NEWS: Voicemail message is getting lost

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:07:34 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:07:38 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
>>>And the people I know think phones are to talk on.
>>
>> That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
>> know are not representative of everyone on the planet!
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>Your opinion. See below:
>
>"Jorma Ollila, chairman and chief executive of Finland's Nokia, said that,
>in developed countries where mobile phone penetration is already high,
>wireless communications will overtake fixed-line communications in terms of
>the volume of voice call traffic." Link to full article follows:
>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinv...le-world_x.htm

Lord know where that came from seeing as how there are literally
millions of SMS sent every day in the UK alone. It still stands that
what you may consider trivial and unimportant isn't necessarily the
held view of everyone else. Believe it or not everything's not always
about *you!*
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

---

› See More: NEWS: Voicemail message is getting lost

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 23:14:21 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> IMHO wrote:
>>> "Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:07:38 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
>>>>>And the people I know think phones are to talk on.
>>>>
>>>>That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
>>>>know are not representative of everyone on the planet!
>>>>
>
>>> Your opinion. See below:
>>>
>>> "Jorma Ollila, chairman and chief executive of Finland's Nokia, said
>>> that, in developed countries where mobile phone penetration is already
>>> high, wireless communications will overtake fixed-line communications in
>>> terms of the volume of voice call traffic." Link to full article
>>> follows:
>>> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinv...le-world_x.htm
>>
>> Of course Jorma Ollila would say that; he runs the world's #1 handset
>> manufacturer, which happens to be headquartered in a country where mobile
>> phone penetration is ridiculously high.
>>
>Then you agree with [email protected] that most cell users IM & SMS
>rather than talk on a cell phone?

Do not twist what I said to suit your whim. I never said that most
cell users IM & SMS rather than talk.

It matters what the mobile phone culture is in particular countries to
how much SMS/text messaging is used. In North America it hasn't
really caught on likely because the cost to make a voice call is
likely to be cheaper or as cheap as sending SMS. In Europe and many
other countries especially on caller pays it's very pricey during the
daytime hours to make calls either to other networks or to wireline
phones. In that case it's cheaper to send an SMS rather than use
voice. In case you hadn't noticed the whole world does not live in
North America. The mobile phone culture is very different in North
America than it is in Europe and Asia partially because of what people
are used to (paying for each call) and the way calls are charged.
It's always expensive for wireline phones to call mobiles and there is
no way to dicker for the price you pay as that's determined by the
tariff that is set so you have no way to bargain as you do with your
outbound/inbound plans in North America.
>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004
22:27:59 GMT, "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Quick" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:1100025125.459206@sj-nntpcache-5...
>> John Richards wrote:
>>> "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:_vWjd.48629$_g6.11722@okepread03...
>>>> And the people I know think phones are to talk on.
>>>
>>> Same here. I guess you and I don't hang out with teenagers. :-)
>>
>> Here at work we use a messaging application. It's like AOL
>> IM except that it's more secure (they rolled that out when they
>> found that the sales force and other's were using AOL for
>> company information). It caught on very quickly and, for
>> example, is much used in large meetings for side conversations.
>> Just an example of a changing paradigm.
>
>Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but if I were a classroom instructor or
>lecturer of a small group, I'd be offended if attendees started
>typing away on cell phones while I was talking. It denotes
>disrespect for the speaker.

How is that different from taking notes on paper or on a laptop computer?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> IMHO wrote:
>>
>> Then you agree with [email protected] that most cell users IM & SMS
>> rather than talk on a cell phone?
>
> You can't even infer that from what I just said. Nor can you infer it from
> what Joseph said. Nice try.
>

I agree I can't infer that from what you said.

But it seems like that's what Joseph was saying?

On Monday, November 08, 2004 9:07 PM I Posted
"Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
And the people I know think phones are to talk on."

On Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:38 AM Joseph replied:
"That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
know are not representative of everyone on the planet!"

IMHO wrote:
> "Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>IMHO wrote:
>>
>>>Then you agree with [email protected] that most cell users IM & SMS
>>>rather than talk on a cell phone?
>>
>>You can't even infer that from what I just said. Nor can you infer it from
>>what Joseph said. Nice try.
>>
>
>
> I agree I can't infer that from what you said.
>
> But it seems like that's what Joseph was saying?
>
> On Monday, November 08, 2004 9:07 PM I Posted
> "Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
> And the people I know think phones are to talk on."

