|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cell Phones in Great Britain > March 2008 > PTT in the UK?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| shaun.okeefe@gmail.com 2008-03-24, 10:33 am |
| Hi,
Does anyone know any networks which offer PTT in the UK?
I know it is very popular in the USA and I also use it over in Israel,
if not networks is there any services which provide it in the UK ?
Many thanks,
Shaun
| |
| Adrian C 2008-03-24, 10:33 am |
| shaun.okeefe@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know any networks which offer PTT in the UK?
>
> I know it is very popular in the USA and I also use it over in Israel,
> if not networks is there any services which provide it in the UK ?
If PTT is introduced here, I won't be held responsible for murdering the
prat on the bus, or in the supermarket isle, who wants to share the
tinny speaker walkie-talkie outbursts of his/her life-long good buddie
with the rest of us.
--
Adrian C
| |
| Adrian C 2008-03-24, 10:33 am |
| shaun.okeefe@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know any networks which offer PTT in the UK?
>
Orange.
Google "orange talk now ptt".
Information looks a bit dated now, "Talk Now" seems to be currently
available to business customers only according to their website.
--
Adrian C
| |
| Chris Boyd 2008-03-24, 3:35 pm |
| On 2008-03-24 15:16:46 +0000, Adrian C <email@here.invalid> said:
> shaun.okeefe@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Orange.
>
> Google "orange talk now ptt".
>
> Information looks a bit dated now, "Talk Now" seems to be currently
> available to business customers only according to their website.
Orange brought it out to PAYG customers a few years ago, but it really
didn't take on at all. After that, they limited it to business
customers.
Chris
| |
|
| On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:55:39 GMT, Chris Boyd
< chrisbboyd@NOSPAMgma
il.com> wrote:
>On 2008-03-24 15:16:46 +0000, Adrian C <email@here.invalid> said:
>
>
>Orange brought it out to PAYG customers a few years ago, but it really
>didn't take on at all. After that, they limited it to business
>customers.
My Nokia n95 has PTT settings which I can configure, no idea which
non-network provider would offer this to a 3rd party.
--
-- Nick ICQ: 9235201 EMAIL & MSN: nickmooney@spamcop.net
-- Triumph Tiger 955i -- http://www.bgn.me.uk -- Touch -
-- LOTR#4 SKOGA#8 DS#7 BOTAFOT#159 BOTM#2 FBOTY#06 PM#11
| |
| Steve Terry 2008-03-24, 3:35 pm |
|
"Chris Boyd" < chrisbboyd@NOSPAMgma
il.com> wrote in message
news:200803241753151
6807- chrisbboyd@NOSPAMgma
ilcom...
> On 2008-03-24 15:16:46 +0000, Adrian C <email@here.invalid> said
>
> Orange brought it out to PAYG customers a few years ago, but it really
> didn't take on at all. After that, they limited it to business customers.
> Chris
>
As usual Orange didn't tell anyone, their ads are too busy ridiculing
Movie stars and getting up their own arse.
One wonders just how badly a company that big has to be run before
anything is done about it.
Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
If Hans Snook was dead he'd be spinning in his Feng Shui grave
Steve Terry
| |
|
| On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:57:05 -0000, "Steve Terry" <gFOURwwk@tesco.net>
wrote:
>
>"Chris Boyd" < chrisbboyd@NOSPAMgma
il.com> wrote in message
> news:200803241753151
6807- chrisbboyd@NOSPAMgma
ilcom...
>As usual Orange didn't tell anyone, their ads are too busy ridiculing
>Movie stars and getting up their own arse.
>One wonders just how badly a company that big has to be run before
>anything is done about it.
>Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
When Wildfire & Everyphone went, so did I.
--
-- Nick ICQ: 9235201 EMAIL & MSN: nickmooney@spamcop.net
-- Triumph Tiger 955i -- http://www.bgn.me.uk -- Touch -
-- LOTR#4 SKOGA#8 DS#7 BOTAFOT#159 BOTM#2 FBOTY#06 PM#11
| |
| White Knight 2008-03-25, 7:33 am |
| * shaun.okeefe@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know any networks which offer PTT in the UK?
