Dumb question for Web phone users...

I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
ass. I'm really asking.,)

I live on the Internet at home. An average of 8hrs a day. But when I
run to the store or am out about town, the only practical application
I can see to have a Web enhanced phone is looking up the phone number
of Home Depot while I'm sitting at the Lowe' parkinglot... or
something of that nature.

To those of you who have the 8100, etc... what do you use it for?
Maybe you'll convince me I need it too.

THANKS!
Jane

---

› See More: Dumb question for Web phone users...

"Jane" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
> use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
> available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
> for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
> ass. I'm really asking.,)

No, it's not necessary, but there are number of things one can do with
Vision. Set up news or weather alerts to be delivered via Text messaging,
sports scores, stock price alerts, etc. Check your account online on the
phone. Go to a number of news and sports portals to get updated info. Go to
your my.yahoo.com page or IM through Yahoo, AOL or MSN ... There are a lot
more things that one can do with Vision.


>
> I live on the Internet at home. An average of 8hrs a day. But when I
> run to the store or am out about town, the only practical application
> I can see to have a Web enhanced phone is looking up the phone number
> of Home Depot while I'm sitting at the Lowe' parkinglot... or
> something of that nature.

Well, all those things I mentioned above, while you are away from your
computer.

>
> To those of you who have the 8100, etc... what do you use it for?
> Maybe you'll convince me I need it too.
>
> THANKS!
> Jane

It's a good phone, with lots of positive reviews here ...

Bob

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> kindly wrote:

>
>"Jane" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
>> use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
>> available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
>> for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
>> ass. I'm really asking.,)
>
>No, it's not necessary, but there are number of things one can do with
>Vision. Set up news or weather alerts to be delivered via Text messaging,
>sports scores, stock price alerts, etc. Check your account online on the
>phone. Go to a number of news and sports portals to get updated info. Go to
>your my.yahoo.com page or IM through Yahoo, AOL or MSN ... There are a lot
>more things that one can do with Vision.

Okay... I can see how this would be really handy for someone where
there is practical value to having to know-- in the moment-- any of
those things.

And I can see I'm not one of those people. :-D That helped.

>It's a good phone, with lots of positive reviews here ...

Thanks, Bob. I mostly want good signal strength. I'm thinking of the
Sanyo RL2500 but it's a bit pricey for my pocketbook. The free Nokia
doesn't interest me however. The general consensus seems to be to
stick to Sanyo for good signal strength. I have an older Samsung and
get dropped in my house constantly. I have to walk out in the backyard
to use it. Very annoying!

Jane

Email.
During commutes, while traveling, etc.


"Jane" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
> use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
> available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
> for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
> ass. I'm really asking.,)
>
> I live on the Internet at home. An average of 8hrs a day. But when I
> run to the store or am out about town, the only practical application
> I can see to have a Web enhanced phone is looking up the phone number
> of Home Depot while I'm sitting at the Lowe' parkinglot... or
> something of that nature.
>
> To those of you who have the 8100, etc... what do you use it for?
> Maybe you'll convince me I need it too.
>
> THANKS!
> Jane

I have the 8100 and I use the go2 website (
http://www.go2online.com/webbrowser/...?locatedFlag=1 ) the most.
from there I can get directions to any restaurant, movie times, and
locations, travel, local information from locations that I specify in a
saved file or from my current location. then from yahoo I have my top
stocks quoted to me once a day along with my daily horoscope, and weather
ever 4 hrs. (the drive to work the drive home) and the ability to send IMs
through Yahoo, AOL or MSN or quick notes thru "short mail" not to mention
the basic quick "damn I wish I had a camera" feature.

If this sounds like a plug for the 8100, I am happy with the phone


"Jane" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
> use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
> available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
> for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
> ass. I'm really asking.,)
>
> I live on the Internet at home. An average of 8hrs a day. But when I
> run to the store or am out about town, the only practical application
> I can see to have a Web enhanced phone is looking up the phone number
> of Home Depot while I'm sitting at the Lowe' parkinglot... or
> something of that nature.
>
> To those of you who have the 8100, etc... what do you use it for?
> Maybe you'll convince me I need it too.
>
> THANKS!
> Jane

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:29:07 GMT, Jane ([email protected]) wrote:

>I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
>use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
>available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
>for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
>ass. I'm really asking.,)

This is a perennial question. For people who, like myself, work
from home, Vision could hardly be more superfluous.

