Being 64, I remember all those 'features' from the mid to late 50's.
Several customers shared a 'party' line, and you had to wait for the
line to clear before you could place a new call.

Roger, first off, let me say you've made some excellent points, so before
I shred them... ;-) let me explain that there might a prize for sticking
with me to the end...

There's an important diffrence however- cell companies only encouraged
(via lower rates, free N&W, etc.) high usage when they had the capacity for it.  Back in the analog (400 simultaneous phone calls per tower maximum!) days, rates were kept high to discourage "overuse."

With wireless data, there is still a severe capacity issue- they don't
really want us dumping our DSL and cable broadband to go 100% wireless.
Look at Verizon- they have the fastest and most expensive wireless data
in the US- 600kbps @ $80/month, and they have a 5GB/month transfer cap!
No one, except desperate folks outside the reach of traditional broadband
options would consider that as their primary internet source.

True, but at a price point that makes sense to the carrier.  Other
carriers (Sprint, Cingular) sell data add-ons for $15-20/month.  If T-Mo
wants to undercut the market with a $6 plan, I'm all for it, but
realistically they probably need a $10-12 EDGE option to make it viable
for them, and not discourage the use of higher price-point plans.

True, but this is a competitive marketplace.  The carriers (in their
minds) already hurt their industry with their "x minutes for y dollars"
war and don't want to make the same mistake with add-ons.  The first carrier to, say, give "1000 free SMS messages with all rate plans" forces the others to do something similar to compete, which negates the competitive advantage of being the first.  Net result- everyone retains the same number of customers yet loses all of their SMS revenue.

I don't find that applicable here, because unlike the micropayments
essay, there are no "free" alternatives to mobile data to choose instead.
Carriers have no obligation, nor incentive to "give away" data, (unless
one of their competitors does first!)  Like my SMS example above, the
first one who does ruins it for everyone else!  

However, your micropayment link above actually helps describe what has
already happened to wireless data- it became "unlimited use" because of
customer confusion.  When AT&TWS first launched "m-Mode" wireless data
for your "m-Life" ("m" was for mobile, apparently!), on their then-new
GSM network, they offered a ridiculous number of rates plans- a 1MB plan
for $3 or 4 bucks, a 2MB plan, a 4, an 8, a 20, etc.  And the brochures
were packed with stupidly confusing charts detailing how many "average" e-
mails fit in a MB, how many WAP pages, etc.

Waaaaay too confusing for the average cellular customer, and way too
scary (at 3-cents a kb!) to go over your plan.  The net effect was that
nobody wanted an "m-Life" that one was afraid to actually use!

So, the plans that have caught on (at least so far as any data plan has
"caught on" in the USA!) are "unlimited use" plans like Sprint's Vision,
Cingular's MEdiaNet unlimited, or T-Mo's T-Zones/T-Mo Web- plans that you
can use withut counting KBs or MBs.  All of these plans have limitations
or restrictions on _how_ you can use them, or what they'll do, but they
don't have any "overage fee" surprises.  That's what customers don't want-
they want a price upfront that a feature will cost, then they can decide
if that amount is justified.

I disagree.  Games have failed because mobile gaming is a piss-poor
substitute for "real" gaming, and the novelty wears off quick.  I've
owned Pocket PCs (and now a PPC phone) since they've existed, and the
game I still play the most is good ol' Solitare- the one that's been free
with every PPC since day one!  

If the "add-on model" is the reason for the failure of gaming, why have
ringtones been successful?  Same model, same stupid restrictions, and
roughly the same pricing.  

It also said, basically, that most mobile games stink.  That's a bigger
factor, IMHO.

mitstart=2

LOL!  That's an interesting experiment.  Sprint is trying something
similar in certain test markets (coincidentally markets where Cricket or
MetroPCS offer flat-rate unlimited voice)- unlimited voice, text, picture
messaging and web for a flat fee.

Which kind of reinforces my original premise- Americans don't use (or,
frankly "need") SMS because voice calling is relatively cheap here.  In
countries where voice is expensive, SMS represents value, and tends to be
utilized more.  Here it's used by teens as the 21st-century equivalent of
passing notes around the classroom behind the teacher's back.  I can
secretly text my buddy in the back of the classroom, but couldn't call
him without getting caught!

