Rant: I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.
-
@Dashrender said in Rant: I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.:
@scottalanmiller said in Rant: I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.:
@Dashrender said in Rant: I feel like Rodney Dangerfield.:
If you're going to say the disjoined nature of email is what makes it unique, then I'm going to say the same thing about SMS - it's totally disjointed, each carrier provides it's own connections for it's users, but allows for an interconnect between systems, like DNS allows interconnect between email servers.. .
Except the carriers OWN them, in silos. Email is not like that. You are misunderstanding the nature of the two things. Email uses the Internet to connect people, it is converged. SMS requires non-Internet connections between silos. At no point does it enter the converged, public domain.
Not even close to being the same.
Until you can run your own private SMS server, have no phone carrier, and know that it can reach everyone else with SMS and they can reach you, for free... you have no point to make. Free, open, public, converged. Show me another tech that comes close. SMS is the farthest on every point.
No chat solution has that either though.
I didn't argue that they did (except one does, I just didn't point it out.) My point is that email is the lowest common denominator and the only modern technology of its type. And my second point was that modern instant messaging was superior to SMS - not because they are perfect, but because they improve on SMS with SMS having no actual benefits.
However, XMPP actually does fix the problems. It covers all SMS basis, while also being free, open, converged, etc.
