Why Do People Still Text
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
@StrongBad said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender 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.
Tell that to your parents.
My dad uses Telegram.
You are one of the lucky few.
Exactly! My wife's mother only texts. it's nearly the same for all of her siblings.
I would say that I use FB messenger for 90% of my messages, but I still find that I have to maintain Skype, Telegram, Hangouts and ICQ.
The lack of ubiquitous messaging is definitely frustrating.
I was pretty surprised to find that basically no one in my family in Ohio texts. My parents' siblings all live on phone calls or FB Messenger. The cousins are all FB. Grandma is all voice calls. All of my aunts and uncles have texting blocked. My dad has it but uses Telegram.
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
The lack of ubiquitous messaging is definitely frustrating.
That's a reason that I want to see SMS go away, it is not a modern technology like the others and doesn't have the potentially to be merged in like the others are.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
@StrongBad said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender 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.
Tell that to your parents.
My dad uses Telegram.
You are one of the lucky few.
Exactly! My wife's mother only texts. it's nearly the same for all of her siblings.
I would say that I use FB messenger for 90% of my messages, but I still find that I have to maintain Skype, Telegram, Hangouts and ICQ.
The lack of ubiquitous messaging is definitely frustrating.
I was pretty surprised to find that basically no one in my family in Ohio texts. My parents' siblings all live on phone calls or FB Messenger. The cousins are all FB. Grandma is all voice calls. All of my aunts and uncles have texting blocked. My dad has it but uses Telegram.
Considering the supposed high costs you mention - why are you surprised?
I'm not surprised that Europe citizens don't text much because there is so much cross network communication and texting between networks (countries) didn't used to be free that people found a free alternative - namely WhatsApp.
-
I bet if we looked at the cost of SMSing in Brazil we'd find that it was ridiculously expensive (for what it is) and the people found that they could use a tiny amount of data and get free texting using WhatsApp. Clearly when the country shut down access to WhatsApp server, there was a huge public outcry - so bad in fact that another court over turned the ruling to shut it down.
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
I bet if we looked at the cost of SMSing in Brazil we'd find that it was ridiculously expensive (for what it is) and the people found that they could use a tiny amount of data and get free texting using WhatsApp. Clearly when the country shut down access to WhatsApp server, there was a huge public outcry - so bad in fact that another court over turned the ruling to shut it down.
That's what we find in places like Panama and Nicaragua, at least.
-
@Dashrender In Panama we have Data and we use apps like Telegram, Whatsapp and BBMessenger, we don't text that much, it costs more than making an 8 cents-a-minute call. Even businesses offer customer service by whatsapp chats. In Venezuela (before I left 8 years ago) we texted a lot since it was cheaper than a call and it depended on the carrier, I had Movilnet and if I wanted to text a Digitel user it would cost me more that texting another Movilnet user.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
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.
Google voice = SMS on any device. Plus you don't have to give people your actual phone number.
-
@RojoLoco said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
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.
Google voice = SMS on any device. Plus you don't have to give people your actual phone number.
I tried, could not get Google Voice last time I checked. It was not available. This was recent.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@RojoLoco said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
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.
Google voice = SMS on any device. Plus you don't have to give people your actual phone number.
I tried, could not get Google Voice last time I checked. It was not available. This was recent.
Try it again while you are located in the first world. Google likes 'Murica, should work from here.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
@RojoLoco said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
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.
Google voice = SMS on any device. Plus you don't have to give people your actual phone number.
I tried, could not get Google Voice last time I checked. It was not available. This was recent.
HUh, I got a new Google Voice number yesterday.
-
Like others, email is my "check it sometimes" medium. Text is sort of more-immediate-but-annoying-sometimes.
I personally am digging Telegram. You sign up via phone number which texts you an MMS which then registers your account.
At that point you can create a channel, add people, invite people, create ad-hoc groups, search conversations. You get all the MMS abilities, emoji, inline images, videos, you can record quick audio notes, snap pictures. It reports when the message has been read, you can adjust notifications, etc etc.
There is the web app as well as desktop apps so I have it wherever I am. Messages are encrypted and secure, no prying eyes.The problem is that Telegram is a 3rd party service, and I have to fight people to get them to sign up and try it because they are so bent on their built-in phone texting.
Rather than describe how things "should be" I'll just describe how they ARE.
Almost nobody texts me, and those who do I will only describe as less computer-literate. Texting is probably the easiest thing for them to figure out how to do on a smart phone. Email might be 100 fold more difficult for them to master.
My most frequent contacts I've got on Telegram now, which I use 90% of the time from the Windows app.
I have like 6 email accounts so I don't use notifications. I check it when I check it. I get almost no personal messages. I get either work stuff, client stuff, marketing, or newsletters and other info. Sometimes family members will send a group message or something but email is barely personal in my world.If I had my way, Telegram probably beats out email. This mainly due to the way email still sucks at group conversations. There is a lot of "email etiquette" people need to learn to make email effective. You give Bob from church your email and suddenly he's forwarding every political activist meme he's ever seen to you. You give your email to Sally and now you're suddenly on some city-wide MLM group sales newsletter which is impossible to ever escape from.
These things don't seem to happen with texting because there is something about texting that is less, shall we say "automated". You don't get text "newsletters" and spam doesn't seem to be a huge issue. You don't typically "forward" texts so a lot of email etiquette issues are resolved.I don't see email replacing what texting does, but neither text nor email do very well with group conversations either, which is where the next network comes into play. Most everybody else who isn't my core Telegram group or email connect, does their thing on Facebook. Ad-hoc "group" conversations start there when family posts something. And the odd message comes in too.
