What the hell is the deal with text messaging?

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: Fritzo
I hear ya brother- AMEN! It seems like the new generation is downgrading everything and enjoying it: music quality sucks due to MP3's and they eat 'em up, texting slows communication 10 fold and they see it as the way to go, quality TV and movies are being replaced by 2 minute video clips of a guy lighting his farts or squashing his sack...the world is going to be a scary place when these kids take over.

Well lets see, I can either carry around my music on an mp3 player or I can get the new walkman record player. It does 33's and 45's.

There are other methods of digital recording- it's just MP3's caught on. There is so much compression in recorded music today (even on CD's), that a lot of the feeling and ambience of the recording is lost forever. The music crowd today doesn't know any different because that's what they grew up with, but it's sad when a stick with a diamond chip being dragged along a disk of vinyl can produce more sound than the widely available technology today.

its really not that sad. Don't you get it? Nobody misses records or record players. You are one of like a dozen people on the planet that are distraught over this.

::bangs head on desk:: Don't YOU get it? We could be using something like FLAC instead of MP3s to record digital music, and this wouldn't happen. Most of the younger generation (including you obviously) is perfectly content with their 128bit MP3 files, and it's a step backwards.

I REPEAT NOBODY CARES. NOBODY CARES.

<<<< has vinyl collection and used to own 2 technics 1200's with 120 dollar sylii

I still dont care. Its good enough. Mp3 isn't permanent it will evolve like every other medium.

 

[Minjin]

I really don't get it either. I know there are certain situations where it makes sense. But people take it far beyond that. I've seen a couple have a 20 minute text message argument that would have been resolved in a few minutes on the phone. And it irritates me when people text message me because it costs me 15 cents each. I'd be less annoyed with them if they were free, but they're not. If you want to talk to me, even to ask a simple question, call me, or if its something unimportant that can wait, email me.

 

[grohl]

My first thought: don't act so OLD. I hate it when people start the "Those damn kids!" arguements because it makes me think of being old.

What's the difference between testing and coming on these forums and typing random nonsense to a bunch of strangers? It's the same type of useless pointless recycled conversations!

The thing that bugs me is, trying to have a conversation with someone WHILE they are texting! Nearly everyone will get off the phone for conversation but try talking to someone as they continue to text. I agree texting is a waste of time compared with talking to that person but basically you need to get over it.

 

[Raduque]

Originally posted by: rivan
I don't have, or need, a cell phone. I've considered getting one to have in the car for emergencies, mostly because I've got kids. I don't feel the need to communicate that much - with anyone. Quality > quantity.

If you need a phone in the car simply to dial 911, you don't even need service. An unactivated phone will still dial 911.


And I use text messaging because I can't exactly answer my cell phone while I'm answering CS calls. Also, I hate talking on the phone.

 

[James Bond]

Originally posted by: intogamer
IDK MY BFF JILL

This is the only acceptable response.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: Fritzo
I hear ya brother- AMEN! It seems like the new generation is downgrading everything and enjoying it: music quality sucks due to MP3's and they eat 'em up, texting slows communication 10 fold and they see it as the way to go, quality TV and movies are being replaced by 2 minute video clips of a guy lighting his farts or squashing his sack...the world is going to be a scary place when these kids take over.

Well lets see, I can either carry around my music on an mp3 player or I can get the new walkman record player. It does 33's and 45's.

There are other methods of digital recording- it's just MP3's caught on. There is so much compression in recorded music today (even on CD's), that a lot of the feeling and ambience of the recording is lost forever. The music crowd today doesn't know any different because that's what they grew up with, but it's sad when a stick with a diamond chip being dragged along a disk of vinyl can produce more sound than the widely available technology today.

its really not that sad. Don't you get it? Nobody misses records or record players. You are one of like a dozen people on the planet that are distraught over this.

::bangs head on desk:: Don't YOU get it? We could be using something like FLAC instead of MP3s to record digital music, and this wouldn't happen. Most of the younger generation (including you obviously) is perfectly content with their 128bit MP3 files, and it's a step backwards.

I'm only 22 and I agree with you completely Fritzo. Of-course, I'm an audiophile of sorts, and grew up doing acid-techno live PA sets at raves and clubs. I'm a little obsessed with audio quality.

