Music Do people really buy cell phones to play music?

[Evo]

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.

What do you buy a cell phone for?

 

[Cyrus]

Mostly a clock.

 

[Evo]

Mostly a clock.

Yeah, use it as a clock.

 

[Math Is Hard]

I just thought it would be cool to have that big crowd of people following me around, like in the commercials. But they hang out and eat all my food and they stare at me while I sleep. It's starting to bother me a little.

 

[dontdisturbmycircles]

The fact that I can replace my ipod + cell phone with just a cell phone is nice. Lots of phones have much more space for songs than my ipod plus better battery life. But in reality, a cell phone is much more expensive if you are just using it to play music than any ipod (meaning no contract, so you pay the no-contract price for the phone), so I can't see it being bought just for playing music.

edit: Hmm I just noticed I used the word 'ipod' everywhere instead of mp3 player... Damn apple marketing! I don't see why everyone buys an ipod (myself included!) over a cheaper mp3 player. I think ipods are over priced, but yet I own one. :-(( But that's a different topic.

 

[Moonbear]

I just thought it would be cool to have that big crowd of people following me around, like in the commercials. But they hang out and eat all my food and they stare at me while I sleep. It's starting to bother me a little.

I have enough trouble remembering to keep my cell phone charged just from making phone calls. I would hate to use up all the battery listening to music, and then need to make an emergency call. I'm still searching for a ring tone that actually rings instead of plays music. I was sitting in my office today grumbling that someone in the lab next to me must be playing the music awfully loudly, then it dawned on me it was my cellphone ringing in my desk drawer. I don't like having one gadget for everything...way too easy to lose everything in one fell swoop if I lost or broke it.

 

[Loren Booda]

I have yet to get a cellphone and am unaware what I am missing regarding one. I appreciate a good stereo but doubt that a cellphone (or even an ipod) would satisfy my audio needs.

 

[JasonRox]

Having a cellphone play music is in fact that smartest thing a cellphone could do.

Whenever I'm at work and it's dead, I never have my MP3 player and my cellphone doesn't play music. All my buddies have cellphones that play music, so they always have there music in the phone. Instead of carrying a phone and MP3 player, you just carry a phone. That easy. Not only that, it has a pretty loud speaker, so when we go to the beach, we just play music just like that.

Smartest thing ever. When I get a new cellphone, I'll probably never see my iPod again. (Cellphones can have up to 4GB of space currently, which is my current iPod.)

 

[JasonRox]

I appreciate a good stereo but doubt that a cellphone (or even an ipod) would satisfy my audio needs.

You'd be surprised. Phones are much higher quality nowadays. I bet you couldn't even tell the different between a cellphone and a MP3 player.

 

[Cyrus]

I saw an Iphone last week, the thing is awesome.

 

[JasonRox]

I saw an Iphone last week, the thing is awesome.

I so want one!

 

[Cyrus]

In my opinion, its worth every penny. An Ipod video costs 300 bucks. This thing is an Ipod video, and a phone. A good phone is around 200 bucks. So the price is fair and the technology is great. Also, you can surf the web.

 

[Cyrus]

AHAHAH die Iphone DIEEEEEE

 

[Smurf]

I just got the cell they give free with your contract. I got turned off of mobile music (i had an ipod) in my second year, just too distracting.

 

[chroot]

I'm something of an entry-level audiophile, and I've honestly never heard a cell phone that plays music with enough fidelity to satisfy me. (This doesn't mean they don't exist -- I just haven't found one.) At the same time, I've never heard a set of earbuds that satisfy me, either, and I'm sure as hell not going to carry around my $250 full-size circumaural headphones with me. I also can't even imagine how grating it must be to listen to music on a tiny cellphone speakerphone -- even the little iHome "stereos" they sell at the Apple store make my want to claw my ears off.

I personally just don't think "portable audio" is high-enough quality to bother at the moment. I have my fantastic headphone rig at work, a fantastic stereo in my car, and a very capable portable stereo at home. I don't even know when I'd want to use a cell phone as a music player. I currently value my cell phone (a RAZR) mainly because it's tiny enough to fit in my pocket. The larger-capacity mp3/cell phones are just too big for me. And there's no way in hell I'm ever using a "holster."

I'm also not the sort to walk around on the city streets with headphones on. It seems somehow... pretentious and isolationist to me.

- Warren

 

[Cyrus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifzdez7FRbk&mode=related&search=

AHAHAHa

 

[Loren Booda]

The heck with cellphones - where can I get that blender?

 

[Cyrus]

http://www.blendtec.com/productDetails.aspx?id=28

its 400 bucks

 

[Smurf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifzdez7FRbk&mode=related&search=

AHAHAHa

Can you hear me now? Totally awesome.

 

[Smurf]

on the same topic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8H29jU8Wrs&mode=related&search=

 

[moose]

Mostly a clock.

Yeah seriously. I also text quite a bit.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

I wouldn't buy a cell phone if it could transport me to a world of make believe and adventure, but then I detest them and think they are the weapons of Satan (seriously don't get me started ) Frankly- If I want to listen to music I'll just get an Ipod they are excellent.

A mobile phones only value is as a reciever, come the final battle between Good and Evil, Satan will use the phones as a location beacon to round up the slaves for the coming carnage. I saw that in a vision

 

[JasonRox]

I'm also not the sort to walk around on the city streets with headphones on. It seems somehow... pretentious and isolationist to me.

- Warren

No one said you have to.

 

[ank_gl]

What do you buy a cell phone for?

for communicating

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

I have yet to get a cellphone and am unaware what I am missing regarding one. I appreciate a good stereo but doubt that a cellphone (or even an ipod) would satisfy my audio needs.

your'e not missing anything, i could tell you that much.

 

[Evo]

The iPhone - Conan O'Brian

 

[JasonRox]

your'e not missing anything, i could tell you that much.

No one is saying you're missing out on something because you don't have a cellphone.

At the same time, we must realize that the cellphone is revolutionizing our social network and our social life is evolving. If you don't have one 5-10 years from now and you're in the new generation, I would say it's relatively believeable that you'll be left behind socially.

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

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.

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.

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

I did say don't get me started, didn't I

 

[chroot]

Schrodinger's Dog:

I do understand (and appreciate) that you'd rather rely on face-to-face communication than communication on a cell phone. I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

However, restricting oneself to face-to-face communication would mean that I'd only be able to maintain friendships with people who live within, say, a fifteen minute drive. I live in a vast metropolitan area, and that would restrict me to only a tiny fraction of it. I tend to be fairly picky with my friends, though, and it would seem unfortunate to rule out the many people I meet who live 30 or 45 minutes away just because of the distance.

I'd also virtually never talk to my family, since they all live some thousands of miles away now.

I don't disagree that there are many drawbacks to the text-message and IM culture we've been developing lately, but I believe that a telephone can greatly enrich your life.

- Warren

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

That's why I have a non mobile telephone I'm only talking about the walkie talkie version, of course I still need a normal phone, I just don't need a mobile

People sitting on trains talking to their wives all the way home, and then what do you say when you get home, nothing you've already said it? What's the point of that? Surely you can just wait?

 

[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.