But be fair- is $5/month for a 400 message package really a barrier?  
What alternative (other than voice) is as mobile or convenient for you?
If $5/month is a "deal-breaker," then SMS isn't as useful or convenient
(to you or I) as you've expoused.  And if texting isn't worth a lousy
$5/month to the average person, mobile operators will have no interest in
making it more ubiquitous.  They're better off squeezing the text-
addicted for all they can bleed them for rather than expanding the market
by lowering rates.

(But stick with me- the "prize" at the end might net you free SMS!)

That would kill automated e-mail retrieval, wouldn't it!  Is that
prompting a network thing, or a phone thing that could be fixed with a
SEEM edit?

Perhaps, but unless T-Mo's total number of texts processed multiplied ten-
fold, 1-cent texting would be a revenue loss for them- not a gain.  (And,
frankly, even at 1-cent, my usual reply to a text would be the same as it
is now: "CALL ME!" ;-)

Again, if that's true, explain the success of ringtones!  $2 to download
a 30-second clip of a song I can buy for $1 (if I don't already own it on
CD!) and not be able to transfer it to any different device.  Where do I
sign?  ;-)

That's still not a "network effect," because my PURCHASE of caller-ID
service doesn't generate a purchase of caller-ID for anyone else.  My
refusal to purchase it doesn't reduce the usefulness of other's purchase
of it either.  (I think you were trying to say that if I use it myself,
I'm less likely to block my ID, increasing it's value to others.  But if
that's so, I still disagree, because nothing prevents me from purchasing
caller ID and still blocking my number from displaying on other's phones.)

What are you, a communist?  ;-)  

Again, at least with SMS, carriers have tried a number of permutations- T-
Mo used to give the first 50 for free.  That didn't increase usage to the
"masses", so they went to 50-incoming for free and made you pay for
outgoing to generate revenue.  Still no "network effect" so they do the
same as other (USA)
carriers- try to maximize revenue by charging as much as possible
without squashing the relatively small amount of use there is.  That's
the same
playbook they're using for data.

I don't think so.  Many have abandoned landlines for wireless or VoIP,
perhaps, but no one-way communication like e-mail is a direct substitute
for the immediacy of two-way voice.

Doesn't that statement invalidate your whole premise?  Failure of
micropayments, "nickle and diming" of incremental costs, etc.?  ;-)

But, seriously, it reinforces why "free" caller ID makes sense there and
not here, since it might spur more phone usage, meaning more pennies.  
Here, it's a simple incremental revenue grab.  Like an all-you-can-eat
buffet restaurant that can't get additional revenue from offering more
food, landline phone companies can't get more revenue from people making
more calls- they have to offer more services, either in bundles or pay-
per-use.

They've already lost that battle to wireless and VoIP- all they have left
is quality and reliability!

I'm not (and they're obviously not) convinced that effect is worthwhile
(to them) here.  

Don't feel bad- it didn't work for Barpoint.com either. ;-)  (Barpoint
was part of the Cingular WAP deck on my first data-enabled phone: a Nokia
7160 TDMA phone that connected to the web with CSD at the blazing speed
of 14.4k!)

BTW, you aren't the MGopher guy, are you?  (In case you're not, I'll
quickly explain.)  About five or six years ago, someone wrote an app
primarily for their own use, but let anyone who wanted to use it, use it.
You sent an e-mail to him (via text- this was 2001 or 2002- "real" e-mail
hadn't come to phones yet) requesting info to type_of_info@mgopher.com-
like if you wanted local weather for Chicago, you sent "Chicago, Il" or a
zip code to
weather@mgopher.com and got a reply back to sender (your phone) within a
minute with that locations current weather.  You could get John Smith's
phone number and
address by sending "John Smith, Chicago, Il" to info@mgopher.com or the
current price of crap on ebay by sending "crap" to ebay@mgopher.com, etc.

IIRC, there were five catagories you could use the "mobile go-fer" for.
Brilliant app.  The guy should've taken it commercial.  That was a
service I actually used a few times per month (back when my first 50
texts were free) until I eventually upgraded to a Voicestream phone that
had a mobile
web browser built-in.

MGopher eventually stopped working, and my e-mails to the author bounced.
I assume he too eventually outgrew the need for his own service, but I
prefer to think someone like Google bought it from him for a gazillion
dollars and turned the idea into the current Google Alerts SMS reply
system. ;-)

Carriers will only be interested in
mobile commerce if they get a cut, and again, frankly, texting is not
prohibitively expensive here IF you buy a relatively low-priced bundle.
Lack of penny texting is not holding back "commerce over SMS."  A change
in mobile-phone user "culture" or a missing "killer app" holds back
widespread adoption of SMS.  Look at "American Idol" and the number of
idiots-- err, I mean fans, who'll pay a buck a vote on their phone when
they're at home watching on TV!  

