Slashdot Mirror


Sore Thumbs and Texting

Ant writes "ABC News reports that text messaging, once seen as a way to send a short message without running up the expense of a cellular telephone/cell phone call, has become so popular that it poses its own public health problem: sore thumbs. This comes from a survey and warning put out by Virgin Mobile, one of the largest cellular service providers in Great Britain. Virgin reports that 93 million text messages are sent every day in the United Kingdom (U.K.). One estimate for the United States (U.S.), whose population is five times as large, is 700 million text messages a year. "

170 comments

  1. Nintendo thumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I used to have this problem all the time in the 80's after too much Nintendo.

    1. Re:Nintendo thumb by XenoRyet · · Score: 1
      Exactly, no one even knew the word "ergonomic" back in those days. These texters have it easy...

      Why I had to walk two miles, barefoot, through the snow to get to my controller, and it was uphill, both ways...

      --
      If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
    2. Re:Nintendo thumb by OSUJamesC · · Score: 1

      I still call this affliction "Nintendo Thumb" no matter what it comes from. Great to see I'm not the only one.

      Ways a person could get a case of "Nintendo Thumb"
      1. Up-Up-Down-Down-Left-Right-Left-Right-A-B-A-B-Star t
      2. Flip Book Sketch Artist
      3. Apparently Texting
      4. Street Fighter
      5. Spin Tricks on Any Tony Hawk Game
      6. Playing a Bass Guitar

    3. Re:Nintendo thumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Medically, it's probably "Nin-tendonitis".

  2. Oh come on now. by Eightyford · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If my thumbs could survive Dr. Mario, Excite Bike, Punch Out and River City Ransom; I'm pretty sure that they can handle a few LOLs, BRBs and WTFs.

    1. Re:Oh come on now. by TheBogie · · Score: 0

      These kids nowadays never played those games, they were before their time. Thus, the weak thumbs. Maybe all those hours of 'Tendo actually did some good for me!

    2. Re:Oh come on now. by Nos. · · Score: 1

      Heh, first thing that jumped to my mind was Asteroids on the Atari. I remember beating it by wrapping the score... I think at 100,000 points. And those old atari joysticks didn't have thumb friendly buttons either.

    3. Re:Oh come on now. by fantom2000 · · Score: 1

      It's not people like you complaining though. It's the millions of people who never played Nintendo or the like suddeny having to use their thumbs.

    4. Re:Oh come on now. by b00stA · · Score: 0

      I don't have any thumbs, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Stop making that big face!
    5. Re:Oh come on now. by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      Atari joysticks were a little different. You moved the stick with your whole hand and pressed the button with your left thumb. You could switch to a finger for the button if your thumb got tired. The NES gamepad was one of the first to use all thumbs, and it was very unergonomic, all square edges.

    6. Re:Oh come on now. by woolio · · Score: 1

      Lucky you! Nobody can claim "you're all thumbs!"

    7. Re:Oh come on now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this different from the sore-hands lonely single guys get when alone on the Internet?

  3. First litigation? Someone else to blame? by us7892 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Has anyone sued the phone maker, text message service, or anyone else they can think of getting money from? Seems like that's the next story we'll see following all thse people with sore thumbs who need someone other than themselves to blame.

    It's just a poll, actually. So they have sore thumbs...big deal.

  4. Arghh bad use of statistics by ironwill96 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hate it when people place two statistics side by side as if they are comparable when they really aren't. It is misleading to say U.K. does "73 million messages per day" while U.S. estimate is "700 million per year". The mind tends to think, wow, the U.S. must text message a whole lot more! When, of course, this is not the case. Since, of course, one is a per year statistic and the other a per day statistic.

    /rant off

    --
    "To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson
    1. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by boldtbanan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that means the UK averages ~ 93 million * 365 days = 33.945 BILLION text messages per year, which is almost 50 times the estimate for the US.

    2. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Karem+Lore · · Score: 1
      I hate it when people miss-quote another author's text. It says 93 Million a day in the UK NOT 73 million a day! The mind tends to think, wow, the author (probably US based), must not be able to remember a figure between reading the article and clicking reply :P

      karem

      --
      When all is said and done, nothing changes...
    3. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 3, Informative

      well, 93 million a day. i apologise for being petty.

      texting (sending an sms message) is much more popular in the UK and europe in general than it is in the states, mainly because initially the infrastructure was terrible, a very large proportion of messages were lost when sending abroad or to other networks, this has been resolved but people in general do not have the same sense of trust in the technology as they do in other countries.

      imagine that in your first year of emailing more than half of your emails did not get through. this is looking through the eyes of a consumer, say you sent your first email in '98 and it didnt go through, what would you think of email? you might avoid it for a while, the same seems to have happened with sms in the states.

      i agree entirely with your point as to the misleading figures, its appalling that someone would write that, especially considering the fact that it could be much more dramatic with the US population sending 700 million a year and the uk upwards of 30 BILLION.

      and another point, virgin is nowhere near being a leading UK mobile phone company, the big four are 02, Vodafone, Orange and T-Mobile, with 3 doing a very good job of catching up (3 is an exclusively 3g network, i am not sure who they are owned by).

    4. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Martz · · Score: 1

      if I remember correctly "3" is the 3G brand for O2 (British Telecom)

      What silly branding anyway!

      I think O2 were trying to get the same minimalist style as Orange, and to chuck in a random fact about Orange... they have never depicted a mobile phone in any of their TV adverts, only a "sold a lifestyle".

    5. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by ironwill96 · · Score: 1

      Whoops, bad typo there, sorry. I know typos aren't allowed on /. and have NEVER ever occurred here before :-). And yes, I did understand what they meant - but if they are trying to show the U.S. is doing way less text messaging, why not just say so instead of using a statistic right after another one when they aren't directly comparable. Its roughly as useful as me saying "50 oranges were sold last week in the U.S. while 50 apples were sold in the U.K. - the fruit market is indeed doing well!". Ok, so maybe not to that extent but it is still a mis-usage of statistics. At least do the multiplication for us to make the stats comparable.

      --
      "To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson
    6. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by TheOneTrueRhys · · Score: 1

      Nope, "3" is the 3G network of Hutchinson 3G UK Limited, which is 100% owned by Hutchinson Whampoa. Nothing to do with any of the UK big four (voda, orange, o2 and t-mobile).

    7. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by 2sheds · · Score: 1

      No, 3 is Hutchinson Telecom, who were also the original people behind Rabbit (remember them?) and Orange (which is now France Telecom). Though they use O2 as a fallback network outside of the range of their 3g coverage, it's nothing more than a business relationship with them.

      --

      Absit Invidia
    8. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by RonnyJ · · Score: 1

      I'll try to make these figures somewhat comparable.

      Firstly, let's convert the US figure to 'per day':

            700 million / 365 = ~2million sent per day in the US.

      If you then factor in the population difference:

            2 million / 5 = ~0.4million per day for a comparable population size.

      Work out the ratio:

            93million / 0.4million = ~230

      Hence, based on those estimated figures, texting in the UK is approximately 230 times as popular as in the US.

    9. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Brushfireb · · Score: 2, Informative

      NOt only that, the statistics are WRONG.

      4 billion text messages per month are sent in the US. This is according to the Mobile Messaging Alliance, a industry group of carriers. www.mma.com

      Maybe they ment 700 Million per year for Virgin? Thats about right.

