Re: Things we remember...
- From: wollman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Garrett Wollman)
- Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 19:55:35 +0000 (UTC)
In article <1257622598@xxxxxxxxx>, Wayne Throop <throopw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
: erilar <drache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: And getting it to save numbers with some version of names attached is
: irritating, to say the least.
So don't do that.
Not doing it is no loss of functionality, and no increase of simplicity
compared to a landline.
Perhaps erilar has a phone like the one on my downstairs phone table,
with a dozen programmable number memories and a paper label on which
names can be written. (That one's also an answering machine, but I
turned off that function years ago when I got an all-digital
answerer.) That was certainly much easier to program than my cell
phone. (Although the cell is getting quite elderly now; I shall
probably need to replace it before its ninth birthday. Sadly, nothing
made today is likely to last as long as that StarTAC.)
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wollman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Things we remember...
- From: Mike Ash
- Re: Things we remember...
- From: Wayne Throop
- Re: Things we remember...
- References:
- Things we remember...
- From: Matt Hughes
- Re: Things we remember...
- From: Mike Ash
- Re: Things we remember...
- From: erilar
- Re: Things we remember...
- From: Wayne Throop
- Things we remember...
- Prev by Date: Re: Things we remember...
- Next by Date: Re: Things we remember...
- Previous by thread: Re: Things we remember...
- Next by thread: Re: Things we remember...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|