Music Do people really buy cell phones to play music?

[chroot]

Then I think you're a hypocrite, Schrodinger's Dog. You complain about how cell phones don't allow you to see body language, yet you admit to using a telephone? And you're talking to us on an... internet forum?

I don't even have a land-line, just the cell phone. I don't believe I really use the cell phone any differently than I would use a land-line, so I don't believe it's a tool of satan. It's just a telephone I can take with me.

It sounds like you have an issue with cell-phone culture -- what you percieve to be an abuse of the technology -- not the technology of voice telecommunication itself. In the future, you should just say that instead.

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

No a stationary phone and a mobile are two completely different things with different uses by the user. One I can use to keep in contact with people. The other I don't need to use at all. You simply have to accept that most people don't need them as a normal phone will suffice. They are a fashion accessory for most. People say things like I couldn't cope without my mobile phone? And I want to ask why not, you did for x years before they were invented? What changed?

I think you like most mobile users are so in love with mobiles that you missed the point I was trying to make, that in fact you probably know yourself you could easily get by without it but that would mean that you didn't keep in with the in crowd. If your job demanded it I could understand but frankly I don't think most peoples do.

That's the point, for most people they are superfluous to their needs, but most people cannot accept that, they have invested too heavily in them and lost perspective.

 

[chroot]

No a stationary phone and a mobile are two completely different things with different uses by the user.

This is not necessarily true -- at all. This is begging the question, a logical fallacy.

They are a fashion accessory for most.

Most? How can you make such cavalier, sweeping generalizations?

People say things like I couldn't cope without my mobile phone? And I want to ask why not, you did for x years before they were invented? What changed?

I don't know many people who would say this. Are you really trying to use some kind of an anecdote to support your generalization? You seem to be the king of incredibly poor debate tactics right now. How's that for a logical fallacy?

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

OK let me ask you personally would you be able to cope without a mobile? I have asked many people and the answers they give are not logical, they are not living lifestyles that require them to be in contact with somebody 24/7. It's a perfectly valid point, one that you seem unwilling to accept but still valid. I'm not in a position to do a census of all mobile users, hell all mobile users wouldn't accept the results anyway, if you like using them fine, but don't convince yourselves they are essential when they aren't, all I'm saying, they are luxury items, unlike a phone for me which is essential. I get job offers by phone, my future career depends on one, I can live without a mobile and do easilly.

 

[chroot]

I think you like most mobile users are so in love with mobiles that you missed the point I was trying to make, that in fact you probably know yourself you could easily get by without it but that would mean that you didn't keep in with the in crowd. If your job demanded it I could understand but frankly I don't think most peoples do.

And now you're putting words in my mouth? Seriously, your debate skills are on par with a class of fifth graders.

I don't consider myself "in love with" my cell phone. It's the smallest and simplest one I could buy. I freely admit that I could easily get by without it, but why should I? I don't really consider myself part of the "in crowd," and I certainly didn't buy a cell phone to make a fashion statement. It spends 99% of its life buried in my pocket with a generous pile of lint.

That's the point, for most people they are superfluous to their needs, but most people cannot accept that, they have invested too heavily in them and lost perspective.

If there's anyone who's lost perspective, it's you. Just look at the silly, half-formed arguments you're tossing at me. I feel like a bear catching salmon as they jump out of the water.

By the way, the Amish would make a very similar argument about your use of your land-line. Surely one telephone is enough for a whole village's emergency needs, yes?

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

My debating skills who's the one resorting to ad hominems instead of debating the issue. I'm an average fifth grader, debate wise? I suggest you stick to the issue really, that doesn't do your debating skills any justice either.

I Just wanted to make the point that people seem to place too much importance on the mobile phone, whether someone has one or not bothers me little, that's their choice, I just here a lot of phony reasoning as to why they have them.

By the way, the Amish would make a very similar argument about your use of your land-line. Surely one telephone is enough for a whole village's emergency needs, yes?

A non sequitur

 

[chroot]

OK let me ask you personally would you be able to cope without a mobile?