If you travel for business, getting e-mail on the road is
fantastic, but if your work calls for great specificity and attention
to the text, Vision on a phone is not what you want. I work on the road,
but I write for a magazine, so I must be able to read attachments, respond
with proper documents, type with all my fingers and so on.

If you have stocks and find it easier to look at a ticker on
a phone screen than use the phone to call your broker, Vision is
worthwhile.

But for weather, sports and news, where can you NOT see those,
and much better, these days? I mean, the only person who NEEDS sports
scores immediately is a bookie. In Japan, everyone uses the equivalent of
Vision, but that's because it's included in all phone plans, and quite
reasonable. So not long ago when I was driving with my family there, and I
asked what the weather would be like the next day, my sister in law looked
it up on the phone. I asked if it wouldn't be easier to just reach over and
turn on the radio to the news, and was told that the effort would be about
the same.

There is a school of thought that seems to tend toward wanting to
make everything do everything. I think such people should cook their
breakfast on their engine while driving to work. Why waste all that good
heat? TV on the toaster? Why not? We HAVE the technology!

What it comes down to is that an extremely small segment of the
population will find Vision essential. A much larger segment (Sprint hopes)
will find it _entertaining_, and be willing to pay a fair amount for it.

I only carp when SPCS tries to push users who don't need these
functions into paying for them.

Readylink is another example of this. I asked this NG recently how
it is worth paying extra for PTT when you have tons of free pcs to pcs
minutes and speed dial, which achieves exactly - exactly - the same end.
The reasonable answer I recieved was that people who enjoy PTT like it
because it "feels right". They like it, they are willing to pay for it, it
fits their mood and that's that.

Fine with me, but again, I don't want to be left out in the cold
because I have no need in the world for it.

DGI

In article <[email protected]>,
David G. Imber <[email protected]> wrote:

> I only carp when SPCS tries to push users who don't need these
> functions into paying for them.

They effectively have when they only sell "Vision capable" phones. That
adds how much to the manufacturing cost?

In article <[email protected]>,
"Rob Barba" <rbarba@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote:

> along with my daily horoscope



OK, if you have to have a horoscope....

Just be careful where you get it from, every place you get it from will
be different.

"New Yorker" <[email protected]> kindly wrote:

>Email.
>During commutes, while traveling, etc.

In So CA we drive everywhere and I'd not be able to use a phone to
send email while driving, even if I had my huge desktop on the front
seat. But again, I can see how it might be handy for those who
take public transportation to commute (as one might in NY).

This has been enlightening. <g>

Jane

In article <[email protected]>,
Jane ([email protected]) wrote:

> I have an older Samsung and
> get dropped in my house constantly. I have to walk out in the backyard
> to use it. Very annoying!


A friend gets lousy (badically unuseable) reception indoors. So he tried
my Sanyo 4700, and it made zero difference versus his older Samsung. As
soon as porting settles down, he'll be moving to Verizon.

"Rob Barba" <rbarba@sprîntpcs.côm> kindly wrote:

>I have the 8100 and I use the go2 website (
>http://www.go2online.com/webbrowser/...?locatedFlag=1 ) the most.
>from there I can get directions to any restaurant, movie times, and
>locations, travel, local information from locations that I specify in a
>saved file or from my current location. [...]

This might be the only handy thing I would use. And only when I get
stuck somewhere, as usually I find all this out before I leave the
house.

Jane

In article <[email protected]>,
Jane ([email protected]) wrote:

> "Rob Barba" <rbarba@sprîntpcs.côm> kindly wrote:
>
> >I have the 8100 and I use the go2 website (
> >http://www.go2online.com/webbrowser/...?locatedFlag=1 ) the most.
> >from there I can get directions to any restaurant, movie times, and
> >locations, travel, local information from locations that I specify in a
> >saved file or from my current location. [...]
>
> This might be the only handy thing I would use. And only when I get
> stuck somewhere, as usually I find all this out before I leave the
> house.

I would suspect most folks don't go to a restuarant every day, let alone
a new one they don't know where it is. Actually infone is more of an
answer for most folks. 89 cents a call, instead of $1.25 info call on
Sprint or $15/month for visison.

http://www.infone.com/index.xwt

Matthew Lindeen <[email protected]> kindly wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> "Rob Barba" <rbarba@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote:
>
>> along with my daily horoscope
>
>
>
>OK, if you have to have a horoscope....

I know how my day is going by going along with it. <g> Kinda like how
I get my weather reports... by looking out the window.

