From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Short Message Service)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Telecommunications (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


I archived the old talk page - it's available here. By the time anyone reads this, I should have copied all the tags in that old page into here too. Carre 19:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

SMS size: character != byte[edit]

In the "History" section I found the following regarding SMS size: ".. (later improved to 160 characters) .."

The term "character" really should not be used where, as the number of bits used to represent a character depends on which encoding is used. A character != a byte, please do not interchange the two terms just in order to add variety to the wording.

See: Character_encoding —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:23, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Stating "160 characters" is actually entirely correct — as you can read later on in SMS#Message size, they're actually squeezed into 140 octets (bytes). Jpatokal (talk) 15:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I updated the article slightly to address this. In the future, rather than adding an issue to talk, please be bold and edit the article directly! :)--Karl.brown (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

This article is extremely GSM-biased.[edit]

{{NPOV}} short SMS existed on AMPS in the 1990's and on all other digital technologies. They are rarely mentioned.This comment, unsigned, taken from the archived talk page. Carre 19:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Since SMS was invented as part of the GSM standard, it makes sense that the article would focus on GSM, no? Also, do you have a reference for SMS on AMPS in the 1990's? I thought it was only on digital. Billgordon1099 (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Split suggestion[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

I would like to suggest that this article be split into 2 - 1 article called "Text messaging" or something similar, which deals with the social phenomonomonomonomon that is Texting, and this article dealing with the Short Message Service itself, from a telecoms perspective. Numerous reasons for this:

  • This article as it is is something like 36k in size, so needs splitting anyway;
  • The style of the article, as mentioned numerous times in the talk archive, is all over the place. I feel this is exacerbated by the mix and match between the social aspects of texting, and the actual service in the telco world;
  • Wikilinks - many of the wikilinks that point to this article are actually trying to link to an article on Texting, not an article on the Short Message Service.
  • Personal - I have no interest in the social aspect, but a fair bit in the technical aspects and history;
  • Maintenance - the social aspects seems to attract a load of link spam, so best have it elsewhere in an article I don't look at ;)

Anyway - you can vote, oppose, approve, ignore, whatever; depending on the response to this, I'll either try to split (and probably dismally fail), or not. Thanks. Carre 20:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Support for several reasons. The social and technical aspects are separate - I too am far more interested in the technical than the social, and feel the piecemeal way in which the social aspects are handled gets in the way of a potentially good technical article. Indeed the social aspects could be common to other technologies (MMS, Chat,...) some of which could be combined, others which could not. I am not sure how the split might be handled, since "text messaging" may or may not be the right term for the split, but in principle I agree. SMeeds 21:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - this article doesn't have a focal point, we need an article that's about the SMS and one that's about "Text messages" or "Text messaging". There should be a link using one of the {{redirectx}} templates to the messages article from the technical SMS one. Yonatan talk 22:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
It was suggested that this article be split into 2, keeping the technical aspects in situ and moving the social aspects over the top of the currect redirect page Text messaging. The consensus was to do the split. Carre 13:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
The split has been done, at a very basic level. There's still a bit too much commonality between the 2 articles for my liking, but I've pruned it a fair bit on both articles. Next step is to go through the several hundred articles that link here, and check to see if they really want the Text messaging article. Help appreciated on doing that, cos it'll take ages on my own. Carre 14:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

GSM Technical section[edit]

I do believe I've finally got the Short message service technical realisation (GSM) article done! Anyone can feel free to go hack it about. What I'm not sure about is whether or not to move the content up to the main article once the split happens (I'll be doing the split in a couple of days, if there aren't any objections by then), or to leave it as a sub-page and paraphrase it in the main article. I think the latter may be more appropriate, because eventually I hope to either see technical sections on the ANSI and AMPS implementations added by subject matter experts, or I'll go off and read up on those technologies and do those sections myself. Opinions? Carre 21:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

SMS != Text messaging[edit]

Regarding this edit, text messaging and SMS are not the same thing. SMS is a specific protocol, and there are other text messaging implementations that are not SMS-based. Jpatokal 15:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

