Cleverrr

markwm

BoonDock

@ Shortarabguy: "I press one. When I see my phone has a text message, I press the button which indicates that I would like to read the text message, then press it again to view that specific message( unless it's not the most recent one, but that's a given)."

You pressed three buttons, evidently. You pressed the same button three times. You also forgot how many button presses it takes to send out a text message. If your cell phone gets crappy reception, you shouldn't be using that company in the first place.

WSUCanuck

con800

Add in 3G/4G network (e.g. WiMax/802.16/WCDMA) connectivity (such as where Clearwire is headed) mixed with WiFi hotspots and you have exactly what your talking about, and within a year or two.

Too bad IPv6 has so many huge deployment challenges, it's integrated mobile-ip and ipsec would make this sort of app much more reasonable to engineer, and easier for the end-user.

Celeus

asherchang

scoobydoo

fluxtatic

I think this is a prime example of how all cell phone provides are blatant thieves. These companies have successfully targeted a demographic consisting of trendy, pretentious, boneheads who think that a service is worthwhile and supremely necessary simply because you have to pay for it.

The fact that text messaging is being marked up to the point of absurdity is in itself asinine.

BoonDock

Obviously, you're not familiar with this story.

eastvillageidiot

He

hals

Bortsch

mariod505

Your math is wrong in a lot of ways. Sending TCP/IP data, the bandwidth includes overhead (negotiating TCP connections, packet headers, acknowledgment packets, etc.). I'd also guess they do use 8 bits per character. In addition to data, we need the phone number we're sending to. That's another 10% or so. Let's add the 2-3x inflation for acknowledgments and similar packets. Now, let's add 2x (this is probably much higher) for authentication on the phone network. We add 12.5% for your stupid 7 bit assumption (even if they only allow 7 bit chars, they almost certainly transmit in 8 bit). Let's factor in a 50% discount for buying in bulk.

We've hit a factor of 7.4x-11.1x that you were off in your calculation. And that's almost exactly the unfair markup you're complaining about. Go figure.

cypherpunks

scientifics

brenda23

What annoys me is that I have an unlimited data plan from vzw (actually unlimited = 5GB/mo, but that's another story), and they STILL charge extra for SMS!

Regarding Jabber (comment by Apreche) - just get a windows mobile smartphone with an unlimited data plan, and run skype on it. A lot of people do that.

virgilstar

JohnMc has the right idea, but the overhead cost to set up a data connection in order to send a short text message isn't really worth it. That's why SMS already goes over a shared channel. Newer technologies still have a built-in mechanism to transmit very short sets of data over the common channels.

Basically, when you use a data plan, you're typically using a common channel to set up a connection and then using a dedicated channel to transmit a large quantity of data, so each byte that you transmit has a relatively small associated cost in terms of common channel usage & dedicated channel signalling. For an SMS, it's usually all on the common channel, thus the higher cost/byte. Even if you were to use a dedicated channel for SMS, the message itself is so short that there would be a very high cost/byte for common channel usage (to set up the connection) and dedicated channel signalling.

tschepsit

Apreche

jaredharley

Also, SMS messages are typically delivered to mobile phones via the paging channel. The paging channel is a limited slice of the radio spectrum that is used so that the cell towers and the phones can talk to each other - the "control" channel, if you will. The capacity of the paging channel must be shared by all the phones (whether being used to make a call or not) in any given sector. So it's a very limited and valuable resource.

The amount of paging channel capacity that is consumed by delivery of an SMS message is much higher than that used by a data session, if measuring the amount of capacity consumed versus the number of bytes that is delivered to the mobile phone.

quizzoid

It will be really interesting to see how the telcos answers to these threats. Will they give up their cash cow, the SMS, and develop similar messaging solutions, or simply lower the prices, or will they ignore the threat and hope for the best?