>
> I know it is very popular in the USA and I also use it over in Israel,
> if not networks is there any services which provide it in the UK ?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Shaun
I heard it's going to be big this year/early next year after doing well
in other parts of Europe.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2008-03-25, 3:33 pm |
| "BGN" <nickmooney@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:bk2gu39bb5ba5vu
nm1b2a1p2ffo28l42qv@
4ax.com
: On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:57:05 -0000, "Steve Terry"
: <gFOURwwk@tesco.net> wrote:
[snip]
: >One wonders just how badly a company that big has to be
: >run before anything is done about it.
: >Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
:
: When Wildfire & Everyphone went, so did I.
Likewise. Although I still keep a PAYG SIM with Out Here on, as I send
very few SMS messages (sorry but I flatly refuse to use the noun 'text' as
an adjective..!).
Ivor
| |
| Theo Markettos 2008-03-25, 3:33 pm |
| BGN <nickmooney@spamcop.net> wrote:
> My Nokia n95 has PTT settings which I can configure, no idea which
> non-network provider would offer this to a 3rd party.
My N70 had a dedicated PTT button which fired up Talk Now on the original
Orange firmware. Thankfully it's reprogrammable to something more useful
(and I've now reflashed it with the generic firmware so byebye Orange).
Theo
| |
| Dirk Bieber 2008-03-25, 10:33 pm |
| White Knight wrote:
[color=darkred]
> I heard it's going to be big this year/early next year after doing well
> in other parts of Europe.
In Germany only T-Mobile offers PTT and they are going to quit the
service in July.
Greets Dirk
| |
|
| On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:07:02 +0100, Dirk Bieber wrote:
> White Knight wrote:
>
> In Germany only T-Mobile offers PTT and they are going to quit the
> service in July.
Bit of a shame really. I used it in the US on an iDEN network [forget the
name of the carrier] and it was very handy. The light at the end of the
tunnel is that you could probably DIY with 3G and an application on the
handset, so once 3G gets cheaper and more ubiquitous it might just
happen. Also, if it was data-based, then you wouldn't need to be on the
same network as the people you want to speak to.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
08:00:29 up 30 days, 15:53, 2 users, load average: 0.31, 0.12, 0.03
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data
| |
| Chris Blunt 2008-03-26, 10:33 am |
| On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:33:54 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>"BGN" <nickmooney@spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:bk2gu39bb5ba5vu
nm1b2a1p2ffo28l42qv@
4ax.com
>: On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:57:05 -0000, "Steve Terry"
>: <gFOURwwk@tesco.net> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>: >One wonders just how badly a company that big has to be
>: >run before anything is done about it.
>: >Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
>:
>: When Wildfire & Everyphone went, so did I.
>
>Likewise. Although I still keep a PAYG SIM with Out Here on, as I send
>very few SMS messages (sorry but I flatly refuse to use the noun 'text' as
>an adjective..!).
>
>Ivor
Then you could use it as a noun. eg. "I send very few texts"
Chris
| |
| Ivor Jones 2008-03-26, 3:33 pm |
|
"Chris Blunt" <mail@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:2ehku3ld77rv13p
08iec03irp6cbt3nt2i@
4ax.com
: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:33:54 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
: <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
:
: >"BGN" <nickmooney@spamcop.net> wrote in message
: > news:bk2gu39bb5ba5vu
nm1b2a1p2ffo28l42qv@
4ax.com
: >: On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:57:05 -0000, "Steve Terry"
: >: <gFOURwwk@tesco.net> wrote:
: >
: >[snip]
: >
: >: >One wonders just how badly a company that big has to
: >: >be run before anything is done about it.
: >: >Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
: >:
: >: When Wildfire & Everyphone went, so did I.
: >
: >Likewise. Although I still keep a PAYG SIM with Out Here
: >on, as I send very few SMS messages (sorry but I flatly
: >refuse to use the noun 'text' as an adjective..!).
: >
: >Ivor
:
: Then you could use it as a noun. eg. "I send very few
: texts"
But texts isn't a word:
From the OED:
text
. noun 1 a written or printed work regarded in terms of content rather
than form. 2 the main body of a book or other work as distinct from
appendices, illustrations, etc. 3 written or printed words or computer
data. 4 a written work chosen as a subject of study. 5 a passage from the
Bible, especially as the subject of a sermon.
