176 lines
8.1 KiB
Plaintext
176 lines
8.1 KiB
Plaintext
From fork-admin@xent.com Mon Aug 26 21:57:51 2002
|
|
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
|
|
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
|
|
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E472D43F9B
|
|
for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 16:57:50 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
|
|
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
|
|
for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 21:57:50 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
|
|
(8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7QKwdZ09291 for <jm@jmason.org>;
|
|
Mon, 26 Aug 2002 21:58:39 +0100
|
|
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
|
|
with ESMTP id 4863F2941CA; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 13:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Delivered-To: fork@example.com
|
|
Received: from plato.einstein (unknown [65.170.226.173]) by xent.com
|
|
(Postfix) with ESMTP id E80D0294099 for <fork@xent.com>; Wed,
|
|
21 Aug 2002 01:08:33 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Received: from RSHAVELL ([209.151.242.53]) by plato.einstein with
|
|
Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Wed, 21 Aug 2002 01:10:12 -0700
|
|
From: "Rob Shavell" <rob@mobiusvc.com>
|
|
To: "'Mike Masnick'" <mike@techdirt.com>
|
|
Cc: <fork@example.com>
|
|
Subject: RE: sprint delivers the next big thing??
|
|
Message-Id: <000301c248ea$43c44ac0$0601a8c0@einstein>
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
|
|
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
|
|
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
|
|
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20020820234041.03213bd0@techdirt.com>
|
|
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
|
|
Importance: Normal
|
|
X-Originalarrivaltime: 21 Aug 2002 08:10:12.0401 (UTC) FILETIME=[2C62BA10:01C248EA]
|
|
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
X-Beenthere: fork@example.com
|
|
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
|
|
List-Post: <mailto:fork@example.com>
|
|
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
|
|
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
|
|
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
|
|
<mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
|
|
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
|
|
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 01:10:50 -0700
|
|
X-Pyzor: Reported 0 times.
|
|
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=7.0
|
|
tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,
|
|
SPAM_PHRASE_01_02,USER_AGENT_OUTLOOK
|
|
version=2.40-cvs
|
|
X-Spam-Level:
|
|
|
|
right Mike,
|
|
|
|
i will agree to disagree but i take your comments to heart. my opinion is
|
|
only that this is one of the last frontiers of communications ('instant
|
|
show') that we cross easily (though you are right as rain on pricing). i am
|
|
mildly amused at the level of skepticism and innatention it is getting.
|
|
|
|
my premise is that the world will change in dramatic and unexpected ways
|
|
once there are a billion 'eye's' which can instantly share what they see
|
|
amongst each other. that doesn't mean that people will stop talking on
|
|
their phones, or that people will spend more time w/images than voice. just
|
|
that it is fundamental. from news to crime to privacy to dating to family
|
|
life to bloopers and practical jokes, i believe there will be an explosion
|
|
of images unleashed specifically by cell phone integrated lenses because of
|
|
their utter ubiquity that dwarfs all pictures taken in the history of
|
|
photography by orders of magnitude and in short order. and yes, changes
|
|
things 'big time'.
|
|
|
|
rgds,
|
|
rob
|
|
|
|
|
|
-----Original Message-----
|
|
From: Mike Masnick [mailto:mike@techdirt.com]
|
|
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 11:58 PM
|
|
To: Rob Shavell
|
|
Cc: fork@example.com
|
|
Subject: RE: sprint delivers the next big thing??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not to keep harping on this, but...
|
|
|
|
At 11:36 PM 8/20/02 -0700, Rob Shavell wrote:
|
|
|
|
>content: who cares about content? that no one can think of 'useful'
|
|
content
|
|
>is always the business persons mistake. the content is the users
|
|
>communications. its anything and everything. avg person could easily send
|
|
>half dozen pics to a dozen people a day. mainly humorous i'd guess. who
|
|
>cares if content is trivial in nature. picture speaks a thousand words.