You're confusing the importance of the technical definition of jargon with the common vernacular of the English-speaking world. If Wikipedia were the GSM specification, or a technical reference for a technical audience, then you'd be absolutely correct in pointing this out. The vast majority of the world understands an "SMS" to mean a "mobile phone text message", without regard for the protocol or the implementation actually used on their phone. Reswobslc 16:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted Reswobslc's changes, and I have done so for a very specific reason. Look back up in this talk section a couple of lines, and you'll see the requested split consensus. Basically, the original article here was an utter mess, mixing up the technical details with the social aspects. World wide (note, NOT N. American specific), the common term is texting, or text messaging. The Short Message Service is, always has been, and always will be, the means by which text messages are sent. There is a very deliberate stub template in the article for people who know about non-GSM implementations to come along and add their knowledge to the technical aspects. In the meantime, the Text messaging article is the place to talk about "texting", from a non-technical perspective, whereas this article is where the technical details should go. I've tried, at the top of this article, above the lead, to point people looking at the social aspects to the right place, but it seems not to be working. If this crap carries on, I'm inclined to just revert everything to the original article, and let everyone else sort out the resulting abortion of an article. Carre 16:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree, but it's definitely worth clarifying "The Short Message Service is, always has been, and always will be, the means by which text messages are sent." is just wrong. In some parts of the English speaking world, texting/text messaging now means any form of mobile to mobile communication and is increasingly not SMS based (WhatsApp, iMessage, Facebook are all increasingly common used for 'texting' and one of them are Short Message Service/GSM based. richardwhiuk 22:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Free SMS[edit]

Now there's a way to send SMS from your computer for free it's called <link deleted by User:Carre>

Thank you - Wikipedia is not an advertising agency, nor a link farm. Carre 17:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I genuinely would like to know about the SMS-from-internet service: googling comes up with a lot of sites, and I imagine they're mostly spammers/cowboys. It would be useful to have some discussion of whether this is true. 09:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC) If you want to see such a thing just go to history .. :) Ebricca 19:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

You can send an SMS message to any mobile phone using AIM, sending to the screen name +1(areacode)(phonenumber). sending a text message to "+18185551212" would send it to (818) 555-1212. Don't know if mentioning this counts as advertizing for AIM... (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe one can also send SMS messages from Outlook as well. Outlook plug-in. AL (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Fast SMS[edit]

I thought i read this expression once for the *number*code# service that some cellphone providers offer to get specific services like the ?flash sms display that is sent back as example for the money you still have on your cell account (as example *121*# in this case) or entering *131*code# for the recharging of your prepaid cell or *111*telnumber# to have a callback solution if you are in a roaming area to get cheaper calls .. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebricca (talkcontribs) 19:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

These codes are Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) messages which aren't that similar to SMS. They're fire and forget messages, no SMSC involved. There can be mobile and network initiated ones, which do a variety of things. A set of USSD codes are defined in standards for performing certain functions, and network operators have the option of using spare ones for their own purposes. Actually, that USSD article looks pretty poor, and needs some work... maybe I'll go and clean it up some time, if I can be bothered. Carre 06:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


The story about e2sms seems a bit peripheral. People visiting this topic arguably want to read about the history of SMS itself, not various dot-com era companies and marginal business models. Perhaps digressions of this nature merit their own page, especially as SMS gateways merit their own topic anyway. 11:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I've pretty much abandoned this article these days - it's so much a spam magnet that I just got fed up with it; however, the recent addition of speedy-delete requests and other templates has made me address this issue. The huge e2sms chunk is now replaced with a single sentence. Carre 07:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Following taken from [1]. I wonder why this Wikipedia article doesn't mention Matti Makkonen at all. He is known as the inventor of the text messaging service, after all.