    10. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Brushfireb · · Score: 1

      correction http://www.mmaglobal.com/ Sorry

    11. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by dwachs · · Score: 1

      Actually, according to the CTIA (the "official" wireless association), over 7 billion messages were sent in June of last year. It is now over 8 billion a month (according to some parenthetical remarks) meaning we're approaching 100billion annually in the US alone a year! You can get the CTIA info here:

      http://files.ctia.org/pdf/Wireless_Quick_Facts_Oct ober_05.pdf

      By the way, i run a mobile tech company, if you're interested in learning more: http://www.cellitmarketing.com/

    12. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Vancorps · · Score: 1
      The thing I'm curious about is where the 700 million came from. Sounds like it has to be an old statistic.

      Cell Statistics for the USA
      Roughly 50 messages per month on average which is a low number in my head.


      Subscriber Stats
      Roughly 120 million americans have phones. Sounds like that number has got to be way out of date. I know I personally send over 200 messages a month. Routinely 300 and I'm not considered a heavy texter. Think of all those blackberry users out there.


      I could be way off and this week may have fried my brain but I'm pretty sure the USA isn't THAT far behind the UK although I would believe they use it more heavily since it has been reliable for longer than in the U.S. I remember texting as soon as 3 years ago. It was a best guess as to whether or not my message would be received by someone with another provider. Annoyed the hell out of me being in the southwest and northeast of the U.S.
    13. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by horatio · · Score: 1

      I hate it when people place two statistics side by side as if they are comparable

      I personally avoid text messages because I get charged (US, Cingular) for every text message I send or receive. (Being a socio-phobic geek, not that I really have a g/f or a bunch of people I would want sending me inane messages...) I also get charged by the kilobyte for data, be that on the phone itself or (when it works) using the phone as a modem for my laptop. I paid for the 5MB data plan one month - a waste. A simple SSH session was plagued by latency, compression or no. With windoze, you have very little control over what bits of the system decide to contact the 'net (certain processes cannot be firewalled or things like DNS stop working also), so that eats away at your small quota as well.

      Yes, there are "data" plans, but they tend to be stupidly expensive for what you get - 10$ for 5MB/month or 20$/month for "unlimited" usage in addition to the 45$/month I'm already paying for the voice service. (Verizon was or is 70$/mo and you are "required" to purchase a PCMCIA card, as well as sign another contract.) There are also "text messaging" plans which for like 5$/month would give me 100 messages or something like that. (I can't find "unlimited text messaging" on cingular's site) I'm not paying for it. They already nickel-and-dime (and 1.75$ for 411 calls) me nearly to death. This isn't much different, IMO, than the state of broadband. They get decent service and bandwidth overseas for a reasonable price, or so I read. We get jack customer service, lousy speeds (or 500$/month for a T1 and an SLA) and the prices continue to go up.

      Speaking OT for a moment, where are the broadband connections that aren't a) way overpriced or b) so damn asymmetric that I could walk the 15mi to my university office faster than I can move files (14 hours to upload 2GB of data) or wait for my X session to catch up? Where are the providers that let you take some of that downstream bandwidth and convert it into upstream for a slightly more symmetric link?

      --
      There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.
    14. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by yoyhed · · Score: 1
      I hate it when people miss-quote another author's text. It says 93 Million a day in the UK NOT 73 million a day! The mind tends to think, wow, the author (probably US based), must not be able to remember a figure between reading the article and clicking reply :P

      I hate it when people misspell words in the English language. It's misquote, NOT miss-quote! The mind tends to think, wow, the author (probably a dumbass), must not have been able to remember a spelling between learning a word and using it in an inflammatory post on Slashdot!

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
    15. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 1
      Nope, "3" is the 3G network of Hutchinson 3G UK Limited, which is 100% owned by Hutchinson Whampoa. Nothing to do with any of the UK big four (voda, orange, o2 and t-mobile).
      actually, no.
      --
      TIAEAE!
    16. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Rufty · · Score: 1

      OK, so I look at that and think "WOW - about 2 orders of magnitude more per head population!!!" Does this mean: a) I need a life. b) You've got a fine arts degree. c) Both!

      --
      Red to red, black to black. Switch it on, but stand well back.
    17. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by dwater · · Score: 1

      I'd bet a lot of these are email or pages though - ie not typed into the phone with thumbs...

      --
      Max.
    18. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by LogicX · · Score: 1

      What kind of geek are you?

      Read forums, learn where not to get screwed by your cell provider.
      ex:
      I pay $10/mo for Power Vision with Sprint, I get unlimited high speed internet, and I can tether my laptop through the phone.

      To listen to a providers shit about required this or required that is BS -- just talk to a sales rep, call customers service, and you'll eventually get what you want.

      Finally, regarding your 411 Fees: 1-800-free-411

      --
      May this post be indexed by spiders, and archived for all to see as my Internet epitaph.
    19. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      where are the broadband connections that aren't a) way overpriced or b) so damn asymmetric that I could walk the 15mi to my university office faster than I can move files (14 hours to upload 2GB of data) or wait for my X session to catch up? Where are the providers that let you take some of that downstream bandwidth and convert it into upstream for a slightly more symmetric link?

      Remember, to the telcos and media corporations you are a consumer. Your internet connection is provided for you to passively consume the "content" they produce. Only other corporations have any legitimate business sending data; that's why telcos provide business plans for 4x more $$$ per month. It's a sort of barrier to entry that ensures that only profitable organizations have access to the end-to-end internet.

      In a free market this wouldn't be possible. Instead, we have a symbiotic relationship between monopolistic telcos and a corrupt government that results in technological stagnation. Since 2000, the US has fallen from first in the world in broadband penetration to 19th.

    20. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by AGMW · · Score: 1
      Roughly 120 million americans have phones

      Of course, certainly in the European Parliament, many people have two phones and artificially raise the No of texts sent by having to text themselves, so the right hand knows what the left hand is doing!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    21. Re:Arghh bad use of statistics by Alioth · · Score: 1

      A possible reason for the lower amount of texting in the US is that texting across networks is pretty unreliable. Texting between GSM providers in the US seems to work OK, but I have never yet successfully sent a text from my GSM phone to someone on one of these odd non-GSM systems they have in the US. In Britain and Europe, texting just works regardless of provider.

  5. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You may find this hard to believe, but in the UK there are more than 5 days in a year. Perhaps that's the source of the error?

  6. Doctor, doctor by GoddessOfDeath · · Score: 1

    from TFA: "If your forearms and hands start to hurt, stop." Seems to be similar to that old doctor, doctor joke "doctor, doctor, it hurts when I do this" "well stop doing it then". Common sense, really. Who doesn't know this?

  7. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by TheRealCoreyHaim · · Score: 1

    I think it's supposed to be 700 billion, if not, only roughly 2 million text messages are being sent per day in america, which doesn't seem right.

  8. What? by hal2814 · · Score: 4, Informative

    "once seen as a way to send a short message without running up the expense of a cellular telephone/cell phone call"

    My text messages cost 10 cents per message. I'd have to talk for over 2 minutes to cost more than a text message and I can sure relay more information in that two minutes than most can in a text message and even get feedback during that time. Text messages have their uses but being cheaper isn't one of them. Besides, I thought the point of text messages was to annoy others trying to watch a movie in a movie theater.

    1. Re:What? by GoddessOfDeath · · Score: 3, Informative

      In New Zealand text messages cost 20 cents, and one minute of calling costs (off peak) 49 cents or (on peak) $1.29. You must live in one of the lucky countries where calling is cheaper than texting. Plus there are many plans which give huge numbers of "free" texts, and not many "free" minutes.

    2. Re:What? by mcho · · Score: 1

      True that.

