Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Hardware

Morse Code on Cell Phones? 316

Posted by timothy from the rotary-dial-too dept.
An anonymous reader writes "In a recent showdown, veteran Morse coders were able to send SMS messages faster via Morse than the fastest thumb-typists. What about embedding support for Morse code directly into handsets? This article on O'Reilly Network floats the idea of using Morse code to compose text messages, as well as tapping commands (i.e. answer call, forward to voice mail, etc) in hands-free mode by tapping on the handset case."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Morse Code on Cell Phones? More

Morse Code on Cell Phones?

Comments Filter:

  • The Most Amazing Dupe Known To Man! (Score:4, Funny)

    by nokilli ( 759129 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @04:41AM (#12939904)
    Having already posted one dupe [slashdot.org] today, timothy pulls off the amazing feat of posting a dupe [slashdot.org] of a dupe [slashdot.org]!

    It's a dupe followed by a dupe-dupe!

    What do you call that?

  • Rather impractical (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nmg196 ( 184961 ) *
    The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad.

    If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug' then I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have won. It takes several keypresses to send a single character in morse and just because it's morse, it doesn't mean that you can press the keys

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:5, Insightful)

      by elgatozorbas ( 783538 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:03AM (#12939964)
      If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug' then I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have won. It takes several keypresses to send a single character in morse and just because it's morse, it doesn't mean that you can press the keys any quicker. He could only key quicker because of the equipment he was using.

      While I can follow your reasoning, it is also not completely fair:
      - transmitting morse code is done using the equipment the guy used, transmitting text messages is done using the equipment the boy used. What you are saying is "cars would be not faster than bicycles, if it weren't for the combustion engines".
      - it is only your assumption that the morse guy wouldn't have won using the keypad. Maybe yes, maybe no. Not very scientific either.
      - No-one is saying this was a scientific endeavour. Was Leno nominated for the Nobel prize or so?

      • Very true. This is all about the speed and efficiency of the interface. Morse is faster both because of the proficiency of that particular operator and because of the efficiency of the interface (namely two buttons/paddles vs a bunch of buttons not optimally laid out on a tini phone). In the end though I submit that just talking in to the phone in the first place is the most efficient and would meet all of the improvements suggested in the article (voice recognition/command already exists on some phones). T
      • > What you are saying is "cars would be not faster than bicycles,
        > if it weren't for the combustion engines".

        Well they wouldn't! I'm not sure what your point is here - you seem to be arguing my point for me.

        To use your rather misfitting analogy, this guy is saying that on our peddle bikes, instead of peddling in circles, we can just press the right peddle and we'll go much faster just like you can in a car (but somehow achieving this without the engine). I'm saying that we can't. It won't work. And
        • I think we are talking about different sibjects here. More specifically: I am NOT suggesting that a morse option would be a good idea on phones. My point (still standing) was that getting a message through with a morse transmitter is apparently faster than getting it through with text messages.

          That is: comparing a standard morse device and a standard phone (one could argue about T9). That the morse key is more convenient is not the point, because it is part of a standard setup, just like an engine is part

          • > What did you expect them to to, cripple the key and use an untrained
            > operator to prove that text messaging is faster?

            What's important and interesting is real world tests. Ie whether an "average" HAM can beat an "average" texter. Not whether a very experienced expert HAM can beat a teenager.

            They should have got two people the same age who have both been morsing/texting since the same age for a fair test. Most importantly, they should have had more than one candidate from each test group. All I was
          • in REALISTIC conditions a bike is often faster than a car. i guarantee i can get across london on my bike faster than you can in a car. even a taxi using the bus lanes. anyway, to fill this post with non-bragging content; was the kid using T9 or just mashing the buttons? the FA doesnt say. Either way, my phone is dead portable, it would ruin its appeal if i had to carry a 93 year old man and his morse machine around too...
      • If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug'

        I would also hasten to add it wasn't a bug that Chip used, but rather a Bencher iambic keyer, and they start around $100.

        Straight-key morse is somewhat unintuative and I think would wear off quickly. Two-paddle or iambic, on the other hand, is much easier and faster (usually left for dits, right for dahs). I can bang out 40+ WPM in a contest or while DXing with paddles.

