On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Benjamin Kowarsch wrote:
<snip>
> > Even features that may seem inferior to you like SMS can from a
> > different perspective have a superior usefulness. For example, the
> > fact that SMS has QoS, while email has not. When you send someone an
> > SMS you will get a notification telling you if the message has been
> > received or if it has failed.
<snip>
> This is not always true. SMS messages get lost or not delivered as
> well.
Yup. I tried sending a message to another network once and it went
straight into the bitbucket because the networks hadn't arranged to
exchange messages. I still got charged, of course.
> The QoS may be better than with i-mode mail but there are no real
> guarantees as far as I can tell.
Right. If there were, they'd be written into the contract.
> I've also never received confirmation of SMS messages being sent.
> Perhaps this is a network configuration setting, but as a user I would
> feel quite uncomfortable knowing that someone could see when I receive
> my messages.
You can request confirmation on a per-message basis (same as with Internet
email). PhoneSMS on my Palm has a checkbox for 'Status report requested';
however, I've tried using this but I don't think I ever got a report back.
So whether the request is honoured appears to be network-dependent.
Received on Fri Jun 21 16:47:48 2002