Why Do People Still Text
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Complaining that they don't have texting to tantamount to complaining that they don't have Facebook messenger - everyone can choose for themselves what methods of communication they want to use.
But if you don't want Messenger you can always block or unblock at will, and you are never charged for it itself.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
-
I handle this my own way, I have unlimited texts but I don't keep my phone with me. So if you want to reach me quickly, text is not likely going to work well. It might be an hour or two before I see it. My roommate doesn't read her texts at all, she just ignores them. Her phone screen is bad, but her laptop works fine, so she mostly just reads whatever goes to her laptop (most of the time.)
That SMS is tied to a device is one of my long running concerns with it. In the post 1990s world, why would anyone put up with communications tied to a device rather than to the person? And, the answer is, a lot of people don't.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
If those people don't want an unlimited texting plan, then they should contact the carrier and disable texting. With luck, anyone attempting to text them should get a message back saying that texting isn't available.
Two problems with this, though:
- Not everyone allows (or allowed) the blocking of texts.
- Just because people don't want to chat over text doesn't mean that they want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. SMS verifications or emergency notifications might be desired, but not conversations.
Yeah, 10 years ago sprint didn't allow blocking of texts.
as for part two, then you can't stop 'normals' from sending you texts.. the only option you have is to not respond to their texts. The majority of people will do what is most convenient for themselves. If texting isn't denied them.. then it will take a lot of effort to break that other party from using it with you.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Complaining that they don't have texting to tantamount to complaining that they don't have Facebook messenger - everyone can choose for themselves what methods of communication they want to use.
But if you don't want Messenger you can always block or unblock at will, and you are never charged for it itself.
Sure you are, you're charged data when in use. But that might not be your point.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Complaining that they don't have texting to tantamount to complaining that they don't have Facebook messenger - everyone can choose for themselves what methods of communication they want to use.
But if you don't want Messenger you can always block or unblock at will, and you are never charged for it itself.
Sure you are, you're charged data when in use. But that might not be your point.
Whoa, no. Here is how it works...
- Either you get charged for both, or both are free. If we say "who doesn't get unlimited texts" we also say "who doesn't get unlimited data." Both are commonly unlimited, even in cheap plans, or capped high enough to not be of any concern for messaging.
- Unlike texting, there is no association with Messenger to a paid-for network. LIbraries, restaurants, whole cities have free Internet. No one has free texting. Messenger is free itself, totally free. That you might choose to pay for data is a separate issue. I can certainly use Messenger 100% free a lot of the time if I want.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
What I find is that while driving, I get SMS slightly more often than data, but because of how sending and receiving works, it remains less reliable so the usefulness of SMS is still lower than non-SMS messaging (because one is like UDP and one is like TCP, one tries till it works, the other just fails, constantly.)
When not driving, I nearly always have far better Internet than SMS.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
This whole conversation is moot point. It isn't 2006 anymore.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
And you don't need 4G for messaging, only 2G if even that.
-
@IRJ said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
This whole conversation is moot point. It isn't 2006 anymore.
Except people are still texting!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@IRJ said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
This whole conversation is moot point. It isn't 2006 anymore.
Except people are still texting!
Hate when Messages shows green.
-
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
Great point. And what about plans that have unlimited texting and NO data? now those people are limited to only phone calls if they don't text messages.
The main issue here (in the US - most other non North American countries seem to already have moved away from texting as a primary communication mode) is that the carriers can't make any money on the other options. The messaging platforms, unless they stand one up themselves - like Apple (Yeah I know it's not a carrier, but it is entirely ubiquitous in Apple products) - they don't want to be taking troubleshooting calls for things that aren't theirs.
Plus, a huge majority of US citizens just use whatever came on their phone. Today most of them could use FB messenger because that is included by default on almost all smart phones. But you have to get your friends and family to move do - you have to get them to do work.
With SMS/MMS there is zero work to be done by someone owning a phone. It's just there, it just works. You already have your friends phone numbers in your contact list, so using SMS/MMS is easy. No other solution is that simple. Sure things like FB messenger are damned close - just log into it, you're friends are already there - but you did have an extra step of logging in. It's amazing how much of a barrier that is. Plus now days you have people who refuse to use FB messenger for privacy reasons (sadly they don't know that the phone company is already collecting an selling that same data).
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
With SMS/MMS there is zero work to be done by someone owning a phone. It's just there, it just works. You already have your friends phone numbers in your contact list, so using SMS/MMS is easy.
Actually I find that to be a barrier. I have tons more people on everything other than SMS. SMS is the only service where people are regularly either not giving out their info and/or it changes and you lose contact.
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Plus now days you have people who refuse to use FB messenger for privacy reasons (sadly they don't know that the phone company is already collecting an selling that same data).
And those that block texting for the same reasons. I know people affected by text snooping.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@IRJ said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@coliver said in Why Do People Still Text:
@garak0410 said in Why Do People Still Text:
Our family has moved to GroupMe for things like family news and get-togethers...too many people were either getting left out of texts or somehow, they would get dropped out of a group text. We also use it at church for staff communication and when I direct a community theatre show, I use it for cast communications.
Overall though. I think this is the solution. I wish GroupMe (or Skype or...) was ubiquitous as texting and SMS is.
Yes, these things are what I propose. I'm in no way opposed to instant messaging. It's the legacy SMS protocol that is problematic because it doesn't ride on the modern networks and creates both cost and technical problems.
I'm in agreement with this. However SMS works in some places that data doesn't... my home town (until they just spun up a new LTE tower) was one of these places.
True. And I get that to some degree. However, does your home town also not have wifi?
I am places that have email, instant messaging, Skype, etc. every day that don't have SMS. The opposite happens, but at least what I see, it's like 90% favourably towards Internet, only 10% to SMS. If you use only SMS to reach pretty much anyone that I know, it gets there no faster and far, far less reliably than, say, email.
Public Wifi? No not really. I have wifi at my office and the McDonalds has Wifi but there is nothing around that everyone has access to as ubiquitously as they do SMS.
Who said public? Cell phones aren't public. You have to pay for that. If you live in your town, likely you have home Internet, so there is coverage in prime spot(s). Same with cellular. We are talking about paid services that we assume that people have.
Except prime spots with SMS is literally the entire town. Where as wifi is limited to specific locations. It's a moot point now that we have 4G data for most carriers.
This whole conversation is moot point. It isn't 2006 anymore.
Except people are still texting!
I don't get why it matters. People are still faxing even though we all agree there is no need for faxing anymore. Sometimes technology dies slowly. Just let a die a long horrible death.
Most people are using hangouts or facebook messenger these days anyway. I rarely get texts anymore but yes I still get texts occasionally. Every plan these days has unlimited texting so what does it matter? I usually end up contacting people that text me via hangouts or facebook messenger. Then they start contacting me through those mediums.
