john on 28 Dec 2008 18:50:08 -0800

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] [OT] NYTimes article: What Carriers Arent Eager to Tell You About Texting

Its an interesting article, but I personally have no problem with rates of 
text messaging (per msg) going up even if the "cost of operation" for the 
carrier has not risen. 

To be honest, I believe that the carriers have raised per use rates in 
order to push people towards unlimited or bulk messaging plans. And its 
that migration away from per use rates that has triggered an explosive 
growth in text messaging. 

Besides, this is capitalism. Prices are set to trigger all sorts of 
behavior. Government should not be telling ATT to lower text messaging 
rates just because they can from a financial standpoint. In fact, its only 
logical that if demand for text messaging is high, then the rates should 
go up. 


>From : TuskenTower <>
To : Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List 
Subject : [PLUG] [OT] NYTimes article: What Carriers Aren?t Eager to 
Tell You About Texting 
Date : Sun, 28 Dec 2008 12:04:23 -0500
> I thought this part was interesting enough to warrant an OT topic:
> "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."
> Amul
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         -- 
> Announcements - 
> General Discussion  -- 

Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
Announcements -
General Discussion  --