|
|
|
|
This does nothing to answer my question. I *do* care about content. Hell,
|
|
if I could be convinced that people would send stupid pics back and forth
|
|
all day, I'd have a different opinion of this. I just am not convinced
|
|
that they will (stupid or not).
|
|
|
|
While a picture may be worth a thousand words (and this is the same
|
|
argument the guy who works for me made), how many people do you know who
|
|
communicate by pictures? Sure, it sounds nice to say that a picture is
|
|
such an efficient messaging mechanism, but how often do you actually find
|
|
yourself drawing someone a picture to explain something?
|
|
|
|
I don't buy it.
|
|
|
|
For most messages, text works fine and is the most efficient
|
|
mechanism. For some messages, pictures do the job, but I would say not
|
|
nearly as often as words. Why do you think Pictionary and Charades and
|
|
such are games? Because images are usually not the most efficient way to
|
|
get a message across.
|
|
|
|
>misc ramblings: i suppose you skeptical forkers would have said the same
|
|
>thing about '1 hour photo' processing. trivial, who needs it, i get better
|
|
>resultion elswhere. and yet, it had great decentralizing impact - the
|
|
plant
|
|
>had to be downsized and pushed to the retail operation - the digital
|
|
camera,
|
|
>and finally the integrated digital camera phone brings this cycle of
|
|
>decentralization in photography to a logical conclusion (which will put the
|
|
>photo giants to bed) and change the world in a meaningful way. also, SMS
|
|
>didn't take off because its easy, it took off because it costs less. its
|
|
>greatly ironic the carriers often trumpet the 'profitabilty' of their SMS
|
|
>traffic over others because of its ratio of cost to bandwidth. in reality,
|
|
>SMS cannibilizes the voice rev's they bought their networks to handle.
|
|
|
|
Again, this is the same argument my colleague made (along with "you just
|
|
don't understand kids today, and they'll run with this"). I wasn't saying
|
|
that MMS wouldn't take off because it wasn't high quality or that it wasn't
|
|
easy. I was saying that I couldn't see why people would use it in a way
|
|
that "changed the face of communications".
|
|
|
|
I'm looking for the compelling reason (even if it's a stupid one) why
|
|
people would want to do this. Sure, if they integrate cameras into the
|
|
phone, and the quality improves (even only marginally) I can certainly see
|
|
people taking pictures with their cameras and occasionally sending them to
|
|
other people. But, mostly, I don't see what the benefit is to this over
|
|
sending them to someone's email address, or putting together an online (or
|
|
offline) photoalbum.
|
|
|
|
I don't think 1 hour photos are trivial. People want to see their own pics
|
|
right away, and the quality is plenty good enough for snapshots. That's
|
|
one of the main reasons why digital cameras are catching on. The instant
|
|
view part. I'm guessing your argument is that people not only want
|
|
"instant view", but also "instant show". Which is what this service
|
|
offers. I'm not convinced that most people want "instant show". I think
|
|
people like to package their pictures and show them. That's why people put
|
|
together fancy albums, and sit there and force you to go through them while
|
|
they explain every picture. Sure, occasionally "instant show" is nice, but
|
|
it's just "nice" on occasion. I still can't see how it becomes a integral
|
|
messaging method.
|
|
|
|
What's the specific benefit of taking a picture and immediately sending it
|
|
from one phone to another? There has to be *some* benefit, even if it's
|
|
silly if people are going to flock to it.
|
|
|
|
I'm searching... no one has given me a straight answer yet.
|
|
|
|
The *only* really intriguing idea I've heard about things like MMS lately
|
|
are Dan Gillmor's assertion that one day in the near future some news event
|
|
will happen, and a bunch of people will snap pictures with their mobile
|
|
phones, from all different angles, and those photos tell the real story of
|
|
what happened - before the press even gets there.
|
|
|
|
Willing to be proven wrong,
|
|
Mike
|
|
|
|
PS If the wireless carriers continue to price these services as stupidly as
|
|
they currently are, then MMS is *never* going to catch on.
|
|
|
|
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
|
|
|