It seems here that he's saying exactly the opposite, don't you think?

> "That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
> know are not representative of everyone on the planet!"

It's hard for me to interpret this without context, and I don't remember what
he was replying to.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> IMHO wrote:
>> "Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>IMHO wrote:
>>>
>>>>Then you agree with [email protected] that most cell users IM & SMS
>>>>rather than talk on a cell phone?
>>>
>>>You can't even infer that from what I just said. Nor can you infer it
>>>from what Joseph said. Nice try.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I agree I can't infer that from what you said.
>>
>> But it seems like that's what Joseph was saying?
>>
>> On Monday, November 08, 2004 9:07 PM I Posted
>> "Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
>> And the people I know think phones are to talk on."
>
> It seems here that he's saying exactly the opposite, don't you think?
>
>> "That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
>> know are not representative of everyone on the planet!"
>
> It's hard for me to interpret this without context, and I don't remember
> what he was replying to.
>
>>>>> IMHO (me) posted
>>>>> On Monday, November 08, 2004 9:07 PM "Not all phones have IM and SMS
>>>>> capability.
>>>>> And the people I know think phones are to talk on."

<<<<< Joseph replied:
<<<<< On Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:38 AM
<<<<< "That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
<<<<< know are not representative of everyone on the planet!"

"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:07:34 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Joseph" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:07:38 -0600, "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Not all phones have IM and SMS capability.
>>>>And the people I know think phones are to talk on.
>>>
>>> That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
>>> know are not representative of everyone on the planet!
>>>
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>Your opinion. See below:
>>
>>"Jorma Ollila, chairman and chief executive of Finland's Nokia, said that,
>>in developed countries where mobile phone penetration is already high,
>>wireless communications will overtake fixed-line communications in terms
>>of
>>the volume of voice call traffic." Link to full article follows:
>>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinv...le-world_x.htm
>
> Lord know where that came from seeing as how there are literally
> millions of SMS sent every day in the UK alone. It still stands that
> what you may consider trivial and unimportant isn't necessarily the
> held view of everyone else. Believe it or not everything's not always
> about *you!*
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"consider trivial and unimportant" Where did you get that stupid idea?
I just think more phone use is for voice than IM and SMS!

IM & SMS works for some groups - not for others - but only cell to cell.
IM and SMS instead of using voice mail: make voice call - no answer - hang
up - send SMS.

"Jacob Suter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Reasons SMS blows Voicemail away (and why I've replaced many of my voice
> conversations with SMS/Email):
>
> #1 - I can SMS on much less than 'talkable' signal
>
> #2 - I can check my text messages in less time than it takes to get a *86
> call to connect
>
> #3 - SMS is dirt cheap when you pre-pay for it. I pay $2/mo for like 100
> messages. It easily saves me 250 minutes/month.
>
> #4 - I can maintain a bidirectional SMS conversation in a movie theater,
> restraunt, while holding a real life conversation, etc, and not disturb
> anyone.
>
> #5 - Delivery confirmation on SMS messages (cool feature until your
> girlfriend finds out about it - no more "oh I didn't read that message til
> this morning" excuse)
>
> #6 - Reduced on-body RF exposure (no need to hold the handset up to your
> head)
>
> #7 - You can SMS while on a voice call (unless you've got a craporola
> v120e and it gets so damned slow it just *can't*)
>
> #8 - SMS doesn't eat as much battery - backlights are less consumption
> than transmitters and signal processors
>
> #9 - Easy to review later, can CC or FW to home email address for later
> reference...
>
> #10 - leaving a 'voice based' number-only text page generally is enough
> information for anyone that wants to leave voicemail. If its easy to call
> back, I probably will.
>
> Is that enough reasons?
>
> JS
>
>
finally you've put down to text what i've been telling friends for a long
time. good work, dude. thanks. there are more reasons, but yours are the top
10.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004
> 22:27:59 GMT, "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but if I were a classroom instructor or
>>lecturer of a small group, I'd be offended if attendees started
>>typing away on cell phones while I was talking. It denotes
>>disrespect for the speaker.
>
> How is that different from taking notes on paper or on a laptop computer?
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

in the 6 years i was in university (BS and MS), right from my first
semester, students were taking notes on laptops and lecturers did not see it
as an issue of distraction. some lecturers would ask for an electronic copy
of the lecture notes from the note takers so they would know what content
they have taught and making it easier to compose exams/tests/quizzes as the
instructor has proof he taught the topic.