      But with a generation growing up with quick, instant messages and text messaging is an extension of that. Sure it may be quicker to just call somone, but new habits are hard to break. Text messaging is the mobile instant messenger.

      Double true that. (Heck, I made a business out of text messaging.)

    3. Re:What? by garcia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My text messages cost 10 cents per message. I'd have to talk for over 2 minutes to cost more than a text message and I can sure relay more information in that two minutes than most can in a text message and even get feedback during that time. Text messages have their uses but being cheaper isn't one of them. Besides, I thought the point of text messages was to annoy others trying to watch a movie in a movie theater.

      That's you. T-mobile's Sidekick data plan includes unlimited SMS. Because I use SMS so frequently my wife, my father, and several friends have also picked up unlimited SMS plans to be able to contact me.

      I wish that *more* people relied on SMS rather than making a phone call. It would keep the noise down in public places that people shouldn't be on the phone in, such as mass transit.

    4. Re:What? by m.e.l.l.e.n.t.i.n.e · · Score: 1

      See... That - among other reasons - is why I don't live in New Zealand.

      --

      Producer: NEXT!!
      Ralph Wiggum: Chicken necks
    5. Re:What? by pimpimpim · · Score: 1
      you've never been in a train where someone was sending and recieving unlimited sms-messages all trip long, did you? A lot of people have "sms-recieved" beeps turned on, hearing a stupid "beep-beep" every 30 seconds is not a joy, I can tell you that.

      On another note, I and most of my friends have simple prepaid phones (with high costs/minute), and sending text messages is also there often really a cheaper way to talk to others. Wouldn't mind getting a unlimited sms account as you have, though ;)

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    6. Re:What? by RonnyJ · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that this is mainly talking about the UK (where SMS messaging is far more popular than in the US).

      For example, on a 'Pay As You Go' UK phone, it might cost around 10p for a text message, and 40p per minute or more for a cross-network call. It's possible to certainly phone up and speak your message for the same price, but when you factor in added time for general greetings, phone calls can easily end up a lot longer and a lot more expensive than a SMS would have been.

    7. Re:What? by Frogbert · · Score: 1

      Well you see that is where the US is different, I live in Australia and it costs me about $1 per minute to talk on the phone, whereas text messages are 20 cents after my 300 or so free messages.

    8. Re:What? by JonathanR · · Score: 1

      As long as they have their fucking keypad tone turned off.

    9. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's you. T-mobile's Sidekick data plan includes unlimited SMS."

      SMS may make sense on a Sidekick, which appears to have a larger screen and keyboard, among other features. If you're using a normal cellphone it's not clear why you'd ever want to SMS. Typing "hi there", for example, becomes: 4-4-[wait 1 second]-4-4-4-0-8-4-4-3-3-7-7-7-3-3. It takes forever, and is extremely unnatural as you have to hunt and peck for which key to press. And my guess is that data devices (like a Sidekick, Treo, Blackberry, whatever) are relatively uncommon compared to standard bar or flip phones.

      A number of commenters from outside the US have mentioned that phone calls are very expensive (40p/minute in the UK, $1/minute in Australia or New Zealand), whereas calls in the US are typically $0.05-$0.15/minute. Given that we generally feel like we're getting ripped off by the telecom companies here in the US - what gives? Why are other countries so expensive?

    10. Re:What? by dkktav · · Score: 1
      It seems to be the general opinion of foreigners who visit the US that we get better deals here then they do at home. But they're also *different* deals.

      I never use my T-Mobile "anytime" minutes, and have unlimited calls nights, weekends, and at any time between members of my family plan. But SMS messages are ridiculously expensive considering how little it costs for T-Mobile to send them (especially between members of my family plan, because then I get double-billed).

      Still, I've used them heavily for these reasons:

      1. I use my cell phone as a "text pager" for work.
      2. I can do texting (with the sounds turned off) without bothering people much.
      3. I can send text messages without disrupting the recipient.
      4. I can type text messages without even looking at the screen. Yes, on a several-year old, tiny flip-phone (Ericsson t-39).
    11. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So have you expressed your concerns to the mass transit as one of their customers, and pointed out to them that in some countries there are signs about the rudeness of talking on the phone while in the confined area of a mass transit...

    12. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That's incredible... when I was with T-Mobile USA and using the phone much, I had a $40/month plan that gave 1000 minutes plus free nights/weekends. Add $20/month for unlimited GPRS data (internet). And SMS still cost more per message unless I bought some SMS package. But, since nobody uses them much, I never saw the point. Chicken and egg.

      This is also with no roaming and no long-distance anywhere in the US, for $0.04 per minute. The cost for overages was higher, something like $0.20 per minute as I recall, but the name of the game is to choose the appropriate service tier for your usage and not go over too much. I eventually downgraded my subscription because the next cheaper tier plus overage charges was less on average than the $40/month when I stopped using the mobile for multi-hour conference calls.

      The idea of $1 per minute for voice is what I consider an incredible rip-off even for international roaming, and which leads me to get pre-paid SIMs when I travel overseas. I will note, a pre-paid US SIM costs about $0.35 per minute until you use it a lot and the tarrif changes a little bit in your favor. The post-paid accounts are much more affordable for frequent use, however.

      The other side of this nobody outside the US seems to understand why we pay for incoming air-time. This is because a land-line phone making a "local" call to a cell phone (same area code and exchange numbers) would not be metered and it is the mobile user who pays for the privelege of using the wireless network. Similarly, a long-distance land line call to the mobile number does not get charged more than calling a land line in the same area/exchange. The cost for mobility goes to the mobile user, which seems fair to us.

    13. Re:What? by AGMW · · Score: 1
      But SMS messages are ridiculously expensive considering how little it costs for T-Mobile to send them

      As I understand it, SMS's (AKA "text" messages) are actually free to send as far as the Telco's are concerned. They use spare bandwidth on the network, and whilst it must have cost "something" to setup the capability to utilise this spare bandwidth, now it is all setup, it's a cash-cow for the Telco's.

      Also, because it only uses "spare" bandwidth, delivery within any specific timeframe is not guarenteed.

      What I dislike most about text messages is that you feel obliged to reply when you get one! If someone want's to talk to you, they could simply call and we can chat!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    14. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No question, for what SMSs are, they are far too expensive. I don't think anyone uses SMS because they are cheaper than calling, it's because for many purposes they are better than calling.

      The truth is that for some kinds of information they are far more efficient than talking for two minutes. First of all, they do not implicitly assume that the person receiving them has nothing better to do that to receive calls from you. Secondly, it gives them a record of the information you sent, without them having to say "wait a minute while I get a pen", which is going to eat up a lot of your 2 minutes as well as cause them unnecessary inconvenience. Thirdly, there is a lot of social flotsam that you have to incorporate when you are talking to someone, that you don't have to worry about in a text message. For some people, phoning them and not having a 5 minute conversation about their health and their family and their most recent trials at work before you invited them to meet you at 222b Baker Street for a party at 7.45, and if you're late, call Fred on this number 0044230123452. would be positively rude. The point is that sometimes you want to be impersonal, it can be a more efficient way to communicate, and using an asynchronous message medium is just simply more polite.

    15. Re:What? by Beatbyte · · Score: 1

      1) My text messaging is free
      2) I'd rather not get feedback on things I text... it's just like an e-mail, send complete thoughts and once you're done "talking", you get a complete response
      3) Multitasking is much easier when text messaging than it is when talking on the phone (for the reason of #2, you don't have to be prepared to respond to feedback immediately)

    16. Re:What? by dkktav · · Score: 1
      What I dislike most about text messages is that you feel obliged to reply when you get one! If someone want's to talk to you, they could simply call and we can chat!