 

[Saint Nick]

i agree with you andy. after this month i'm shutting off texting to and from my phone, i think.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: Fritzo
I hear ya brother- AMEN! It seems like the new generation is downgrading everything and enjoying it: music quality sucks due to MP3's and they eat 'em up, texting slows communication 10 fold and they see it as the way to go, quality TV and movies are being replaced by 2 minute video clips of a guy lighting his farts or squashing his sack...the world is going to be a scary place when these kids take over.

Well lets see, I can either carry around my music on an mp3 player or I can get the new walkman record player. It does 33's and 45's.

There are other methods of digital recording- it's just MP3's caught on. There is so much compression in recorded music today (even on CD's), that a lot of the feeling and ambience of the recording is lost forever. The music crowd today doesn't know any different because that's what they grew up with, but it's sad when a stick with a diamond chip being dragged along a disk of vinyl can produce more sound than the widely available technology today.

its really not that sad. Don't you get it? Nobody misses records or record players. You are one of like a dozen people on the planet that are distraught over this.

::bangs head on desk:: Don't YOU get it? We could be using something like FLAC instead of MP3s to record digital music, and this wouldn't happen. Most of the younger generation (including you obviously) is perfectly content with their 128bit MP3 files, and it's a step backwards.

In your mind it's a step backwards because you value fidelity in your music. On the other hand, most people use what is most convenient. When that corresponded to 45s, people used records. CDs supplanted tapes because they were easier to use, not because they sounded better. Now, Mp3s have supplanted CDs because they are easier to use. You can mix and match songs, you can take them anywhere, etc.

Convenience > Quality for 95% of the population.

 

[altonb1]

Originally posted by: Minjin
I really don't get it either. I know there are certain situations where it makes sense. But people take it far beyond that. I've seen a couple have a 20 minute text message argument that would have been resolved in a few minutes on the phone. And it irritates me when people text message me because it costs me 15 cents each. I'd be less annoyed with them if they were free, but they're not. If you want to talk to me, even to ask a simple question, call me, or if its something unimportant that can wait, email me.

This is my biggest beef with texting. I got the $5/mo unlimited plan and realized after a month or two that it was a waste of money, so I cancelled it. i didn't WANT to text anyone because it was easier to pick up the phone and call. My wife's friend's husband, though, liked sending me pix messages which cost .25 each. i finally figured out how to block his number completely since our requests to have him stop were ignored. I don't need to see some animated .gif of a banana flashing his "junk" while some tinkly music plays and tells me I've been flashed by the angry banana and need to forward the message within 5 minutes...blah blah blah.

I have a blackberry for work, so I will email people using it but do not use text messages at all.

 

[FlashG]

Like anything else, It becomes an addiction when people use it exclusively (to excess) instead of considering other (more appropriate) methods of communication.

 

[oddyager]

I don't txt for conversations. If we need to talk, we talk. I am addicted to my blackberry though.

 

[MyThirdEye]

Originally posted by: grohl
My first thought: don't act so OLD. I hate it when people start the "Those damn kids!" arguements because it makes me think of being old.

What's the difference between testing and coming on these forums and typing random nonsense to a bunch of strangers? It's the same type of useless pointless recycled conversations!

The thing that bugs me is, trying to have a conversation with someone WHILE they are texting! Nearly everyone will get off the phone for conversation but try talking to someone as they continue to text. I agree texting is a waste of time compared with talking to that person but basically you need to get over it.

Is it the lack of intelligence that compels you? It's not about age. It's about common decency.

 

[ZeroEffect]

i think it would suck to be a teenager now... you're girlfriend can be in
touch with you 24-7!

"Did you get my text?"


or worse... she doesn't TEXT you back! LOL

 

[MyThirdEye]

Originally posted by: ZeroEffect
i think it would suck to be a teenager now... you're girlfriend can be in
touch with you 24-7!

"Did you get my text?"

When I said that teens can't go 2 feet out the door without their cell phones, thats what I was talking about. "OMG WHAT IF MY GF TEXTS ME AND ASKS ME SOMETHING AND THEN I'M NOT GOING TO BE THERE?~!?!?! SHE'S SGOING TO DUMP M3!!

 

[tatteredpotato]

Part of the appeal is that it doesn't consume your entire attention. If you're hanging out w/ your friends you can send some texts back and forth without interrupting the local conversation.

Personally I only use them if I have a specific question, but I guess that just makes me an antisocial by todays standards.

