Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Recommend a good texting app
7 views
Skip to first unread message
micky
Nov 16, 2018, 4:46:12 AM11/16/18
to
I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and elsewhere,
and it doesn't work only with texting.
Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems to
have had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when I
use anything.)
So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads or
try to sell things.
Any suggestions?
and it doesn't work only with texting.
Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems to
have had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when I
use anything.)
So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads or
try to sell things.
Any suggestions?
Libor Striz
Nov 16, 2018, 6:17:04 AM11/16/18
to
micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> Wrote in message:
> I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and elsewhere,and it doesn't work only with texting. Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell things. Any suggestions?
What exactly do you mean by texting ?
As it looks like you speak about email,
but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
--
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
> I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and elsewhere,and it doesn't work only with texting. Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell things. Any suggestions?
What exactly do you mean by texting ?
As it looks like you speak about email,
but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
--
Libor Striz aka Poutnik ( a pilgrim/wanderer/wayfarer)
"Humour is the only effective weapon against stupidity."
Miloš Forman
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
micky
Nov 16, 2018, 1:11:43 PM11/16/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:17:02 +0100 (GMT+01:00),
Not interested in email. I didn't put the clauses in the best order and
only mentioned email because the built-in email app is another app that
I've read does not rotate on Xiaomi phones.
Libor Striz <poutnik4R...@CAPITALSgmail.com> wrote:
>micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> Wrote in message:
>> I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and elsewhere,and it doesn't work only with texting. Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell things. Any suggestions?
>
>What exactly do you mean by texting ?
>As it looks like you speak about email,
>but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
Yes, I meant SMS and MMS.
>micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> Wrote in message:
>> I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and elsewhere,and it doesn't work only with texting. Googling showed me that the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years! (and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell things. Any suggestions?
>
>What exactly do you mean by texting ?
>As it looks like you speak about email,
>but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
Not interested in email. I didn't put the clauses in the best order and
only mentioned email because the built-in email app is another app that
I've read does not rotate on Xiaomi phones.
nospam
Nov 16, 2018, 1:14:02 PM11/16/18
to
In article <b94tud1kjmijh8gnb...@4ax.com>, micky
want to talk to use.
<NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads or
> try to sell things.
messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
> So what's a good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads or
> try to sell things.
want to talk to use.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 16, 2018, 3:32:44 PM11/16/18
to
stock (SMS) 'Messaging' app doesn't rotate once you've started typing
something. The obvious workaround/hack for that is to first rotate and
then start typing.
You might want to try if that works/helps in your case as well.
arlen michael holder
Nov 16, 2018, 4:39:45 PM11/16/18
to
On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:14:02 -0500, nospam wrote:
> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
> want to talk to use.
Is that a joke?
> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
> want to talk to use.
Anyway, as with what Frank said, my stock messaging app rotates just fine.
It's the stock SMS app for the LG Stylo 3 Plus, Nougat 7.0 for T-Mobile.
It's called "Messaging version 5.30.61.002" in the Android app settings.
I backed it up to an APK so that I could give the OP the full name:
Messaging-com.android.mms-53061002-v5.30.61.002.apk
If desired, I can upload that app to a binary site for the OP.
In addition, if we look for the _best_ third-party free message apps,
maybe we'll find a venn diagram overlap of the best to test for the OP.
<https://www.androidauthority.com/best-texting-apps-for-android-653970/>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
<https://www.androidcentral.com/best-text-messaging-apps>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.textra>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>
o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
<https://www.androidpit.com/best-sms-apps-android
o Features
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
o Customization
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
o Simplicity
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
o Desktop integration
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mysms.android.sms>
I'd start with those to explore for rotation features...
nospam
Nov 16, 2018, 5:09:42 PM11/16/18
to
In article <psndev$h0o$1...@news.mixmin.net>, arlen michael holder
separate platforms, although some might fall back to sms.
<arlen_mich...@example.com> wrote:
>
> > messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
> > want to talk to use.
>
> Is that a joke?
no. whatsapp, facebook messenger, viber, signal and the rest are all
>
> > messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
> > want to talk to use.
>
> Is that a joke?
separate platforms, although some might fall back to sms.
Eli the Bearded
Nov 16, 2018, 7:39:52 PM11/16/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, arlen michael holder wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:14:02 -0500, nospam wrote:
>> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
>> want to talk to use.
> Is that a joke?
Probably a misunderstanding. QKSMS won't interoperate with with What's
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:14:02 -0500, nospam wrote:
>> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
>> want to talk to use.
> Is that a joke?
App or Telegram. But it will interoperate with other SMS apps.
> In addition, if we look for the _best_ third-party free message apps,
> maybe we'll find a venn diagram overlap of the best to test for the OP.
This one seems good to me, but I'm not OP. I just got a new phone which
came with a new SMS client and it was doing Google-ish things like
suggest answers to SMS messages. Which is a big fucking no-no in my
book, so I was on the look-out for a better SMS app. This is open
source, doesn't show ads (it does have a way to send donations, which
gets flagged as "in app purchase" in Play Store), and doesn't ask for
unnecessary permissions.
Elijah
------
would take suggestions for open source non-stock phone app
arlen michael holder
Nov 16, 2018, 9:31:13 PM11/16/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 00:39:52 +0000 (UTC), Eli the Bearded wrote:
> Probably a misunderstanding. QKSMS won't interoperate with with What's
> App or Telegram. But it will interoperate with other SMS apps.
Thanks for being kind to nospam, where I full well knew exactly what nospam
> Probably a misunderstanding. QKSMS won't interoperate with with What's
> App or Telegram. But it will interoperate with other SMS apps.
was talking about since I read every post on this ng, where there's
currently a huge thread where almost everyone falls into one of two camps:
o Those who think proprietary VOIP apps are all the rage (for everyone).
o Those who think standards-based SMS/MMS works just fine (for them).
What's interesting is that the proprietary VOIP camp seems to have entirely
unreasonable assumptions that require everyone to follow, and where the
standards-based SMS/MMS camp is entirely pragmatic, where the apps work
fine for them, and which work for everyone.
For me, for example, I deplore proprietary solutions. If the texting app
doesn't work with the standard default apps on EVERY phone, then it's a
nearly worthless, and almost completely useless app, IMHO.
Nonetheless, proprietary-versus-standard politics aside, I surmised the OP
was asking about the non-proprietary solutions, which are the default app
on every phone (AFAIK).
>> o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
> This one seems good to me, but I'm not OP. I just got a new phone which
> came with a new SMS client and it was doing Google-ish things like
> suggest answers to SMS messages. Which is a big fucking no-no in my
> book, so I was on the look-out for a better SMS app. This is open
> source, doesn't show ads (it does have a way to send donations, which
> gets flagged as "in app purchase" in Play Store), and doesn't ask for
> unnecessary permissions.
I'm fine with my default SMS app, but it doesn't do two things I'd like it
to do, so I'll look around also at the SMS apps to see which of that short
list make sense).
I'll test out the QKSMS app first, and report back so that, as always,
everyone benefits from every action (I deplore imaginary solutions, which
people like nospam excel in).
Eli the Bearded
Nov 16, 2018, 11:00:18 PM11/16/18
to
In comp.mobile.android,
communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
positions.
Elijah
------
selects a few threads by subject and junks the rest
arlen michael holder <arlen_mich...@example.com> wrote:
> Thanks for being kind to nospam, where I full well knew exactly what nospam
> was talking about since I read every post on this ng, where there's
> currently a huge thread where almost everyone falls into one of two camps:
> o Those who think proprietary VOIP apps are all the rage (for everyone).
> o Those who think standards-based SMS/MMS works just fine (for them).
Voice Over Internet Protocol is a completely different form of
> Thanks for being kind to nospam, where I full well knew exactly what nospam
> was talking about since I read every post on this ng, where there's
> currently a huge thread where almost everyone falls into one of two camps:
> o Those who think proprietary VOIP apps are all the rage (for everyone).
> o Those who think standards-based SMS/MMS works just fine (for them).
communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
positions.
Elijah
------
selects a few threads by subject and junks the rest
arlen michael holder
Nov 17, 2018, 12:52:46 AM11/17/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 04:00:18 +0000 (UTC), Eli the Bearded wrote:
> Voice Over Internet Protocol is a completely different form of
> communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
> little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
> positions.
Let's get back to choosing a better SMS/MMS app for _this_ thread.
> Voice Over Internet Protocol is a completely different form of
> communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
> little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
> positions.
If we want to waste our time on the politics of the proprietary versus
non-proprietary texting solutions, we can join _that_ thread (which is
already well over a hundred posts long) so there's no need for it here.
*Let's get back to choosing a better SMS/MMS app for _this_ thread.*
o I installed the QK SMS app, just like you did, so we can compare notes
o As a test, while in the default SMS, I deleted an entire set of texts
o Then I started up the QK SMS app
o Upon first use, it asked to be the default, and it took it
o Just like that (it was too easy, that I had to check that it worked)
o Then I checked the messages, and, yup, it was faithful to the original
o All the texts were there except the ones I deleted in the default app
o Then I checked the QK SMS settings
- I noticed it has an "inbox" and an "archived" section (interestingly)
- It seems to have an automatic-blocking capability ("should I answer")
- It has a global "delayed sending" option (what for?)
- It can prevent non-mobile numbers from showing up when composing
- It can auto-compress MMS attachments to any of 7 sizes
100KB, 200KB, 300KB, 600KB, 1MB, 2MB, or no compression
- And it does a couple other things which aren't all that important
One thing that is nice that I hadn't expected is that it can SEARCH your
"inbox" for a keyword, and find _all_ the messages that have that keyword!
Who knew!
Not me.
QKsms seems to have a only a couple payware options:
o Backup and restore
o Schedule messages
And, I haven't seen an ad yet (if it has ads, I'll ditch it, as NONE of my
apps have ads unless it's the only app on the planet that does the job).
In the past, I recall an SMS-scheduler for messages you want to schedule
(either one time, or repeatedly), so that's the only thing, I think, that
is missing.
Oh, I forgot to test the sidewise thing for the OP...
o It seems to work in both portrait mode & landscape mode for me!
M.L.
Nov 17, 2018, 1:48:42 AM11/17/18
to
> I recall an SMS-scheduler for messages you want to schedule
>(either one time, or repeatedly), so that's the only thing, I think, that
>is missing.
one. It has very flexible scheduling, including recurring events. It's
not on Google Play anymore for some reason.