      Uh, not when I'm in a meeting. Not when I have company. Not when I'm driving. Not when I'm in bed. Etc.

  9. once seen by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

    but now far from it. The ammount of money cellphone carriers make off of the service now is shamefull in relation to normal phonecalls.

    --

    "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    1. Re:once seen by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I worked out a couple of years ago that the amount I was being charged for SMS worked out to about £500/MB. I now tend to use XMPP relayed via my 'phone, which costs a whole lot less even counting the huge overhead involved with XMPP (I can have several minutes of chatting for the cost of a single SMS).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  10. but seriously... by HolyCrapSCOsux · · Score: 1

    I Get way sorer thumbs playing Gran Tourismo...

    --
    0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
  11. Shall I look out for by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    co.'s proposing a tiered text-messaging protocol on account of congestion in their pipes?

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  12. Actually.... by everphilski · · Score: 1

    Also got units wrong, UK does 93 millon a day, whereas they say the US does 700 million a year... that means its incredibly *unpopular* in the US (unless it is a typo... from context, it probably is)

  13. This just in... by B00yah · · Score: 2, Informative

    waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    seriously. That's like complaining about your legs hurting after walking 200ft, because you usually just do laps from the fridge to the couch. You can avoid soreness in your thumbs the same way you avoid soreness everywhere else: stretch your muscles (try shadow thumb wrestling), repetition, and don't go till it hurts. You know when you're getting near that point, just stop there.

    IANAPFE (I am not a physical fitness expert), but I do play a lot of video games, A LOT of video games, and between that and the literally hundreds of thousands of characters I type on a daily basis for work, I've learned how to deal with digit soreness.

  14. There's HOPE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sociologists and marketers say the messages also became an outlet for shy young people, a way, for instance, for a nervous teenage guy to strike up a conversation with a girl he admired.

    Shy Slashdotters rejoce! No need to leave the basement!!!
  15. Americans are wealthier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think Americans have more money, and so don't need to send "txts". They can make full voice calls.

    This is a bit like asking "why don't americans get the bus" or "why don't americans watch so much black and white tv"?

    1. Re:Americans are wealthier by narcc · · Score: 1

      Wealth has little to do with it -- In the US, at least in my area, most carriers charge ten cents per text!

      I pay $55 a month for my cell phone. I don't pay per minute (e.g. I can talk all day long, all month long) and I don't pay for long distance (I can talk to someone clear across the country all day long)

      Texting would COST ME MORE MONEY. No thanks.

    2. Re:Americans are wealthier by monktus · · Score: 1

      This may be over simplifying things a little, but this post reminds me a little of Americans complaining about gasolene prices (which are less than half as much as the UK IIRC).

      I think that anyone in the UK who could get your talk plan would be pretty happy. 10 cents a text? That's half of the UK average price, and you get as many free calls as you want which is unheard of here (unless it's to landlines, and usually off peak).

      Since Europeans tend to send more text messages, most people do have some included in their monthly tariff but I get the feeling that most of my fellow countrymen would react to your post as if you had written this:

      Wealth has little to do with it -- In the US, at least in my area, most carriers charge a dollar per litre of gas!

      --
      Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel."
  16. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Duh, they said 700M a YEAR. Hmmm, seems either the article is fuzzy, or they do a LOT of text messaging over there!

  17. Umm, did someone forget about... by benjjj · · Score: 2, Informative

    video game controllers? Sorry, but there's no way texting is as rough on the thumbs as bingeing on Gran Turismo. maybe for a few 1337 texters who text a couple hundred wpm, but they need to stop with the "texting = public health crisis" line. there's no way it's true.

  18. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone bothered to read TF post, it says that the UK sends 93 million texts PER DAY. We only send 700 million in a YEAR. So unfortunately, this is no conspiracy against America, it would seem that the UK would be the text whores.

    Sometimes units are specified for a reason.

  19. Other appendages? by Nuclear+Elephant · · Score: 1

    so popular that it poses its own public health problem: sore thumbs

    As opposed to other bodily appendages that have also grown sore because of the Internet?

  20. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by CyberBill · · Score: 1

    In that case, shouldnt it be 93 million * 5 * 365 = ~170 billion text messages a year?

    What, are they trying to say that Americans dont have the text messaging skills that they do??

    --
    -Bill
  21. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1

    Read the slashdot editor's writeup again. He's comparing 93 million messages per day versus 700 million messages per year.

    That's not twice as often. It's less than 1/100th as often.

  22. Wussies. by UseTheSource · · Score: 1

    I type on my RIM 950 all day, sometimes even when driving, with no ill effects. It's all about conditioning.

    --
    "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
    "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
  23. Maybe it's just me, but... by RodgerTheGreat · · Score: 2, Informative
    I'm really trying to figure out how "sore thumbs" counts as a "public health problem".

    By my definition, a health problem is something that you need medication or a doctor's appointment for. If your thumbs hurt you, taking a break from texting is all you really need. An alternative would be to try holding the phone in your hand a different way- after all, a repetitive strain injury is a repetitive strain injury.

    --
    I'm a signature virus. Copy me to your signature so I can replicate, and introduce your own mutations so I can evolve.
    1. Re:Maybe it's just me, but... by 404notfound · · Score: 1

      I'm really trying to figure out how "sore thumbs" counts as a "public health problem".

      Seriously. Guitar players actually develop calluses because of having to press the strings, and none of the pain associated with learning to play guitar has been considered an issue. This Is Not News.

    2. Re:Maybe it's just me, but... by karnal · · Score: 1

      But you don't really get calluses (sp?) from just sitting there and pounding on the bare fretboard. You get them from smashing the strings and sliding on the strings...

      Minor difference, but I never got a callous from playing NES, SNES, Genesis or the like... and I only ever got sore thumb syndrome from playing wayyyy too many hours of SF2 and SF2:Turbo....

      --
      Karnal
    3. Re:Maybe it's just me, but... by Firehed · · Score: 1
      However, the substancial drop in IQ from trying to decipher dozens of txts per day may well qualify as a public health problem.

      I think the term is being used as "a health problem that affects the public", i.e. [public (health problem)] rather than [(public health) problem]. Just like the "public obesity problem" that plagues my fellow Americans - it's the problem that's public, not the fat.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  24. Poor Filipinos by Eightyford · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In the Philippines where the average user sent 2,300 messages in 2003, making it the world's most avid SMS nation.
    SOURCE

  25. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

    Wow. Whatever you've done in your life to make you come up with that, please let me know, so that I may never do it.

    --
    It's like sex, except I'm having it!
  26. I personally don't like texting by bobcat7677 · · Score: 2, Informative

    While it certainly has it's uses. It does seem over-used.

    Pros for me:
    -Have my computer send me alerts.
    -Send a quick e-mail to someone from the road.
    -Send a short message to someone discreetly in a location where talking on the phone would be rude/inappropriate.
    -Get a message through to someone when the reception is there but not good enough to have a conversation.

    Cons for me:
    -Almost have driven off the road on various occasions while trying to punch in a message or read a message. Way more dangerous then just talking.
    -Time consuming to communicate the simplist of concepts.
    -Sore thumbs
    -U.S. carrier pricing on text messages makes it not make much sense economically.
    -Additional way of being in-personal in your communication with other human beings.
    -Short messages can be easilly mis-interpreted. Have gotten several people mad at me for no reason just because they took a brief text message the wrong way.