IF you can find someone offering better service.  (I'm not suggesting
that you can't- I'm just saying that's what it takes for anyone to
switch providers.)

There's a very old joke about two friends camping in the woods and a bear
comes into the camp.  They both lie still as to not antagonize the bear.
One of them carefully and slowly puts on his boots and prepares to run.
The other whispers "you're crazy- you can't outrun a bear!"  The first
guy tosses his buddy's boots into the woods, and whispers back "I don't
have to- I just have to outrun YOU!"  

The point is that T-Mo doesn't have to offer low cost data, penny
texting, or any other service at the price you or I deem "fair" or
"cheap"- they just have to be lower than their competition.  Currently, T-
Mo's data
is cheaper, their texting is cheaper, and their voice is cheaper.  We
have nowhere else to go essentially!

Agreed.  And I suspect that's where they're eventually headed, but I
think they just haven't figured out how to get there with the minimal
effort and expenditure.  Think about it- mobile data is such a low
priority to them that the "easiest" solution to a bug in Windows Mobile
MMS implementation was to open up free internet to all of their
subscribers for going on five months!  That's like a grocery store
deciding the solution to broken cash register is to simply stop charging
for groceries!  The only way T-Mo's solution can possibly make sense is
if the 25-cents they charge per MMS generates more revenue than sales of
mobile data!

As would I.  That's probably why I'm in the opposite camp as you- I'd
rather everything they offer was billed seperately and I was free to drop
unneeded services that I'm actually paying for even though it's "hidden"
in my total bill.  If so, I'd have my anytime voice minutes, (no free
weekends or mobile-to-mobile, no 3-way calling, no caller-ID, etc.) and
my $6 data, period.  

They used to- remember we all used to get 50 texts for free.  Obviously
that didn't work as a business model!

Perhaps.  Maybe they'll come to their senses one day... ;-)

One SMS option they haven't tried, but might make a decent option, either
on all rate plans or a special plan created for it would be to follow the
model some prepaid providers use- charge one voice minute for each text
send or received.  Most of us leave extra minutes on the table anyway, or
could use "free" minutes (M2M, N&W, etc.)  It'd use less bandwidth for the carrier than the voice minute it "replaced," eliminates the customer's "costs extra" objection, and possibly raises revenue by inticing one to move up to a higher level voice plan to cover potential overages.  It might make a viable option for the extra-cost adverse.

Nice finish!  

Ok, you've indulged me by reading my lunatic rants and made it all the way to the end, so hopefully I have a perfectly legal and ethical "trick" you can use to get "free" texting.  I picked this up from a long-time T-Mo pro on HowardForums.com and it worked (eventually.)  

T-Mobile offers a set of plans called "National Business Plans" targeted at (you guessed it!) businesses.  They are similar to the regular plans ($39.99 for 600 anytime, free N&W, etc.) but unlike regular plans, they include 300-500 texts per month (depending on which level of plan you take.)

To "qualify" for one, you just con T-Mo's website into thinking you are a business, simply by loging into your account on my.t-mobile.com and selecting the MDA as your device (see "not your device?" in the top right hand corner?  Click it and tell the website you have an MDA instead of whatever phone it thinks you have.  Ironically, the MDA actually IS my phone.)  Now go to "change your plan" and, perhaps due to a sloppy programmer assuming only businesses buy MDAs, the National Business Plans should appear for selection, and not be asterisked (meaning they don't require a contract extension to select, like promotional plans do.)

Select the NBP that fits your minute-usage requirements and budget, and enjoy your included texts!  (Disclaimer #1: this worked for me two months ago when I moved from a regular plan to an NBP.  I've since switched to a myFaves family plan when I added a line for my wife two weeks ago.  I tried checking tonight to see if this "loophole" still works, but the website won't display individual plans if you're on a family plan, so I couldn't pull up the NBPs on my.t-mobile.com any longer.)

I'm sure you could bluster your way into an NBP without the website trick by calling customer service, but IIRC, they'll demand a one-year contract renewal if you call in for it.

Good luck, and hopefully that tip will have been worth reading my ramblings!

Have a good one!