Jane

David G. Imber <[email protected]> kindly wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:29:07 GMT, Jane ([email protected]) wrote:
>
>>I have to upgrade my phone and am wondering why anyone would want to
>>use a Web-enhanced phone? Is it really necessary to have the Web
>>available thru a tiny keypad such as a phone? What do people use it
>>for? What's the practical value? (I don't mean to sound like a smart
>>ass. I'm really asking.,)
>
> This is a perennial question. For people who, like myself, work
>from home, Vision could hardly be more superfluous.
>
> If you travel for business, getting e-mail on the road is
>fantastic, but if your work calls for great specificity and attention
>to the text, Vision on a phone is not what you want. I work on the road,
>but I write for a magazine, so I must be able to read attachments, respond
>with proper documents, type with all my fingers and so on.

I'm more in your boat -- work from home (with a budding writing career
in my case). But I agree with your points.

> If you have stocks and find it easier to look at a ticker on
>a phone screen than use the phone to call your broker, Vision is
>worthwhile.

Right. When I *get* a portfolio <g> I'm more likely to have daily
reports sent to my desktop or laptop. I can't see why I'd check for
that on my phone when I spend 8hrs a day on my computer(s).

> But for weather, sports and news, where can you NOT see those,
>and much better, these days? I mean, the only person who NEEDS sports
>scores immediately is a bookie. In Japan, everyone uses the equivalent of
>Vision, but that's because it's included in all phone plans, and quite
>reasonable. So not long ago when I was driving with my family there, and I
>asked what the weather would be like the next day, my sister in law looked
>it up on the phone. I asked if it wouldn't be easier to just reach over and
>turn on the radio to the news, and was told that the effort would be about
>the same.

Not a sports enthusiast and I don't boat, fly or commute, so I don't
need weather reports. News can be had on my 27" TV a mere six feet
away from my desktop; or on the desktop itself.

> There is a school of thought that seems to tend toward wanting to
>make everything do everything. I think such people should cook their
>breakfast on their engine while driving to work. Why waste all that good
>heat? TV on the toaster? Why not? We HAVE the technology!

I feel an editorial coming on... <g>

>
> What it comes down to is that an extremely small segment of the
>population will find Vision essential. A much larger segment (Sprint hopes)
>will find it _entertaining_, and be willing to pay a fair amount for it.

That's what I figured. I was wondering if I was missing something,
which is why I asked. I _was_ missing something actually... that it
*could* be helpful to a small segment of the population. And I can see
it is. I'm not in that segment for the most part, though.

> I only carp when SPCS tries to push users who don't need these
>functions into paying for them.
>
> Readylink is another example of this. I asked this NG recently how
>it is worth paying extra for PTT when you have tons of free pcs to pcs
>minutes and speed dial, which achieves exactly - exactly - the same end.
>The reasonable answer I recieved was that people who enjoy PTT like it
>because it "feels right". They like it, they are willing to pay for it, it
>fits their mood and that's that.

I just looked into this. With the lag time ("down from 6 seconds to
2-3") and the "only one person can talk at a time" restriction, it
really *is* like walkie talkies. I think that's exactly the draw. We
were all kids once and fascinated by walkie talkies. 'How cool is it
to have your cell phone turn into one, and be able to talk to someone
miles and miles away?' Pretty cool until you actually do it and it
sucks. <g> There's nothing more aggrivating than a lag, or having one
person cut out while the other talks. This is a technology that has a
long way to go before it's going to be useful, it seems. At present
it's good for a short emergency call perhaps -- not of the true
emergency type -- but more like: "I can't get through on your home
phone. Is it off the hook? Call me! Roger Out."

> Fine with me, but again, I don't want to be left out in the cold
>because I have no need in the world for it.

I agree actually. A color screen is nice (pleasant to look at and
easier on the eyes that monochrome), and good reception is a must.
Cameras and Web connections, I really don't need. Not if they add to
the price of the phone. Unfortunately all new phones of high quality
seem to include these.

I've been told for the best signal strength to stick with Sanyo. I'll
look for a Sanyo with a color screen and no camera or Vision option,
but methinks there isn't one. Maybe I'm wrong.

Jane

(Thanks for that amusing post.)

Matthew Lindeen <[email protected]> kindly wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> David G. Imber <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I only carp when SPCS tries to push users who don't need these
>> functions into paying for them.
>
>They effectively have when they only sell "Vision capable" phones. That
>adds how much to the manufacturing cost?

Exactly. If I could get the phone I wanted, it would likely be free
after rebates. Instead it looks like I'll have to get a phone that
will cost me over a hundred bucks (*after* rebates) because it will
include options I don't want and won't use.

Jane