I'm pretty sure that it's been well-established that most people just aren't that interested in video calling, at least not through telephone devices. The technology for that has been around for years and years and no one really cares -- perhaps presenting the option in a better/more concise/usable way will change things, but it just doesn't seem like it's in very high demand.

Isn't part of it on the technology side? More specifically, the cost for bandwidth. Streaming videos back and forth takes up a lot of bandwidth compared to calls and texts. From what I understand the carriers have experimented with it, but the cost doesn't justify it.

Then again, even if it was included in my cell plan, a video call would take too much effort on my end. I'd have to devote my time to the call and interacting with the person I'm calling. How can I do that AND drive at the same time? /sarcasm. Actually, I'm sure some people would find a way...

Cell phones with video aren't the future. I've had one for 2 years now. Unfortunately, it isn't that useful. And I think the carriers know it.

It _is_ included on my cell plan (video calls are treated just like regular calls on the bill) and my phone supports it (front and rear cameras). And it's the same for a large percentage of cell phone users where I live (Singapore). But I don't think anybody really uses it.

The simple mechanics of it involve too much effort for too little additional utility over a simpler voice call. Positioning / holding the camera. Staying still. It's not about video calling and driving, it's about video calling and _walking_. Or typing. Or video calling and doing anything else at all.

Other than grandparents who want video of the new baby, and teenagers who want to send each other naughty video, I honestly can't see very much point in it. I suspect, however the technology will continue to get cheaper and more pervasive, so we'll all end up with it anyway, even if we don't use it much.