I don't know what is the ideal system to use. We kind of have to use whatever everybody else uses who we want to stay connected with.
-
Exactly - getting people to use something new is challenging at best, impossible at worst.
My mom only calls, texting would blow her mind (and make my phone explode, so I'll never teach her).
-
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Exactly - getting people to use something new is challenging at best, impossible at worst.
My mom only calls, texting would blow her mind (and make my phone explode, so I'll never teach her).
I had the opposite. If she called I would be stuck for 45 minutes and my ear would have 1st degree burns.
She learned how to text and then I can casually deal with her over time. The only problem, she texted small books and autocorrect ruined everything.
-
@guyinpv said in Why Do People Still Text:
@Dashrender said in Why Do People Still Text:
Exactly - getting people to use something new is challenging at best, impossible at worst.
My mom only calls, texting would blow her mind (and make my phone explode, so I'll never teach her).
I had the opposite. If she called I would be stuck for 45 minutes and my ear would have 1st degree burns.
She learned how to text and then I can casually deal with her over time. The only problem, she texted small books and autocorrect ruined everything.
I have that problem too. She calls, there's an hour gone.
Though the idea that texting gets rid of 'dealing with it right now' issue, at least for some. Personally email is the ultimate form of "it can wait." A phone call is an indication that something needs to be handled right now, a text is somewhere in the middle.
I guess one good thing, my kids will never post complaining about how their father called and wasted their time - oh wait... I don't have kids
While I appreciate Scott's take that trying to contact him via a single device connection (phone calls or SMS) aren't good for him since he doesn't carry his phone always - the idea that email is somehow instant access to him is something I can't grasp.
I'll be extreme here - if Scott's father was in an accident - does he want an email about that? or does he want a phone call about that? I suppose a message on any number of messaging platforms (other than SMS) would be nearly as good as a phone call, but then as I write that, if the device he is on can get messaging, it can probably get email - and I have to ask... are all of his devices constantly chiming whenever an email is delivered? -
Ran into a new one today... battery was getting low and just before being able to plug in the phone, the charging port got wet. With many modern phones, charging, at least my normal means, requires that the port be completely dry. Towels, a hair drier, a really dry environment, tissues, etc. can all assist in drying out the port. But often it will take hours at best to be able to charge again. Even with absolutely nothing going wrong with the phone, normal usage can cause text messaging to be unavailable for many hours. And if I were, say, camping somewhere humid it might be days without being able to start charging the phone.
-
And at the same time @mary had her phone run over in a parking lot and because it was the weekend, it took a few days before she was able to get texts again. Minor issue, but highlights the risks in the real world. That meant that for those days, any 2FA requiring her phone was unavailable to her as well.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
And at the same time @mary had her phone run over in a parking lot and because it was the weekend, it took a few days before she was able to get texts again. Minor issue, but highlights the risks in the real world. That meant that for those days, any 2FA requiring her phone was unavailable to her as well.
All quality solutions that require 2FA also provide one time use codes or similar to get in. It is your responsibility as the user of 2FA to know how to get into your systems when the main 2FA key is gone.
-
There is only one option besides texting, and that's email.
The reason for that, is because there is not another single platform everyone uses where personal preference is not a factor.
For example, with phone and email, it does not matter your provider. You can send a text from t-mobile and receive it on any other carrier really, or send an email from yahoo and receive it on Gmail.
This is not the case with anything I can think of without putting much thought towards it. If you send a message from Facebook messenger, the other person HAS to have it as well.
I know there are some things like message to text and whatever, but that's besides the point.
I did not read all 360 replies, if this point was made already, I don't care.
-
@JaredBusch said in Why Do People Still Text:
@scottalanmiller said in Why Do People Still Text:
And at the same time @mary had her phone run over in a parking lot and because it was the weekend, it took a few days before she was able to get texts again. Minor issue, but highlights the risks in the real world. That meant that for those days, any 2FA requiring her phone was unavailable to her as well.
All quality solutions that require 2FA also provide one time use codes or similar to get in. It is your responsibility as the user of 2FA to know how to get into your systems when the main 2FA key is gone.
Problem with that approach is that you would need your backup codes to be as quick and easy to use as your 2FA system. This does a lot to heavily defeat the safety of 2FA if you are always carrying and having access to static codes.
In this case, she was traveling when it happened. So carrying codes with you when traveling makes them super risky. You don't want them on paper in your pocket, for example.
-
@Obsolesce said in Why Do People Still Text:
There is only one option besides texting, and that's email.
The reason for that, is because there is not another single platform everyone uses where personal preference is not a factor.SIP technically works that way, but almost no one enabled it. But yes, this is effectively true. Email is the universal tool here. Even SMS requires that you go through a carrier, so it is more like Facebook in a lot of ways, than like email. You can't host your own SMS and talk to other people with SMS. It's actually a closed system, whereas email is open to the entire Internet.
With email, you can get access from any device, anywhere. At least optionally you can. With texting, you have to have your provider (like Facebook) agree to provide you access. And they can give away that access as they often do. There are multiple SMS companies, but they all share a closed backbone (PSTN) together, but you are tied to them. The Internet seems comparable, but it really isn't. You can use any provider, not just the one that you are currently tied to, and it's a democratized system, and you aren't tied to a device or account, and what small centralization is necessary is controlled carefully (domain and DNS systems.)
SMS is also unencrypted, email is optionally encrypted.
Nothing is perfect, but email has some significant advantages over SMS.
