MS Mango (30 seconds evaluation)

Watched the TV announcement.

Interesting name. Right physical size, but fat. At least they didn't
call it "lemon".

Seem to have active app list. Badly needed for Android. For Android,
can't tell if an app is active until you bring it up. Google might
need to "flatter" Microsoft on this.

On May 24, 7:36*am, linnix <m...@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:
> Watched the TV announcement.
>
> Interesting name. *Right physical size, but fat. *At least they didn't
> call it "lemon".
>
> Seem to have active app list. *Badly needed for Android. *For Android,
> can't tell if an app is active until you bring it up. *Google might
> need to "flatter" Microsoft on this.

And now for something completely different:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...tml?cmpid=yhoo

Apps like google map is downloading data all the time, without cache,
as if the roads are changing every minutes. But that's for driving
data revenue for the phone companies in the first place, until it's
too much for them to handle. Why can't they (phone co.) just admit
that they are under-pricing data?

On Tue, 24 May 2011 17:36:47 -0700 (PDT), linnix
<> wrote:

>And now for something completely different:
>
>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...tml?cmpid=yhoo
>
>Apps like google map is downloading data all the time, without cache,
>as if the roads are changing every minutes. But that's for driving
>data revenue for the phone companies in the first place, until it's
>too much for them to handle. Why can't they (phone co.) just admit
>that they are under-pricing data?

Phone companies hardly are "under" pricing data. Most are guilty of
gouging customers, charging 100s of times the cost of providing the
service.

There was an article in the Wall St. Journal last year talking about
rates for SMS. They found that the handling cost per message was
about 1/10,000th of a cent, while at the same time /most/ customers
were being charged 2..10 cents per message. The so-called "unlimited
texting" monthly packages were priced so that a customer would have to
send 100s of millions of text messages within the monthly time frame
to impact the companies profit.

George

On May 25, 9:17*pm, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2011 17:36:47 -0700 (PDT), linnix
>
> <m...@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:
> >And now for something completely different:
>
> >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ompromise-with...
>
> >Apps like google map is downloading data all the time, without cache,
> >as if the roads are changing every minutes. *But that's for driving
> >data revenue for the phone companies in the first place, until it's
> >too much for them to handle. *Why can't they (phone co.) just admit
> >that they are under-pricing data?
>
> Phone companies hardly are "under" pricing data. *Most are guilty of
> gouging customers, charging 100s of times the cost of providing the
> service.
>
> There was an article in the Wall St. Journal last year talking about
> rates for SMS. *They found that the handling cost per message was
> about 1/10,000th of a cent, while at the same time /most/ customers
> were being charged 2..10 cents per message. *The so-called "unlimited
> texting" monthly packages were priced so that a customer would have to
> send 100s of millions of text messages within the monthly time frame
> to impact the companies profit.
>
> George

Yes, i mean underpricing data cost vs. text. Text and voice users are
subsidizing data users.

On Wed, 25 May 2011 22:20:06 -0700 (PDT), linnix
<> wrote:

>On May 25, 9:17*pm, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 May 2011 17:36:47 -0700 (PDT), linnix
>>
>> <m...@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:
>> >And now for something completely different:
>>
>> >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ompromise-with...
>>
>> >Apps like google map is downloading data all the time, without cache,
>> >as if the roads are changing every minutes. *But that's for driving
>> >data revenue for the phone companies in the first place, until it's
>> >too much for them to handle. *Why can't they (phone co.) just admit
>> >that they are under-pricing data?
>>
>> Phone companies hardly are "under" pricing data. *Most are guilty of
>> gouging customers, charging 100s of times the cost of providing the
>> service.
>>
>> There was an article in the Wall St. Journal last year talking about
>> rates for SMS. *They found that the handling cost per message was
>> about 1/10,000th of a cent, while at the same time /most/ customers
>> were being charged 2..10 cents per message. *The so-called "unlimited
>> texting" monthly packages were priced so that a customer would have to
>> send 100s of millions of text messages within the monthly time frame
>> to impact the companies profit.
>>
>> George
>
>Yes, i mean underpricing data cost vs. text. Text and voice users are
>subsidizing data users.

Even so, my own plan has "unlimited" web for $1.00/day (on days of
use). But 3.xG service (depending on the phone) is at maximum
equivalent to 54g wifi ... about 4GB/day. Only rarely is that maximum
speed attainable - usually speeds are closer to 10b - and few if any
customers are downloading 24 hours per day.

If you figure that a 140 character (+ header) SMS message costs the
company 1/10,000th of a cent, then one byte of data is approximately
1/10 millionth of a cent. 4GB of data works out to about 30 cents
whereas I'm being charged $1 whether I use it all or not.

Obviously MMV with other access plans.

And, of course, 4G service is far faster, but worldwide only a few
percent of all mobile customers are using it and they are being
charged a lot more for it.

I just don't believe that the phone companies are giving up anything.
George

On Thu, 26 May 2011 16:20:45 -0400, George Neuner
<> wrote:

>
>If you figure that a 140 character (+ header) SMS message costs the
>company 1/10,000th of a cent, then one byte of data is approximately
>1/10 millionth of a cent. 4GB of data works out to about 30 cents
>whereas I'm being charged $1 whether I use it all or not.
>

Whoops! Read the decimal incorrectly. Should be 1/hundred millionth
per byte. But 30 cents still is correct.

George