Cope? Are you kidding me? It's a cell phone. Why would I be unable to cope without it? Oddly, the feature I appreciate most about my cell phone is that it has a GPS and can navigate when I'm driving. That's fantastically useful, but maps and asking for directions would suffice -- they would just be more difficult.

I have asked many people and the answers they give are not logical, they are not living lifestyles that require them to be in contact with somebody 24/7. It's a perfectly valid point, one that you seem unwilling to accept but still valid.

I'm sure there are plenty of pre-teen kids who think they couldn't cope without a mobile phone. But there are plenty of pre-teen kids who think they couldn't cope without Comedy Central and shiny bracelets either.

I'm not in a position to do a census of all mobile users, hell all mobile users wouldn't accept the results anyway, if you like using them fine, but don't convince yourselves they are essential when they aren't, all I'm saying, they are luxury items, unlike a phone for me which is essential. I get job offers by phone, my future career depends on one, I can live without a mobile and do easilly.

Again, who ever said they were essential? You can keep on erecting strawmen as long as you'd like, but I will point them out to you every single time. You need to learn how to debate.

- Warren

 

[chroot]

My debating skills who's the one resorting to ad hominems instead of debating the issue. I'm an average fifth grader, debate wise? I suggest you stick to the issue really, that doesn't do your debating skills any justice either.

An ad hominem argument attacks the person himself. I am attacking your arguments, because they resemble those that fifth graders would make. I'm sure you're a smart guy, but your arguments are garbage.

I Just wanted to make the point that people seem to place too much importance on the mobile phone, whether someone has one or not bothers me little, that's their choice, I just here a lot of phony reasoning as to why they have them.

It apparently bothers you quite a bit!

- Warren

 

[chroot]

A non sequitur

You do not seem to know what a 'non sequitur' is.

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

You do not seem to know what a 'non sequitur' is.

- Warren

I do I live in a modern society were I cannot just nip down five rows down to a door that is never locked if there is an emergency, your point is completely unrelated to anything but the Amish. Please explain how this argument applies to me or telephone use in our society not the Amish's.

Your conclusion literally does not follow in this context.

 

[chroot]

I do I live in a modern society were I cannot just nip down five rows down to a door that is never locked if their is an emergency, your point is completely unrelated to anything but the Amish. Please explain how this argument applies to me or telephone use in our society not the Amish's.

My point is that there many different cultures which eschew technology of various levels. The Amish would look upon you with disdain for feeling that a land-line is essential, in an analogous way that you look upon cell-phone users with disdain for feeling that their cell phones are essential.

Neither you nor the Amish are 'right' in your beliefs, because they are just beliefs. As a result, I think both the Amish and you should simply do as you wish and leave the rest of society to do as they wish.

- Warren

 

[Evo]

OK let me ask you personally would you be able to cope without a mobile? I have asked many people and the answers they give are not logical, they are not living lifestyles that require them to be in contact with somebody 24/7. It's a perfectly valid point, one that you seem unwilling to accept but still valid. I'm not in a position to do a census of all mobile users, hell all mobile users wouldn't accept the results anyway, if you like using them fine, but don't convince yourselves they are essential when they aren't, all I'm saying, they are luxury items, unlike a phone for me which is essential. I get job offers by phone, my future career depends on one, I can live without a mobile and do easilly.

Until last year, I went without a cell phone for three solid years, and only used them on rare occasions before that. My company gave me a free unlimited use cell phone for my personal use (not business), so I have one now. It's the only phone I use and I use it to talk. It's invaluable when you are away from home, if you are lost, stranded, need to advise the person you're meeting that you are running late, etc..

Only 5 people in this world know my cell phone number, my family and a couple of close friends. My girls can call me if they need me, I am never unreachable for them. That alone is worth having a cell phone. They have very practical uses.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

My point is that there many different cultures which eschew technology of various levels. The Amish would look upon you with disdain for feeling that a land-line is essential, in an analogous way that you look upon cell-phone users with disdain for feeling that their cell phones are essential.