        I seriously believe this would c

      • - transmitting morse code is done using the equipment the guy used, transmitting text messages is done using the equipment the boy used.

        Except, a morse code machine is of no real use in a real world situation. "Hang on, I'll just get the mobile morse machine out of my pocket and send a text message to someone on other end of this cable which I've draped along the floor everywhere I go." I can't see that working out.

        It would probably be more effecient even than morse code to use a computer keyboard, but
    • I always felt the test was like pitting Michael Schumacher in a f1 racing car against someone who got their license in a fiat Panda ,to prove that Germans have more testosterone .
    • You were doing real good until you tossed out the Dvorak keyboard idea.

      You use logic that it "takes ages to learn morse code" (therefore, bad), and then you ignore the "ages that it takes" to learn a new keyboard layout, and profess Dvorak keyboard as good.

      If we didn't have a huge installed base of QWERTY keyboards and users, then I'd prefer Dvorak hands down (well, hand on, I guess). Oh well. Darn installed base gets you every time!

      • I actually did some research on the Dvorak keyboard, and it turns out that there isn't much evidence that it's any better than Qwerty. Dvorak himself gave a lot of statistics which others haven't been able to reproduce. Mind you, I haven't invested the time to learn the Dvorak keyboard, so I can't say for sure. I'd be interested to hear from people who actually use it.

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MidnightBrewer ( 97195 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:12AM (#12939992)
      So really you're just agreeing with the results of the test - which is that the best designed Morse code equipment is superior to text messaging on a numeric keypad. It doesn't require someone with 80 years of practice, either - just enough. I used to have an interest in ham radio when I was a kid, and I have seen the advanced key switches myself. Amazing stuff.

      So we have Morse code, which works now and could be fitted to a phone. You have two thumbs and, as you pointed out, two big buttons; fit one to be the dot, one to be the dash. There you go. Ergonomic, really hard to make a mistake (assuming you know which hand is which), and already tried-and-true. No need to reinvent the wheel.

      I don't think this is a case to cry foul, but to appreciate a superior message-sending format. Morse code can be learned relatively quickly, actually - within a week, if you really want to. When you get right down to it, it's just a bunch of ones and zeroes. You would think Slashdot people would appreciate that. )

      As far as other technologies go, such as type-ahead find, etc, a japanese person would trump someone using the alphabet because they use a phonetic system that combines a consonant and vowel in every symbol, giving them a two-for-one deal. Combined with the fact that most nouns involve only two kanji and a far simpler grammatical structure and now you know why everyone in Japan emails via their cell, even with the limited keypad. Trust me, Japanese is a lot harder to learn than Morse.
      • > So really you're just agreeing with the results of the test

        I can't dispute the results of the test - I was just saying that they're probably wrong for the general case.

        My main point was that unless the two operators are using the same device (a phone keypad) the test is totally unfair. It's like comparing texting to typing on a qwerty keyboard - you know which is faster, but the latter won't be faster by the time you've put the input device on a 3x3 cm space at the bottom of a phone.

        The context of t
      • Morse code can be learned relatively quickly, actually - within a week, if you really want to.

        Braille can be learned relatively quickly, actually - within a week, if you really want to.

        Cursive writing can be learned relatively quickly, actually - within a week, if you really want to.

        Sign language can be learned relatively quickly, actually - within a week, if you really want to.

        Yeah, all those statements are equally as vaccuous.

      • Morse is highly unsecure. You enable people to easily tell what you are coding just by listening to your message being entered. At least with a keypad you can kind of hide the face of the device to provide some semblance of deterrence to getting your message contents. Are we for privacy today, or not?

        "dit-dot dat dat..."
        Translation: "Phil, I was able to sneak on the bus without paying. Oh wait the bus driver heard my messaging..."
      • Actually I think Korean could be more efficient - it's pure alphabet, 24 characters.

        Whereas Japanese has 3 different character sets.

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:4, Informative)

      by dj1yfk ( 736311 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:33AM (#12940042) Homepage Journal
      The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad.