MikeyMan

In fact, you'd probably be better off getting a sms-email-sending j2me program for your phone and using that to take advantage of the data rates.

mystes

Stockholder

Big fat internet tube to a mobile device... isn't that the definition of 3G - http://eurotechnology.com/3G/ - which already popular in the UK, but almost ubiquitous in Japan and parts of Asia. Take a look at the phones for sale in South Korea if you want a glimpse at what the Western markets might see in a few years time.

linxeh

SMS Messages are typically sent in the same way that the phone sets up a call - over the control channel which is separate from the voice data. For CDMA phones then ANSI41 defines how this works (see http://www.cdg.org/technology/roaming/Technology/ansi41.as... for example) and with GSM it is defined in MAP, part of SS7 - http://www.protocols.com/pbook/ss7.htm#MAP

SMS messages started off free (in the UK at least where the craze seems to have started), and were limited to within network (it was intended as a way for engineers to communicate with each other). Once it became popular, the networks opened up access to allow cross network delivery. Of course, as soon as this happened they twigged they could start making money and introduced charges per text message.

As for the overpricing - that is just market dynamics. People are prepared to pay extortionate amounts, so the networks will charge.

linxeh

Nestor66

Most subscription services offer a number of free SMS per month though, usually between 500 and 1000, so for a lot of people it's not really noticeable.

I'm 25 and am always texting. In general the UK are quite a heavy user of SMS.

Duncan Sample

I press one. When I see my phone has a text message, I press the button which indicates that I would like to read the text message, then press it again to view that specific message( unless it's not the most recent one, but that's a given).
When I call voicemail, on the other hand, assuming that I'm using my cell phone( which doesn't require a login) I often have to deal with either
a) bad reception
b) unrecognizable diction
c) bad ambient noise, or
d) a myriad of all of the above. I also have to bother everyone around me by initiating a phone call. Viewing a text message is just faster and more polite, two qualities of which people need more these days...

Oh, and before anyone else says that viewing a text message is dangerous while driving, it's almost equally dangerous to use the phone while driving. That said, there are some huge benefits to using text messages, but the inequality involved here is just too great. The telecommunication companies have banked on our love of SMS and we're just their prey. Very little to do now but hope that Google comes up with some revolutionary new thing which sticks it to them, haha...

shortarabguy

Also, there're lots of people I'd rather text back and forth than speak with. Like my annoying sister in law. I can get rid of her in a few texts, but if she catches me on the phone, forget it - I'm on the hook for at least 20 minutes of blather.

Metschick

JimXugle

We like to use sms messages because

-Our phone is always with us
-Its the best way to contact someone in the middle of class
-We aren't always at our computer. If we were, we would use IM

brishenhawkins

short message service. similar to email, but uses more low level commands. AT commands. Super nerds know what those are.

A little like TTY, a little like push email, and alphanum pager...

Anyone hungry for deets just read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS

Try it: if you send a text to your email, it comes from 123-456-7890@cingular.blahsomethinglikethat.com. Try it.

It is a customer accepted markup. If everyone in a given market (say US) said nuts to TXT, then the prices would drop.

As an important side note... SPRINT USERS watch out for CASUAL TXT. Aka... press 5 to page this person...

wesrubix

You are comparing apples and oranges, so your analogy does not hold.

That said, I'm sure they are making insanely immense profits. But your math really doesn't hold up.

johnrover

You assume wrongly that any future development in wireless would utilize SMS. When you have essentially ISDN rates speeds over a wireless data packet network you abandon SMS and go with any of the internet IM protocols to do the equivalent of text messaging.

JohnMc

Kangarara

reeg2

There's actually nothing stopping you from using one of a number of 3rd party sms providers that have substantially lower rates (where you pay your provider's regular data rate for 200bytes or so, plus are billed a few cents from the third party), but it's inconvenient. There's also nothing stopping you from sending e-mails using your data package to one of the many providers' e-mail-to-sms gateways (mine is XXXXXXXXXX@fido.ca, for example and received messages are almost alays free).

What it comes down to is convenience and willingness to pay. The service is wirth whatever people are willing to pay for it, basic supply and demand.

Just my 2 cents...

jhembach

laser

eastvillageidiot

LAGirl

The network for transmitting SMS messages is a terribly complicated one where pretty much everything is based on old(er) packed switched connections. Each provider invests millions in sms service centers, which in essence are just massive computer servers from companies like Comverse.