Neither you nor the Amish are 'right' in your beliefs, because they are just beliefs. As a result, I think both the Amish and you should simply do as you wish and leave the rest of society to do as they wish.

- Warren

It's not the same I have produced a valid reason why a mobile is not essential for most people: they do not need to remain in contact 24/7. Comparing our phone use to an Amish community where they are all very closely linked and can rely on just one phone is not reasoned. And it doesn't have the same context, I'm talking about a community that does not know anyone from Adam regardless of how small it is. Your making claims that the situation is analogous between an Amish culture and ours and it simply is not. If they made the claim I could do without a non mobile in our society because they do apart from one communal one, I'd say they were using faulty reasoning.

Evo If you went without one for three years then you don't really need one. On the off chance that you are stranded? How often has that happened? Never to me, I have legs I can walk. I mean that sincerely some people don't have the use of theirs and if their car broke down they would be in trouble without a mobile.

However if your work provides you with one gratis then you'd be a fool not to use it. I did not say there are no advantages by the way, just that I think in the main the cost is too much to justify them.

 

[chroot]

The Amish cultivate a society where telephones are not essential (despite being overwhelming useful). The Amish wouild look upon you with disdain for participating in a society in which telephones are made essential, because your participation in such a society necessarily perpetuates it.

You look with disdain upon cell-phone users for helping to build a society which encourages dependence upon them.

It's the same argument. Exactly the same argument. Your unwillingness to accept that it's the same argument is just evidence that you don't appreciate being on the other side of the fence.

- Warren

 

[Evo]

Evo If you went without one for three years then you don't really need one.

It was always a pain to have to find a working pay phone, driving around looking for one. I got lost one night in a VERY bad part of town due to a wreck on the highway that closed it forcing me to get off the highway and not have any idea where I was going, I was running out of gas. That's when I decided to take my company's offer of the free cell phone, it is just plain stupid to put my life at risk because I didn't have a cell phone.

 

[turbo]

I had a cell phone for a couple of years, then got sick of paying for airtime that I was not using and stopped the service and trashed the phone. If I did not want DSL, though, I would ditch my land-line phone service and get a pay-as-you-go mobile.

Luckily, the phone switch a mile away was crapping out when we moved here, and the phone company upgraded to DSL-ready equipment. The population density is so low out here that the cable TV companies won't run cable, but I was the first person in town to get DSL.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

It was always a pain to have to find a working pay phone, driving around looking for one. I got lost one night in a VERY bad part of town due to a wreck on the highway that closed it forcing me to get off the highway and not have any idea where I was going, I was running out of gas. That's when I decided to take my company's offer of the free cell phone, it is just plain stupid to put my life at risk because I didn't have a cell phone.

That's where our cultures different, where I live I would not be in danger no matter where I was in a 50 mile radius of my home, we don't have ghettos or neighbourhoods where you take your life in your hands if you break down there, and I don't drive anyway. Trains and buses have radio communication if they break down. I can adequately explain why I was late when I get there.

If you fear for your safety though that is a legitimate concern, don't get me wrong.

I'm lucky Turbo I live in a village but it's on the edge of a major city so if I'm not mistaken we have fibre optics like London. Which means we can get high speed broad band if we want it, I freely admit it's a luxury I use it for online gaming . I could easily live without it though. I need an email connection to stay in touch with the University, and a phone to stay in touch with my tutor. But I could use dial up.

 

[chroot]

That's where our cultures different, where I live I would not be in danger no matter where I was in a 50 mile radius of my home, we don't have ghettos or neighbourhoods where you take your life in your hands if you break down there, and I don't drive anyway. trains and buses have radio communication if they break down. I can adequately explain why I was late when I get there.

Okay, this explains a lot. You live in a society where cell-phones really aren't a survival advantage, so you look with disdain upon people who live in places where they really are a survival advantage.

The Amish feel the same way about people who choose to live in cities.

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I don't think they do? I think they respect people they are after all Christian, to have arrogant disdain for any culture would be against their beliefs.

And I don't think everyone in the US needs it just to survive by any means.