- ORIGIN Latin textus 'tissue, literary style', from texere 'weave'.
It doesn't mention an 's' on the end nor does it specify SMS messages.
Ivor
| |
| Chris Blunt 2008-03-27, 4:33 am |
| On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:24:56 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>"Chris Blunt" <mail@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:2ehku3ld77rv13p
08iec03irp6cbt3nt2i@
4ax.com
>: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:33:54 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
>: <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>:
>: >"BGN" <nickmooney@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>: > news:bk2gu39bb5ba5vu
nm1b2a1p2ffo28l42qv@
4ax.com
>: >: On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:57:05 -0000, "Steve Terry"
>: >: <gFOURwwk@tesco.net> wrote:
>: >
>: >[snip]
>: >
>: >: >One wonders just how badly a company that big has to
>: >: >be run before anything is done about it.
>: >: >Everyphone gone.Wildfire gone. etc, etc.
>: >:
>: >: When Wildfire & Everyphone went, so did I.
>: >
>: >Likewise. Although I still keep a PAYG SIM with Out Here
>: >on, as I send very few SMS messages (sorry but I flatly
>: >refuse to use the noun 'text' as an adjective..!).
>: >
>: >Ivor
>:
>: Then you could use it as a noun. eg. "I send very few
>: texts"
>
>But texts isn't a word:
>
>From the OED:
>text
>
> . noun 1 a written or printed work regarded in terms of content rather
>than form. 2 the main body of a book or other work as distinct from
>appendices, illustrations, etc. 3 written or printed words or computer
>data. 4 a written work chosen as a subject of study. 5 a passage from the
>Bible, especially as the subject of a sermon.
>
> - ORIGIN Latin textus 'tissue, literary style', from texere 'weave'.
>
>It doesn't mention an 's' on the end nor does it specify SMS messages.
Of course its a word. Its the plural form of "text".
The fact that the plural form is not shown in the dictionary extract
you quoted means nothing. Dictionaries will only show the plural form
of a noun if it takes an irregular or unusual form.
If you don't like using it that way you could say "I send very few
text messages", which does appear in the OED.
Chris
| |
| Ivor Jones 2008-03-27, 7:33 am |
| "Chris Blunt" <mail@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ei7mu3593p2qddo
98pu1hehk0uk8t1lgm2@
4ax.com
: On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:24:56 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
: <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
: >It doesn't mention an 's' on the end nor does it specify
: >SMS messages.
:
: Of course its a word. Its the plural form of "text".
I beg to differ. Sheeps isn't the plural of sheep. Not all plurals end in
s.
: The fact that the plural form is not shown in the
: dictionary extract you quoted means nothing. Dictionaries
: will only show the plural form of a noun if it takes an
: irregular or unusual form.
Ok, maybe, but I still don't believe 'texts' is a valid description for a
text message.
: If you don't like using it that way you could say "I send
: very few text messages", which does appear in the OED.
Either that or SMS messages. Yes I agree. But 'texts' still isn't a word
as far as I'm concerned.
Ivor
| |
| Grumpy Old Man 2008-03-27, 7:33 am |
| "Ivor Jones" <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
> "Chris Blunt" <mail@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:ei7mu3593p2qddo
98pu1hehk0uk8t1lgm2@
4ax.com
> : On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:24:56 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
> : <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> : >It doesn't mention an 's' on the end nor does it specify
> : >SMS messages.
> :
> : Of course its a word. Its the plural form of "text".
>
> I beg to differ. Sheeps isn't the plural of sheep. Not all plurals end in
> s.
>
> : The fact that the plural form is not shown in the
> : dictionary extract you quoted means nothing. Dictionaries
> : will only show the plural form of a noun if it takes an
> : irregular or unusual form.
>
> Ok, maybe, but I still don't believe 'texts' is a valid description for a
> text message.
>
> : If you don't like using it that way you could say "I send
> : very few text messages", which does appear in the OED.
>
> Either that or SMS messages. Yes I agree. But 'texts' still isn't a word
> as far as I'm concerned.