The inventor of SMS is a Finnish civil servant by the name Matti Makkonen who then worked for a state-owned postal and telecommunications company Posti (Finland). He presented the idea in a pizzeria in Copenhagen, during a conference of mobile phone communication's future in fall of 1982. Today M. Makkonen is the CEO of Finnet. Initially conceptualized as Message Handling Services, SMS was proposed to be included in the GSM digital mobile phone standard as early as in 1984 by the Nordic Countries (in GSM WP3, a group chaired by J. Audestad). SMS was further discussed in the main GSM Group in February 1985 and it was included in the draft GSM spec (GSM Doc.28-85) the same year. The technical standard known today was largely created by IDEG's Draft Group on Message Handling in 1987–1990, first chaired by Friedhelm Hillebrand. The first commercial short message was sent on 3 December 1992 by Neil Papworth of Sema Group from a personal computer to Richard Jarvis of Vodafone on the Vodafone GSM network in the United Kingdom. SMS was originally designed as part of GSM, but is now available on a wide range of networks, including 3G networks. However, not all text messaging systems use SMS, and some notable alternate implementations of the concept include J-Phone's SkyMail and NTT Docomo's Short Mail, both in Japan. E-mail messaging from phones, as popularized by NTT Docomo's i-mode and the RIM BlackBerry, also typically use standard mail protocols such as SMTP over TCP/IP, not SMS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigmundur (talkcontribs) 20:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
The majority of the above quoted text was taken from an old version of this very Wikipedia article, as it happens. See /archive1#History for the reason Makkonen's name was removed. Carré (talk) 12:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
In October 2008, Matti Makkonen was awarded The Economist’s Innovation Award of Computing and Telecommunications for his work on Short Message Service (SMS) text messaging. Should he really not be mentioned in this article? Garrulus carelicus (talk) 18:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
If you can find a reliable source to cite, then put it in. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Recent non-technical additions[edit]

As this article states at the top, this is about the technical aspects of the Short Message Service, not the social aspects. All of the recent additions belong, if anywhere (and if not copy-vio as some of it appears to have been), in the Text messaging article. I also have a bit of concern about the similarities of the three user names who have been posting this stuff. Anyway, here's the stuff that was added, to be either put back here if people disagree, or to be moved to the more appropriate article (watch out for nowiki tags if you do though). Carre 15:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed Text[edit]

== Impact on linguistics ==

The popularity of mobile phone and SMS has impacts on the language standard varieties and conventional linguistic. [1] Doing research in Finland, there is a high population of mobile phone and SMS users, Kasesniemi (2003) [2] observes that “the wider the phenomenon has spread, the more discussion it has aroused in the Finnish media concerning its influence on the language and, most notably, the written expression of teenagers.” Many young users of SMS now write the abbreviation and symbol rather than standard language. Such as some SMS language "Homework" is "hw", "Got to go" is "g2g" or "gtg". [3] The emergence of a new language form tailored to the immediacy and compactness of these new communication media.

Concern has been raised about the effect of text messaging on adolescents' writing style at school. [4] In particular, the frequency of errors in grammar and SMS language often appears to student's homework or examination. Judith Gillespie, development manager at the Scottish Parent Teacher Council, said: “There must be rigorous efforts from all quarters of the education system to stamp out the use of texting as a form of written language as far as English study is concerned” [5]

== Impact on Lifestyle ==

SMS has a wide impact on lifestyle. People find it easier to send a text message rather than meeting face-to-face, or calling in most cases. The reason being, it is convenient and flexible to send a text message rather than trying to meet up with someone across a long distant. The flexibility lies with the availability and knowing that almost everyone has access to SMS.

SMS are not only used within a social aspect. Advertising is done through this medium as well. Businesses send short SMS’s when promoting a new product. Nightclubs, dating services and football updates use this as a means to reach out to the public. Stuart J. Barnes, author of Mbusiness: The Strategic Implications of Mobile Communications defines the term “opt-in”, which is a scheme which “involves the user agreeing to receive advertising before anything is sent, with the opportunity to change preferences or stop messages at any time”. Advertising in such a way also becomes a privacy issue to consumers, which restricts advertising being vast and reachable to absolutely everyone. There is also a high degree of acceptance with the fact that a mobile phone is readily accessible rather than television or radio, considering that the message sent is by a trusted source. They find this acceptable that most media, such as magazine inserts, direct mail and telemarketing sales (Barnes, 2003).

