Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: Why home phone service at all? RE: [internetworkers] TW Phone Service?

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David R.Matusiak <dave AT matusiak.org>
  • To: internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: Why home phone service at all? RE: [internetworkers] TW Phone Service?
  • Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:42:45 -0500

On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 02:30 PM, Jeremy Portzer wrote:

On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 14:20, K. Jo Garner wrote:

You tell me when I can carry on a two-way conversation, speaking *at the
same time* as the other party, when I'm on a cell phone - and have the
conversation be transmitted and understood - then, maybe, I'll be sold on
cell-phone-only service. CBs receive and transmit one-way (one party at a
time), which was my comparison.

That is what I meant.

Okay, and I agree that most cell phones need improvments to make full
duplex (the ability to transmit and receive at the same time) a
reality. But can you really listen to what the other party is saying
while you're talking? ;-)

(Yes, I do understand why full duplex is better; with half-duplex you
can sometimes get in an awkward cycle where you keep cutting each other
off. But that doesn't happen to me too much; I guess maybe I don't have
as many long phone conversations where it really matters. The $25/mo.
saved on the land-line is worth it for me.)

True Luddites believe that all phone technology should be destroyed.

You either get in-person conversation or you get letters.

And GPG signing is for those who fear a full-on Homeland Security audit.

DESTROY ALL MACHINES NOW! READ AND HONOR THE UNABOMBER MANIFESTO!

< http://www.panix.com/~clays/Una/ >
















*smirk*





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page