SMS Scheduler (by Gizmoquip LLC)
https://www.amazon.com/Gizmoquip-LLC-SMS-Scheduler/dp/B00D7JCRO8
https://gizmoquip.com/sms-scheduler.php
arlen michael holder
Nov 17, 2018, 2:03:25 AM11/17/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 05:52:46 -0000 (UTC), arlen michael holder wrote:
> QKsms seems to have a only a couple payware options:
> o Backup and restore
> o Schedule messages
I am testing out these four, which claim the following...
> QKsms seems to have a only a couple payware options:
> o Backup and restore
> o Schedule messages
o QK SMS
- 100% ad free
- auto compress MMS
- search messages
o Mood Messenger
- 100% ad free
- Typing indicator to see when the contact is writing
- Private conversations password protected
- Schedule messages
- Pin important messages at the top of the list
o Handsent SMS
- Encrypted messages
- backup
- scheduled messages
- pin favorites to the top
- search messages
o Chomp SMS
- passcode app lock
- private messages
- scheduled sms
- revoke text
- pin favorites to the top
- backup text
- auto save pictures to the gallery
If others can test the rest, we'll have a good survey for all.
BTW, a quick peek at all four showed that they all rotated the screen when
I rotated the phone, so the OP can't go wrong on that with any of them.
arlen michael holder
Nov 17, 2018, 2:14:05 AM11/17/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 00:48:39 -0600, M.L. wrote:
> SMS Scheduler (by Gizmoquip LLC)
> https://www.amazon.com/Gizmoquip-LLC-SMS-Scheduler/dp/B00D7JCRO8
> https://gizmoquip.com/sms-scheduler.php
Thanks for that keyword search term, where the first hit was this:
> SMS Scheduler (by Gizmoquip LLC)
> https://www.amazon.com/Gizmoquip-LLC-SMS-Scheduler/dp/B00D7JCRO8
> https://gizmoquip.com/sms-scheduler.php
<https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.yeriomin.smsscheduler/>
And where you are totally correct in that there are a billion of these
on Google Play.
For example.
o SMS Scheduler Free, by Ulka International Pvt Ltd
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ulka.sms_scheduler_trial>
o SMS Scheduler, by Juboraj Sarker
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.juborajsarker.smsscheduler>
o Do It Later - Message Scheduler, by Hnib
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.hnib.smslater>
I installed the F-Droid one, and scheduled a message where the GUI seems to
be kind of nice (you just scroll to the date and time and then type the
recipient and message and set how many times you want it to be sent).
micky
Nov 17, 2018, 2:55:33 PM11/17/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 16 Nov 2018 21:39:44 -0000 (UTC), arlen
that if there's a way to disagree with what is said, nospam will find
it.
>Anyway, as with what Frank said, my stock messaging app rotates just fine.
>
>It's the stock SMS app for the LG Stylo 3 Plus, Nougat 7.0 for T-Mobile.
>It's called "Messaging version 5.30.61.002" in the Android app settings.
>
>I backed it up to an APK so that I could give the OP the full name:
> Messaging-com.android.mms-53061002-v5.30.61.002.apk
>
>If desired, I can upload that app to a binary site for the OP.
From your offer, I gather you don't think being for an LG phone will be
a problem for a Xioami phone.
So yes, I'd appreciate it a lot if you'd upload it somewhere.
>In addition, if we look for the _best_ third-party free message apps,
>maybe we'll find a venn diagram overlap of the best to test for the OP.
><https://www.androidauthority.com/best-texting-apps-for-android-653970/>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
>
><https://www.androidcentral.com/best-text-messaging-apps>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.textra>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
>
><https://www.androidpit.com/best-sms-apps-android
>o Features
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
>o Customization
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
>o Simplicity
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o Desktop integration
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mysms.android.sms>
>
>I'd start with those to explore for rotation features...
Wow. There are a lot, and I don't think any are likely to list Rotate as
a feature. Reviews might say if one doesn't rotate, but I would guess
that all of them do. I'm surprised that mine doesn't. It's hard enough
to type a long text rotated, using ones thumbs, even harder in portrait
position with smaller keys.
I don't know how to write android code but I would think it's only a few
lines to make something rotatable.
michael holder <arlen_mich...@example.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:14:02 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
>> want to talk to use.
>
>Is that a joke?
Eli the Bearded says he doesn't read the group much, so he doesn't know
>On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 13:14:02 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>> messaging apps don't interoperate, so use the one that the people you
>> want to talk to use.
>
>Is that a joke?
that if there's a way to disagree with what is said, nospam will find
it.
>Anyway, as with what Frank said, my stock messaging app rotates just fine.
>
>It's the stock SMS app for the LG Stylo 3 Plus, Nougat 7.0 for T-Mobile.
>It's called "Messaging version 5.30.61.002" in the Android app settings.
>
>I backed it up to an APK so that I could give the OP the full name:
> Messaging-com.android.mms-53061002-v5.30.61.002.apk
>
>If desired, I can upload that app to a binary site for the OP.
a problem for a Xioami phone.
So yes, I'd appreciate it a lot if you'd upload it somewhere.
>In addition, if we look for the _best_ third-party free message apps,
>maybe we'll find a venn diagram overlap of the best to test for the OP.
><https://www.androidauthority.com/best-texting-apps-for-android-653970/>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
>
><https://www.androidcentral.com/best-text-messaging-apps>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.textra>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>
>o <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
>
><https://www.androidpit.com/best-sms-apps-android
>o Features
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.calea.echo>
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.p1.chompsms>
>o Customization
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.handcent.app.nextsms>
>o Simplicity
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
>o Desktop integration
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mysms.android.sms>
>
>I'd start with those to explore for rotation features...
a feature. Reviews might say if one doesn't rotate, but I would guess
that all of them do. I'm surprised that mine doesn't. It's hard enough
to type a long text rotated, using ones thumbs, even harder in portrait
position with smaller keys.
I don't know how to write android code but I would think it's only a few
lines to make something rotatable.
micky
Nov 17, 2018, 2:57:51 PM11/17/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, on 16 Nov 2018 20:32:42 GMT, Frank Slootweg
Thanks for the suggestion. It didn't work.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 17, 2018, 3:15:21 PM11/17/18
to
this group ("8MB sms pic") poster 'K120' asked for an SMS/MMS app to
solve his (MMS size) problem.
IIRC someone suggested QKSMS and K120 just reported that he used that
to solve his problem. So may be QKSMS will also solve your
(non-rotation) problem. Worth a try.
'QKSMS'
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
arlen michael holder
Nov 17, 2018, 3:25:05 PM11/17/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 14:55:28 -0500, micky wrote:
> Wow. There are a lot, and I don't think any are likely to list Rotate as
> a feature.
I tested _every_ one on rotation for you, micky.
> Wow. There are a lot, and I don't think any are likely to list Rotate as
> a feature.
They _all_ rotated on my LG Stylo 3 Plus Nougat 7.0.
That's all I can tell you.
Of the bunch, the QKSMS works the best for me, but each has nice things.
All of the ones I tested are far *better* than the LG native app, so I no
longer recommend the LG native app (now that I have them).
For me, what's working GREAT (in my limited tests anyway) are these two:
1. QKSMS
<https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
2. SMS Scheduler (the F-Droid one)
<https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.github.yeriomin.smsscheduler/>
The second app works fine alonside the first app (where I was worried only
one could be the "default" but it worked just fine).
That's my recommendation.
> Reviews might say if one doesn't rotate, but I would guess
> that all of them do. I'm surprised that mine doesn't. It's hard enough
> to type a long text rotated, using ones thumbs, even harder in portrait
> position with smaller keys.
setting a switch, of course, in the phone).
So I wonder if it's the app on your phone, or the phone, but you can tell
in a split second just by downloading and setting QKSMS up.
It works instantly.
And, don't worry about the default as I tested it by going back to the old
SMS app. It worked great.
All my messages came along for the ride.
It takes less time to do it than it took me to type this up.
> I don't know how to write android code but I would think it's only a few
> lines to make something rotatable.
about a week or so ago, as I recall, a switch that the developer can set,
so, it "could" be your app (but I don't know enough to say that for sure).
All I can say is that I think your solution may be this app:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
<https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
If you have F-droid set up, I'd use that one first, as they tend to more
free of "shenanigans" but I don't know if there is a difference for a fact.
--
Too many people on Usenet propose "imaginary" solutions; mine are all real!
arlen michael holder
Nov 17, 2018, 3:36:33 PM11/17/18
to
On 17 Nov 2018 20:15:20 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
On both counts Frank is correct.
QKSMS rotated just fine for me on LG Stylo 3 Plus Nougat 7.0.
(But _all_ four of the SMS apps I tested rotated just fine too.)
But I _like_ QKSMS _better_ than my stock T-Mobile LG SMS app!
So QKSMS has _replaced_ my stock SMS app (it wasn't a hard call).
With respect to photos, I don't have a problem with that as I rarely send
them, but a quick look at the QKSMS settings shows it has a feature for
that.
o It can auto-compress MMS attachments to any of 7 sizes
As for where to get it, I prefer F-Droid but it's also on Google Play:
o QKSMS F-Droid
<https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
o QKSMS Google Play
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
If anyone out there has an inkling of what the difference might be (if any)
between the Google Play and F-Droid versions, that would be of interest to
all.
--
The difference between me and many Usenet posters is that my solutions are
not imaginary - they're real - with real URLs and real facts and real
references.
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
On both counts Frank is correct.
QKSMS rotated just fine for me on LG Stylo 3 Plus Nougat 7.0.
(But _all_ four of the SMS apps I tested rotated just fine too.)
But I _like_ QKSMS _better_ than my stock T-Mobile LG SMS app!
So QKSMS has _replaced_ my stock SMS app (it wasn't a hard call).
With respect to photos, I don't have a problem with that as I rarely send
them, but a quick look at the QKSMS settings shows it has a feature for
that.
o It can auto-compress MMS attachments to any of 7 sizes
100KB, 200KB, 300KB, 600KB, 1MB, 2MB, or no compression
o The "recommended" size, according to the settings, is 300KB
As for where to get it, I prefer F-Droid but it's also on Google Play:
o QKSMS F-Droid
<https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
o QKSMS Google Play
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
If anyone out there has an inkling of what the difference might be (if any)
between the Google Play and F-Droid versions, that would be of interest to
all.