=== Text Messaging Culture ===

SMS was indeed a true newcomer[6] In fact, our society is erupted by the practices of text messaging. SMS is largely used by many people and in many countries. As Rheingold[7] discuss the his experience at Shibuya Crossing of Tokyo, he points out that "the practice of exchaning short text messages via mobile telephones has led to the eruption of subculture in Europe and Asia". (2002;xi) This practice of text messaging are rapidly spread out to the young users, teenagers, and which contributed to create the youth culture. Kasesniemi notes that "the messages became communication for all and their contents came to deal with everyday ife" [8]

In the Study of Finnish and their practices of SMS, Kasesniemi and Rautiainen notes that the culture of text messaging have been quickly formed between teenagers and this culture grows out of unique circumstatces of teenage life [9]

SMS allows young people to create their own shrared culture which is distinction from the so called general culture dominated by adults. As Goggins (2006) talks that "Texting became involved in a wider reworking of youth culture, involving other new media form and technologies and cultural developments". (2006;74)

== Texting and Smart Mobs ==

Since the introduction of texting and a phenomenon at Shibuya Crossing, one theme seems to be widespread and well-known after that, Smart Mobs. Smart mobs is an example of the extension in the use of mobile phone. No more a simple phone functioned only for making a call. A phone can now be used as a tool to gather people together and perform actions.

The people who make up smart mobs cooperate in ways never before possible because they carry devices that possess both communication and computing capabilities. [10] They can connect and link to each other, exchange information, and form a virtual community. New media allow people to have more freedom and be able to do things that old media couldn’t provide, for example, texting 100 people within a click. Group of people using these tools will gain new forms of social power, new ways to organize their interactions, and exchanges just in time and just in place. [11] Human’s life starts to change within this world of interactive media. Some of these changes are beneficial and empowering, and some amplify the capabilities of people whose intentions are malignant. [12]



  1. ^ Thurlow, C (2003) “Generation Txt? Exposing the sociolinguistics of young people’s text messaging”, Discourse Analysis Online 1
  2. ^ Kasesniemi, E.L (2003) “Mobile Messages: Young People and a New Communication Culture”, Tampere University Press, Tampere
  3. ^ Text Messaging Abbreviations,
  4. ^ Bane or boon? Educators debate impact of 'text messaging' on students' writing skills,
  5. ^ Goggin, G (2006) Cell Phone Culture: Mobile technology in everyday life. New York: Routledge, p115
  6. ^ Troby,F (2004) 'SMS, the strange duckilng of GSM', Telektronikk, p.187
  7. ^ Rheingold, Howard (2002) Smart Mobs: the Next Social Revolution, Perseus, Cambridge, Massachusetts, p.xi
  8. ^ Kasesniemi, E. L. (2003) Mobile Messages: Young People and a New Communication culture, Tampere: Tampere University Press
  9. ^ Kasesniemi, E. L. $ Rautiainen, P. (2002) 'Mobile Culture of Children and Teenagers in Finland' p.177
  10. ^ Rheingold, Howard (2002) Smart Mobs: the Next Social Revolution, Perseus, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp.xii.
  11. ^ Rheingold, Howard (2002) Smart Mobs: the Next Social Revolution, Perseus, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp.xiii.
  12. ^ Rheingold, Howard (2002) Smart Mobs: the Next Social Revolution, Perseus, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp.xiii.


SMS Security In reviewing SMS/TEXTING on Wikipedia, I find it to be very slack on security. I hope we can expand it to address this issue. I have information in several links on my PC that I will attempt to compile and record here.

In particulur we need to address






Persistance —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC) (talk) 19:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC) To add, the SMS protocol itself only runs with clear text data going back and forth with communication. That data is notorious for "man-in-the-middle" attacks. Since phone hacking has become an issue with more sophisticated phones, the security question becomes more important for protecting personally identifiable information including phone numbers and phone account information.