I don't disdain anyone as I said: if you want one have one, fine, I just believe some people kid themselves they are an essential part of modern life and I question their reasoning. I think of it like my broadband connection, I don't really need it but I enjoy having it, it is a pure luxury.

 

[turbo]

It was always a pain to have to find a working pay phone, driving around looking for one.

Try finding any pay phone at all, now. It seems the only places here that still have them are laundromats and truck stops. If I had to travel to earn a living, like during my years consulting for pulp and paper mills, I would get a cell phone in a heartbeat. It's awfully easy to get turned around in a strange city and end up in places that you shouldn't be. Even when you know the city well enough to get around, detours (especially at night when there's no sun to orient with) can put you in some places where you would definitely NOT want to have your car break down. I got into into Philly one night around 10pm, got a rental car and got turned around by a detour, and didn't make it out of the city heading in the right direction until after midnight.

 

[chroot]

I don't think they do? I think they respect people they are after all Christian, to have arrogant disdain for any culture would be against their beliefs.

Actually they have quite a bit of disdain for people who leave their communities to go into the rest of the world. They have a culture based entirely around the concept of "shunning," the practice of evicting people from their society for doing anything against their beliefs.

Good try, though.

I don't disdain anyone as I said if you want one have one, fine, I just believe some people kid themselves they are an essential part of modern life.

I think almost anyone would agree with this assessment. You should have just left it at that!

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

Then that is not a Christian belief, it is a heretical one, let's face it I think we both know that the NT doesn't support such things, alienating others for differences of opinion or culture are strictly forbidden, take the story of good Samaritan (a culture discriminated against in Jesus's time) Sorry for assuming they were Christian, a mistake anyone could make.

Well I would if you didn't jump down my neck as if I'd claimed they were the weapons of Satan seriously, that was a joke, if I believed it I would be insane no?

 

[turbo]

I'm lucky Turbo I live in a village but it's on the edge of a major city so if I'm not mistaken we have fibre optics like London. Which means we can get high speed broad band if we want it, I freely admit it's a luxury I use it for online gaming . I could easily live without it though. I need an email connection to stay in touch with the University, and a phone to stay in touch with my tutor. But I could use dial up.

I didn't think I'd ever get DSL out here when we moved in, and then my sister-in-law who worked for the phone company gave the good news about the switch upgrade. The switch is at an intersection 1.2 miles east of here I am only the 6th house in all that distance. It's over 2 miles to the main road in the other direction and there are only 8 houses between here and the main road. That's why the cable companies shun us - though I don't care, I watch the news then turn the box back off.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I think your problem is distance really, your population is very spread out in a lot of cases, and focused in very small areas. We should actually be embarrassed that everyone doesn't have fibre optics like some countries do in Europe, because our country is tiny and distances are small and population density large. But it is a pretty hefty investment for companies to replace the old copper wires, I'm sure we will eventually. Many people use satellite links for internet connections such as on Sky broadband though so it's still covered wherever you live.

I'm on AOL, myself should be Virgin Media, but AOL haven't steered me wrong yet, they rent the connection from Virgin. Customer service is typically American, ie excellent although they have put their call centres in India which is sad, I like the American ones, different from what we're used to very accommodating.

 

[Astronuc]

With all due respect I think that is complete and utter bilge. If anything mobile phones actually remove communications most valuable factors, the ability to read body language or gain understanding from intonation, skills that only come with face to face dialogue. Mobile phones actually lead people to talk less in person and more over the phone.

I use a cell phone provided by the company. I work on the opposite side of the country from my corporate office, and my main contact is on the same calling plane so phone to phone is no extra charge (i.e. more or less free). Most of the time my cell phone if off - when I'm in the office - and I use the land line.

I use my cell when I travel, and that enables clients or my colleagues to contact me wherever I happen to be. Evenso, most of the time it is turned off.

As for body language, I've seen people being very expressive while using a cell phone. Once while waiting to board a plane, some guy waiting at the gate was pacing back and forth, waving his arms and yelling into his cell phone. I think he was talking to his lawyer about his divorce. And I've seen people just yacking away about gossip.