of course, cellphones should not be used in exams ;-)

IMHO wrote:

>>It's hard for me to interpret this without context, and I don't remember
>>what he was replying to.

> <<<<< Joseph replied:
> <<<<< On Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:38 AM
> <<<<< "That's just it. It's the people *you* know. You and the people you
> <<<<< know are not representative of everyone on the planet!"

duh, now I see it, and yes, the snippets do seem contradictory.


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

"Andy M - Tampa Bay" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004
>> 22:27:59 GMT, "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:
<<<< SNIP >>>>
>
> in the 6 years i was in university (BS and MS), right from my first
> semester, students were taking notes on laptops and lecturers did not see
> it as an issue of distraction. some lecturers would ask for an electronic
> copy of the lecture notes from the note takers so they would know what
> content they have taught and making it easier to compose
> exams/tests/quizzes as the instructor has proof he taught the topic.
>
> of course, cellphones should not be used in exams ;-)
Taking notes on a laptop is one thing.
To text message others in the meeting and outside the meeting about other
matters is something else.
Why go to the meeting if you are going to text message about other matters.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <uWAkd.50798$EZ.43547@okepread07> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:23:05 -0600,
"IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Andy M - Tampa Bay" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...

>Taking notes on a laptop is one thing.
>To text message others in the meeting and outside the meeting about other
>matters is something else.

How so? Done with discretion, it might even be less intrusive than taking
notes.

>Why go to the meeting if you are going to text message about other matters.

It might well be the same matters, or unexpected other matters that need
prompt attention.

Read what we're writing with a bit more of an open mind -- while it could be
abused, with discretion it really can make sense.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <uWAkd.50798$EZ.43547@okepread07> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:23:05 -0600,
> "IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Andy M - Tampa Bay" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>
>>Taking notes on a laptop is one thing.
>>To text message others in the meeting and outside the meeting about other
>>matters is something else.
>
> How so? Done with discretion, it might even be less intrusive than taking
> notes.
>
>>Why go to the meeting if you are going to text message about other
>>matters.
>
> It might well be the same matters, or unexpected other matters that need
> prompt attention.
>
> Read what we're writing with a bit more of an open mind -- while it could
> be
> abused, with discretion it really can make sense.
>

Like the Nextel commercials - having a meeting, everyone in the same room,
using direct connect.

The meetings I go to have a specific purpose and those who attend are there
to solve problems and make decisions. Matters needing prompt attention
are - in my opinion - Medical, Fire, Chemical Spills, etc. Most other
matters can wait until after the meeting when they can be given full
attention. There are many times when a decision is required right away -
then it is weeks before it gets implemented.

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.attws - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 10 Nov 2004
> 22:27:59 GMT, "John Richards" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but if I were a classroom instructor or
>>lecturer of a small group, I'd be offended if attendees started
>>typing away on cell phones while I was talking. It denotes
>>disrespect for the speaker.
>
> How is that different from taking notes on paper or on a laptop computer?

Simple. A student writing in a notebook is generally presumed to be taking
lecture notes. A student tapping on cellphone keys is presumed to be
engaged in something unrelated to anything the teacher/lecturer is saying.
There are exceptions. I understand that text messaging during meetings is
accepted nowadays in some business circles.

--
John Richards

"IMHO" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:uWAkd.50798$EZ.43547@okepread07...
> Taking notes on a laptop is one thing.
> To text message others in the meeting and outside the meeting about other
> matters is something else.
> Why go to the meeting if you are going to text message about other matters.

If nothing else it would tell your fellow attendees that you are bored
with them and you think that the meeting is a waste of time.
That's probably not a good impression to leave with your colleagues
and superiors.

--
John Richards