Capitalization Consistency[edit]

We should be consistent as to whether "Short Message Service" is capitalized. As an acronym, obviously SMS should be capitalized wherever it is written, but as far as the long-hand version goes, what should we do? AL (talk) 14:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Delivery receipts[edit]

"No delivery receipts"? I've been receiving SMS delivery receipts for many years. Is my phone using a different protocol without my knowing it? Also "lack of timely delivery"? I find that provided both users have their phones switched on, 99% of messages are delivered within a minute. 18:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

The section you're referring to is a thinly disguised plug for Tyntec's direct SMS delivery service. It is, however, accurate in the sense that a) SMS delivery is not guaranteed, and b) you can't really trust delivery reports. It's possible for a DR to claim "delivered" when it was not, to claim "failed" when it was delivered, and (most commonly) not report back anything at all, leaving the message in a Schrodinger's cat state as far as the sender is concerned. Jpatokal (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
A properly implemented SMS system delivers all messages eventually. But it seems that such systems are rare. "SMS makes use of a Short Message Service Center (SMSC), which acts as a store-and-forward system for relaying short messages. Similar to an MSC, the SMSC guarantees delivery of text messages by the network. Messages are stored in the network until the destination cell phone becomes available, so a user can receive or transmit an SMS message at any time, whether a voice call is in progress or not." -Source: 19:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Orbitel / First SMS Fact Check[edit]

There seems to be a discrepancy in the "First SMS Sent":

  • This article says it was sent in 1992 "to Richard Jarvis of Vodafone using an Orbitel 901 handset"
  • From the Orbitel Page - "Orbitel was founded in 1997"

Perhaps the technology wasn't an Orbitel handset, OR the link is to the wrong "Orbitel" (ie - Was it a development name for a handset from another Manufacturer?).. (talk) 22:47, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Accodring to They were around in 1993 Speer320 (talk) 22:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


Gmail has just added a new lab which enables gmail users to send SMS text messages. I am not trying to advertise for Gmail, but it is already a huge thing and so this is probably relevant to the article, perhaps under SMS Today? Here's a temporary link that gives a brief overview of the service Gmail provides: I hope this helps! Lekkin (talk) 13:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

SMS and 9-1-1[edit]

Although a common misconception, it probably should be noted that SMS does not work for summoning emergency services (yet). With its lack of providing the texter's location (like 9-1-1 does) and lack of guaranteed delivery, it is not the best way of calling for help. There are solutions in the works for 9-1-1 centers to accept text messages, but that's likely years away [2] Jc3 (talk) 15:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved to SMS. Aervanath (talk) 04:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Short message serviceSMS — Quoting from WP:NAME: "Generally, article naming should prefer what the greatest number of English speakers would most easily recognize."Guy0307 (talk) 05:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support. Most people don't know that SMS stands for short message service. --Siddhant (talk) 07:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Support. Primary meaning of SMS, and common name. Andrewa (talk) 07:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Support Agree that the consensus of the primary meaning of SMS is short message service. Also, GSM follows the proposed naming convention. As someone pointed out below, the alternative, to be consistent, would be to redirect SMS to the disambiguation page, which would not be appropriate. JustGettingItRight (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Support SMS is the much more common name. dissolvetalk 22:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


I wouldn't oppose the move, SMS redirects here already anyway. Jpatokal (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Yea, it does and it was changed from the dab page. The edit comment on the move did not even claim that this is the primary use. I think that point needs to be made before a move. Otherwise the redirect should point to the dab page, or the dab page should be moved over the redirect. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
The change to point the redirect here instead of to the DAB occured more than a year ago, and followed the moving of the DAB page away from the undisambiguated term. Andrewa (talk) 07:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Have a look here. About a year and a half ago there wasn't one support vote. Guy0307 (talk) 23:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

A lot of things change in 2 years. JustGettingItRight (talk) 04:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

What is this section "Anonymous SMS"?[edit]

An ad for a Russian hacker site?

"Ability to specify Any Sender ID(sms address of the sender, sending SMS from any telephone number,fun SMS,jokes) on the phone receiver, so you can absolutely anonymously send from Any numbers (11 alphanumeric characters or mobile number) Text SMS (up to 160 characters) Support for Unicode, so you can write in Russian sms etc. (Arabic, Russian, Chinese and so on, up to 70 characters) You can use this service here" —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

SMS Compression[edit]

There's a section called "SMS Compression" which states the following:

An Indian startup myMobile Ergonomics has introduced on phone SMS Compression in its products CleverTexting and Panini Keypad in which they offer an increase in the capacity of the SMS by 40% and 350% respectively. This is done through an application on the phone with its own compression and decompression routines which uses the SMS as a transport layer.