    1. Re:I personally don't like texting by asahetter · · Score: 1

      Please warn me when you are on the road. People just talking on hands free cell phones scares me enough, but someone actually typing a message? *shiver*

    2. Re:I personally don't like texting by rsidd · · Score: 1
      -Almost have driven off the road on various occasions while trying to punch in a message or read a message.

      You send text messages while driving? I wish Darwinism worked a bit more efficiently. Unfortunately, people like you don't just kill themselves, they kill other people too.

      Reading messages while driving is bad enough. Didn't it occur to you to, like, pull over, or maybe get to the next traffic light? That's a major advantage of SMS vs phone calls -- it waits for you.

    3. Re:I personally don't like texting by MullerMn · · Score: 1

      -Almost have driven off the road on various occasions while trying to punch in a message or read a message. Way more dangerous then just talking.

      Yes, in a similar way, a con of lace up shoes is that I often fall off my bike while attempting to tie them and cycle.

      Have you considered the possibility that you might be an idiot?

    4. Re:I personally don't like texting by bobcat7677 · · Score: 1

      I am intrigued. I get lambasted for having tried to text while driving as if I am a lone idiot doing it (I do avoid it as a rule) ...and yet I see other people on their cell phones, PDAs, and blackberrys while driving almost every day as I drive back and forth to work. Probably the funniest/saddest example to me was a guy on a bicycle who almost got run over because he was weaving into traffic while trying to punch something into his cell phone.

    5. Re:I personally don't like texting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they are idiots too.

  27. Sore thumbs from the spam... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    My thumb is sore from having to delete the spam messages from my cell phone inbox. The worst part? There's no option to diable text messages since don't I even use that feature. Makes want to suck my thumb.

  28. cellphone dialpad as keyboard by dotpavan · · Score: 1

    I remember reading it on Gizmodo or somewhere, that a company launched a USB keyboard in Japan, which had its keys placed like a cell phone (its very small, and doesnt need a desk). It seems it was for the people (read teenagers) to chat faster.

  29. Use Morse Code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those who're using text messaging should look into the patches that let you enter messages in Morse code with one key and any finger you want to use. Tests have shown that Morsing works much faster than thumbing text and learning to send the code faster than you can thumb the characters is a trivial task.

    Keep in mind that learning to send Morse code is far easier than learning to receive it since you can move at your own pace. In fact, when I took my amateur radio exam back in the distanct past when you were tested by the FCC at their office, the staffer didn't even bother with sending. She knew that if I could receive 13 wpm, sending that fast was trival.

    Simply learning Morse code is the equivalent of sending 5 wpm, which is 25 characters or about one character every two seconds, probably better than a lot of text messagers can do with their tired thumbs. And you can do it without looking at a screen.

    --Mike Perry, KE7NV, Seattle, Untangling Tolkien

    1. Re:Use Morse Code by ickoonite · · Score: 1

      One character every two seconds? Way too slow. I'll stick to T9 predictive input thank you. And I'm not one of the textaholic types that the article refers to.

      iqu :|

    2. Re:Use Morse Code by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      One character every two seconds? Way too slow. I'll stick to T9 predictive input thank you. And I'm not one of the textaholic types that the article refers to.

      You must not have seen the Tonight Show episode that pitted two hams (using Morse code) against two people using SMS. Morse code was faster.

      I suspect that email through a Treo or a BlackBerry would be faster than either of them, due to the availability of a keyboard that makes punching in text much less tedious than on the average cellphone. Given a choice between flat-rate email ($15/month for unlimited wireless Internet) and charge-by-the-message SMS, I know which one works better for me, anyway.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    3. Re:Use Morse Code by Zakir · · Score: 1

      Um, the FCC ameatur radio exam mandates that you must be able to receive text at 15 WPM, not be able to send it. You must then take a short multiple-choice test on what happened during the encounter or be able to transcribe a certain number of characters correctly. So... your VEC wasn't doing you any favor. Also, the FCC doesn't test you, a VEC does... you must have gotten your ticket a long time ago.

      KC0VAA

  30. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. Strange as it may seem, the fact that the US has a population five times the size of the UK does not mean that you have to multiply any number by five. The population comparison was put in to give context. The US has a far larger population but a far lower rate of text messaging. That's it. No need to multiply anything by five. Understand?

  31. Re:FP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would've had first post but due to sore thumbs..yada yada yada..

  32. Nothing to worry about by MyOtherUIDis3digits · · Score: 1

    If our wrists survived the proliferation of web porn, I'm sure our thumbs can handle some text messaging.

    Umm...I mean...because of moving the mouse so much. Yeah, that's it.

    --
    Ignore anything I said above, I actually agree with everything you believe - mod accordingly.
  33. Not surprising at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's hard enough to understand a limey when they are in front of ya. Could you imagine how bad it is over a crappy cell connection?

  34. Who's mind thinks that? by Vellmont · · Score: 2, Informative

    I was able to read those two sentences and know what they meant. "per year" and "per day" are clearly different time period. If you really didn't understand on first read I think you need to slow down a bit, rather than just plowing through the summary and (apparently) reading only every other word. The article is very clear, it's your comprehension that's the problem here.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      It's not a matter of you, myself, and grandparent not being able to understand -- after all, we're all super-geniuses here on /., right?

      No, the problem is the other 99.9% of the population who aren't, and who simply won't make that connection. Comparisons like the one in TFA are deliberately misleading for the poor sots.

    2. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by prodangle · · Score: 2, Informative
      I'm grateful for the GP post pointing this out. I mis-read the article too. Most people don't read a single word at a time -- the important word year can be easily missed, Just as it's common to skip over over repeated words, such as the the. Whilst the summary is factually correct, it is written in a misleading way.

      For more ways of bending the truth, check out Darrell Huff's How to Lie With Statistics.

    3. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      Whilst the summary is factually correct, it is written in a misleading way.


      Only because you're reading too fast and not paying enough attention. Stop skimming and start reading.

      --
      AccountKiller
    4. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by fossa · · Score: 1
      The article is very clear, it's your comprehension that's the problem here.

      I don't refuse to not disbelieve that the article wasn't factually inaccurate, nor do I fail to forget that logical precision without a lack of disorientation may not rarely be misleading.

      When presenting data, it's not only curteous but absolutely critical to present it in a way that's easily understandable. In some cases, such as the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, lives may be at stake. (quick summary: Boeing had no data on the probable effects of a piece of foam of the observed size hitting the shuttle as it did.)

    5. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by Aadomm · · Score: 1

      Don't skip over 'The The' they are seriously worth listening to. Dusk is an amazing album.

      --
      Mention the Lord of the Rings one more time and I'll more than likely kill you.
    6. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, you really are an uptight wanker. sucks to be you if you cant handle being wrong, loser

    7. Re:Who's mind thinks that? by gsslay · · Score: 1
      Whose mind.

      I think you need to slow down a bit. It's your grammar that's the problem here. :)

  35. BRILLIANT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm gonna buy a phone right now so I will be able to sue. Screw this working-for-a-living bullcrap.

    Litigation FTW! W00T!

  36. Don't believe those estimates... by argent · · Score: 1

    Virgin reports that 93 million text messages are sent every day in the United Kingdom (U.K.). One estimate for the United States (U.S.), whose population is five times as large, is 700 million text messages a year.

    That's odd... Texting has been practical in the UK much longer than in the US, where for the longest time it simply wasn't possible to send text between networks. There's so much more support for text in the UK and one sees so much more online evidence of a text 'culture' there that it seems unlikely that its per-capita text message use would be higher.