Languages develop. At one time, the terms "computer" and "typewriter" referred
to people who did those things, rather than to machines. "Presently" has at
various times meant "now" and "in the near future". To use "text" as a verb
seems quite sensible to me, after all we use "email" as a verb, also
"(tele)phone" and "pen" (as in "pen a letter").
| |
| Ivor Jones 2008-03-27, 7:33 am |
| "Grumpy Old Man" <v.meldrew@i.do.not.believe.it> wrote in
message news:dc0nu3peurrjmpc
o252rfrecq1hv8v4pin@
4ax.com
[snip]
: Languages develop. At one time, the terms "computer" and
: "typewriter" referred to people who did those things,
: rather than to machines. "Presently" has at various
: times meant "now" and "in the near future". To use
: "text" as a verb seems quite sensible to me, after all we
: use "email" as a verb, also "(tele)phone" and "pen" (as
: in "pen a letter").
True. But it's not *currently* in the dictionary and in any case I don't
like it. It just looks plain wrong. Rather like misplaced apostrophes.
Ivor
| |
| Chris Blunt 2008-03-27, 7:33 am |
| On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:28:16 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>"Chris Blunt" <mail@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:ei7mu3593p2qddo
98pu1hehk0uk8t1lgm2@
4ax.com
>: On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:24:56 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
>: <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>: >It doesn't mention an 's' on the end nor does it specify
>: >SMS messages.
>:
>: Of course its a word. Its the plural form of "text".
>
>I beg to differ. Sheeps isn't the plural of sheep. Not all plurals end in
>s.
I didn't say all plurals do end in "s", I said that "Texts" is the
plural of "Text". The fact that you can come up with a different noun
that happens to take an irregular plural form is irrelevant.
Do a Google search for "Texts" and you'll come up with hundreds of
references to such things as "Biblical texts", "Latin texts",
"Historical texts" "Religious texts", "Sacred texts" and so on.
>: The fact that the plural form is not shown in the
>: dictionary extract you quoted means nothing. Dictionaries
>: will only show the plural form of a noun if it takes an
>: irregular or unusual form.
>
>Ok, maybe, but I still don't believe 'texts' is a valid description for a
>text message.
It depends on the context, but I agree that using the word "texts"
alone could be ambiguous. That's why I suggested using "text message"
to make it clearer.
>: If you don't like using it that way you could say "I send
>: very few text messages", which does appear in the OED.
>
>Either that or SMS messages. Yes I agree. But 'texts' still isn't a word
>as far as I'm concerned.
It might not be as far as you are concerned, but "texts" is a
perfectly acceptable word to millions of other English speakers. The
use of the word "texts" predates mobile phones by many generations.
Chris
| |
| Theo Markettos 2008-03-27, 7:33 am |
| Ivor Jones <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
> Either that or SMS messages. Yes I agree. But 'texts' still isn't a word
> as far as I'm concerned.
"At school we had three set texts: Julius Caesar, Romeo and Juliet, and
Great Expectations"
I agree that the modern usage of text might feel slightly uncomfortable, but
its use isn't hugely different from the example above (OK, 160 chars isn't
quite on the same par as Shakespeare but its usage to mean a body of
language is roughly the same).
If you feel uncomfortable with the pluralisation of 'texts' you could define
the plural of 'text' to be 'text', which doesn't feel completely alien:
"At school we had three set text: Julius Caesar ..."
Theo
| |
| Grumpy Old Man 2008-03-27, 10:33 am |
| "Ivor Jones" <ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:
> "Grumpy Old Man" <v.meldrew@i.do.not.believe.it> wrote in
> message news:dc0nu3peurrjmpc
o252rfrecq1hv8v4pin@
4ax.com
>
> [snip]
>
> : Languages develop. At one time, the terms "computer" and
> : "typewriter" referred to people who did those things,
> : rather than to machines. "Presently" has at various
> : times meant "now" and "in the near future". To use
> : "text" as a verb seems quite sensible to me, after all we
> : use "email" as a verb, also "(tele)phone" and "pen" (as
> : in "pen a letter").
>
> True. But it's not *currently* in the dictionary and in any case I don't
> like it. It just looks plain wrong. Rather like misplaced apostrophes.
Dictionary definitions record usage, so obviously there must be a period when an
accepted definition is not in a dictionary. Nothing like misplaced apostrophes
at all, which are an abomination. One of the worst examples I saw was "a
serie's" - ouch !
|
|
|
|
|