If I don't have a mobile phone in twenty years? I will not have one because I believe they sap your ability to communicate and they are a jump backwards not forwards. And what's more I think I could make a pretty good case that most people have them merely to appear in with the crowd and do not actually need them, they are little more than a fashion statement to be frank.

Certainly the type of phone and the way one wears it could be a fashion statement for some. I carry mine in my pocket.

Au contraire, I believe people with mobiles are slowly removing themselves from real communication, and being left behind socially.

I do prefer face-to-face meetings with clients and colleagues. I just returned from several days of technical meetings in which I met with a number of people from one organization.

The next best medium to an in-person meeting is webcasting, and I will be do that next week concerning a big project on which I'm working. We'll be using phone and internet to present overview and status to people distributed across the US and Europe.

Evo and chroot make several good points. I have used my cell in an emergency and otherwise, when on the road. It's especially useful when trying to rendezvous with someone out in the field and away from a land-line.


As for the OP, I find 'ringtones' to be rather obnoxious, especially when the volume is turned up so that everyone around can hear it. As chroot mentioned, the fidelity is horrible. I have my phone on the vibration (quiet) mode so that I can sense it, and it doesn't impact anyone around me.

 

[JasonRox]

Honestly I use to be like... I don't own a cellphone because I prefer the face-to-face talk.

Well you know what, now that I have a cellphone (just got 2 months ago), I enjoy more face-to-face talk than I did before. It's so easy to hook up with someone who has a cellphone. Before I'd be out the door or something and not get the call. Now I don't have to worry about that as much or not at all.

So yeah, if you enjoy face-to-face talk, then get a cellphone because you might as well throw that argument out the door.

And the other argument that cellphones are for emergencies and that if you live in the city you won't need it for emergencies. Well you know what, maybe 1% of the market buys a cellphone for emergencies. It's not even a real reason anymore. So throw that excuse out of the door because it's not even a reason people use to buy one in the first place. Maybe a teenager will say that to his or her parents, but that's it. No one should be dumb enough to fall for that one.

 

[Astronuc]

Going back to the OP question - I just received a new cell phone (courtesy of my company), and it has an FM radio. The quality of the music is poor.

It also has a camera (I might use it occassionally), it has games , online shopping and all sorts of garbage which I certainly don't need or want.

All I need is the ability to communicate and obtain useful information when I'm traveling. I do like the GPS feature.

 

[radou]

I keep seeing all of these cell phone ads that only talk about playing music, as if that is the only reason to buy one. I thought you were supposed to talk on them.

Again, the key word is marketing.

As Astronuc pointed out in the previous post, today's cell phones come with a load of unnecessary garbage, such as FM radios, cameras, etc. But people go for it.

I bought a new cell phone recently, and it was cheap just because it doesn't have a camera.

Mostly a clock.

Since I own a cell phone, I don't wear a watch anymore. I'm not specially fond of watches anyways, so one of the most important functions of a cell phone is a clock, definitely.

 

[Monique]

I have had the same cellphone for over 4 years now and I have no inclination whatsoever to buy a new one. I can see the advantage to having it play music like an mp3 player, if the quality is good, but I have an iPod so why bother.

The thing I love about iPods is that I can automatically download the latest Podcasts from scientific journals and other subjects, so that I am always up to date. So if there is a cellphone with that function and my current one breaks down, I'd probably go for it.

And the other argument that cellphones are for emergencies and that if you live in the city you won't need it for emergencies. Well you know what, maybe 1% of the market buys a cellphone for emergencies.

I actually know quite a few people who use it only for emergencies, I'm not allowed to call them on their cell phone (only text-message) and they usually have it turned off if there is no special reason for anyone to call them. But for most people it goes: "if you have it, you'll use it".

 

[Astronuc]

I received a text message from someone I don't know on the other side of he country. It asked "When do we leave?" I'm inclined to respond - "Who are you?"

They must have a wrong number, because they called twice but did not leave a message.