    1. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      That's odd... Texting has been practical in the UK much longer than in the US, where for the longest time it simply wasn't possible to send text between networks. There's so much more support for text in the UK and one sees so much more online evidence of a text 'culture' there that it seems unlikely that its per-capita text message use would be higher

      Yeah, that's why the (albeit confusing) statistics show that US users send far fewer texts than UK users.

      As for your comment about the lack of carrier interoperability, I have had no problems sending texts to any network for some time now - even back in 1997 I recall sending texts from a GSM phone (Voicestream) to a D-AMPS phone (AT&T Wireless) and to CDMA2000 phones (Verizon and Sprint).

      I never saw the point of SMS - most of my friends stay signed in to AIM all the time, and sending an IM is easier and costs less, particularly if you have a GPRS IM client like I do.

    2. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by argent · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why the (albeit confusing) statistics show that US users send far fewer texts than UK users.

      Hrm? Not the ones I quoted.

      UK: 93 million
      US: 700 million / 5 = 140 million, accounting for population.

      The population figures wrong, or did the story misquote something?

    3. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      The US stat is per year, the UK stat is per day.

    4. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by aidfarh · · Score: 1

      UK: 93 million per day
      US: 700 million per year = 1.92 million per day

      --
      There is no sig.
    5. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by Alioth · · Score: 1

      I think you're not reading that carefully enough. The summary is very badly written; Virgin reports ... 93 million ... sent every day United States .... 700 million per year.

      Or to normalise the two statistics to the same time base, UK texters send 34 billion texts per year, but US texters only send 0.7 billion per year despite the population being 5 times larger.

    6. Re:Don't believe those estimates... by argent · · Score: 1

      Oh!

      Per day vs per year.

      <emilylatella>nevermind</>

      (goddamn /. ... I tried to post this yesterday as I was leaving but it decided that posting a correction right after a message was abusive or something. It's also got 'issues' with cut-and-paste)

  37. Virgin one of the largest...? by ickoonite · · Score: 1

    Virgin Mobile, one of the largest cellular service providers

    Erm, Virgin Mobile is probably one of the smallest networks. It's certainly not one of the largest, and it uses T-Mobile's transmitters rather than having its own.

    iqu :|

    1. Re:Virgin one of the largest...? by SecureTheNet · · Score: 1

      Erm, Virgin Mobile is probably one of the smallest networks. It's certainly not one of the largest, and it uses T-Mobile's transmitters rather than having its own.

      This is only true for the United Kingdom, where Virgin uses GSM.
      In the United States, Virgin Mobile is CDMA. T-Mobile is GSM. They are incompatible technologies, and Virgin Mobile uses Sprint towers. In Canada they are also CDMA and use Bell towers. I'm not sure what they use in Australia.

      They are also not a "network" per se, as they don't have any towers of their own. They piggyback off of other network's towers.

      --
      SecureThe.Net - Practical Resources for Securing Systems
  38. You're getting screwed by Vellmont · · Score: 1

    Many providers don't charge for text messages, or give you a set amount of free messages to send. 10 cents per message is simply an outrageous amount of money.

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:You're getting screwed by mattpointblank · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the US enjoys much better value (or is it certain plans?)

      It's about 10 pence (£0.10) a message here if you're not on some kind of plan, that's 17 cents according to Google.

      As for calls, I never make them because a 2 minute call is going to cost me much more than the price of a message. I guess that's why texting is much more popular here since it works out cheaper.

    2. Re:You're getting screwed by demonlapin · · Score: 1
      The 10-cent-per-msg rate is pretty common amongst US providers.

      Standard US-vs-everyone-else cell phone rant: While the US doesn't have nifty handsets, or GSM (that literally everyone else uses), and traditional plans force you to pay for incoming calls, the US plans are ridiculously cheap. For $35 a month (after tax), my wife has a plan with Sprint that offers 300 anytime minutes, unlimited 9pm-7am, free weekends, free long distance to anywhere in the country, and no roaming anywhere on their nationwide network (and, incidentally, no roaming in Puerto Rico or the USVI). While their coverage is spotty outside major roads and cities, it's nice to know that when I travel 2000 miles from home (>3000km), I can still use the same phone and call home for free.

      But SMS will cost, not just to send but to receive. Thus, Americans spend all their time talking, and rarely SMS.

    3. Re:You're getting screwed by Detritus · · Score: 1

      My Cingular phone uses GSM, just not the same frequency bands as in Europe.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    4. Re:You're getting screwed by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Still can't use your phone over there, which was more my point.

    5. Re:You're getting screwed by kraut · · Score: 1

      a) paying to recieve an SMS is as nonsensical as paying to receive a letter, phone call or email.

      b) the US is is still the country with the worst GSM coverage I've encountered. For example, India and South Africa have far better coverage, so the old population density argument won't wash. As a tourist, I want my mobile to work, particulatly when I'm between major cities where there aren't any public phones.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    6. Re:You're getting screwed by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      Nothing is free. My plan charges 10 cents per SMS but is significantly cheper than plans in my area that include free SMS. The point of the 10 cent per SMS is to get me to fork over $5 - $10 a month for bulk SMS messaging. I refuse to do that as it would put the cost of this phone in line with the cost of plans with free SMS messsaging. I'd get far more minutes out of $5 - $10 a month than I would out of SMS.

    7. Re:You're getting screwed by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it made sense. But it's what happens here, and it's a major part of why Americans Don't Text.

  39. Re:what else is new.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    correction, virgin mobile(tm)....rtfa

  40. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by greenegg77 · · Score: 1

    We must act quickly to resolve this text-messaging deficit in America before some other country wins the SMS race!

    --
    --- This .sig for sale - $500 OBO.
  41. Re:Incorrect multiplication? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
    In the US, it is common to be charged to receive SMS, and so it is somewhat less popular than the UK, where reception is free. Most consumer talk plans in the UK have a minimum of 30 text messages a month bundled, with most offering significantly more.

    In contrast, SMS is almost unheard of in Japan, where all telephones sold in the last few years have supported email.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  42. misspelling in title... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that should be "Sore Bums and Sexing"

    Thank you.

    ~Sir Elton

  43. fuck this dumb quasi-news by illtron · · Score: 1

    Fuck this dumb quasi-news. People have been playing video games at home for the past 25 years and there was no fucking epidemic of sore thumbs. Give me a god damn break. This isn't even news on a slow day.

    --
    Slashdot: 24 hours behind every other site or your money back!
  44. Re:First litigation? Someone else to blame? by vertinox · · Score: 1

    Has anyone sued the phone maker, text message service, or anyone else they can think of getting money from?

    If people could sue for sore thumbs, Nintendo would have gone out of business years ago.

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  45. Inexpensive? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    At $0.10 a pop, it is hardly affordble. Figure a conversation takes 20 such messages, that's $2. That's several minutes of talk time, or dozens of minutes spent texting.

    I just don't get it.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:Inexpensive? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Many phone plans have an allowance of free texts. Even so, people seldom have a long conversation with texts, normally it's something like 'going 2 the pub 2nite?' with a response of 'yes at 8', EOT. It's also a lot more considerate to text in a public place, such as on the train or the bus because you don't annoy your fellow passengers with annoying ringtones and conversation carried out at the top of your voice.

      The other use of texting is sending messages to lots of people, for example, at the glider club I'm in, whoever does the weather check in the morning texts the membership with a message whether we are flying or not. To do it in a text takes seconds, to call each member individually would take much longer.

  46. CmdrTaco's wrists are killing him... by sweetnjguy29 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ....why am I almost positive that this is not from Text Messaging?

