Dec
29
Posted (Van Santos) in Technology on December-29-2008

You knew it, I knew it… but now wired.com is coming out and providing information to remind us of the truth – text costs the carriers next nothing to send.  Actually, the main article is based off of a piece in the New York Times.

The lucrative nature of that revenue increase cannot be appreciated without doing something that T-Mobile chose not to do, which is to talk about whether its costs rose as the industry’s messaging volume grew tenfold. Mr. Kohl’s letter of inquiry noted that “text messaging files are very small, as the size of text messages are generally limited to 160 characters per message, and therefore cost carriers very little to transmit.”

 

A better description might be “cost carriers very, very, very little to transmit.”

 

A text message initially travels wirelessly from a handset to the closest base-station tower and is then transferred through wired links to the digital pipes of the telephone network, and then, near its destination, converted back into a wireless signal to traverse the final leg, from tower to handset. In the wired portion of its journey, a file of such infinitesimal size is inconsequential. Srinivasan Keshav, a professor of computer science at the University of Waterloo, in Ontario, said: “Messages are small. Even though a trillion seems like a lot to carry, it isn’t.”

And why is the text limited to 160 characters?  

Perhaps the costs for the wireless portion at either end are high — spectrum is finite, after all, and carriers pay dearly for the rights to use it. But text messages are not just tiny; they are also free riders, tucked into what’s called a control channel, space reserved for operation of the wireless network.

 

That’s why a message is so limited in length: it must not exceed the length of the message used for internal communication between tower and handset to set up a call. The channel uses space whether or not a text message is inserted.

 

So, the providers have little to no cost for sending texts because they limit the size yet they charge roughly .10 to .20 per text for the average person.  

Hey, it’s capitalism and we pay for it….I’m not complaining, just point out that we are totally getting ripped.

UPDATE – Arstechnica also talks about this topic



 
Dec
01
Posted (Van Santos) in Technology on December-1-2008

Aware the device in question has been on the market in Asia and Europe for almost a half a year, I find it interesting the device hasn’t made it to the U.S. shores on any major scale.  Samsung used a triband 3G chip set, rendering the phone useless on American networks but I have to wonder why.

Look at the features this thing has to offer:

  • 7.2Mbps HSDPA 2100
  • 5 megapixel autofocus camera
  • 3.2-inch screen
  • WiFi
  • 8 or 16GB of Flash with microSD expansion

And yes, it looks like an iPhone too (hmmm… by chance?)  While the device is running Windows Mobile, it seems like it could have been a winner.

On another note, why do mobile OS developers feel the need to cover every inch of usable space on the screen?  Less is more!