Video communications has been around for years. Whether you consider the first viable videoconferencing system to be the system that AT&T’s debuted at the world’s fair in the late 60s, or Cornel’s CuSeeMe application, or the Polycom Viewstation, there is no doubt that the technology for interacting visually with a person or persons who are geographically distant from you has existed for a long period of time.

When videoconferencing systems moved from ISDN to IP in the late 90s and early 00s, it opened up the videoconferencing world in many important ways, namely driving down the cost of making a connection. But ISDN had one big advantage: a national dialing plan. With IP, there is no one standard system for calling. Yes, every system has an IP address, but many systems are behind firewalls and have to be NATed, others are using a firewall transversal devices or gateways, and most are registered to their organization’s gatekeeper and use their own scheme for E.164 numbers, etc. Likewise, other resources that one might want to use in a video call (MCUs, video recording devices, gateways and gatekeepers, etc) take more than just knowing the IP address to access (for some good reasons). The so-called unified communications solutions have only been able to unify communications within an organization and often at great expense compared to the increase in productivity that they provide.

In the fall of 09, we saw the first traditional videoconferencing device (the LifeSize passport) with built in support for Skype in the endpoint itself. And today at CES, numerous vendors are announcing lcd displays with a built in camera and built in Skype capabilities (http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/01/ces-2010-skype-hd-arrives-on-tv-screens-193540). In a month or two, you will be able to purchase an HD videoconferencing system at your local Best Buy. It seems clear to me that Skype is becoming the national dialing plan for video communications, allowing laptops, display appliances (like those being announced at CES), and room conferencing systems to exist together. It won’t be long until every video system from the major makers (Polycom, Tandberg, Lifesize, etc)–perhaps with the exception of Cisco whose profit margins are dependent on remaining proprietary–will offer Skype capabilities built in. Expect video streaming/recording devices to also be compatible with Skype as well.

What I think we are seeing here is the dawn of videoconferencing 2.0: the ubiquitous integration of video systems of different form factors on one network, from telepresence rooms to cell phones. Is Skype the best system/network to support videoconferencing 2.0? It doesn’t matter, because Skype has the critical mass in the marketplace. If Skype is good enough for Oprah, it is good enough for you. Skype has already become a verb in our culture, much the same way as google has. “I’ll skype you tomorrow.”, “Just Skype me later today and we’ll talk about it”.

What will this mean for distance learning? A lot, I think. For one, it will open up lots of doors for truly blended forms of distance learning–online courses can have a weekly discussion section via Skype every week. This could be a great boon from not just the student perspective, but also the instructor side. Teaching online is hard and many instructors have been reluctant to do so, but a blended course feels more like a traditional course and can give the one-on-one visual interaction with students that they need to feel comfortable. For traditional I-TV courses, it will open up new locations and opportunities for gaining students (and teachers). How else? You tell me…