      The two hams who won are certainly not the fastest morse operators. They were sending at less than 40 WpM / 200 LpM, whereas most good operators can send around 50 to 60 WpM. Probably they kept it so slow because the audience wouldn't have believed it was morse code if they went to their full speed.

      As an example, this is a sample of 60 WpM: click [dutch.nl].

      Furthermore good morse equipment doesn't have to be expensive; I am using this homebrew sensor keyer [tu-dresden.de] for the last 7 years now and I am able to send over 50 WpM with it. Estimated cost less than $20...

      • Re:Rather impractical (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sgant ( 178166 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @06:36AM (#12940233) Homepage Journal
        The operators have already stated elsewhere (I don't have a link handy, sorry) that they were limited in speed because the reciever couldn't use a typewriter to write down the code he was recieving...which would be much quicker. So they were actually hampered by is writing with a pencil speed.

        The morse operators were also tapping out the entire message, while the text-messenger guys were using abbreviations. Anyone that has sat in on a CW QSO would know that operators use a TON of abbreviations to keep the code quick.

        And it's true, CW equipment doesn't have to be expensive at all. In fact, to get on the HF bands it's probably one of the cheapest part of the hobby, especially if you're looking to do QRP which is running at 5w or less.
      • > The two hams who won are certainly not the fastest morse operators.

        Well on Leno they said they were - and that was all I had to go on. The sender was way faster than 40wpm, so I don't know where you got that figure from. Most of the delay occured with the guy that was writing it down with a pencil IIRC.

      • Re:Rather impractical (Score:3, Interesting)

        by BreadMan ( 178060 )
        My Dad (as a result of a stroke) was totally disabled, but could move a few fingers. In order to communicate, the PT group at the hospital got together with a local university and created a thumb-driven Morse code input device hooked-up to the latest marvel in computer technology at the time... an Apple II. The designers added some extra codes for the control keys and other symbols not in Morse code.

        After about 3 weeks of training, Dad could "type" rapidly; and this was a person who didn't have full hand

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:5, Informative)

      by Pat__ ( 26992 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:49AM (#12940086)
      Nice analysis, however morse code is in fact faster since it is very easy to provide a -natural- way for inputing morse code on the phone almost as fast as the morse equipment!
      In fact you provide a way in your own comment!

      > the reason morse is as fast as it is is because you hardly have to move your finger at all.

      That's why typing SMS using this program for morse code IS ACTUALLY FASTER.
      http://laivakoira.typepad.com/blog/2005/05/morse_t exter.html [typepad.com]

      You use the keypad on the phone to type the dit and dah (left, right) and click to seperate letters/words. Try it if you have access to a symbian phone!

      Even if you don't know morse code by heart.
      Write a message to send by sms, look up the morse equivalent and write it down too.
      Try to input the words as sms, now try the dots and dashes (follow what you have on the paper without thinking, left for dot, right for dash, click to separate letters, another click to separate words) ...
      So if you know morse code it is actually faster than sms! Now learning it is a whole other issue http://www.learnmorsecode.com/ [learnmorsecode.com].

      • Thank you, I can't wait to install the Morse code package into my Nokia 3650 -- the round keypad is impossible to type with, as the buttons are not in the standard T9 layout. This makes typing while driving very difficult.

        Now I can send messages using two buttons, and I don't even have to look at the keypad or screen anymore -- Thank you!!! I made mention of stuff like this in yesterday's post about blind/deaf UIs.
      • Who really cares which is faster? Both suck tremendously. This is like racing snails or ride-on lawnmowers.
        When will Xerox invent us something better?
        I'd like touchscreen keyboard or touchscreen OCR or Speech-to-Text on a phone.

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:4, Informative)

      by Tim ( 686 ) <`ude.notgnihsaw.inmula' `ta' `rmit'> on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @06:05AM (#12940132) Homepage
      "The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad."

      Where the heck did you get this? I watched the video, and at no point were the morse guys introduced as the "world's fastest" anything. And honestly, I know morse, I know a lot of old-school Ham radio guys, and those guys on Leno weren't sending at any particularly blazing rate of speed. It sounded like 20-30 WPM, give or take. There are guys out there who can copy at nearly twice that rate.

      "If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug' then I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have won."

      IIRC, the guys in the video were using a straight key, not a "bug". Nevertheless, you're kidding yourself if you think the type of key being used gave them an unfair advantage. What gave them an advantage is the fact that morse requires one button, and therefore can be sent without even looking at the keys. Even the best telephone keypad requires a certain amount of delay while switching buttons....
    • The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad.

      Retard. That '. . .world's fastest morse coder. . .' was nothing of the kind. He was a typical Ham Radio contest enthusiast. Also, no one but some goofball on ./ would call them 'morse coders'.

      They're radio amateurs, cw ops, ham radio guys, even brass pounders, but not 'mors
      • Besides, Morse isn't a code, it's a cipher.

        True, but I've never heard anyone refer to it as anything other than "Morse code".
      • > Retard

        Mature aren't you?

        > no one but some goofball on ./ would call them 'morse coders'.

        I referred to them as hams in my later posts. I called them morse coders because I wasn't sure everyone ELSE would know what a ham was. I wasn't even sure if "ham" was UK slang.

        > Morse isn't a code, it's a cipher.

        Search for "morse cipher" on google - 16 hits.
        Search for "morse code" on google - 918,000 hits.

        I think everyone else in the world knew what I meant...

        > Now, crawl back in your hole, curl u
    • And, more importantly, the SMS was entered without T9 (which in itself speeds up typing by a factor of 2 or 3).
      • was entered without T9 (which in itself speeds up typing by a factor of 2 or 3).
        Does it? It may reduce the number of button presses (and even that's debatable) but that's failingly obviously not the same thing as being faster.

        • Re:Rather impractical (Score:3, Interesting)

          by dabadab ( 126782 )
          Well, it does, I can tell it from experience (even in Hungarian, which, being an agglutinag language, is ill fitted for limited size T9 dictionaries).
          The text used in the test could be entered on my phone without having to switch between the possible hits, so it definitely required less keypresses. The other thing is, what slows down SMS typing is the situation when the next letter is on the same button as the previous was - you have to wait for the phone to time out so you won't get "c" instead of "ba" - t

    • get your facts straight... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by lophophore ( 4087 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @06:21AM (#12940177) Homepage
      Huh?

      "worlds fastest morse coder"? nope. Not hardly. Just an experienced operator sending at less than 30 words a minute. Fast for morse code is 60 WPM.

      "very expensive morse equipment"? uhhh, no. Not really. They used a cheap "Bencher" paddle, $100, not any "$200 morsing bug"...

      Morse is the first and oldest digital transmission mode that I am aware of. The cell phone text message is also ultimately a digital transmission mode.

      Personally, I hate text messaging because of the clunky input method. The idea that perhaps there is a better way to enter text into a phone is intrigueing. Also the idea that the phone could output the text message as morse code is interesting.

      How many people are aware that when their Nokia sends "dah dah dah dit dit dah dah dah" it is in fact sending "SMS" in morse to indicate Short Message System? I hear it all the time, and nobody knows why it beeps like that!

      • How many people are aware that when their Nokia sends "dah dah dah dit dit dah dah dah" it is in fact sending "SMS" in morse to indicate Short Message System? I hear it all the time, and nobody knows why it beeps like that!

        Hay, that gives me an idea. Instead of beeping "S-M-S" when a message is recieved, why not have the phone beep the actual message -- in morse code? (Okay, might get annoying if you recieve a very long message and it might not be so great if you get a top s3kr1t message from your mistre

      • "Personally, I hate text messaging because of the clunky input method. The idea that perhaps there is a better way to enter text into a phone is intrigueing."

        There is [google.com]. (Though, having owned both, I prefer the older 6800. I don't use the bluetooth or camera enough to make up for the worse keyboard.)
    • You didn't see the clip did you? Jay Leno introduced the "teenager" as Ben Cook, the Countries fastest text messenger. A little googling gives us this:

      "King of SMS. In November 2004, a seventeen-year-old from Utah became the world's text messaging champion. Ben Cook typed his way into the Guinness World Book of Records by using his cell phone to type 160 characters in just 57.75 seconds. The message was: "The razor-toothed piranhas of the genera Serrasalmus and Pygocentrus are the most ferocious freshwa

    • The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad.

      World's fastest morse coder? He was going about 28 WPM. The morse code team mentioned afterwards that they could have gone faster. There's many coders that can go over 40 WPM and legendary morse code senders can send and recieve 50 to 60 WPM. If anything, these were typical
    • While the above poster is mainly negative, and in kind of a mean way, he does have most of his facts straight.

      A fast text messager does about 20 wpm. Maybe the best can do 30 wpm.

      A fast morse coder does about 50 to 60 wpm. The best can do maybe 75 wpm.

      A fast typer regularly does 90 wpm. I can do about 120 wpm on a good day. Mrs. Barbara Blackburn of Salem, Oregon can maintain 150 words per minute (wpm) for 50 minutes (37,500 key strokes) and attain a speed of 170 wpm using the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:3, Interesting)

      by fatboy ( 6851 )
      The supposed "showdown" on Jay Leno was a highly unscientific and inaccurate test which pitted the world's fasted morse coder using very expensive morse equipment against a teenager using a cheap cell phone with a membrane keypad.Um, that was only about 30wpm. Nowhere near a record for IMC sending speed. That is the typical traffic speed I hear on the radio every day.
      If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug' then I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have wo
    • Actually, you're wrong. It wasn't the "worlds fastest morse coder", he was just an average ham radio operator that specialized in morse code. He was sending his message at around 30 WPM.

      To be fair, his "competitor" was billed as "the fastest text messager in the country".

      Check your facts next time.

    • If the pro-morser had been forced to enter morse on a phone keypad instead of his $200 morsing 'bug' then I'm pretty sure...

      I can easily send using the membrane keys on the back of my FT-817 microphone at 20WPM. I've also built a keyer out of microswitches for less than 3 dollars that can easily get up to 40WPM. It's a no brainer.

      So, your "I'm pretty sure..." comment is equivalent to most slashdot comments -- the product of total and complete ignorance. -- Brian

    • Re:Rather impractical (Score:3, Interesting)

      by pyser ( 262789 ) *
      It takes several keypresses to send a single character in morse

      True, but so it also does using a telephone keyboard, where, depending on the protocol used, it takes one to three keypresses (and sometimes a short wait) to send a single character. It would be a simple matter to set up the keyboard with two buttons, one for dit and one for dah, just like a paddle would be configured. (Some ham rigs, including the cute little Elecraft KX1 [elecraft.com] allow you to do this with the front panel buttons if you don't happen t
    • The hams who did the code part of the competition are NOT world record holders at all, but just regular amateur hams and are not professionals. They specifically limited their speed under 30 WPM. The world record is held by the late Ted MacElroy at 72 WPM in 1943, if I recall correctly. I'm only an occasional code operator and the speed they used is quite comfortable for me. I'd like to point out, too, that the hams send the entire text verbatim while the cell phone messagers used abreviations.

      This same th

  • Semi-Dup (Score:3, Informative)

    by A Dafa Disciple ( 876967 ) * on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @04:42AM (#12939908) Homepage
    This is a semi-http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/03/0 525225&tid=133&tid=215 [slashdot.org]">dup. This submission has an article containing a reference to the material that Jay Leno stole, plus an unnecessary commentary on O'Reilly Developer Weblogs that provides no revolutionary thought and hardly any intellectual merit

    At least this time Timothy's dup and its original post were more than http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/ 29/0212242&tid=232&tid=14 [slashdot.org]">8 hours a part.

    I'm not trying to be mean here, but is there anyway /. can fire http://www.monkey.org/~timothy/ [slashdot.org]">this poor fellow and hire me for the seemingly cush job of /. editor? I promise to never dup! (or semi-dup in this case)
  • While Veteren morse code typers can do it quickly, I don't know how many average consumers are veteran more code typers. If people became veteran SMS typers, they could probably do it just as fast if not even faster. Not a fair comparison.

  • They'll happily accept more $$$'s for
    all that over-charged air-time... ;-) ...wouldn't you? :-)

    PS The reason Morse Coders were faster
    was that their gear was on a table,
    while their competitions' was hand-
    held & subject to movement-based
    error.

    Morse Coders... what a TERRIFIC name
    for a new programming contest! ;-)
  • Lets just take the voice functionality out of the phones and have portable camera devices that can check email and make electronic dots and dashes. You can still download "dotonze" from the online store, which will play a certain song clip for a dot, and a certain one for a dash, making all communication nigh impossible, but you'll get to listen to the same note over and over again, and will therefore be a "trend-setter."

  • It has already been done! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Pat__ ( 26992 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:34AM (#12940044)

    After watching the Jay Leno episode I was about to start writing a program to do that on my 6600, luckily I did some research before starting and found this [typepad.com] with the source included!

    You write the sms in morse and it converts and sends it as a regular sms.
    You can use the joystick on the phone (left for dot and right for dash) so you have your finger on one button all the time!

    Also I found this page [learnmorsecode.com] for learning morse code ...

    • On the learnmorsecode page (very useful, thanx), the all-important and recently added @ sign is missing.

      It's dit-dah-dah-dit-dah-dit

      And the character to emphasize that there she was, she was walking down the street, is :

      do-wah-diddy-diddy-dum-diddy-do

  • Command Line administration shown to be faster than GUI.
  • well not exactly. Its handsfree, I just talk in to the phone, the phone automagically turns the sound in to a series of 1s and 0s (dots and dashes) then converts them back into a sound at the other end! Fantastic! No learning curve, just instant messaging. I live in the UK, so I'm more than aware of the actual use of SMS, I use it myself, but is it really worth devoting a week of my life to learning a code, that if I get really good at, may let me do 50 CHARACTORS a MINUTE! No. I know T9 isn't perfect, but

  • Morse slower (Score:3, Informative)

    by DrSkwid ( 118965 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @05:56AM (#12940102) Journal
    according to this :
    http://www.160characters.org/news.php?action=view& nid=1541 [160characters.org]

    Just 90 seconds after Mr Hill began transmitting, Mr Gibson announced that he had the message received and written down correctly.

    The message was

    "Hey, girlfriend, you can text all your best pals to tell them where you are going and what you are wearing."

    thats 108 characters

    108 / 90 = 1.2 cps

    yet the world record for SMS entry is 3.7 cps

    http://www.smartmobs.com/archive/2004/06/28/sms_sp eed_recor.html [smartmobs.com]

    Ms Kimberly Yeo,a 23yo business student,clocked just 43.24 seconds for typing this 160-character, 26-word text."The razor-toothed piranhas of the genera Serrasalmus and Pygocentrus are the most ferocious freshwater fish in the world. In reality they seldom attack a human."

    • morse speed records are measured in wpm, a crazy metric but I guess it stops people sending .......... really fast and claiming cps records

      Ms Yeo's was 36.1 wpm

      Hill/Gibson managed 14 wpm

      the record for morse wpm is in the mid 70's, but for competition they transmit for 15 minutes from a newspaper

      http://www.rogerwendell.com/morsecode.html [rogerwendell.com]
    • Well, with T9 enabled on my Nokia 6230 I have managed to enter this message in 82 seconds (without using any abbreviations) and I am not a skilled SMS sender.
    • "Ms Kimberly Yeo,a 23yo business student,clocked just 43.24 seconds for typing this 160-character, 26-word text."

      And I just keyed that on my Schurr paddle and Logikey in under 35 seconds.

      Do I get to lay Ms. Yeo now?
  • "...tapping commands (i.e. answer call, forward to voice mail, etc) in hands-free mode by tapping on the handset case."

    I bet that's already patented by someone - if not, I bet it soon will be.

  • Morse Keyer (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @06:12AM (#12940151) Homepage
    Electronic morse keyers are very simple. All you need is one relatively simple integrated circuit (see The History of Curtis Keyers [arrl.org]) and a switch or two. For a cell phone, the IC could be modified to generate ASCII characters for the SMS message while sending dots and dashes to the phone's speaker. If the phone could be attached to the user's arm or leg, it would provide a base for the keyer. The user could then use his free hand to operate the keyer. A pair of pressure sensitive panels on the left and right sides of the phone, near the bottom, would be ideal.
  • What about having it vibe out incoming text messages in morse.. or sound them out.

  • hmmmm (Score:2)

    by rnd() ( 118781 )
    morse code is designed quite consistently with zipf's law, which is nice.... but computer morse readers tend to do a fairly poor job of copying code, and so using morse as input might be just as error prone as the so-called "predictive" input in cell phones (the first feature I turn off -- highly annoying).

    why not have the screen of the cell phone be a Graffiti input area designed to be 'written' on with one's finger (about twice the size of the Palm graffiti sensor area)... ?

  • Some numbers (Score:3, Interesting)

    by smchris ( 464899 ) on Wednesday June 29, 2005 @06:46AM (#12940264)
    Sending morse code isn't so important to amateur radio any more but here were some long-standing requirements:

    5 words/minute -- novice/technician license.

    13 words/minute -- general/advanced license

    15 words/minute would get you highest privileges in some countries if I remember correctly

    20 words/minute for a U.S. extra license

    (a "word" averaging 5 characters)

    There are "Q" abbreviations like "QTH" for "location" and slang like "C" for "yes". But I expect most amateurs in the day were banging out under 20 wpm with a "straight key". It's true that a "keyer" can be a one IC device. Touch pads have been used for them. So I suppose a keyer could be integrated into a phone quite easily. Ergonomics could be a factor. I don't know how well you could key on the metro.
    • Actually, the keyer is the device that actually generates the dots and dashes if you're using an iambic key (to keep the length and spacing even), and it can indeed be a single IC [rason.org]. FWIW, the current requirement is 5wpm for a General class license*, with no additional speed requirement for the higher class. There's talk that the FCC may drop the Morse code requirement (many other countries have), but probably not for awhile yet.

      * Current licensing classes are Technician (access to allocated frequencies fr
  • In my opinion this may be a neat idea, but I can't see any companies biting on this and putting morse capabilities on cell phones. There is just not enough of a following to justify doing this.
  • <off-topic plug modifier="slightly">

    I've been a proponent of cell phones for the deaf for a long time. Unfortunately the phone companies just don't get it. The idea is that they would need a plan with no minutes, but lots of text messaging. They can use sms instead of relay calls to customers who can accept sms, and use the relay call network for others who don't.

    </off-topic>

    • I would say that the Danger Hiptop [danger.com], otherwise known in the US as the T-Mobile Sidekick, is an excellent cell phone for the deaf. I tried to get my deaf 80-year-old grandmother to learn how to use it last year, but she was just too old.

      In fact, you can even buy a plan from T-Mobile that has no voice minutes built in -- only data.

  • See, there are equivalent keypresses in morse and plain keypad.

    Sometimes you hit a key once, sometimes twice.. up to 4 times. If you need two letters in a row, you gotta wait a split second.

    Same thing in morse. It's slower typing "to" in morses than it is w/ the keypad. -*wait*--- as opposed to pressing 8666.

    Sorry, morse loses... that is, if you were using morse on your CELL PHONE to send messages.

    Besides, the input methods are very different. What, you gonna use the left/right buttons to send morse as
  • And if you drop your phone, that's a couple taps on the bounce... lets say that calls 911.

    C'mon- Most users have a tough enough time knowing that the E on their desktop opens their Web browser, let alone memorizing that three taps answers their call.

    Not to mention the normal bumping a phone would get. I can see awkward moments in a club/bar. :) No baby... my girlfriend would never know you keep bumping into me (BTW: I'm sure a 'what's a girl' comment will follow).

    -M
  • This has got to be the most lame thing I ever heard. Who is going to memorize Morse code. Why not learn Latin or Klingon and power your cars with steam and coal. I will just use the number pad like the other 99.9999999% of the realistic people in the world.

    Flame away byatches, I could give a fuck!

  • If this means that people will have to pass an Amateur Radio license exam to use a cell phone, then I'm all for it. Please, anything to get fewer people running around with annoying loud ring tones in movie theaters, driving while on the phone, and yelling into phones in restaurants! :)

Slashdot Top Deals

It is better to travel hopefully than to fly Continental.

Close