--
The difference between me and many Usenet posters is that my solutions are
not imaginary - they're real - with real URLs and real facts and real
references.
micky
Nov 17, 2018, 5:15:55 PM11/17/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, on Sat, 17 Nov 2018 20:36:33 -0000 (UTC), arlen
just a couple days ago a new-to-me fuel oil company said they either had
to oome out and look at my oil tank or text them 3 pictures of it. To
make sure it's not leaking.
>o It can auto-compress MMS attachments to any of 7 sizes
> 100KB, 200KB, 300KB, 600KB, 1MB, 2MB, or no compression
>o The "recommended" size, according to the settings, is 300KB
>
>As for where to get it, I prefer F-Droid but it's also on Google Play:
>o QKSMS F-Droid
> <https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
>o QKSMS Google Play
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
>If anyone out there has an inkling of what the difference might be (if any)
>between the Google Play and F-Droid versions, that would be of interest to
>all.
I don't have F-droid yet but the app is in and seems to be working fine.
Thanks and thanks all.
michael holder <arlen_mich...@example.com> wrote:
>On 17 Nov 2018 20:15:20 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
Well this one gets 3 votes, so that's the one for me.
>On 17 Nov 2018 20:15:20 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
>On both counts Frank is correct.
>
>QKSMS rotated just fine for me on LG Stylo 3 Plus Nougat 7.0.
>(But _all_ four of the SMS apps I tested rotated just fine too.)
>
>But I _like_ QKSMS _better_ than my stock T-Mobile LG SMS app!
>So QKSMS has _replaced_ my stock SMS app (it wasn't a hard call).
>
>With respect to photos, I don't have a problem with that as I rarely send
>them, but a quick look at the QKSMS settings shows it has a feature for
>that.
I think I've sent one photo with the old app, but it's coincidental that
>On both counts Frank is correct.
>
>QKSMS rotated just fine for me on LG Stylo 3 Plus Nougat 7.0.
>(But _all_ four of the SMS apps I tested rotated just fine too.)
>
>But I _like_ QKSMS _better_ than my stock T-Mobile LG SMS app!
>So QKSMS has _replaced_ my stock SMS app (it wasn't a hard call).
>
>With respect to photos, I don't have a problem with that as I rarely send
>them, but a quick look at the QKSMS settings shows it has a feature for
>that.
just a couple days ago a new-to-me fuel oil company said they either had
to oome out and look at my oil tank or text them 3 pictures of it. To
make sure it's not leaking.
>o It can auto-compress MMS attachments to any of 7 sizes
> 100KB, 200KB, 300KB, 600KB, 1MB, 2MB, or no compression
>o The "recommended" size, according to the settings, is 300KB
>
>As for where to get it, I prefer F-Droid but it's also on Google Play:
>o QKSMS F-Droid
> <https://f-droid.org/packages/com.moez.QKSMS/>
>o QKSMS Google Play
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
>If anyone out there has an inkling of what the difference might be (if any)
>between the Google Play and F-Droid versions, that would be of interest to
>all.
Thanks and thanks all.
arlen michael holder
Nov 18, 2018, 11:14:16 AM11/18/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 04:00:18 +0000 (UTC), Eli the Bearded wrote:
> Voice Over Internet Protocol is a completely different form of
> communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
> little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
> positions.
Do they make an Internet solution that is _not_ proprietary?
> Voice Over Internet Protocol is a completely different form of
> communication than Simple Message Service (aka "texts"). I read very
> little of this group but I suspect that's not a fair summary of
> positions.
I don't know. Do they?
I must admit I made a thinko, where I wrote VOIP, but what I really meant
was the Internet solutions (which are all, I think, proprietary in that the
other person has to be on the same damn solution - which is a huge cost).
As such, I knew full well the idiocy that nospam was spewing, since that
super long thread contains so many posts from so many idiots that it's not
funny.
Basically they all seem to fall into one of two camps:
o Either they think Internet (proprietary) solutions are all the rage, or,
o They're just fine with the default SMS-based non-proprietary solution.
What I'm calling Internet "proprietary" solutions are things like WhatsApp
where the limitation is that everyone has to be on it (which is, IMHO, a
ridiculous limitation), but where the advantage is mostly that it's "free"
for those who need free because it uses the "Internet" instead of SMS/MMS
channels.
*Lord knows, I love free* ... but the _cost_ for that free is huge!
It's just a fact that I'd be hard pressed, where I live to find cellular
service that is _not_ free unlimited texting, so it's a needs-based thing,
where, the reality is...
o If you _need_ the "free" of an Internet based solution, then use it.
o Otherwise, why on earth would you use it?
The people in _that_ thread said it does groups better than SMS but they
are full of shit as regular SMS does groups just fine. They said a _lot_ of
crap in that thread, where most of it was due to sheer ignorance (e.g.,
they said "nobody uses SMS", which is just ignorant horse shit).
The truth of the matter is, as I see it, that:
o The internet solutions are great if you need the "free" they provide,
o But, the _cost_ of those Internet solutions is vast (compatibility).
Do they make an Internet solution that is _not_ proprietary?
I don't know. Do they?
arlen michael holder
Nov 18, 2018, 11:14:19 AM11/18/18
to
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 17:15:50 -0500, micky wrote:
>>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
> Well this one gets 3 votes, so that's the one for me.
Hi micky,
>>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moez.QKSMS>
>
> Well this one gets 3 votes, so that's the one for me.
You didn't mention specifically whether the "ROTATION" was fixed.
Did the QKSMS rotate for you?
If so, then it was the app, not the phone.
============= Mood Messenger ==============
*BTW, DO NOT INSTALL THAT DARN MOOD MESSENGER APP!*
Jesus Christ. It's obnoxious!
I tested it, and then switched back to QKSMS.
Now, today, that darn Mood Messenger keeps annoying me asking to be put
back! It's popping up *multiple* notifications, asking to be put back as
the default SMS app.
For Christs' sake, it's even popping up advertisements!
I am going to leave it on the phone for a couple more days just to see what
it does, (someone has to do it for the team), but I do NOT recommend an app
that sleazy.
> I think I've sent one photo with the old app, but it's coincidental that
> just a couple days ago a new-to-me fuel oil company said they either had
> to oome out and look at my oil tank or text them 3 pictures of it. To
> make sure it's not leaking.
size, for MMS, which is typically the kind of photo that asks the wife
"should I buy this color or that color blanket for the grandkids?".
It seems that a good number (that QKSMS recommends) is 300KB.
Do folks here concur that 300KB is a good size compromise for MMS?
> I don't have F-droid yet but the app is in and seems to be working fine.
_both_ F-Droid and on Google Play but _some_ are payware on Google Play
while they're freeware on F-Droid (off hand I think "OSMAnd~" and "FTP
Server (free)" are in that category, as I recall).
Also, some apps you want are _only_ on F-Droid, e.g., New Pipe, which, if
you've ever watched YouTube using the YouTube app, you'll _never_ use again
for the rest of your natural life, once you use New Pipe.
HINT: Personally, I think New Pipe is the canonical example of the _best_
open-source freeware on Android ever ... it's _that_ good (for what it
does).
Andy Burns
Nov 18, 2018, 3:25:47 PM11/18/18
to
nospam wrote:
> micky wrote:
>
>> So what's a good texting app
>
pretenders, just use real SMS
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
> micky wrote:
>
>> So what's a good texting app
>
> messaging apps don't interoperate, so
[...] refuse to use any of the whatsapp/viber/telegram/hangouts
pretenders, just use real SMS
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.messaging>
nospam
Nov 18, 2018, 3:46:27 PM11/18/18
to
In article <g5e06a...@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
end-to-end encryption, embedded media, receipts, group chats, p2p
payments and will work on a desktop/laptop computer as well as over
wifi.
<use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> >> So what's a good texting app
> >
> > messaging apps don't interoperate, so
>
> [...] refuse to use any of the whatsapp/viber/telegram/hangouts
> pretenders, just use real SMS
real sms is primitive. messaging apps do quite a bit more, including
> >> So what's a good texting app
> >
> > messaging apps don't interoperate, so
>
> [...] refuse to use any of the whatsapp/viber/telegram/hangouts
> pretenders, just use real SMS
end-to-end encryption, embedded media, receipts, group chats, p2p
payments and will work on a desktop/laptop computer as well as over
wifi.
Andy Burns
Nov 18, 2018, 4:09:52 PM11/18/18
to
nospam wrote:
> real sms is primitive. messaging apps do quite a bit more, including
> end-to-end encryption
Nothing I send via SMS needs encrypting
> real sms is primitive. messaging apps do quite a bit more, including
> end-to-end encryption
> embedded media
I would use email
> receipts
SMS supports delivery notifications (not all providers do, or some of
them charge)
> group chats
> p2p payments
Neither are the sort of thing I use SMS for
> and will work on a desktop/laptop computer
quite neat
<https://messages.android.com>
> as well as over wifi.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 1:54:56 AM11/19/18
to
Am 18.11.18 um 22:09 schrieb Andy Burns:
Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
ever answer back with an SMS.
Full quote intentional.
ever answer back with an SMS.
Full quote intentional.
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 2:03:31 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
It is used by many yet.
Most users I know will answer with an SMS,
especially if they realize or already know
they do not have the other side withing their messaging app contacts.
> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will
never ever answer back with an SMS.Full quote intentional.
Perhaps outdated, but not completely.
never ever answer back with an SMS.Full quote intentional.
It is used by many yet.
Most users I know will answer with an SMS,
especially if they realize or already know
they do not have the other side withing their messaging app contacts.
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 2:09:04 AM11/19/18
to
Libor Striz <poutnik4R...@CAPITALSgmail.com> Wrote in message:
> Perhaps outdated, but not completely.It is used by many
yet.Most users I know will answer with an SMS, especially if they
realize or already knowthey do not have the other side withing
their messaging app contacts.
P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
switched ON on their demand only,
so they are not reachable.
> Perhaps outdated, but not completely.It is used by many
yet.Most users I know will answer with an SMS, especially if they
realize or already knowthey do not have the other side withing
their messaging app contacts.
P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
switched ON on their demand only,
so they are not reachable.
Andy Burns
Nov 19, 2018, 2:59:51 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
> ever answer back with an SMS.
You must live with and interact with very different people to me.
> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
> ever answer back with an SMS.
Chris
Nov 19, 2018, 3:24:29 AM11/19/18
to
but they do use it. In iOS for example it's hard to know the difference as
imessages is used for both SMS and encrypted IM chat.
