From: ant on 13 Aug 2006 09:41 Mxsmanic wrote: > Jim Ley writes: > > > It's getting near impossible to find anyone with a watch > > these days, it's another thing the mobile phone has killed. > > I'm not sure I see the connection. How have mobile phones killed > watches? Apparently (and this still surprises me) mobiles have replaced the old fob watches. People actually pull them out and look at them to ascertain the time, rather than looking at their wrist. I have NO idea why. -- ant
From: Miguel Cruz on 13 Aug 2006 10:32 "ant" <yusuf_ali778(a)yahoo.fr> wrote: > Apparently (and this still surprises me) mobiles have replaced the old fob > watches. People actually pull them out and look at them to ascertain the > time, rather than looking at their wrist. I have NO idea why. The functions performed by a mobile phone are a superset of those performed by a watch (i.e., phones do everything watches do, and a whole lot more). So the case for carrying a phone is much more compelling than for a watch. And the case for carrying both is diminished. miguel -- Photos from 40 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu Latest photos: Malaysia; Thailand; Singapore; Spain; Morocco Airports of the world: http://airport.u.nu
From: Mxsmanic on 13 Aug 2006 10:46 Miguel Cruz writes: > The functions performed by a mobile phone are a superset of those > performed by a watch (i.e., phones do everything watches do, and a whole > lot more). So the case for carrying a phone is much more compelling than > for a watch. And the case for carrying both is diminished. I use my watch much more than I use a phone, so I continue to carry a watch. Also, the watch is accurate, whereas the time on the cellphone is not. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: JohnT on 13 Aug 2006 10:52 "Miguel Cruz" <spam(a)admin.u.nu> wrote in message news:spam-2C38FC.10325013082006(a)localhost... > "ant" <yusuf_ali778(a)yahoo.fr> wrote: >> Apparently (and this still surprises me) mobiles have replaced the old >> fob >> watches. People actually pull them out and look at them to ascertain the >> time, rather than looking at their wrist. I have NO idea why. > > The functions performed by a mobile phone are a superset of those > performed by a watch (i.e., phones do everything watches do, and a whole > lot more). So the case for carrying a phone is much more compelling than > for a watch. And the case for carrying both is diminished. > I don't need a mobile phone so I carry one very rarely. I do wear a watch when I go out. JohnT
From: Mxsmanic on 13 Aug 2006 11:14
barney2(a)cix.compulink.co.uk writes: > Because mobile phones mostly display the time, so if one is carrying a > mobile phone it is not necessary to wear a watch. In my experience, mobile phones keep poor time, and even if the display shows the time, it doesn't show the seconds. And you still have to pull it out of your pocket, whereas a wristwatch is instantly accessible. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |