Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Peter M, Dec 29, 2008.

  1. Peter  M

    Peter M Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. Peter  M

    peterwn Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    > http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...


    Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.

    In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    companies to carry it by other means.
    peterwn, Dec 30, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Peter  M

    oneofus Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    peterwn wrote:
    > On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...

    >
    > Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    > available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    > make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >
    > In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    > traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    > companies to carry it by other means.
    >

    No, its not possible for the traffic to "swamp the channel" the channel
    is there anyway whether it has text or not.
    RTAFFS
    oneofus, Dec 30, 2008
    #3
  4. Peter  M

    Squiggle Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    Puddle wrote:
    > peterwn wrote:
    >> On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...

    >>
    >> Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    >> available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    >> make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >>
    >> In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    >> traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    >> companies to carry it by other means.
    >>

    >
    > I don't think anyone is asking them to charge nothing for this but 20
    > cents for 160 chrs seems excessive, but hey, if you can get away with it
    > why not.


    How many users pay that? Vodafone does 2000 texts for $10 (5c /text)
    within the vodafone network, and telecom does 500 or 1000 to any network.
    Only if you very rarely use text messages would you be paying that much.

    Telling whhich numbers are within which network is becoming a pain in
    the ass, if vodafone doesn't offer a decent all networks bulk rate i'll
    be changing to telecom when they go GSM or whatever the standard is
    called. That was originally supposed to have happened already, but it
    looks like June next year now.
    Squiggle, Dec 30, 2008
    #4
  5. Peter  M

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    Somewhere on teh intarwebs "Squiggle" typed:
    > Puddle wrote:
    >> peterwn wrote:
    >>> On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >>>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...
    >>>
    >>> Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    >>> available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    >>> make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >>>
    >>> In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    >>> traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    >>> companies to carry it by other means.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I don't think anyone is asking them to charge nothing for this but 20
    >> cents for 160 chrs seems excessive, but hey, if you can get away
    >> with it why not.

    >
    > How many users pay that?


    <raises hand>

    > Vodafone does 2000 texts for $10 (5c /text)
    > within the vodafone network, and telecom does 500 or 1000 to any
    > network. Only if you very rarely use text messages would you be
    > paying that much.


    That's me. Maybe 5 texts a week, sometimes more, sometimes less.
    --
    Shaun.

    > Telling whhich numbers are within which network is becoming a pain in
    > the ass, if vodafone doesn't offer a decent all networks bulk rate
    > i'll be changing to telecom when they go GSM or whatever the standard
    > is called. That was originally supposed to have happened already, but
    > it looks like June next year now.
    ~misfit~, Dec 30, 2008
    #5
  6. Peter  M

    Richard Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    Squiggle wrote:
    > Puddle wrote:
    >> peterwn wrote:
    >>> On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >>>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...
    >>> Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    >>> available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    >>> make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >>>
    >>> In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    >>> traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    >>> companies to carry it by other means.
    >>>

    >> I don't think anyone is asking them to charge nothing for this but 20
    >> cents for 160 chrs seems excessive, but hey, if you can get away with it
    >> why not.

    >
    > How many users pay that? Vodafone does 2000 texts for $10 (5c /text)
    > within the vodafone network, and telecom does 500 or 1000 to any network.
    > Only if you very rarely use text messages would you be paying that much.
    >
    > Telling whhich numbers are within which network is becoming a pain in
    > the ass, if vodafone doesn't offer a decent all networks bulk rate i'll
    > be changing to telecom when they go GSM or whatever the standard is
    > called. That was originally supposed to have happened already, but it
    > looks like June next year now.


    I have gotten to the end of the months with 499 remaining under $10 text
    on one of my telecom ones, all 500 on the other and have sent about 3 on
    my vodafone to idiot friends that dont answer when called.
    Richard, Dec 30, 2008
    #6
  7. Peter  M

    Richard Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    oneofus wrote:
    > peterwn wrote:
    >> On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...

    >>
    >> Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    >> available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    >> make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >>
    >> In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    >> traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    >> companies to carry it by other means.
    >>

    > No, its not possible for the traffic to "swamp the channel" the channel
    > is there anyway whether it has text or not.
    > RTAFFS


    The idea of a control channel is largly depreciated with the end of
    analog and TDMA based networks which have many channels.

    It will still choke up and get delayed behind the important stuff on the
    channel like setting up data and voice calls.
    Richard, Dec 30, 2008
    #7
  8. Peter  M

    oneofus Guest

    Re: Cell phone Text users are being ripped off.

    Richard wrote:
    > oneofus wrote:
    >> peterwn wrote:
    >>> On Dec 30, 10:32 am, Peter M <> wrote:
    >>>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/08/12/29/the-truth-behind-the-cost-of...
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Why should there be any obligation for cell phone companies to make
    >>> available spare 'control channel' capacity at nil cost. If they can
    >>> make revenue on it, that is a fair bonus for their shareholders.
    >>>
    >>> In any case if the companies charged nil for this capacity, ithe
    >>> traffic offered would in due course swamp the channel requiring the
    >>> companies to carry it by other means.
    >>>

    >> No, its not possible for the traffic to "swamp the channel" the
    >> channel is there anyway whether it has text or not.
    >> RTAFFS

    >
    > The idea of a control channel is largly depreciated with the end of
    > analog and TDMA based networks which have many channels.
    >
    > It will still choke up and get delayed behind the important stuff on the
    > channel like setting up data and voice calls.


    It will always be a trivial amount of data, and until gsm disappears
    completely its part of the architecture.
    oneofus, Dec 30, 2008
    #8
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BigHock

    Netflix Ripped Me Off

    BigHock, Nov 18, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    478
  2. sensible

    Ripped Off?

    sensible, Nov 5, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    659
  3. pavan prabhat
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    512
    pavan prabhat
    May 24, 2007
  4. CSE
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    521
    ~misfit~
    Apr 11, 2005
  5. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,250
Loading...

Share This Page