Maybe you only hang around with teenagers and never communicate with
organisations?
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 3:29:05 AM11/19/18
to
Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> Wrote in message:
intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,
there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.
For similar reasons many do not have even TV.
They are afraid or even verified
these technology advances would take too much of their time and
they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct
physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and
interests.
> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.
> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.
Similarly as there is many even young people who do not
> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.
intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,
there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.
For similar reasons many do not have even TV.
They are afraid or even verified
these technology advances would take too much of their time and
they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct
physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and
interests.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 4:55:30 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:
it is almost inexistent.
> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> switched ON on their demand only,
> so they are not reachable.
>
In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> switched ON on their demand only,
> so they are not reachable.
>
it is almost inexistent.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 5:01:03 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 09:28 schrieb Libor Striz:
> They are afraid or even verified
> these technology advances would take too much of their time and
> they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct
> physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and
> interests.
They live an admirable life but your point is OT.
> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> Wrote in message:
>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.
>
>> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.
>
> Similarly as there is many even young people who do not
> intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,
> there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.
> For similar reasons many do not have even TV.
I admire these people but your point is completely OT.
>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.
>
>> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.
>
> Similarly as there is many even young people who do not
> intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,
> there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.
> For similar reasons many do not have even TV.
> They are afraid or even verified
> these technology advances would take too much of their time and
> they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct
> physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and
> interests.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 5:03:41 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 09:24 schrieb Chris:
office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
with iMsg and WA.
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
>> ever answer back with an SMS.
>> Full quote intentional.
>
> Very odd assertion. Almost everyone I know uses SMS maybe not exclusively,
> but they do use it. In iOS for example it's hard to know the difference as
> imessages is used for both SMS and encrypted IM chat.
>
> Maybe you only hang around with teenagers and never communicate with
> organisations?
Bullshit. I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
>> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
>> ever answer back with an SMS.
>> Full quote intentional.
>
> Very odd assertion. Almost everyone I know uses SMS maybe not exclusively,
> but they do use it. In iOS for example it's hard to know the difference as
> imessages is used for both SMS and encrypted IM chat.
>
> Maybe you only hang around with teenagers and never communicate with
> organisations?
office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
with iMsg and WA.
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 5:30:18 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
> Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,> switched ON on their demand only,> so they are not reachable.
> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe it is almost inexistent.
You have biased information.
> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe it is almost inexistent.
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 5:31:27 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
> Am 19.11.18 um 09:28 schrieb Libor Striz:> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> Wrote in message:>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.> >> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.> > Similarly as there is many even young people who do not> intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,> there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.> For similar reasons many do not have even TV.I admire these people but your point is completely OT.> They are afraid or even verified> these technology advances would take too much of their time and> they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct> physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and> interests.They live an admirable life but your point is OT.
Not more than you info about outdated not used SMS. :-) aka texting.
Jim S
Nov 19, 2018, 6:34:29 AM11/19/18
to
micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in
news:er1uudpvftjshshcs...@4ax.com:
> In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:17:02 +0100 (GMT+01:00),
> Libor Striz <poutnik4R...@CAPITALSgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> Wrote in message:
the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years!
(and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a
good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell
things. Any suggestions?
>>
>>What exactly do you mean by texting ?
>>As it looks like you speak about email,
>>but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
>
> Yes, I meant SMS and MMS.
>
> Not interested in email. I didn't put the clauses in the best order
and
> only mentioned email because the built-in email app is another app that
> I've read does not rotate on Xiaomi phones.
MySMS.
Can be installed on pc, but otherwise just the same as SMS/Text app on
mobile.
--
Jim S
news:er1uudpvftjshshcs...@4ax.com:
> In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 16 Nov 2018 12:17:02 +0100 (GMT+01:00),
> Libor Striz <poutnik4R...@CAPITALSgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> Wrote in message:
>>> I finally noticed that Rotate does work with the browswer and
elsewhere,and it doesn't work only with texting. Googling showed me that
the Xiaomi text app has that flaw, and seems tohave had it for years!
(and the email app also, but I use K9 when Iuse anything.) So what's a
good texting app, free or under $5 that doesn't show ads ortry to sell
things. Any suggestions?
>>
>>What exactly do you mean by texting ?
>>As it looks like you speak about email,
>>but by an informal term texting is usually implied SMS.
>
> Yes, I meant SMS and MMS.
>
> Not interested in email. I didn't put the clauses in the best order
and
> only mentioned email because the built-in email app is another app that
> I've read does not rotate on Xiaomi phones.
MySMS.
Can be installed on pc, but otherwise just the same as SMS/Text app on
mobile.
--
Jim S
Chris
Nov 19, 2018, 8:09:15 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 09:24 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
>>> ever answer back with an SMS.
>>> Full quote intentional.
>>
>> Very odd assertion. Almost everyone I know uses SMS maybe not exclusively,
>> but they do use it. In iOS for example it's hard to know the difference as
>> imessages is used for both SMS and encrypted IM chat.
>>
>> Maybe you only hang around with teenagers and never communicate with
>> organisations?
>
> Bullshit.
Which bit?
> Am 19.11.18 um 09:24 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
>>> ever answer back with an SMS.
>>> Full quote intentional.
>>
>> Very odd assertion. Almost everyone I know uses SMS maybe not exclusively,
>> but they do use it. In iOS for example it's hard to know the difference as
>> imessages is used for both SMS and encrypted IM chat.
>>
>> Maybe you only hang around with teenagers and never communicate with
>> organisations?
>
> Bullshit.
> I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
> office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
> with iMsg and WA.
what the implications are? For example does he use it to "text" any of his
Android owning friends?
Frank Slootweg
Nov 19, 2018, 8:14:10 AM11/19/18
to
OTOH, it's quite funny see someone say "completely outdated" in a
*NetNews/Usenet message* for crying out loud. Isn't NetNews/Usenet
"completely outdated" and 'replaced' (by web forums) as well!?
Frank Slootweg
Nov 19, 2018, 8:14:10 AM11/19/18
to
Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> nospam wrote:
[About SMS versus other - mutually incompatible - IM systems:]
> > and will work on a desktop/laptop computer
>
> The QR code link from a desktop browser to the Android Messaging app is
> quite neat
>
> <https://messages.android.com>
Thanks for that! May come in handy. I use a similar thing for WhatsApp
(Oops! :-)), so it is nice to be able to (view and) compose SMS messages
on my computer as well.
> nospam wrote:
[About SMS versus other - mutually incompatible - IM systems:]
> > and will work on a desktop/laptop computer
>
> The QR code link from a desktop browser to the Android Messaging app is
> quite neat
>
> <https://messages.android.com>
(Oops! :-)), so it is nice to be able to (view and) compose SMS messages
on my computer as well.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 8:16:10 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 11:30 schrieb Libor Striz:
In Europe it is almost impossible to sell "feature phones". The ones
that are still around from the pre-Android- and pre-iPhone era are dying
with worn out batteries. Population-share presumably considerably less
than 5% and usage-share under 1%?
I would also appreciate if you could shorten your lines to 72 characters
maximum. That's a question of politeness.
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe it is almost inexistent.
>
> You have biased information.
Do you want to defend your own outdated behaviour?
>
> You have biased information.
In Europe it is almost impossible to sell "feature phones". The ones
that are still around from the pre-Android- and pre-iPhone era are dying
with worn out batteries. Population-share presumably considerably less
than 5% and usage-share under 1%?
I would also appreciate if you could shorten your lines to 72 characters
maximum. That's a question of politeness.
Chris
Nov 19, 2018, 8:22:27 AM11/19/18
to
https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-region-in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 8:23:30 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 14:09 schrieb Chris:
Is this a serious question? Not really ...
My Dad is using all the features you can imagine: From iCloud, GPS,
Fotos, E-Mail and the like very proficiently.
And he likes his Apple-watch very much and uses it the full extent.
Questions?
My Dad is using all the features you can imagine: From iCloud, GPS,
Fotos, E-Mail and the like very proficiently.
And he likes his Apple-watch very much and uses it the full extent.
Questions?
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 19, 2018, 8:36:31 AM11/19/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 14:22 schrieb Chris:
What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
and Indian cell phones?
In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
and Indian cell phones?
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 8:43:56 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
> Am 19.11.18 um 11:30 schrieb Libor Striz:> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe it is almost inexistent.> > You have biased information.
> Do you want to defend your own outdated behaviour?
It need not defense.
> Am 19.11.18 um 11:30 schrieb Libor Striz:> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe it is almost inexistent.> > You have biased information.
> Do you want to defend your own outdated behaviour?
I do use messaging apps a lot so do I use sms.
SMS are e.g. invaluable for receivers abroad out of EU if they do
not use roaming data nor local SIM.
> I would also appreciate if you could shorten your lines to 72 characters maximum. That's a question of politeness.
Generally, it is hard to count them here, but I usually put a new
line every 2 display lines on the Android screen.
The quoting mess us the recent strange behaviour of one of few
free and usable Android Usenet client .
Libor Striz
Nov 19, 2018, 8:55:11 AM11/19/18
to
>In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African and Indian cell phones?
Note that the OP has not explicitly stated he wanted US solution
and that this group is international.
nospam
Nov 19, 2018, 9:41:08 AM11/19/18
to
In article <psudei$h77$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
what matters is number of messages sent/received, not number of phones
sold.
wrote:
sold.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 19, 2018, 10:34:12 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:22 schrieb Chris:
> > Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> >> Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:
> >>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
> >>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> >>> switched ON on their demand only,
> >>> so they are not reachable.
> >>>
> >> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
> >> it is almost inexistent.
> >
> > Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
> > https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-region-in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
> >
> > Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
> > US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
> > dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
> > https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
>
> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
The one wanting to be right at any price would be *you*! Or what
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:22 schrieb Chris:
> > Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> >> Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:
> >>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
> >>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> >>> switched ON on their demand only,
> >>> so they are not reachable.
> >>>
> >> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
> >> it is almost inexistent.
> >
> > Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
> > https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-region-in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
> >
> > Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
> > US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
> > dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
> > https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
>
> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
defense do you have for dodging "eu" and diverting to an attack?
> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> and Indian cell phones?
a long time ago, the OP found what he wanted and *said* so.
*Currently* we're (not) discussing *your* silly statment
<You>
Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never
ever answer back with an SMS.
which you made - oh the irony - using this "completely outdated" medium.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 19, 2018, 10:40:14 AM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:09 schrieb Chris:
> > Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> >> I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
> >> office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
> >> with iMsg and WA.
> >
> > Does your dad know the difference between SMS and Apple IM in iMessage and
> > what the implications are? For example does he use it to "text" any of his
> > Android owning friends?
>
> Is this a serious question? Not really ...
Are you in the habit of answering your questions for others?
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:09 schrieb Chris:
> > Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> >> I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
> >> office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
> >> with iMsg and WA.
> >
> > Does your dad know the difference between SMS and Apple IM in iMessage and
> > what the implications are? For example does he use it to "text" any of his
> > Android owning friends?
>
> Is this a serious question? Not really ...
But, yes, for someone with a non-closed mind it is a serious question.
> My Dad is using all the features you can imagine: From iCloud, GPS,
> Fotos, E-Mail and the like very proficiently.
>
> And he likes his Apple-watch very much and uses it the full extent.
>
> Questions?
of his Android owning friends?" question?
Chris
Nov 19, 2018, 2:42:11 PM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:09 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
>>> office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
>>> with iMsg and WA.
>>
>> Does your dad know the difference between SMS and Apple IM in iMessage and
>> what the implications are? For example does he use it to "text" any of his
>> Android owning friends?
>
> Is this a serious question? Not really ...
Absolutely. That's why asked it/them.
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:09 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> I'm almost 60 but I have 4 kids and my colleagues at the
>>> office are younger than I am. But my 80year old Dad is communicating
>>> with iMsg and WA.
>>
>> Does your dad know the difference between SMS and Apple IM in iMessage and
>> what the implications are? For example does he use it to "text" any of his
>> Android owning friends?
>
> Is this a serious question? Not really ...
> My Dad is using all the features you can imagine: From iCloud, GPS,
> Fotos, E-Mail and the like very proficiently.
> And he likes his Apple-watch very much and uses it the full extent.
>
> Questions?
of them.
Chris
Nov 19, 2018, 2:48:16 PM11/19/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:22 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:
>>>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
>>>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
>>>> switched ON on their demand only,
>>>> so they are not reachable.
>>>>
>>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
>>> it is almost inexistent.
>>
>> Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-region-in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
>>
>> Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
>> US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
>> dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
>
> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
> Am 19.11.18 um 14:22 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> Am 19.11.18 um 08:09 schrieb Libor Striz:
>>>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
>>>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
>>>> switched ON on their demand only,
>>>> so they are not reachable.
>>>>
>>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
>>> it is almost inexistent.
>>
>> Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-region-in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
>>
>> Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
>> US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
>> dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
>
> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> and Indian cell phones?
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 20, 2018, 4:33:32 AM11/20/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 14:55 schrieb Libor Striz:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
>
>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African and Indian cell phones?
>
> Note that the OP has not explicitly stated he wanted US solution
> and that this group is international.
You are deliberately bullshitting. EOD.
>
>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African and Indian cell phones?
>
> Note that the OP has not explicitly stated he wanted US solution
> and that this group is international.
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 20, 2018, 4:42:43 AM11/20/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 20:48 schrieb Chris:
92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
"feature phone".
>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
>> and Indian cell phones?
>
> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
to WhatsApp or WeChat.
EOD
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>
> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>
> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
"feature phone".
>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
>> and Indian cell phones?
>
> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
to WhatsApp or WeChat.
EOD
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 20, 2018, 4:43:12 AM11/20/18
to
Am 19.11.18 um 15:41 schrieb nospam:
+1
Chris
Nov 20, 2018, 7:40:52 AM11/20/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 19.11.18 um 20:48 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>>
>> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
>> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
>
> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> "feature phone".
Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
> Am 19.11.18 um 20:48 schrieb Chris:
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>>
>> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
>> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
>
> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> "feature phone".
feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
>>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
>>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
>>> and Indian cell phones?
>>
>> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
>
> How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
> Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
> Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
> phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
> to WhatsApp or WeChat.
>
messaging via apps.
Chris
Nov 20, 2018, 8:05:44 AM11/20/18
to
https://www.statista.com/statistics/712394/a2p-sms-traffic-worldwide/
In the UK it's about 100 billion
https://www.statista.com/statistics/271561/number-of-sent-sms-messages-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
arlen michael holder
Nov 20, 2018, 11:56:31 AM11/20/18
to
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 16:14:19 -0000 (UTC), arlen michael holder wrote:
> I tested it, and then switched back to QKSMS.
> Now, today, that darn Mood Messenger keeps annoying me asking to be put
> back! It's popping up *multiple* notifications, asking to be put back as
> the default SMS app
The good news is that Mood Messenger didn't pull any tricks today.
I'll leave it on for about a week, just to see if it pops up ads again.
But the way to go, it seems is one of the other four I tested.
> I tested it, and then switched back to QKSMS.
> Now, today, that darn Mood Messenger keeps annoying me asking to be put
> back! It's popping up *multiple* notifications, asking to be put back as
> the default SMS app
The good news is that Mood Messenger didn't pull any tricks today.
I'll leave it on for about a week, just to see if it pops up ads again.
But the way to go, it seems is one of the other four I tested.
Lars Enderin
Nov 20, 2018, 1:04:02 PM11/20/18
to
2018-11-19 11:31 skrev Libor Striz:
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
>> Am 19.11.18 um 09:28 schrieb Libor Striz:> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> Wrote in message:>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.> >> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.> > Similarly as there is many even young people who do not> intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,> there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.> For similar reasons many do not have even TV.I admire these people but your point is completely OT.> They are afraid or even verified> these technology advances would take too much of their time and> they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct> physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and> interests.They live an admirable life but your point is OT.
>
> Not more than you info about outdated not used SMS. :-) aka texting.
>
Your ng reader (X-Newsreader: PiaoHong.Usenet.Client.Free:1.65) sucks.
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> Wrote in message:
>> Am 19.11.18 um 09:28 schrieb Libor Striz:> Andy Burns <use...@andyburns.uk> Wrote in message:>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:> Your choice but completely outdated. And 99% of the users will never > ever answer back with an SMS.> >> You must live with and interact with very different people to me.> > Similarly as there is many even young people who do not> intentionally have a Facebook/Twitter/Whatever account,> there are many, who do not intentionally want a smartphone.> For similar reasons many do not have even TV.I admire these people but your point is completely OT.> They are afraid or even verified> these technology advances would take too much of their time and> they prefer to spend it rather by the old-fashened direct> physical interaction with people, real life hobbies and> interests.They live an admirable life but your point is OT.
>
> Not more than you info about outdated not used SMS. :-) aka texting.
>
It's not acceptable to ignore newlines in cited text, at least if they
start with a >.
--
Lars Enderin
nospam
Nov 20, 2018, 1:28:14 PM11/20/18
to
In article <pt0vcj$he5$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
you're also confusing unit sales with messages sent. those who buy
feature phones don't text anywhere near as much as those with
smartphones, mostly because it's a pain to do so.
> >>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> >>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> >>> and Indian cell phones?
> >>
> >> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
> >
> > How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
> > Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
> > Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
> > phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
> > to WhatsApp or WeChat.
>
> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
> messaging via apps.
the point is that usenet has been replaced with modern web forums.
and since india was mentioned:
<https://trak.in/tags/business/2013/09/28/death-sms-indians-sending-2-sm
s-day/>
In a recent survey by Nielson, India, it was revealed that mobile
chat applications such as Nimbuzz and WhatsApp have literally
destroyed the SMS culture and usage inside India. Powered by
internet, these applications are prompting Indians to ditch SMS which
normally costs Re 1 to Rs 1.5 for local numbers and as high as Rs 5
for international numbers.
...
This trend is not a one-off case. Researchers and trend watchers have
observed this phenomenon to occur in USA and China as well. Famous
chat applications in China such as Weibo and WeChat have triggered
massive downfall in SMS usage in cities such as Beijing where the per
capita SMS usage has fallen to 36 from 42 a year ago. And the trend
is continuingŠ
...
Gartner India has already predicted that revenues from SMS would
slowly extinct in Asia and rest of the world in coming years.
wrote:
> >>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
> >>
> >> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
> >> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
> >
> > Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> > 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> > "feature phone".
>
> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
8% is a very small fraction, and it isn't just switzerland.
> >>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
> >>
> >> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
> >> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
> >
> > Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> > 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> > "feature phone".
>
> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
you're also confusing unit sales with messages sent. those who buy
feature phones don't text anywhere near as much as those with
smartphones, mostly because it's a pain to do so.
> >>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> >>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> >>> and Indian cell phones?
> >>
> >> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
> >
> > How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
> > Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
> > Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
> > phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
> > to WhatsApp or WeChat.
>
> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
> messaging via apps.
and since india was mentioned:
<https://trak.in/tags/business/2013/09/28/death-sms-indians-sending-2-sm
s-day/>
In a recent survey by Nielson, India, it was revealed that mobile
chat applications such as Nimbuzz and WhatsApp have literally
destroyed the SMS culture and usage inside India. Powered by
internet, these applications are prompting Indians to ditch SMS which
normally costs Re 1 to Rs 1.5 for local numbers and as high as Rs 5
for international numbers.
...
This trend is not a one-off case. Researchers and trend watchers have
observed this phenomenon to occur in USA and China as well. Famous
chat applications in China such as Weibo and WeChat have triggered
massive downfall in SMS usage in cities such as Beijing where the per
capita SMS usage has fallen to 36 from 42 a year ago. And the trend
is continuingŠ
...
Gartner India has already predicted that revenues from SMS would
slowly extinct in Asia and rest of the world in coming years.
nospam
Nov 20, 2018, 1:28:15 PM11/20/18
to
In article <pt10r7$psq$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
how does *24* *trillion* whatsapp messages sound?
3.5 years ago, it was 7 trillion, still quite a bit more:
<https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2015/03/25/whats-up>
The number of WhatsApp messages sent every day now exceeds the
number of standard texts. Last year it handled more than 7 trillion
messages, about 1,000 per person
spring 2018, whatsapp carried 65 billion messages *per* *day*, or
nearly 24 trillion per year, and that's just *one* app out of many
messaging apps:
<https://cdn.24.co.za/files/Cms/General/d/5145/b3729128a0124653857e56348
05a840c.png>
> In the UK it's about 100 billion
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/271561/number-of-sent-sms-messages-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
paywall again.
from a few years ago:
<https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2538488/SMS-takes-seat-
IM-number-texts-sent-Britain-falls-time.html>
Number of text messages being sent falls for the first time ever as
more people turn to Whatsapp and iMessage
...