  47. get a phone that takes dictation... by bbdd · · Score: 1

    ... no, seriously!

    my new samsung a900 has a really functional speech-to-text function for dictating text messages right into the phone.

    not useful for a location where you have to be quiet (the library, etc.), but much easier any other time.

    http://www.samsung.com/Products/MobilePhones/Sprin t/SPH_A900ZKSXAR.asp

  48. Re:Who's mind thinks that? OT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be such a dick. He read 73 million a day vs 700 million a year and was annoyed that he had to stop reading the summary and divide 700 million by 365.

  49. User Interface by Detritus · · Score: 1

    While I like the idea of SMS, I hate the user interface on the cell phone. The text input methods are an ugly kludge and the buttons on the phone were designed for some other species.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:User Interface by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem to be any problems for the teens of today. The thumb are just flying over the keys, it is not exactly one letter pr. second. I guess it is just a matter of getting used to it. I am too old for that crap.

  50. This is why I always roll my eyes by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Informative

    everytime I read a comment here bemoaning how many useless features mobile phones have "that nobody use".

    Based on these statistics, people in the UK send roughly 50 times as many text messages each year as people in the US. Factoring in the relative population sizes, on average we send 250 times as many SMSs as you guys do.

    You might not use those "useless features" on your phones, but we most certainly do. Entire message boards exist solely to compare the picture quality and associated features of the various camera phones, which is a serious deciding factor for some people when buying a new phone...

    1. Re:This is why I always roll my eyes by schlumpf_louise · · Score: 1
      I'm in the UK, I get 1000 "free" text messages a month (£24 a month contract for students). I use about 900 of those free texts a month, and probably receive a very similar number. I make about 50 minutes worth of calls each month. For me at least, sms is not a useless feature.

      On topic, I've been using my phone for 6 years, sore thumbs never even crossed my mind til I read this article. How are people holding their phones to get sore thumbs? It takes me a few hours to get sore thumbs from a console, which I can understand perfectly, but from a phone?? Just... how!?

    2. Re:This is why I always roll my eyes by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      You might not use those "useless features" on your phones, but we most certainly do. Entire message boards exist solely to compare the picture quality and associated features of the various camera phones, which is a serious deciding factor for some people when buying a new phone...

      Oh, really? You have message boards for cellular phones! Wow! It's not like HowardForums has 6.54 million posts or anything.

      Also, the statistics are wrong. CITA claims that 7.3 billion messages were sent in the US in October 2005, about 235 million per day or 1/2 as much per capita as the UK.

  51. Re:GSM and the USA by santiago · · Score: 1

    Cingular (which includes the former AT&T Wireless) and T-Mobile are both GSM providers serving the United States. Verizon and Sprint are CDMA.

  52. Public by SchrodingersRoot · · Score: 1

    I don't mind people being on the phone in public. I mind people being on the phone loudly in public. I don't mind people having conversations in public. I mind people having conversations loudly in public.

    Personally, I don't think it's the cell phones that are the problem. I think people being rude is the problem. I don't see anything wrong with considerate use of a cellphone in public spaces. My cell phone is my only phone. I have it with me pretty much wherever I go, but I'm polite about its use. I don't leave the ringer on in movie theatres or the like, I don't talk on it loudly, and I generally try and be as unobtrusive about it as possible. I tend to think that if people wouldn't mind my talking to a friend, they shouldn't mind my talking to a friend on the phone.

  53. Re:GSM and the USA by demonlapin · · Score: 1
    That'll teach me to hit "post" instead of "preview".

    I'm aware Cingular uses GSM. But it doesn't use it on the same frequency as everyone else, and it appeared a lot later in the US than everywhere else.

    Either way, you usually can't (excluding world-band) use the phones elsewhere in the world. My comment was directed at the Standard Critiques of American Cellular Service, which I have listened to one too many times.

  54. just stop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's an idea. Stop acting like 12 year old girls and quit texting. After all it is a "phone" and talking would seem much quicker and easier anyway.

  55. Something strange with the statistics by Aggrajag · · Score: 1

    According to this link (in Finnish), there were 20.5 billion text messages sent in 2003 in UK and in Finland the figure is about a billion per year. The one billion limit was broken in 2001 and you have to remember that the population in Finland is less than six million.

  56. Public health problem: by Hydraulix · · Score: 0

    Public health problem: Avian bird flu. Not a public health problem: Typing text messages on your cellphone. Now get back to curing cancer and making my flying car.

  57. Oblig VG Cats by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1
    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
  58. US vs Europe by Wellerite · · Score: 2, Informative

    As the statistics say (not very clearly), texting is far more popular in the UK (and I would assume Europe, too) than the US. Cue lots of americans saying it's expensive and crap and don't understand why it's so popular.

    Reason is that texting is cheap and universal in Europe (inc. the UK) because of the GSM network prevalent there, plus all sorts of organisations jumping onto the texting bandwagon to encourage people to text more.

  59. This Is News? SlashDot Hits New Low! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Jeez! Thumbing?!!

    Eeditors: time to send out an updated resume: you're headed for unemployment.

  60. Re:GSM and the USA by tetromino · · Score: 1

    T-Mobile does use the same frequencies as in Europe (makes sense, cause in Europe T-Mobile is known as good old Deutsche Telekom) and you can bring your T-Mobile phone across the Atlantic, it's just that you will be killed by roaming charges unless you get a European prepaid SIM card.

  61. Boondocks quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gin Rummy: Man, I don't get that.
    Wuncler III: What?
    Gin Rummy: That "texting" shit.
    Wuncler III: What's wrong with texting?
    Gin Rummy: Oh, you mean other than the fact that it's the stupidest fucking thing in the world? Who in their right mind would spend fifteen minutes trying to type some shit they could have called and said in five seconds? Plus, it involves typing with your thumbs, which I just don't approve of. I don't know about you, but I don't have time to read something that a motherfucker typed with his thumbs. Fun Fact: Nothing typed by somebody's thumbs has ever been important. It's all just nigga technology, anyway.
    Wuncler III: What'd you call it?
    Gin Rummy: Nigga Technology. Technology for niggas, and don't start trippin' and sh*t, calling me a racist, because I don't mean "nigga" in a disrespectful way. I mean it as a general term for an ignorant motherfucker. Anybody, of any race, can be an ignorant motherfucker.
    Wuncler III: Shit, I be texting my ass of. Shit, bitches like texting. I be texting 'em all the time. Matter of fact, I also be texting my weed man, too, cause, you know, he don't like to be on the phone, so I text him.
    Gin Rummy: ...Case in point.

  62. n00bs! by cybermint · · Score: 1

    Only n00bs get sore thumbs! L33t text0rz have phat, numb calluses!

  63. Mod parent -1, uninformative! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    You can avoid soreness in your thumbs the same way you avoid soreness everywhere else: stretch your muscles (try shadow thumb wrestling), repetition...

    You obviously don't know what "repetitive strain injury" is, right?

    One thing is muscle fatigue due to exercise, a VERY DIFFERENT THING is when your joints are about to implode* because you've DAMAGED them.

    * - In a metaphorical sense

    The point with SMS is that the phone buttons are designed NOT to be pressed easily (otherwise you might end up calling long distance because you accidentally pushed them), and the excessive and repetitive pushing of the keys leads to injury.

    Compare with the much softer touch of a computer keyboard. People type everyday, and they don't get sore thumbs and fingers.

