Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 16th Aug 2012 23:47 UTC
Internet & Networking Twitter is changing its API guidelines. Lots of new restrictions and limitations for third party clients. I'm within 140 characters.
Thread beginning with comment 531378
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: About time...
by zimbatm on Fri 17th Aug 2012 08:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: About time..."
zimbatm
Member since:
2005-08-22

You would think that, given how pretty much every American citizen over 15 years old has at least a basic cellphone, they would prefer SMS. It seems that people here are foregoing the older, more reliable (and these days, pretty much free) technology built into the phone, instead preferring a bug-ridden, spam infested web 2.0 service.


My guess is that they don't want to pay 10 cents every time to receive the SMS. That's really an absurdity of the US cell network. In Europe, only the sender pays to deliver the message

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: About time...
by darknexus on Fri 17th Aug 2012 13:21 in reply to "RE[3]: About time..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

My guess is that they don't want to pay 10 cents every time to receive the SMS. That's really an absurdity of the US cell network.

What are you talking about? Which network? We do have a few of them, you know. The only providers these days that do this are mostly small regional resellers of the major networks, i.e. they piggy-back on a major network (typically Sprint or Verizon) but provide alternative plans and charges. These piggy-backers are usually the ones that slap you with roaming charges as well. It's stupid really, as if you go with a major carrier directly you actually end up with more fair terms more often than not (how unusual is that in our corporate culture?), while the resellers make you pay more because they have to pay more in turn to use the network they're borrowing. It's not really a problem with the network though. I doubt the network cares one way or the other what the providers are charging.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: About time...
by zimbatm on Fri 17th Aug 2012 13:29 in reply to "RE[4]: About time..."
zimbatm Member since:
2005-08-22

[removed dupe]

Edited 2012-08-17 13:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: About time...
by zimbatm on Fri 17th Aug 2012 13:36 in reply to "RE[4]: About time..."
zimbatm Member since:
2005-08-22

My bad. A Canadian friend told me it was the same in the US, when I learned that he was charged 10 cent to receive SMS on Rogers. I should mention my sources.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: About time...
by fretinator on Fri 17th Aug 2012 13:44 in reply to "RE[4]: About time..."
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I have AT&T in the U.S., which qualifies as a large provider. For SMS message I have 2 choices - pay $20/month or $0.02 per message. Both choices stink. For now, I use Google Voice, but I do have reliability issues for messages coming and going (most like due to data connection, just like with twitter). No one should have to pay that much just for text messages.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: About time...
by edwdig on Fri 17th Aug 2012 20:27 in reply to "RE[4]: About time..."
edwdig Member since:
2005-08-22

Verizon charges 20 cents per text. That's why I avoid text messaging whenever possible. Especially once I got a smartphone with unlimited data. I have more ways to contact me on my phone than I can keep track, all of which are free, so text messages are the option of last resort.

Even voice calls are essentially free these days - unlimited nights, weekends, and in network calls means I rarely have any significant usage of my limited minutes.

Reply Parent Score: 3