The number of texts sent in Britain peaked at 39.7billion in 2011,
having sparked the new language of text speak, from OMG (Oh My God)
to LOL (Laugh Out Loud) and XOXO, meaning hugs and kisses.
However, this year the number is predicted to fall to 21billion, less
than half the 50billion Śinstant messagesą that will be sent.
wrote:
> >>>>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
> >>>>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> >>>>> switched ON on their demand only,
> >>>>> so they are not reachable.
> >>>>>
> >>>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
> >>>> it is almost inexistent.
> >>>
> >>> Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
> >>>
> >>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-re
> >>> gion-
> >>> in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
> >>>
> >>> Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
> >>> US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
> >>> dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-
> >>> amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
> >>
> >> what matters is number of messages sent/received, not number of phones
> >> sold.
> >
> > +1
>
> Ok. How does 1 trillion SMS messages sound? Not very "non-existent" is it?
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/712394/a2p-sms-traffic-worldwide/
paywall, but i assume that's per year.
> >>>>> P.S.: A lot of people have feature phones and a lot of people do
> >>>>> not use a mobile data at all, or with just minimal data plan,
> >>>>> switched ON on their demand only,
> >>>>> so they are not reachable.
> >>>>>
> >>>> In one word: Outdated and a population that shrinks every day. In Europe
> >>>> it is almost inexistent.
> >>>
> >>> Yet still approx half of all eu shipments
> >>>
> >>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/225489/market-share-of-the-european-re
> >>> gion-
> >>> in-global-feature-phone-and-smartphone-shipments/#0
> >>>
> >>> Still a very blinkered view. Most mobile users are outside of the EU and
> >>> US. In Africa and the Indian subcontinent feature phones are still
> >>> dominant. Globally they make up ~50% of all phones sold.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/285596/forecast-smartphone-penetration-
> >>> amongst-mobile-users-worldwide/
> >>
> >> what matters is number of messages sent/received, not number of phones
> >> sold.
> >
> > +1
>
> Ok. How does 1 trillion SMS messages sound? Not very "non-existent" is it?
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/712394/a2p-sms-traffic-worldwide/
how does *24* *trillion* whatsapp messages sound?
3.5 years ago, it was 7 trillion, still quite a bit more:
<https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2015/03/25/whats-up>
The number of WhatsApp messages sent every day now exceeds the
number of standard texts. Last year it handled more than 7 trillion
messages, about 1,000 per person
spring 2018, whatsapp carried 65 billion messages *per* *day*, or
nearly 24 trillion per year, and that's just *one* app out of many
messaging apps:
<https://cdn.24.co.za/files/Cms/General/d/5145/b3729128a0124653857e56348
05a840c.png>
> In the UK it's about 100 billion
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/271561/number-of-sent-sms-messages-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
from a few years ago:
<https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2538488/SMS-takes-seat-
IM-number-texts-sent-Britain-falls-time.html>
Number of text messages being sent falls for the first time ever as
more people turn to Whatsapp and iMessage
...
The number of texts sent in Britain peaked at 39.7billion in 2011,
having sparked the new language of text speak, from OMG (Oh My God)
to LOL (Laugh Out Loud) and XOXO, meaning hugs and kisses.
However, this year the number is predicted to fall to 21billion, less
than half the 50billion Śinstant messagesą that will be sent.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 20, 2018, 2:06:30 PM11/20/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
[...]
> Usenet is a geriatric event
which *you* use and keep using to spout your 'opinions'.
Most people would see the blatant irony in that.
[...]
> Usenet is a geriatric event
Most people would see the blatant irony in that.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 20, 2018, 2:06:30 PM11/20/18
to
person of all ages (i.e. babies till 115 years or so).
But, as nospam said, WhatsApp outnumbers SMS, so SMS is dead and SMS
outnumbers NetNews, so
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 21, 2018, 12:36:31 AM11/21/18
to
Am 20.11.18 um 13:40 schrieb Chris:
difference because you just want to have the last word all the time at
any price.
> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
> messaging via apps.
Usenet is not a forum. But you will hardly ever understand the
> messaging via apps.
difference because you just want to have the last word all the time at
any price.
Chris
Nov 21, 2018, 3:11:18 AM11/21/18
to
>
I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS. However, SMS is far, far
from obsolete and probably won't ever disappear. Especially with iMessage
blurring the lines between them. Discounting 1tr messages a year is folly.
Chris
Nov 21, 2018, 3:21:03 AM11/21/18
to
Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 20.11.18 um 13:40 schrieb Chris:
>> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
>> messaging via apps.
>
> Usenet is not a forum.
You need to revisit the definition of a forum. Usenet is most definitely a
> Am 20.11.18 um 13:40 schrieb Chris:
>> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
>> messaging via apps.
>
> Usenet is not a forum.
forum.
> But you will hardly ever understand the
> difference because you just want to have the last word all the time at
> any price.
Ha! From the guy who stated "EOD" in his last post. The irony.
> But you will hardly ever understand the
> difference because you just want to have the last word all the time at
> any price.
Seeing as you've stopped discussing the actual point then it's definitely
EOD
Joerg Lorenz
Nov 21, 2018, 3:44:40 AM11/21/18
to
Am 21.11.18 um 09:21 schrieb Chris:
Usenet/Newsgroups and a forum is:
https://superuser.com/questions/1041917/difference-between-usenet-and-forums-in-terms-of-servers
*PLONK*
> Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>> Am 20.11.18 um 13:40 schrieb Chris:
>>> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
>>> messaging via apps.
>>
>> Usenet is not a forum.
>
> You need to revisit the definition of a forum. Usenet is most definitely a
> forum.
As I correctly stated you don't know what the difference between
>> Am 20.11.18 um 13:40 schrieb Chris:
>>> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
>>> messaging via apps.
>>
>> Usenet is not a forum.
>
> You need to revisit the definition of a forum. Usenet is most definitely a
> forum.
Usenet/Newsgroups and a forum is:
https://superuser.com/questions/1041917/difference-between-usenet-and-forums-in-terms-of-servers
*PLONK*
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 8:04:38 AM11/21/18
to
In article <pt33v5$78v$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
exactly the point.
> However, SMS is far, far
> from obsolete
it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
> and probably won't ever disappear.
straw man. nobody said it would disappear entirely.
film cameras are obsolete, yet there are still a very small number of
people who use them. there are even people who still use typewriters.
> Especially with iMessage
> blurring the lines between them.
imessage doesn't blur the lines at all. in fact, it's the opposite. it
makes the difference very clear by using blue and green bubbles.
> Discounting 1tr messages a year is folly.
when compared with numbers more than an order of magnitude higher, it's
very easy to discount it, and the difference is becoming wider.
wrote:
>
> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
> However, SMS is far, far
> from obsolete
> and probably won't ever disappear.
film cameras are obsolete, yet there are still a very small number of
people who use them. there are even people who still use typewriters.
> Especially with iMessage
> blurring the lines between them.
makes the difference very clear by using blue and green bubbles.
> Discounting 1tr messages a year is folly.
very easy to discount it, and the difference is becoming wider.
Hergen Lehmann
Nov 21, 2018, 9:00:03 AM11/21/18
to
Am 21.11.18 um 14:04 schrieb nospam:
>> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
>
> exactly the point.
However, even if unpopular, every cell phone does support SMS
out-of-the-box. There are many more people who are capable of sending
and receiving SMS in case of need, then there are users of any other
messaging platform.
>> However, SMS is far, far
>> from obsolete
>
> it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
Except for three major disadvantages:
1. Sender and receiver must use the same app. Most people will need
multiple messenger apps to reach all of their friends and relatives, and
even that will not be enough to reach every person which may pop up when
doing business.
2. To be able to receive urgent messages, you need a permanently
available, mobile internet connection. This can get VERY expensive when
traveling, especially if you use an ad-supported platform, which
constantly transfers a lot of unnecessary data.
3. The most popular messaging app happens to be a security and privacy
risk due to extensive tracking and a controversial owner.
>> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
>
> exactly the point.
out-of-the-box. There are many more people who are capable of sending
and receiving SMS in case of need, then there are users of any other
messaging platform.
>> However, SMS is far, far
>> from obsolete
>
> it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
1. Sender and receiver must use the same app. Most people will need
multiple messenger apps to reach all of their friends and relatives, and
even that will not be enough to reach every person which may pop up when
doing business.
2. To be able to receive urgent messages, you need a permanently
available, mobile internet connection. This can get VERY expensive when
traveling, especially if you use an ad-supported platform, which
constantly transfers a lot of unnecessary data.
3. The most popular messaging app happens to be a security and privacy
risk due to extensive tracking and a controversial owner.
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 9:41:19 AM11/21/18
to
In article <id4gcf-...@hergen.dyndns.org>, Hergen Lehmann
people disable sms due to spam.
some smartphone users don't activate cellular service at all and use
the device as a pocket computer.
so no, not every cellphone supports sms.
> There are many more people who are capable of sending
> and receiving SMS in case of need, then there are users of any other
> messaging platform.
capable of != actually use.
the vast majority of messaging is done via messaging apps, not sms.
> >> However, SMS is far, far
> >> from obsolete
> >
> > it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
>
> Except for three major disadvantages:
none of them are major.
> 1. Sender and receiver must use the same app. Most people will need
> multiple messenger apps to reach all of their friends and relatives, and
> even that will not be enough to reach every person which may pop up when
> doing business.
that's minor and there's no need to reach every person anyway.
what matters is communicating with friends and family, who will all be
using the same app, perhaps two apps. it's not a big deal at all.
> 2. To be able to receive urgent messages, you need a permanently
> available, mobile internet connection. This can get VERY expensive when
> traveling, especially if you use an ad-supported platform, which
> constantly transfers a lot of unnecessary data.
nonsense.
first of all, sms also needs an available connection.
second, turn off data roaming and there won't be any surprise costs
when traveling.
third, the connection does not need to be permanently available. if
someone is out of a service area, messages are deferred. no big deal.
fourth, messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not, which means
there is no cost to use messaging versus sms, one of its many
advantages.
using wifi instead of cellular also means that messaging will work when
out of a cellular service area, including subways and airplanes and
even inside some buildings where the cellular signal too weak to be
used.
it also means that no cellular service is required at all, which
includes unactivated smartphones as well as desktop and laptop
computers.
