For Larry... "Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive than receiving scientific data from space"

05-14-2008, 09:24 AM

I thought you'd enjoy this article, Lar...

http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html

> Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive than receiving
> scientific data from space"
>
> A University of Leicester space scientist has worked out that sending
> texts via mobile phones
> works out to be far more expensive than downloading data from the Hubble
> Space Telescope.
>
>
> Dr Nigel Bannister's calculations were used for the Channel 4 Dispatches
> programme "The
> Mobile Phone Rip-Off".
>
>
> He worked out the cost of obtaining a megabyte of data from Hubble - and
> compared that
> with the 5p cost of sending a text.
>
> He said: "The bottom line is texting is at least 4 times more expensive
> than transmitting data
> from Hubble, and is likely to be substantially more than that.
>
> "The maximum size for a text message is 160 characters, which takes 140
> bytes because
> there are only 7 bits per character in the text messaging system, and we
> assume the
> average price for a text message is 5p. There are 1,048,576 bytes in a
> megabyte, so
> that's 1 million/140 = 7490 text messages to transmit one megabyte. At 5p
> each, that's
> £374.49 per MB - or about 4.4 times more expensive than the 'most
> pessimistic' estimate
> for Hubble Space Telescope transmission costs..."

05-14-2008, 08:31 PM

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in news:TuDWj.58$ba4.18
@fe127.usenetserver.com:

> I thought you'd enjoy this article, Lar...
>
> http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html
>
>

SO COOL! Thank you!.....(c;

5p is a pittance compared to $0.20US.

It's probably cheaper to get data from Voyager 1 in the Oort Cloud, now,
than from Verizon...(c;

.....as I said before, "The most expensive data on the planet."

I guess "in the Solar System" is now more accurate!

05-14-2008, 08:52 PM

At 15 May 2008 02:31:46 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html
> >
> >
>
> SO COOL! Thank you!.....(c;
>
> 5p is a pittance compared to $0.20US.

Given the way the exchange rate is going, they'll be equivalent soon
enough, unfortunately! :-(

> It's probably cheaper to get data from Voyager 1 in the Oort Cloud, now,
> than from Verizon...(c;
>
> ....as I said before, "The most expensive data on the planet."
>
> I guess "in the Solar System" is now more accurate!

Yep- you'll need to update your rant in future posts! ;-)

05-14-2008, 10:37 PM

On 2008-05-15, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in news:TuDWj.58$ba4.18
> @fe127.usenetserver.com:
>
>> I thought you'd enjoy this article, Lar...
>>
>> http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html
>>
>
> SO COOL! Thank you!.....(c;
>
> 5p is a pittance compared to $0.20US.

Not only that, but the 5p is only charged to the sender and the
receiver pays nothing. The $0.20 is double-dipped from both
ends.

Dennis Ferguson

For Larry... "Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive than receiving scientific data from space"

Re: For Larry... "Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive than receiving scientific data from space"

Re: For Larry... "Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive thanreceiving scientific data from space"

Re: For Larry... "Space scientist says texting is four times more expensive than receiving scientific data from space"