SMS and email are different. SMS costs $ per message. Email does not. In the Facebook UI, if you add a SMS user to an email thread, he will receive numerous SMSes from email users who don't realize that they're racking up his bill. Wait a minute, is that true? Do you pay for receiving text messages in the US? That does seem a little crazy from a European perspective.
Technically you can get some nominal charge per text, but most people have an 'unlimited texts' plan. It's like buying a phone and not having minutes now days
This argument would be more compelling if Apple Mail weren't so awful.
I don't know, I've always liked Apple Mail, simple and to the point. I do use MailTags though ( http://www.indev.ca/MailTags.html )... Before that, I used to use Foxmail, then Thunderbird and then Evolution and none of them have been as good as Apple Mail
I haven't used Apple Mail in at least 5 years. Last time I tried, it was adequate for one email account (which is probably what 80-90% of users have). Though it supported more, things always seemed to go weird after a while if you tried to use that. Maybe it's better now? When I last used it, it pretty much still seemed to be the NeXT Mail.app ca 1990.
SMS and email are different. SMS costs $ per message. Email does not. In the Facebook UI, if you add a SMS user to an email thread, he will receive numerous SMSes from email users who don't realize that they're racking up his bill. Wait a minute, is that true? Do you pay for receiving text messages in the US? That does seem a little crazy from a European perspective.
Most heavy users of SMS (aka teens) have messaging plans that are either unlimited or very high numbers, like 1500 per month. Usually $15-20 per month, which seems high but they generally replace actual phone talking so it works out. Also, it's funny that Apple is being brought up in this context. The iPhone treats SMS messages just like chat messages (using the iChat UI), which is exactly the "problem" being describ…
1500 SMS/month for $20 sounds like daylight robbery to me.
Here in Pakistan, we get about 8000 SMS/month for $1. So it's not unreasonable to think that SMS would take off really well.
I disagree that Apple have a low-risk strategy, remember the iPod mini? this thing was wildly successful and yet Apple killed it and replaced it with the nano. I can't think of another company that would take that kind of risk. And although it may not seem so today - launching a glass-fronted phone with a single button, was seen by many to be completely nuts.
Learning that people like small iPods and making an even smaller iPod is not risky -- that's just common sense. Touch-screen phones in almost the same configuration as the iPhone existed years before it's release. There was really nothing nuts about making improvements to that design. Even if there was no guarantee that the iPhone would be wildly successful, it was certainly not going to be a total failure.
I don't know, I think the new nano is too small. Apple did a good job with the UI-on-a-postage-stamp, but the thing is just physically too small to hold and use with one hand. If the body were a bit longer so you could hold it with your fingers and use your thumb to navigate, that would be better. IMHO.
SMS and email are different. SMS costs $ per message. Email does not. In the Facebook UI, if you add a SMS user to an email thread, he will receive numerous SMSes from email users who don't realize that they're racking up his bill. Wait a minute, is that true? Do you pay for receiving text messages in the US? That does seem a little crazy from a European perspective.
Most heavy users of SMS (aka teens) have messaging plans that are either unlimited or very high numbers, like 1500 per month. Usually $15-20 per month, which seems high but they generally replace actual phone talking so it works out. Also, it's funny that Apple is being brought up in this context. The iPhone treats SMS messages just like chat messages (using the iChat UI), which is exactly the "problem" being describ…
Just to add, Android phones have the same issue with SMS/Google talk interfaces being the same. Luckily I have an unlimited plan though.
SMS and email are different. SMS costs $ per message. Email does not. In the Facebook UI, if you add a SMS user to an email thread, he will receive numerous SMSes from email users who don't realize that they're racking up his bill. Wait a minute, is that true? Do you pay for receiving text messages in the US? That does seem a little crazy from a European perspective.
Most heavy users of SMS (aka teens) have messaging plans that are either unlimited or very high numbers, like 1500 per month. Usually $15-20 per month, which seems high but they generally replace actual phone talking so it works out. Also, it's funny that Apple is being brought up in this context. The iPhone treats SMS messages just like chat messages (using the iChat UI), which is exactly the "problem" being describ…
SMS and iChat may have the same interface, but they are not mixed in a single client. In fact, Apple does not provide an IM client. The central complaint in this article is that the same message was being communicated over email and SMS, without the sender being able to distinguish between the two in any way. I did not read this article as complaining that the interfaces for SMS and email were too similar; I read it is complaining that they were in the same client. The only complaint about the interface I saw was that it grouped all messages together, independent of the subject.
[Edited to clarify which part of the parent I was responding to]
SMS and email are different. SMS costs $ per message. Email does not. In the Facebook UI, if you add a SMS user to an email thread, he will receive numerous SMSes from email users who don't realize that they're racking up his bill. Wait a minute, is that true? Do you pay for receiving text messages in the US? That does seem a little crazy from a European perspective.
It's absolutely true - foregoing a texting plan in the US saves a few dollars every month. This is popular enough that it's impolite to assume that all recipients will appreciate text messages.
When I signed an agreement in college, I texted so infrequently that I saved money by paying for individual messages. Now that I can afford it, I still pay per message as an excuse - I can ask people to call or email without sounding rude.
Most heavy users of SMS (aka teens) have messaging plans that are either unlimited or very high numbers, like 1500 per month. Usually $15-20 per month, which seems high but they generally replace actual phone talking so it works out. Also, it's funny that Apple is being brought up in this context. The iPhone treats SMS messages just like chat messages (using the iChat UI), which is exactly the "problem" being describ…
1500 SMS/month for $20 sounds like daylight robbery to me. Here in Pakistan, we get about 8000 SMS/month for $1. So it's not unreasonable to think that SMS would take off really well.
If you are a heavy texter, there are much better plans on other carriers. For instance, Virgin Mobile has unlimited text and data and 300 minutes for $25 a month.