> 3. The most popular messaging app happens to be a security and privacy
> risk due to extensive tracking and a controversial owner.
the most popular messaging app varies by region and device.
whatsapp is common outside the usa, while facebook messenger is common
in the usa, and for mac & ios devices, apple messages is very popular
in addition to the former two.
all of those support end to end encryption, making it far less of a
security and privacy risk than sms, which are unencrypted and can be
intercepted.
but if you don't like using a facebook property, use something else. no
big deal.
choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
<hlehmann.e...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
> >> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
> >
> > exactly the point.
>
> However, even if unpopular, every cell phone does support SMS
> out-of-the-box.
only if the user has an active texting plan. not everyone does. many
>
> >> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
> >
> > exactly the point.
>
> However, even if unpopular, every cell phone does support SMS
> out-of-the-box.
people disable sms due to spam.
some smartphone users don't activate cellular service at all and use
the device as a pocket computer.
so no, not every cellphone supports sms.
> There are many more people who are capable of sending
> and receiving SMS in case of need, then there are users of any other
> messaging platform.
the vast majority of messaging is done via messaging apps, not sms.
> >> However, SMS is far, far
> >> from obsolete
> >
> > it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
>
> Except for three major disadvantages:
> 1. Sender and receiver must use the same app. Most people will need
> multiple messenger apps to reach all of their friends and relatives, and
> even that will not be enough to reach every person which may pop up when
> doing business.
what matters is communicating with friends and family, who will all be
using the same app, perhaps two apps. it's not a big deal at all.
> 2. To be able to receive urgent messages, you need a permanently
> available, mobile internet connection. This can get VERY expensive when
> traveling, especially if you use an ad-supported platform, which
> constantly transfers a lot of unnecessary data.
first of all, sms also needs an available connection.
second, turn off data roaming and there won't be any surprise costs
when traveling.
third, the connection does not need to be permanently available. if
someone is out of a service area, messages are deferred. no big deal.
fourth, messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not, which means
there is no cost to use messaging versus sms, one of its many
advantages.
using wifi instead of cellular also means that messaging will work when
out of a cellular service area, including subways and airplanes and
even inside some buildings where the cellular signal too weak to be
used.
it also means that no cellular service is required at all, which
includes unactivated smartphones as well as desktop and laptop
computers.
> 3. The most popular messaging app happens to be a security and privacy
> risk due to extensive tracking and a controversial owner.
whatsapp is common outside the usa, while facebook messenger is common
in the usa, and for mac & ios devices, apple messages is very popular
in addition to the former two.
all of those support end to end encryption, making it far less of a
security and privacy risk than sms, which are unencrypted and can be
intercepted.
but if you don't like using a facebook property, use something else. no
big deal.
choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
123456789
Nov 21, 2018, 12:41:04 PM11/21/18
to
On 11/21/2018 7:41 AM, nospam wrote:
websites, etc.) ONLY provide their notification/verification services by
SMS then it will remain the universal texting medium, no matter the
quantity of traffic on other apps (IMO).
> messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
The SMS app that came with my phone, Android Messages, DOES work over
WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
> that's minor and there's no need to reach every person anyway.
As long as the commercial entities I deal with (banks, doctors,
websites, etc.) ONLY provide their notification/verification services by
SMS then it will remain the universal texting medium, no matter the
quantity of traffic on other apps (IMO).
> messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
Chris
Nov 21, 2018, 1:36:25 PM11/21/18
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <pt0vcj$he5$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
>>>> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
>>>
>>> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
>>> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
>>> "feature phone".
>>
>> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
>> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
>
> 8% is a very small fraction, and it isn't just switzerland.
No it isn't. 8% is still a huge number of devices.
> In article <pt0vcj$he5$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>>> What do you want to prove? That you want to be right at any price?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not proving anything. Just showing up your baseless assertion for what
>>>> it is. Feature phones are neither outdated nor non-existent.
>>>
>>> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
>>> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
>>> "feature phone".
>>
>> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
>> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
>
> 8% is a very small fraction, and it isn't just switzerland.
> you're also confusing unit sales with messages sent. those who buy
> feature phones don't text anywhere near as much as those with
> smartphones, mostly because it's a pain to do so.
>>>>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
>>>>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
>>>>> and Indian cell phones?
>>>>
>>>> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group ;)
>>>
>>> How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
>>> Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
>>> Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
>>> phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
>>> to WhatsApp or WeChat.
>>
>> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
>> messaging via apps.
>
> the point is that usenet has been replaced with modern web forums.
> and since india was mentioned:
>
> <https://trak.in/tags/business/2013/09/28/death-sms-indians-sending-2-sm
> s-day/>
> In a recent survey
> This trend is not a one-off case. Researchers and trend watchers have
> observed this phenomenon to occur in USA and China as well. Famous
> chat applications in China such as Weibo and WeChat have triggered
> massive downfall in SMS usage in cities such as Beijing where the per
> capita SMS usage has fallen to 36 from 42 a year ago. And the trend
> is continuingŠ
how they use it. People's weibo IDs are used to access government services.
Outside of cities in most countries Wi-Fi and mobile data are rarer so chat
apps are unusable.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 21, 2018, 1:54:07 PM11/21/18
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
[...]
> choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
But that choice applies apparently only to you, because you deny all
others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
Hypocritical much!?
[1] A.o. Andy, Chris, 123456789 and Hergen.
[...]
> choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
Hypocritical much!?
[1] A.o. Andy, Chris, 123456789 and Hergen.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 21, 2018, 2:26:41 PM11/21/18
to
some cases, the infrastructure is the_same/very_similar.
In any case, your reference - a Q&A type of discussion between a bunch
of people - is hardly authoritative.
Back to the point:
Usenet is a (set of) forum(s), but a forum is not neccessarily Usenet.
Analogy: A BMW is a car, but a car isn not neccessarily a BMW.
[Emphasis mine:]
"Usenet is a worldwide distributed DISCUSSION SYSTEM available on
computers.... Usenet resembles a BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM board system
(BBS) in many respects and is the PRECURSOR to INTERNET FORUMS that are
widely used today. Discussions are threaded, AS WITH WEB FORUMS and
BBSs..."
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet>
"The modern forum originated from BULLETIN BOARDS"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum>
Ergo, Usenet(/NetNews), BBSs and Internet/Web forums are *all* 'forum's.
> *PLONK*
Public plonking is a clear sign of childish behaviour. Not that we're
surprised. but still.
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 3:10:42 PM11/21/18
to
In article <pt45bc$1ttf$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, 123456789 <12...@12345.com>
platform.
> > messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
>
> The SMS app that came with my phone, Android Messages, DOES work over
> WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
and a wifi-calling capable carrier.
that's the exception and may not always work on public wifi hotspots.
wrote:
> >> 1. Sender and receiver must use the same app.
>
> > that's minor and there's no need to reach every person anyway.
>
> As long as the commercial entities I deal with (banks, doctors,
> websites, etc.) ONLY provide their notification/verification services by
> SMS then it will remain the universal texting medium, no matter the
> quantity of traffic on other apps (IMO).
as has been said, it won't ever be zero. however, it *is* the minority
> >> 1. Sender and receiver must use the same app.
>
> > that's minor and there's no need to reach every person anyway.
>
> As long as the commercial entities I deal with (banks, doctors,
> websites, etc.) ONLY provide their notification/verification services by
> SMS then it will remain the universal texting medium, no matter the
> quantity of traffic on other apps (IMO).
platform.
> > messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
>
> The SMS app that came with my phone, Android Messages, DOES work over
> WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
that's the exception and may not always work on public wifi hotspots.
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 3:10:44 PM11/21/18
to
In article <pt48j8$a4s$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> >>> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> >>> "feature phone".
> >>
> >> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
> >> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
> >
> > 8% is a very small fraction, and it isn't just switzerland.
>
> No it isn't. 8% is still a huge number of devices.
92% is more than 10x larger.
> > you're also confusing unit sales with messages sent. those who buy
> > feature phones don't text anywhere near as much as those with
> > smartphones, mostly because it's a pain to do so.
>
> See my other post.
no need to. those with feature phones don't text much (or at all), so
the difference is actually more than 92/8.
> >>>>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> >>>>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> >>>>> and Indian cell phones?
> >>>>
> >>>> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group
> >>>> ;)
> >>>
> >>> How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
> >>> Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
> >>> Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
> >>> phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
> >>> to WhatsApp or WeChat.
> >>
> >> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
> >> messaging via apps.
> >
> > the point is that usenet has been replaced with modern web forums.
>
> So what? Doesn't negate what I said.
the so what is that outdated technology has been replaced with modern
versions.
there are many more examples, including digital photography, (which is
almost entirely smartphone cameras), digital music and much more.
> > and since india was mentioned:
> >
> > <https://trak.in/tags/business/2013/09/28/death-sms-indians-sending-2-sm
> > s-day/>
> > In a recent survey
>
> Recent?! Is from 2013. At least I back up my statements with relevant data.
it's very relevant. messaging outpaced sms more than five years ago and
continues to increase. more recent numbers were in another post.
> > This trend is not a one-off case. Researchers and trend watchers have
> > observed this phenomenon to occur in USA and China as well. Famous
> > chat applications in China such as Weibo and WeChat have triggered
> > massive downfall in SMS usage in cities such as Beijing where the per
> > capita SMS usage has fallen to 36 from 42 a year ago. And the trend
> > is continuing?
> Outside of cities in most countries Wi-Fi and mobile data are rarer so chat
> apps are unusable.
nonsense.
wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Because you claim that? Yesterday Deloitte published a study that over
> >>> 92% of all mobile users in Switzerland have a smartphone and not a
> >>> "feature phone".
> >>
> >> Switzerland is a small, wealthy country so hardly representative, and yet
> >> feature phones still make up 8%. Still very much current.
> >
> > 8% is a very small fraction, and it isn't just switzerland.
>
> No it isn't. 8% is still a huge number of devices.
> > you're also confusing unit sales with messages sent. those who buy
> > feature phones don't text anywhere near as much as those with
> > smartphones, mostly because it's a pain to do so.
>
> See my other post.
the difference is actually more than 92/8.
> >>>>> In the context of this thread where someone living in the United States
> >>>>> is asking or an app recommendation, who cares what happens on African
> >>>>> and Indian cell phones?
> >>>>
> >>>> This is an international forum readable by anyone. Not a WhatsApp group
> >>>> ;)
> >>>
> >>> How many Indians or Africans are writing here?
