I posted the math here based on the Guinness sentence that the text messenger had to send for his world record, but I'm too lazy to look for it now. The official text is 160 characters INCLUDING spaces, 136 without. But SMS requires that spaces be keyed in where Morse does not. So SMS is at a throughput disadvantage from the beginning.
Ben Cook set the text messenger record with 160 characters in 57.75 seconds. That works out to 29 wpm (5.5 wpm) for 160 characters or about 24 wpm without. Actually quite unbelievably fast for anyone who has entered an address or note on their cell phone. So to beat him, it only required sending Morse at >24 wpm. My guess is Chip was sending at better than 25, but less than 30 wpm. It doesn't so much speak to the efficiency of Morse as it speaks to the unbearably pathetic human interface that is SMS. However, it takes less than 5 minutes to learn SMS, and probably that many days or even weeks to reach a comparable speed in Morse. AND, the receiver already has the skills necessary to read SMS where Morse requires a trained operator at both ends. Not to apologize for Ben Cook, but he probably practiced the Guinness script every waking moment before his record attempt. He was seeing the Tonight Show text for the first time. So what do we have? I'd say 3:06 minutes of light television entertainment. That's good enough. Eric KE6US -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Rock Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 11:27 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Morse on the Tonight Show, Tonight, Friday the 13th I did a little arithmetic to determine the skills necessary for this 'competition'. It appears the text only folks never stood a chance. Using the standard word PARIS here is the run down. PARIS * 20 wpm = 100 chars/minute 100 chars/60 seconds = 1.67 chars/second At 27 wpm => 2.25 chars/sec At 30 wpm => 2.5 chars/sec. Having never used text messaging, since cell phones do not work where I live, I cannot truly measure the dexterity required to pass this bit of traffic. Since I am a touch typist at a moderate rate of 60 wpm I know I could beat most CW ops if given the chance to type the message on a QWERTY keyboard and send it via one of the digital modes. But on a little cellphone's keypad I do believe I would be severely hampered by its user interface. They are pretty much a two finger input device as far as I can tell. My dad was pretty good at two finger typing (40 wpm) but that method has its inherent difficulties. I don't think this was a valid test of different user interfaces but it makes for a fine joke. Now if those folks using the cellphones would have had Wayne's two button (dot/dash) user input device they would have been on the same footing. But even then there would have been the use of repeaters and landline circuits to transfer their message. This would have slowed the information exchange by just enough to get themselves smoked by the simplex transfer of data by the '817 to '817 connection. The contest would have been more fair however. Imagine if our very own Chicken Fat Operator N0SS had been the keying op? The poor cell op would truly have had egg on his face ;) Long live CW!! 73, Kevin. KD5ONS Should truly be called the "Vail Code" but I digress. KJR -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
