Txt Msgs
Text messages: in England everyone sees them as a great thing. U can evn abbrevi8 thm 2 lk cl 4 ur m8s.
But Americans just don't send them. And do you know why? Because it costs money to receive them. A whole dime (that's 10 cents for the uninitiated) to some people. Which is clearly absurd. The US phone system doesn't distinguish between landlines and mobiles, so it makes a kind-of sense that on a mobile phone you have to pay to receive calls, because the person making the call won't be paying any extra. But to pay to receive a text? Someone has already paid to send it... what is going on?
The benefit of this to me is that prepaid phonecards don't distinguish between landlines and mobiles in England, and I can call a British mobile for 4c a minute. Which is less than if I was just down the road.
posted by Claire @ 1:49 pm
7 comments
7 Comments:
And it's clearly open to abuse. What if someone has a phone contract where you can send large numbers of free text messages?
There's nothing to stop them sending "Pay up, btch" hundreds of times to someone they don't like. I know I would.
It was much better when texts were free. That was the case when mobiles were first becoming popular around '98. Do you remember? Of course, I never had a mobile (or 'cell-phone' in the US perversion) back then.
Hi Claire!
They were really free? If you'd had a contract back then and just kept renewing it would it still be free?
But if you'd done that, you'd currently own a phone as big as a brick...
What if it was a carbon nano-brick? That's what they are making houses out of these days.
Claire, I don't understand your text abbreviations. What doesn `lk cl' mean?
Post a Comment
<< Home