I never understood text messaging for what Billybob said: voice mail is more efficient unless you want near-instant walkie talkie service.
For those of us in the Last Bastion club, it's not that we are being recalcitrant or not paying attention to the change in technology. The reason why I still haven't signed up for a cell is because of the service and coverage issues these thing have. The plans and customer service are a rip-off and it's hard to sign up with all the fine print and exceptional terms that these companies write into their contracts. I swear these companies are colluding and I have resisted a cell phone because I don't want to get ripped off. Also, I feel like now we finally have decent reliable land lines for communication, and cell phones with all their coverage and sound quality problems send us back about 80 years in those terms. Despite the portable convenience, they are inferior technology as far as the end user is concerned. Obviously, the portability counts for a lot, which is why I'm looking at plans right now. Finally, I am not always the vanguard of this technology. I use a Mac because I don't have to know all this technical jargon, though I've learned quite a bit as a dilettante over time. But I'm just starting to grasp all the technical issues with mobile phone technology.
I'm amazed at what people put up with in these terms, but that's why I'm still a member of the Last Bastion Club?.
May you and all your progeny be blessed for a thousand years. I was once a proud member but now must have a cell because my gadget-crazy boss wants to be able to get a hold of me at any time during the week, and my better half doesn't like me driving all over without a phone (in case of an emergency).
Frankly, for emergency purposes, they're pretty good to have. Even if it's someone else you see that's been hurt or whatever. But for work... bah. Email is the way to go.
But you also think text messages are "dumb-ass." You can keep your tip-top SNR, I think I'd rather communicate with people
Maybe I think text-messages are dumbass because it takes more time to send a one sentence text message than it takes to call the guy.
And if I really cared about sending text messages I still could. It's not like Verizon phones are that far behind. . . they just lack the added features like bluetooth and that sort of thing. I find it funny how you fellas make "communication" your big priority, yet furiously support carriers that can't operate in areas with much interference.
Quote:
Well, signal transmission and processing is behind the scenes anyways. And who cares about that part if you can't even send an SMS from T-Mobile to Verizon?
Verizon's IS-95 system can handle more users per cell than any GSM carrier, which in urban/suburban environments is the biggest enemy to cell phone reception. As you noted, communication is about being able to connect with others. Verizon and Sprint are better at this than other carriers are.
Anyway, there's a reason why 3rd gen is CDMA-based. Maybe it's because, gee. . . it's a better technology that has proven itself in the real world.
The one thing everyone I know agrees on with regard to cell phones is that AT&T wireless sucks! The coverage is OK, the plans suck, the customer service sucks, and everyone I know who has used them has been hit with huge bills and overcharges.
I've heard this, but from personal experience (I've been a ATTWS subscriber since 1999) I've had nothing but exemplary coverage and service. My GF and I dumped our landline last year with the only negative impact being loss of service during the regional blackout last August.
Cell phones are wonderful and convenient. If you don't care to be reached, turn it off.
Yes, please understand, these are anecdotal testimonies from a select group of people in the NYC area. I've also heard a lot about T Mobile's overcharges and Sprint's as well. Take it for what it's worth.
Quote:
Originally posted by Moogs
May you and all your progeny be blessed for a thousand years.
?Frankly, for emergency purposes, they're pretty good to have.
Don't mistake my complacency and lack of friendships for stubborn resistance though. I'm in the market myself, and I have been for a couple of years now in earnest. Between not taking the time to do serious homework, and not having enough reasons to justify both a landline and a mobile phone, the status quo remains. This will likely change in the next few months, but I've been saying that for some time now...
Let's say your computer's primary use is to crunch numbers, and 10% of it's usage is for other stuff. Getting a Verizon or Sprint plan is like getting the best $1500 PC, whereas getting something else might be like getting a $1500 mac. The other phones will look cooler, have more featurettes, and in most reasons be better. But if the primary use of your phone is to talk, which for me account for about 98% of its usage, and you don't care about the extras, then Verizon and Sprint win bigtime.
The way they communicate with the towers and their networks is a half-generation ahead of what everyone else is doing in Europe and America.
So, these two companies are using some kind of advanced technology, but what's the practical difference for the customer?
Frankly, I don't see how using the cell phone could be much better that what I get now (in Finland). I buy whatever phone I want, then I get a call plan from a cellular operator. Coverage is fine everywhere, and mostly irrespective of operator, so they have to compete aggressively in prices. There is no "negative lock-in" by operators (you have to stay as a customer for time X or else), but they do give sign-up incentives that work over a longer period of time. Prices are relatively easy to figure out and compare. I call, use a little bit of SMS, and I'm going to switch to a call plan (maybe change operators) that allows GPRS so I can get on the net with my current phone and PB.