> >>> Usenet is a geriatric event from the early days of internet for
> >>> Americans and Europeans. People from Asia or Africa with their "feature
> >>> phones" skipped this oldfashioned way of communication and went directly
> >>> to WhatsApp or WeChat.
> >>
> >> This is an open forum which is searchable. Not at all the same as instant
> >> messaging via apps.
> >
> > the point is that usenet has been replaced with modern web forums.
>
> So what? Doesn't negate what I said.
versions.
there are many more examples, including digital photography, (which is
almost entirely smartphone cameras), digital music and much more.
> > and since india was mentioned:
> >
> > <https://trak.in/tags/business/2013/09/28/death-sms-indians-sending-2-sm
> > s-day/>
> > In a recent survey
>
> Recent?! Is from 2013. At least I back up my statements with relevant data.
continues to increase. more recent numbers were in another post.
> > This trend is not a one-off case. Researchers and trend watchers have
> > observed this phenomenon to occur in USA and China as well. Famous
> > chat applications in China such as Weibo and WeChat have triggered
> > massive downfall in SMS usage in cities such as Beijing where the per
> > capita SMS usage has fallen to 36 from 42 a year ago. And the trend
>
> China is not a normal market as the government dictates what people use and
> how they use it. People's weibo IDs are used to access government services.
yet messaging is still more prevalent than texting there.
> China is not a normal market as the government dictates what people use and
> how they use it. People's weibo IDs are used to access government services.
> Outside of cities in most countries Wi-Fi and mobile data are rarer so chat
> apps are unusable.
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 3:10:45 PM11/21/18
to
In article <pt4d4j...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
<th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
>
> But that choice applies apparently only to you, because you deny all
> others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
i'm not denying anyone anything.
> > choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
>
> But that choice applies apparently only to you, because you deny all
> others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
Eli the Bearded
Nov 21, 2018, 3:35:27 PM11/21/18
to
In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
> messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
Obsolete clearly means something different to you than the rest of the
> all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
> messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
world.
> i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
them come in as SMS because I do not use an Apple device. This
cross-device compatibily issue in messaging apps is not going away
soon, no matter how many times you shout "sms is obsolete".
> people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
> complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
(None of my immediate family uses Facebook.)
Elijah
------
extended family does use Facebook
nospam
Nov 21, 2018, 3:42:14 PM11/21/18
to
In article <eli$18112...@qaz.wtf>, Eli the Bearded
> > i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
>
> All of my family uses the Apple Messages app. All of my messages from
> them come in as SMS because I do not use an Apple device. This
> cross-device compatibily issue in messaging apps is not going away
> soon, no matter how many times you shout "sms is obsolete".
you're the lone green bubble among the blues, without any of the
features that they enjoy.
> > people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
> > complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
>
> None of my family uses whatsapp or fb messenger that I know about.
> (None of my immediate family uses Facebook.)
as you said, they use apple messages, which is covered by the 'etc.'.
<*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
> > all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
> > messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
>
> Obsolete clearly means something different to you than the rest of the
> world.
it doesn't.
> > all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
> > messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
>
> Obsolete clearly means something different to you than the rest of the
> world.
> > i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
>
> All of my family uses the Apple Messages app. All of my messages from
> them come in as SMS because I do not use an Apple device. This
> cross-device compatibily issue in messaging apps is not going away
> soon, no matter how many times you shout "sms is obsolete".
features that they enjoy.
> > people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
> > complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
>
> None of my family uses whatsapp or fb messenger that I know about.
> (None of my immediate family uses Facebook.)
Andy Burns
Nov 21, 2018, 3:50:23 PM11/21/18
to
Eli the Bearded wrote:
> nospam wrote:
>
>> all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been
partly
>> replaced with messaging apps.
> nospam wrote:
>
>> all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been
>> replaced with messaging apps.
>
> Obsolete clearly means something different to you than the rest of the
> world.
Obsolescent maybe, but I'd say it's even rather early to say that.
> Obsolete clearly means something different to you than the rest of the
> world.
123456789
Nov 21, 2018, 5:01:09 PM11/21/18
to
On 11/21/2018 1:10 PM, nospam wrote:
An exception that bit you on your NO SMS WiFi
ABSOLUTE STATEMENT butt... ;)
> 123456789 <12...@12345.com> wrote:
>>> messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
>> The SMS app that came with my phone, Android Messages, DOES work
>> over WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
> that's the exception
>>> messaging works over wifi, whereas sms does not
>> The SMS app that came with my phone, Android Messages, DOES work
>> over WiFi. (Requires a WiFi Calling capable phone.)
An exception that bit you on your NO SMS WiFi
ABSOLUTE STATEMENT butt... ;)
123456789
Nov 21, 2018, 5:01:12 PM11/21/18
to
On 11/21/2018 1:10 PM, nospam wrote:
> people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
> complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
My friends and family mostly use SMS for texting simply because they
> complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
DON'T KNOW what messaging app the others might be using. And virtually
everyone (friends and family) has SMS capability.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 21, 2018, 5:04:53 PM11/21/18
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <pt4d4j...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
> <th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
> >
> > But that choice applies apparently only to you, because you deny all
> > others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
>
> i'm not denying anyone anything.
<Firmly sitting on hands.>
> In article <pt4d4j...@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
> <th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > > choose whatever messaging app best fits your needs.
> >
> > But that choice applies apparently only to you, because you deny all
> > others [1] in this and similar/earlier threads to make their own choice.
>
> i'm not denying anyone anything.
> all i said was that sms is obsolete, having been replaced with
> messaging apps. numerous cites already given.
"obsolete" does and doesn't mean. Same for "replaced". Nothing has been
'replaced'. Other IM systems have been *added*.
> i also said to use whatever their friends and family use.
> people can still use sms if they want, but their friends and family may
> complain that they aren't using whatsapp, fb messenger, etc.
BTW, what's *your* excuse for continuing to ramble on *this*
'obsolete' and 'replaced' medium!? Hypocritical much!?
BTW2, I use SMS and WhatsApp and email and FAX and letters and ..., I
hope that's allright with you?
Frank Slootweg
Nov 21, 2018, 5:16:25 PM11/21/18
to
determine what words, terms, etc. mean, but that nospam does that!
We keep forgetting and keep making the same mistake, over and over
again. Silly us!
And then they are these reference sources, like dictionaries, etc,,
which think that *they* know! The blatant audacity!
Chris
Nov 21, 2018, 5:20:57 PM11/21/18
to
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <pt33v5$78v$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
>
> exactly the point.
> In article <pt33v5$78v$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't deny IM app are more popular than SMS.
>
> exactly the point.
Your aggressive snipping doesn't change the point. You said:
"what matters is number of messages sent/received, not number of phones
sold. "
Note "number" not proportion relative to some other factor. So, no not
"what matters is number of messages sent/received, not number of phones
sold. "
"exactly that point".
>
>> However, SMS is far, far
>> from obsolete
>
> it's obsolete. messaging surpasses it in every way.
>> Especially with iMessage
>> blurring the lines between them.
>
> imessage doesn't blur the lines at all. in fact, it's the opposite.it
> makes the difference very clear by using blue and green bubbles.
understand the difference and just ignored it. Despite the fact they were
confused that some messages (chats) weren't reliably being sent. Turns out
they had mobile data turned off.
E.g
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150211/05455029985/green-bubbles-how-apple-quietly-gets-iphone-users-to-hate-android-users.shtml
Not quite the same point, but it shows that the different colours' meaning
is being conflated with targeting Android users.
Trying to explain how tapping and holding an undelivered chat and selecting
"send as text message" just gives blank expressions.
>> Discounting 1tr messages a year is folly.
>
> when compared with numbers more than an order of magnitude higher, it's
> very easy to discount it, and the difference is becoming wider.
Frank Slootweg
Nov 21, 2018, 5:30:01 PM11/21/18
to
few of them use an IM method that is incompatible with a one a few
others use!? There are *so* many incompatible ones to choose from, so it
*must* be possible to have a communication breakdown! You're just not
trying hard enough! Bunch of wimps!
BTW, why are we all use English here? What's wrong with Dutch and
Spanish and German and ...
123456789
Nov 21, 2018, 5:54:12 PM11/21/18
to
On 11/21/2018 3:29 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> BTW, why are we all use English here? What's wrong with Dutch and
> Spanish and German and ...
Nothing.
> BTW, why are we all use English here? What's wrong with Dutch and
> Spanish and German and ...
I admire those who can speak/write more than one language. My metro area
is around 30% Hispanic. In my past life I tried to learn conversational
Spanish since my job put me in contact with the public. I failed
miserably. So my hats off to you multi-language people. In answer to
your question if this group were in another than English, I couldn't
participate...
Frank Slootweg
Nov 22, 2018, 11:44:35 AM11/22/18
to
I.e. the incompatbility of your English/iMessage [1] versus my
Dutch/WhatsApp.
[1] Sorry about that. No way I was going to have Dutch/iMessage, so
iMessage ended up in your court! :-)
123456789
Nov 22, 2018, 8:39:42 PM11/22/18
to
On 11/22/2018 9:44 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
I thought you meant that like SMS being a common medium, English is also
a common medium - between those speaking different languages. (Because
English is the most widely learned second language.)
> I.e. the incompatbility of your English/iMessage [1] versus my
> Dutch/WhatsApp.
But I certainly didn't catch that.
> [1] Sorry about that. No way I was going to have Dutch/iMessage, so
> iMessage ended up in your court! :-)
Nothing to be sorry for. And I meant what I said about you
multi-linguists. BTW I tried to learn the piano too... :-/
> 123456789 <12...@12345.com> wrote:
>>> BTW, why are we all use English here? What's wrong with Dutch
>>> and Spanish and German and ...
>>> BTW, why are we all use English here? What's wrong with Dutch
>>> and Spanish and German and ...
> You didn't miss the tongue-in-cheek analogy of my comment, did you!?
I thought I recognized an analogy but obviously misinterpreted it.
I thought you meant that like SMS being a common medium, English is also
a common medium - between those speaking different languages. (Because
English is the most widely learned second language.)
> I.e. the incompatbility of your English/iMessage [1] versus my
> Dutch/WhatsApp.
> [1] Sorry about that. No way I was going to have Dutch/iMessage, so
> iMessage ended up in your court! :-)
multi-linguists. BTW I tried to learn the piano too... :-/
0 new messages