Regarding texting: If you could speak the words into your phone, and your phone translated it to text, do you think texting would be as popular as it is?

I think speaking the words and having them transferred could be beneficial in some situations and some phones already have that capability. Typing it offers more privacy because no one over hears what you are saying, which has it’s advantages as well.

@Seaofclouds I understand that, but the question is, if you could speak the words would texting be as wildly popular as it is now?

I got google voicemail and when I see what it interprets as the message (e.g., Kate, this is Roger was translated to OK, this is trousers), I fear what texts people will get from me!

I agree with @Seaofclouds It’s the privacy factor that we seek so it probably wouldn’t be as popular, but still useful for those that are on the go. It would be the same as leaving a voice mail and i just can’t send dirty pictures over a voice mail, but it’s do-able through text.

@Dutchess_III Yes, I think it still would be popular if we had the option to choose which way we wanted to do it. Texting would be a lot easier by speaking, but when we wanted the privacy, typing is best. As long as the choice remains there, sure. If we didn’t have the choice and it was only by speaking, it would probably still be popular because we would still like the convenience of sending a message and doing other things while waiting for a reply without getting pulled into a full conversation about other things (which may happen if we actually called the person we were texting).

Yes I do and yes you can already do this with android phones that have dragon installed (most of them do).

I speak it when it’s easy and I won’t be overheard, however, I often find that it’s too much trouble to get it to recognize the words properly or that there’s a background noise screwing it up.

I think that if you can speak the words (and let’s assume for the moment that there are no “trouser translations”!) then it wouldn’t be that much different from having a conversation. It would go faster…and go on longer. I think that’s one of the things we like about text—they’re short and we have control. Exchange 3 or 4 texts each ( ie; 6 or 8 total) over 10 minutes or so and you’re done done. You don’t have to make any excuses for “hanging up.” You just don’t respond and it’s usually forgiven. It’s assumed “something came up,” or whatever.

No. texting can be a secret way of sending someone information, quietly. speaking the words would just be like talking on a cellphone. everyone around you can hear your conversation.

Not so, with texting. its here to stay.

@john65pennington Bingo. Yes. Plus, honestly, all the effort that one puts into texting is far more like a gift than just “talking.” Like the difference between a snail-mail letter and an email.

@Kayak8 , that’s hilarious. hahaha. <3

My Motorola Droid makes speech-to-type texting very easy.
I use it for work when I am out driving all the time.

@fireside Work, yes. Work messages are expected to be short and cryptic. But do you think it would fly with the teens?

@Dutchess_III – no, probably not. My 14 year old son won’t even pick up the phone to call to his friends when he is banned from texting. There’s no way he would sit there talking into his phone for a text. Instead, he goes to Facebook and IM’s them through that interface.

I think a big part is that he doesn’t want to broadcast his conversations to us. If we are in the same room, he turns the computer or phone away from us when typing.

Maybe, if he was alone, he would use speech to text. But I doubt it, he seems to be very careful with what he says in texts and wouldn’t want to have to go back and correct the grammar or punctuation if it didn’t come out right.

@fireside Ah, the days when the most privacy we teenagers…and MY kids…could hope for was a loooooong phone cord! That would get all twisted up….

Damnyouautocorrect.com might end up even funnier if the computer didn’t understand a persons accent.

Personally, I hate text-speak. I’ve never sent a CU L8r or LOL in my life, and never will (outside of ranting emails and posts decrying the hateful practise). I wouldn’t use a speech service because a) I don’t want to broadcast their content and b) the punctuation wouldn’t be up to scratch.

One of the mail appeals of texting is that it is a non-intrusive way to communicate with someone. You send it in your own good time, they read and reply in theirs.

It is, of course, an outrageous rip off by the mobile phone companies. They charge more to send a text, which ties their network up for a fraction of a second, than they charge for 30 seconds of call. And we fall for it.

My experience of voice-to-text on phones lately has been surprisingly good. The lack of privacy when you say your texts aloud might be a deterrent, but texts are also cheaper in general, which would probably be enough to keep most people texting rather than calling.

Edit: oh, @meiosis says texts are more expensive. Here they’re much cheaper, especially if you have the right plan, and anyway there’s always the chance you’ll waste money on a person who won’t pick up.

@iphigeneia I meant they’re more expensive per second. Calls on my plan are 20p per minute, texts are 12p (and take a fraction of a second of the network’s time). Mobile phone companies have a vastly higher rate of return on their infrastructure costs from texts than from voice calls.

How much are you paying?

@meiosis Thanks for making me check, apparently the costs have gone up since I changed plans!

There is a call connection fee of 35 – 39 cents, then 80 – 89 cents per minute. Texts, on the other hand, are 25 – 29 cents, plus many young people are on a 1 cent text plan, which provides texts for 1 cent each to phones on the same network. There is a much bigger difference.