1) CDMA is a great technology. But GSM offers the world a better way to communicate. Beta was better then VHS. Sad but true. Oh, and CDMA handsets? Say no more.
2) Text messaging rocks. It's much faster then leaving a voice mail (if you're good at it, like just about anyone in Europe), it's discreet (try leaving a voice mail saying "In a boring meeting with a twat" during that meeting and it's ... did I mention MUCH FASTER?
3) Simply, the text is the chosen method of communication for most yong people in the majority of countries with cellular telephony. You may chose to say this because they are dumb-ass, but you would be wrong.
Maybe I think text-messages are dumbass because it takes more time to send a one sentence text message than it takes to call the guy.
I don't send all that much text messages myself, but they definitely have their place. Voice mail and even direct calling is a much worse way to deal with name, address and number data, because you are prone to make errors in them and have to have something to write the things down. These are good examples of SMS use:
- I want to send my bank account no. to a friend.
- I either call or send a SMS to a number finder service. I can have a phone no., a name, or a car registry plate number to start with. The service will send me back a SMS with the full name, address, and phone number of the person.
- I want to pay for a bus ticket but I have no small change/I lost my wallet/whatever. I send a SMS. I get a SMS in return that is a valid ticket.
- Airplane, movie, etc. ticket reservation systems always send the reservation data by SMS.
Harald's point 2) is pretty accurate as well. Of course people aren't as fast at writing than they are at speaking, but OTOH the recipient's time is saved (I hate getting voice mail!) and OTOH predictive text input, mini keyboards like in Nokia 9xxx:s and 6800's can significantly cut down the time it takes to tap in a short message.
Here's an idea. You could get "mobile" access through your house line. There are some products that you can afix to your roof that can broadcast up to a 40KM radius. If you live it the city you could set it up, and carry the "handset" with you throughout the day -- allowing you to just answer your house line, think of it as a really long range cordless phone.
The "handset" I saw was actually a lot like those old two piece units from the early 80's -- a corded phone attached to a black box with a handle.
Too Cool. Just think, you can take part with a retro flair!
- I either call or send a SMS to a number finder service. I can have a phone no., a name, or a car registry plate number to start with. The service will send me back a SMS with the full name, address, and phone number of the person.
- I want to pay for a bus ticket but I have no small change/I lost my wallet/whatever. I send a SMS. I get a SMS in return that is a valid ticket.
- Airplane, movie, etc. ticket reservation systems always send the reservation data by SMS.
Heh. On this side of the pond we don't pay for buses and stuff with text messages. There are reasons for that.
Namely for the reason that if you tried to pay for a bus ticket with your phone, the look you'd get from the bus driver would be PRICELESS. We, um, don't like to waste, err, spectrum with them frivolous transmissions.
Here's an idea. You could get "mobile" access through your house line. There are some products that you can afix to your roof that can broadcast up to a 40KM radius.
It would require some serious power from the handset! Hmmm. . . You'd need to do digitize and then DPSK the signal, and you'd probably need to be dealing with something on the order of 100 watts transmission power on both ends. You'd need to really bake the signal with some serious DSP if you wanted to use less than 100 watts.
In the end, the cost to set this thing up is going to be a lot, you'll need a pretty working knowledge of signal processing and communications, and it would be illegal. . . . . . Which means that it's something I'm going to have to do at some point.
I really love it how the "concentration" listed on my diploma is "Communications." At various California schools that has a whole different meaning.
Went with Cingular and we have 15 days to decide whether or not we want to keep it.
The phone I got was the Sony-Ericsson T616, which I dig a lot, $50.
The fiancee got some Samsung flip phone, free.
The only problem is that she thinks it is not as clear as the SprintPCS she had before. I have never had a phone so I don't have any real opinion on quality, sounds fine to me.
Someone above mentioned Cingular having the best coverage later this year, what's that all about?
As much as I like my phone, the gewgaws on the T616 do not interest me too much. I think call quality is #1 with a bullet, so if Sprint PCS looks to be the clear (no pun intended) winner for now and in the future perhaps we should exercise that 15 day window.
Went with Cingular and we have 15 days to decide whether or not we want to keep it.
The phone I got was the Sony-Ericsson T616, which I dig a lot, $50.
The fiancee got some Samsung flip phone, free.
The only problem is that she thinks it is not as clear as the SprintPCS she had before. I have never had a phone so I don't have any real opinion on quality, sounds fine to me.
Someone above mentioned Cingular having the best coverage later this year, what's that all about?
As much as I like my phone, the gewgaws on the T616 do not interest me too much. I think call quality is #1 with a bullet, so if Sprint PCS looks to be the clear (no pun intended) winner for now and in the future perhaps we should exercise that 15 day window.
I am happy for now.
