Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 25th Mar 2012 21:28 UTC
In the News A few months ago, I wrote an article about comments, in which I said, among others things, that Twitter can never replace comments because not only is it effectively a one-to-one communication channel, Twitter messages are also far too short to foster any form of coherent conversation. Over the weekend, a silly link-bait story illustrated my point perfectly.
Thread beginning with comment 511896
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: 140 characters
by Neolander on Mon 26th Mar 2012 07:09 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: 140 characters"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

Also, SMS can send more than 140 characters (at least in Europe), I regularly do that. But then of course it does cost you "ceil(characters_count/140)*sms_cost" ;)

Yup, I know about that, since I have learned to just enable unicode, type as much as I want, and deal with the neverending warnings coming from my phones and the obligation of finding a phone plan with unlimited texts.

I just wish it wouldn't be so complicated. Talk time is typically at 30 cents per minute for local calls here, and I doubt that a single text makes nearly as much use of the underlying infrastructure as 20 seconds of voice, even if it's heavily compressed.

Edited 2012-03-26 07:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: 140 characters
by _txf_ on Mon 26th Mar 2012 08:01 in reply to "RE[5]: 140 characters"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

and I doubt that a single text makes nearly as much use of the underlying infrastructure as 20 seconds of voice, even if it's heavily compressed.


Actually it is even worse than that. A single text practically has zero cost. In fact texts use the spare capacity allocated to voice calls, so they're pure profit . The cost of the equipment is extremely low (they use the rest of the infrastructure already).

Reply Parent Score: 3