 

[MyThirdEye]

Originally posted by: kstu
I hope you realize these same idiots texting 20+ times back and forth would be having the exact same conversation over the phone. Now, ask yourself, which one would be more annoying?

On the flip side, normal people use text messages for simple conversations that dont really need a phone conversation. Do I really need to call 10 of my friends to see what they are doing on a friday night? Oh i know, I can send them a quick text to find out and go from there. Talking on the phone is annoying and time consuming, sending 1 or 2 text messages is convenient and easy.

Get a clue.

Which would be more annoying? The constant tapping of buttons for 30 minutes, or a simple 30 second phone call? Obviously, anyone would go with the second choice. How about you strap the burden on yourself, and get a clue.

 

[MyThirdEye]

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian
Part of the appeal is that it doesn't consume your entire attention. If you're hanging out w/ your friends you can send some texts back and forth without interrupting the local conversation.

Personally I only use them if I have a specific question, but I guess that just makes me an antisocial by todays standards.

Actually, it's the exact opposite. It takes their focus from your conversation, directly to the phone.

 

[ArmchairAthlete]

It takes me forever to input a text when I must reply to one. But others like my sister have become very fast at it.

I still think it's pretty stupid and would rather call someone, but for a really short question with maybe a yes/no/number answer I guess it can kinda be ok.

Also makes it nice in bars or other loud places where it would be more difficult to talk.

Good point. Concerts too.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: amjohns5


Which would be more annoying? The constant tapping of buttons for 30 minutes, or a simple 30 second phone call? Obviously, anyone would go with the second choice. How about you strap the burden on yourself, and get a clue.

I disagree. How is "button tapping" so annoying? Plus, 30 minutes of texting does not equate to a 30 second phone call. How about 10 30 second phone calls vs 30 minutes of texting?

 

[MyThirdEye]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: amjohns5


Which would be more annoying? The constant tapping of buttons for 30 minutes, or a simple 30 second phone call? Obviously, anyone would go with the second choice. How about you strap the burden on yourself, and get a clue.

I disagree. How is "button tapping" so annoying? Plus, 30 minutes of texting does not equate to a 30 second phone call. How about 10 30 second phone calls vs 30 minutes of texting?

From the time you send 10 text messages to see how they are doing, how their dog is, and whatever else you decide to put in there, their respond time, it should equate to ~30 minutes.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: amjohns5

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: amjohns5


Which would be more annoying? The constant tapping of buttons for 30 minutes, or a simple 30 second phone call? Obviously, anyone would go with the second choice. How about you strap the burden on yourself, and get a clue.

I disagree. How is "button tapping" so annoying? Plus, 30 minutes of texting does not equate to a 30 second phone call. How about 10 30 second phone calls vs 30 minutes of texting?

From the time you send 10 text messages to see how they are doing, how their dog is, and whatever else you decide to put in there, their respond time, it should equate to ~30 minutes.

Wow it took you 30 minutes to type that post?

 

[clamum]

DAMN KIDS! GET OFF MY LAWN!

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: amjohns5

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: amjohns5


Which would be more annoying? The constant tapping of buttons for 30 minutes, or a simple 30 second phone call? Obviously, anyone would go with the second choice. How about you strap the burden on yourself, and get a clue.

I disagree. How is "button tapping" so annoying? Plus, 30 minutes of texting does not equate to a 30 second phone call. How about 10 30 second phone calls vs 30 minutes of texting?

From the time you send 10 text messages to see how they are doing, how their dog is, and whatever else you decide to put in there, their respond time, it should equate to ~30 minutes.

I can type on my phone nearly as fast as I can on my keyboard. And again, a long conversation like that will take longer than 30 seconds by phone.

 

[tokie]

if you hate going the people always having to have their cell with them, then never go into some of my university classes. some kids bring a notebook, a pencil, and their CELL. with no pockets/backpack or anything, they carry JUST these 3 things in their hand to class for an hour lecture

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: tokie
if you hate going the people always having to have their cell with them, then never go into some of my university classes. some kids bring a notebook, a pencil, and their CELL. with no pockets/backpack or anything, they carry JUST these 3 things in their hand to class for an hour lecture

hah...when I was in college I probably wouldn't have even brought the notebook, just the cell phone and keys. Most of my courses had the notes posted online, why waste paper? AL GORE WOULD GIVE ME A MEDAL