Then you need a fairly complex system of billing integration with your existing systems.

Then they need to work on interconnectivity with other providers (remember just a few years ago you couldn't even send an SMS to someone on a different network). Of course, this interconnectivity gets more complicated when you also want to allow people to send messages abroad. You then get into clearinghosues for messaging and crossborder billing.

So, while I agree that the price for a message is still totally insane and out of sync with reality, the technology behind SMS messaging most certainly is not the same as data services for the operator.

But why stop complaining there? The cost of an incoming minute can be as high as 15 cents/min, what justifies THAT? What justifies the operator asking $35 just to let you become a customer ("activation" fee) when activiting your phone is totally automated for them. Mobile operators have to be the only service where you have to pay just to be allowed to pay more.

Lets face it, mobile operators invested millions/billions in their networks, and they'll do whatever they can to get a massive return on that investment.

scoobydoo

We'll see if the new prices outweigh these benefits.

meadowlarkb

And they pay the premium price for such a service.

Did you guys know that if you receive text messages from anyone, then you are charged a fee for simply receiving one?

If you call your provider up, they will put a block on text messages, so you don't end up with a string of 25 cent charges. If you don't have a plan, its usually 25 cents with most carriers.

Woof.

Justinh6

a million times easier to check than the voicemail.

Really? I call up Alltel's voicemail, they request my password and it plays my message(s). I press 5 or 6 buttons when I call it. How many buttons are pushed on during a text message?

mopar_man

As a side note, because text messages and voice don't use the same channel to communicate, it is sometimes possible to send a text message when it's impossible to get a voice call through. EVDO works the same way: it uses a data-only channel to talk (hence the "DO") and heavy call traffic won't disrupt it. I had a friend use voice-over-IP-over-EVDO to place calls during the katrina/rita hurricane season when nothing else could get through.

renial

jrsmith

I don't think there is much reason to go into the technical differences, let's just say that I can receive an SMS from anyone at any time, but I could never host even the most simple web site from my phone. The technology just doesn't work that way.

One thing that they should do is make texting to people who are on the same carrier as you much cheaper.

ExtraCheese

Now lets say it all happens. Skype,Xten, Belkin develop software to run VoIP over the data channel @ 56kbps. I still have another 56kbps for data. The effective rates? .01-.02c/min assuming that you used the device only half the time of the allocated time allowed. That's vs the .03-.05 consumers get today.

If it happens the world of wireless is going to change drastically. For example if Nokia came out with a wireless version of the N770 the rush for phone upgrades die and I just software updates.

JohnMc

YodaYid

He

Sooner or later someone will figure it out and start undercutting the competition, assuming there's any competition left and we're not all customers of AT&TVerizonBellSouthCingularCorp

Pelagius

Wouldn't it be nice if I could trade a few of those unused voice minutes for other services (even if it was 10 voice minutes per text message, or whatever)?

tubby17

I'm not saying that text messages, data services, or voice plans are reasonably, rationally, or fairly priced, but this is a pretty stupid basis for complaint.

Flymaster

tvh2k

ShortbusKid

The post poses a good question, though. Is there any possible infrastructural reason a cellphone company could offer to justify the chasm between the two rates? Even my half-spurious "buying in bulk" notion wouldn't account for a 5,000% markup.

I'm guessing there's no tangible justification. I think Kornkob got it right when he said that we're paying for convenience.

TPIRman

I'm over 30- if I do 20 a month it's a lot.

missdona

doormat

Starfury

mantari

Amiga_500

There has to be a market in there somewhere for phone services like the ones attached to that firefly phone to also include a text messaging packet for an extra $5 a month.

SpiderJerusalem

Let's be honest. The most frequent users of text messages tend to be the under 18 crowd, with no sense of responsibility and often no common sense. Why waste $0.10 for little more than a sentence when you can call them for less?

FLConsumer

Barring that, it's just another way to get more money out of people.

cynon

xkaluv

People will pay a huge markup for anything convienent.

Kornkob