TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse

Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse

DevilsPGD (ihatespam@crazyhat.net)
Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:41:55 -0600

In message <telecom24.164.6@telecom-digest.org> Colin
<colin@sutton.wow.aust.com> wrote:

> The Sydney Morning Herald reports on a challenge between 93 year old
> telegraph operator transmitting morse code to an 82 year old with a
> manual typewriter, and youngsters sending a text message. The text
> message was received 18 seconds after the message was already on
> paper.

> http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/04/14/1113251739401.html

Sure, but much of that 18 seconds was in network transmission time,
but the telegraph has a (by comparison) severely limited "network"

Let's try another test; let's send the same message to each of five
different recipients randomly selected out of a possible thousand
recipients, then travel to a randomly selected location within two
city blocks and send a new message to those five people again.

Anybody want to bet that by the time the telegraph operator gets his
system reconnected to send to the second recipient, the phone user
will have finished walking to the randomly selected location (sending
the first batch of five messages while walking?)

In message <telecom24.167.15@telecom-digest.org> Tony P.
<kd1s@nospamplease.cox.reallynospam.net> wrote:

> They've obviously not heard of T9 mode in text messaging. The biggest
> issue I have with texting is that the keypad is too damned small.

How large a phone are you willing to carry?

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Thomas A. Horsley: "Re: Congress Aims to Thwart Identity Theft"
Go to Previous message: curious@nospam.com: "Can I Substitute a NiMH Battery for NiCd in a Cordless Phone?"
May be in reply to: Colin: "Texting is Slower Than Morse"
Next in thread: Tony P.: "Re: Texting is Slower Than Morse"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page