favorite guy :)

[@AlystrZelland]

Could you share your sources? I'd be interested to know if there's some kind of book or documentary about these.

[@unlokia]

$20 *PER MINUTE*? Oooh, I wonder why it failed...

[@Sorunia]

OVER $150 IN TODAY'S DOLLARS they wanted people to shell out a small fucking fortune just for a single minute of demonstration, wtf

[@zkjgrty]

Never knew such device existed, let alone in the 1960s! True engineering happened back then and really shows us that were not moving as fast as we think we are.

[@jaime99utube]

the CISCO UMI home "telepresence" version of Picturephone, from 2009, also failed for similar reasons (cost, chicken-and-egg problem)