Build Picturephones With an On-Off Switch

Michael Schrage misses the real reason for the failure of Picturephone service 20 years ago.

In a previous incarnation, I was executive director of the AT&T-Bell; Labs division responsible for, among other things, Picturephone systems engineering, and lived through its rise and fall. I see that fall differently.

Many people have published reasons for the failure of Picturephone service. Those include Schrage’s preference for talking without being seen. (We anticipated that by putting a “privacy” control next to the on-off switch.) There are others: It was black and white when TV was in color; some people worried about getting junk video calls and so on.

Picturephone service failed for a simple reason: It cost too much. When it went into commercial, residential service in 1971, the monthly rate was $150. That was 20 years ago, when $150 was a lot more than it is now.

Suppose Picturephone service were available today for $15 per month and that the long-distance charges were the same as those for a telephone call. Maybe Schrage wouldn’t subscribe, but I would, and I’ll bet that a lot of other people would too.

DEAN GILLETTE

Claremont

The writer is a professor in the Claremont Graduate School’s Programs in Information Sciences.