Cingular acquired ATT's wireless biz and is in the process of integrating its capacity into theirs. It remains to be seen if ATT's lousiness will bring Cingular's level of service down.
Comments
Originally posted by billybobsky
americans don't have the patience for typing in text messages... why leave a text message when voicemail is easier and can convey more info?
It's sad 'cause it's true.
For those of us in the Last Bastion club, it's not that we are being recalcitrant or not paying attention to the change in technology. The reason why I still haven't signed up for a cell is because of the service and coverage issues these thing have. The plans and customer service are a rip-off and it's hard to sign up with all the fine print and exceptional terms that these companies write into their contracts. I swear these companies are colluding and I have resisted a cell phone because I don't want to get ripped off. Also, I feel like now we finally have decent reliable land lines for communication, and cell phones with all their coverage and sound quality problems send us back about 80 years in those terms. Despite the portable convenience, they are inferior technology as far as the end user is concerned. Obviously, the portability counts for a lot, which is why I'm looking at plans right now. Finally, I am not always the vanguard of this technology. I use a Mac because I don't have to know all this technical jargon, though I've learned quite a bit as a dilettante over time. But I'm just starting to grasp all the technical issues with mobile phone technology.
I'm amazed at what people put up with in these terms, but that's why I'm still a member of the Last Bastion Club?.
Frankly, for emergency purposes, they're pretty good to have. Even if it's someone else you see that's been hurt or whatever. But for work... bah. Email is the way to go.
Originally posted by billybobsky
americans don't have the patience for typing in text messages... why leave a text message when voicemail is easier and can convey more info?
i guess you don't use iChat either?
Originally posted by Harald
But you also think text messages are "dumb-ass." You can keep your tip-top SNR, I think I'd rather communicate with people
Maybe I think text-messages are dumbass because it takes more time to send a one sentence text message than it takes to call the guy.
And if I really cared about sending text messages I still could. It's not like Verizon phones are that far behind. . . they just lack the added features like bluetooth and that sort of thing. I find it funny how you fellas make "communication" your big priority, yet furiously support carriers that can't operate in areas with much interference.
Well, signal transmission and processing is behind the scenes anyways. And who cares about that part if you can't even send an SMS from T-Mobile to Verizon?
Verizon's IS-95 system can handle more users per cell than any GSM carrier, which in urban/suburban environments is the biggest enemy to cell phone reception. As you noted, communication is about being able to connect with others. Verizon and Sprint are better at this than other carriers are.
Anyway, there's a reason why 3rd gen is CDMA-based. Maybe it's because, gee. . . it's a better technology that has proven itself in the real world.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
The one thing everyone I know agrees on with regard to cell phones is that AT&T wireless sucks! The coverage is OK, the plans suck, the customer service sucks, and everyone I know who has used them has been hit with huge bills and overcharges.
I've heard this, but from personal experience (I've been a ATTWS subscriber since 1999) I've had nothing but exemplary coverage and service. My GF and I dumped our landline last year with the only negative impact being loss of service during the regional blackout last August.
Cell phones are wonderful and convenient. If you don't care to be reached, turn it off.
Originally posted by Moogs
May you and all your progeny be blessed for a thousand years.
?Frankly, for emergency purposes, they're pretty good to have.
Don't mistake my complacency and lack of friendships for stubborn resistance though.
Originally posted by New
i guess you don't use iChat either?
Come now, New, you know that typing on a keyboard is MUCH faster than doing the little telephone button digit thing.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Let's say your computer's primary use is to crunch numbers, and 10% of it's usage is for other stuff. Getting a Verizon or Sprint plan is like getting the best $1500 PC, whereas getting something else might be like getting a $1500 mac. The other phones will look cooler, have more featurettes, and in most reasons be better. But if the primary use of your phone is to talk, which for me account for about 98% of its usage, and you don't care about the extras, then Verizon and Sprint win bigtime.
The way they communicate with the towers and their networks is a half-generation ahead of what everyone else is doing in Europe and America.
So, these two companies are using some kind of advanced technology, but what's the practical difference for the customer?
Frankly, I don't see how using the cell phone could be much better that what I get now (in Finland). I buy whatever phone I want, then I get a call plan from a cellular operator. Coverage is fine everywhere, and mostly irrespective of operator, so they have to compete aggressively in prices. There is no "negative lock-in" by operators (you have to stay as a customer for time X or else), but they do give sign-up incentives that work over a longer period of time. Prices are relatively easy to figure out and compare. I call, use a little bit of SMS, and I'm going to switch to a call plan (maybe change operators) that allows GPRS so I can get on the net with my current phone and PB.
2) Text messaging rocks. It's much faster then leaving a voice mail (if you're good at it, like just about anyone in Europe), it's discreet (try leaving a voice mail saying "In a boring meeting with a twat" during that meeting and it's ... did I mention MUCH FASTER?