    1. Re:Mod parent -1, uninformative! by mikiN · · Score: 1

      The point with SMS is that the phone buttons are designed NOT to be pressed easily

      They're designed that way because the designers are stupid IMHO. There must be more than eleventyhundred bazillion ways to prevent a keyboard from sending unwanted keypresses while still being ergonomic but most phones don't use them. I honestly don't know why.
      (BTW the cheapest and murest way is to cover the keyboard with a plastic flip cover when not in use)

      Surely <wink> the phone manufacturers must have struck a deal with physical therapists to rake in some extra revenue...?

      --
      The Hacker's Guide To The Kernel: Don't panic()!
    2. Re:Mod parent -1, uninformative! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unnecessary inline wink without nudge...10 Yd. penalty....repeat the down.

  64. Give me a f###ing break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sore thumbs propaganda bullshit has got to stop. If it's that much of a problem then drop the phone/BlackBerry and talk with someone in person.

    I just refuse to believe that it's that much of an issue.

  65. Atari-itis by shoelace_822695 · · Score: 1

    I beleive the technical term is Atari-itis as the syndrome was first identified with the Atari 2600 machine

    it was most common after an afternoon playing summer games/decathlon :D

    --
    -- Shoe Lace
  66. Re:Doctor, doctor -- how to avoid painful texting by donutz · · Score: 1

    from TFA: "If your forearms and hands start to hurt, stop." Seems to be similar to that old doctor, doctor joke "doctor, doctor, it hurts when I do this" "well stop doing it then". Common sense, really. Who doesn't know this?

    No kidding. Instead of doing all the texting from your phone, use your computer when you can. Many mobile phone providers have a web page from which you can send your message. Otherwise, try one of these services:

    Google SMS, send to phone extension - send web page text to your phone
    TXT2Day.com - sends a text message to your phone
    bitBomb.com - Schedule a reminder on your computer, get it on your cell phone

  67. Perhaps it's only useless because of the cost. by Inoshiro · · Score: 1

    In Canada, at least, I have to pay 15 cents per sent message, and pay the same per received message over the first 1,000 a month.

    If I wanted an "all I could eat" unlimited package, I'd have to add 10$ onto my bill -- the equivalent of sending roughly 2 messages per day on the old bill.

    Given that the basic "no text, unlimited evenings/weekends" plan is 25$ + tax, why would I want to add over a third to my cost in order to allow myself to relay information I can easily now?

    I bet providers in the UK charge a fee closer in line with what it costs to provide a few bytes of data in a packet to your cell phone, vs. what the US and Canadian providers do.

    A lot of easier (on the service provider) services are held back because they're also more convientent, which causes the service providers to try and charge a premium for them -- a premium few are willing to pay.

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  68. It's the wrists by suwain_2 · · Score: 1

    I got a Treo a couple weeks back, and while I love it overall, I've found that if I do much typing, my wrists start to hurt. (I seem to recall seeing this referred to before as "Blackberry Syndrome" or something?) My thumbs, however, are fine. I wonder if there's a risk for carpal tunnel from prolonged use?

    OT: Giving people unlimited data but charging for text messages is asinine.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  69. UK texting is cheaper than US texting- duh. by Resident+Netizen · · Score: 1

    I live in the US.
    I text, but it costs me more than a regular phone call (entirely dependent on your plan).
    My experience is that 'SMSing' in the UK and Europe is *cheaper* than a phone call, while the opposite is true in the US.
    Why is it more expensive in the US if the bandwidth usage is less??? WHY?
    It's because it's a "cool feature", that's why.

    'In Network' calls on my plan are included in my plan fee, yet I must pay extra to use less bandwidth.

    --
    My other sig is a Porsche!
  70. Wrong by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

    Ummm, according to CTIA, more than 7 billion texts are sent per month in the US (approx 235 million per month):

    http://files.ctia.org/pdf/Wireless_Quick_Facts_Oct ober_05.pdf

  71. text messaging vs. email by joNDoty · · Score: 1

    If cell phones made using email as quick and easy as text messaging, would texting have ANY advantages over email? It seems like texting was invented just so the cell companies didn't have to support REAL email. I wish they would abolish texting altogether and do it the right way.

    1. Re:text messaging vs. email by coofercat · · Score: 1

      SMS was 'invented' because they could do it for free. In the olden days, the phone would communicate with the base station using a variable length packet, which could be between two sizes. For the most part, only the smallest packet was ever used, leaving 160 bytes spare in the protocol.

      As a result, early text messages could only be 160 characters (bytes, as Unicode wasn't possible). Since then, I suspect the protocols have changed a bit (GSM2 and all that). Longer messages are possible by concatenation, etc etc. I would imagine 3G has text data capabilities explicitly, rather than being "something for free".

      In short, someone spotted a bit of spare capability and used it for something. The telcos didn't expect it to do much, but figured it was something landlines couldn't do and they could give it away "for free" (meaning "only" 10 pence per message, as opposed to 50 pence a minute talking, or whatever the plan allows).

      Of course, since then, the proliferation of text message services makes it a proper business proposition, as opposed to "something that might be fun". I suspect they make as much money from texts as they do from calls these days.

      Back on topic: Didn't Virgin used to do TV/poster ads about sore thumbs because their texts were so cheap? This all sounds like Branson-esque promotion to me...

  72. Re:GSM and the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No they do not. T-Mobile USA is on 1900 MHz out west, and in fact is roaming on Cingular towers in most (all?) of California. Perhaps they only sell worldband phones now? One of the nasty tricks T-Mobile does to their subsidized phones is to disable the roaming indicators so customers are not confused by roaming at home. Get your firmware reflashed somewhere, and be amused by all the strange new behaviors.

    As far as I know, the only 900 or 1800 MHz GSM service in the US may be around Washington D.C. for the diplomatic corps. There are newer 850 MHz deployments by Cingular, which again seems to be mostly a US-only frequency for GSM.

    My complaint about GSM is that voicemail indications do not seem to work properly across providers and phones around the world, once you get into the unlocked phone and pre-paid SIM swapping game.

  73. When in Rome... by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

    the US is is still the country with the worst GSM coverage I've encountered.

    Griping that we have poor GSM coverage is like griping that Europe has poor CDMA coverage - worse, actually, because at least we have some GSM coverage, such as it is.

    If we Americans want to go overseas, we have to rent or buy a phone at our destinations (except for the relatively few customers who already have a quad-band phone from a GSM provider). You can do the same when you come here, and then you can laugh at our ugly phones with external antennae just like we get to laugh at your toy-looking phones with weird little removable chips. It's fun!

    --
    Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  74. Sore Thumb's? by tickticker · · Score: 1
    I've had that problem every Mon-Wed-Fri for months now.

    --

    1101010010010001111100100101000

  75. Also in the News: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Folding Letters Into Envelopes Likely To Cause Papercuts And Hangnails," says a study by Hammermill.

  76. Re:GSM and the USA by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

    T-Mobile does use the same frequencies as in Europe (makes sense, cause in Europe T-Mobile is known as good old Deutsche Telekom)

    No, they don't. The European mobile phone frequencies are used for other things here - for example, 900 MHz is an unlicensed band used for cordless phones, baby monitors, walkie talkies, etc.

    However, you can get quad-band GSM phones that work on the American frequencies *and* the European ones. I'm sure T-Mobile sells those, but remember, they're still working on the American frequencies when you use them in America.

    --
    Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  77. Re:GSM and the USA by Scruffeh · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that T-Mobile is still known as T-Mobile in mainland Europe. It definately is in the UK (and it's probably the worst of our big 4 providers). I think they use the 'T' brand in Germany for the mobile phone part of the business; or at least the 'T-Com' that appears on the front of Bayern Munich's (football team) shirts would indicate this.