3) Simply, the text is the chosen method of communication for most yong people in the majority of countries with cellular telephony. You may chose to say this because they are dumb-ass, but you would be wrong.
Originally posted by burningwheel
cell phones are overrated. maybe i'm just in bad zone, but the reception is terrible. they take forever to start up too. keep the land line
Why would you close the cell phone instead of just setting it on silent?
It's been about two months since I flew the last time and had to shut down the cell.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Maybe I think text-messages are dumbass because it takes more time to send a one sentence text message than it takes to call the guy.
I don't send all that much text messages myself, but they definitely have their place. Voice mail and even direct calling is a much worse way to deal with name, address and number data, because you are prone to make errors in them and have to have something to write the things down. These are good examples of SMS use:
- I want to send my bank account no. to a friend.
- I either call or send a SMS to a number finder service. I can have a phone no., a name, or a car registry plate number to start with. The service will send me back a SMS with the full name, address, and phone number of the person.
- I want to pay for a bus ticket but I have no small change/I lost my wallet/whatever. I send a SMS. I get a SMS in return that is a valid ticket.
- Airplane, movie, etc. ticket reservation systems always send the reservation data by SMS.
Harald's point 2) is pretty accurate as well. Of course people aren't as fast at writing than they are at speaking, but OTOH the recipient's time is saved (I hate getting voice mail!) and OTOH predictive text input, mini keyboards like in Nokia 9xxx:s and 6800's can significantly cut down the time it takes to tap in a short message.
The "handset" I saw was actually a lot like those old two piece units from the early 80's -- a corded phone attached to a black box with a handle.
Too Cool. Just think, you can take part with a retro flair!
Originally posted by Gon
- I want to send my bank account no. to a friend.
- I either call or send a SMS to a number finder service. I can have a phone no., a name, or a car registry plate number to start with. The service will send me back a SMS with the full name, address, and phone number of the person.
- I want to pay for a bus ticket but I have no small change/I lost my wallet/whatever. I send a SMS. I get a SMS in return that is a valid ticket.
- Airplane, movie, etc. ticket reservation systems always send the reservation data by SMS.
Heh. On this side of the pond we don't pay for buses and stuff with text messages. There are reasons for that.
Namely for the reason that if you tried to pay for a bus ticket with your phone, the look you'd get from the bus driver would be PRICELESS. We, um, don't like to waste, err, spectrum with them frivolous transmissions.
Originally posted by Matsu
Here's an idea. You could get "mobile" access through your house line. There are some products that you can afix to your roof that can broadcast up to a 40KM radius.
It would require some serious power from the handset! Hmmm. . . You'd need to do digitize and then DPSK the signal, and you'd probably need to be dealing with something on the order of 100 watts transmission power on both ends. You'd need to really bake the signal with some serious DSP if you wanted to use less than 100 watts.
In the end, the cost to set this thing up is going to be a lot, you'll need a pretty working knowledge of signal processing and communications, and it would be illegal. . . . . . Which means that it's something I'm going to have to do at some point.
I really love it how the "concentration" listed on my diploma is "Communications." At various California schools that has a whole different meaning.
This looks like a newer product.
I've seen something like this used in Northern Ontario, but there are less buildings to get in the way.
The phone I got was the Sony-Ericsson T616, which I dig a lot, $50.
The fiancee got some Samsung flip phone, free.
The only problem is that she thinks it is not as clear as the SprintPCS she had before. I have never had a phone so I don't have any real opinion on quality, sounds fine to me.
Someone above mentioned Cingular having the best coverage later this year, what's that all about?
As much as I like my phone, the gewgaws on the T616 do not interest me too much. I think call quality is #1 with a bullet, so if Sprint PCS looks to be the clear (no pun intended) winner for now and in the future perhaps we should exercise that 15 day window.
I am happy for now.
Originally posted by groverat
Went with Cingular and we have 15 days to decide whether or not we want to keep it.
The phone I got was the Sony-Ericsson T616, which I dig a lot, $50.
The fiancee got some Samsung flip phone, free.
The only problem is that she thinks it is not as clear as the SprintPCS she had before. I have never had a phone so I don't have any real opinion on quality, sounds fine to me.
Someone above mentioned Cingular having the best coverage later this year, what's that all about?
As much as I like my phone, the gewgaws on the T616 do not interest me too much. I think call quality is #1 with a bullet, so if Sprint PCS looks to be the clear (no pun intended) winner for now and in the future perhaps we should exercise that 15 day window.
I am happy for now.
Cingular acquired ATT's wireless biz and is in the process of integrating its capacity into theirs. It remains to be seen if ATT's lousiness will bring Cingular's level of service down.