I can't really see its relevance in this article. It's an application that happens to use the SMS protocol. It's no surprise you can compress text, but if it is only available to people who have this application, and then only for text messages sent and received through this application, it's not interresting for SMS in general.

Additionally, I suspect it is written (poorly) by people with too much interest in this company.

Delete it? Bajsejohannes (talk) 18:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Jpatokal (talk) 03:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Brown Fox[edit]

That should be: The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dogs. (Otherwise there is no 'b', 'w' or 'n' in the sentence.) — Dgtsyb (talk) 08:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I created the text message intending to illustrate 160 total characters in a displayed message, and was not concerned with making sure all letters of the English Alphabet appeared. Additionally, the caption was editied by someone to indicate the message was being composed on that screen. This is incorrect. As creator of the image, I can verify that this is the "New Incoming Message" dialogue on a Motorola RAZR V3c, and that was indeed, a message received (not sent) on the handset depicted. Scaredpoet (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

graphic of increasing numbers of SMS calls in US needs a credit / source[edit]

The graphic needs a source tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


any info on the gradual global price increase of sms? -- eiland (talk) 15:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

While there is a line near the beginning of the article about the telecomm cost overhead for text messages, it could be a big enough disparity to warrant a criticism section. I found two refs which may or may not be considered reliable sources. [3] [4] ExtremeSquared (talk) 09:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)


According to the German version of the same page, the first SMS was sent from a PC to a Vodafone phone in the UK on 3rd December of 1992. Someone may want to have a look at that.

In addition to that, there is real names and numbers about the actual inventors of the SMS idea, namely: Friedhelm Hillebrand of the German Postage Service - Bundespost, Bernard Ghillebaert of the PTT (predecessor of the France Télécom), Finn Trosby of the Norwegian Telenor, Kevin Holly of the Cellnet and Ian Harris of Vodafone.

Could someone check that out too?

ISO/IEC 21990 has not been reviewed scientifically....[edit]

from Google scholar point of view -- (talk) 10:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

so do to ISO/IEC 21989 -- (talk) 10:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

SMS security[edit]

Can your employer review the text messages you send on a company paid for phone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:46, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

" 'SMS of Death' Could Crash Many Mobile Phones"[edit]

Is this interesting? Should it be mentioned? (talk) 19:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Not really, it's just the fear-mongering version of Over-the-air programming. Jpatokal (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that is NOT fear-mongering, it is a serious and real issue in the SMS protocols (as currently implemented) and should be briefly explained in the Vulnerabilities section. The research was done by security researchers Nico Gold & Collin Mulliner at the 27C3 and is clearly and explained here. Anyone with a suitable phone that can send SMS by scripting, can directly send "SMS-o-death" to any other user. Jahibadkaret (talk) 15:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

You can't send anything "directly" to any other user, since all SMS traffic goes through SMSCs, and most filter MOs with dangerous UDHs. Even if you sign up as a VASP, most SMS gateways by default do not allow OTA MTs. Jpatokal (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
You need to study the relevant protocols further. Most SMSCs do not know what to filter and that is why these attacks work. Also there are several other SMS-related protocols that can push SMS-toolkit applications and even native phone applications, as is done on the Android platform, when installing applications from Android Market. This can be done silently, without the user ever knowing. --Jahibadkaret (talk) 14:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

UTF-16 versus UCS-2[edit]

The article mentions UTF-16 encoding. However the cited reference mentions only UCS-2. Shouldn't it be UCS-2 then, and UTF-16 is not correct? Cmcqueen1975 (talk) 04:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

However, I see that Emoji have been added to Unicode 6, apparently in order to standardise encoding of these in Japanese SMS among the major Japanese carriers, as well as in e-mails etc. Since these characters are outside the Unicode BMP, presumably SMS would have to use UTF-16 rather than UCS-2 to encode them. Does anyone know the technical details of this? Cmcqueen1975 (talk) 05:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

GSM-MAP Sepcification only details support for UCS-2 and GSM 7 bit encoding, UCS-2 is not exactly the same as UTF-16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twar99 (talkcontribs) 21:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

8-bit and PDU[edit]

Can someone add more about 8-bit and PDU encoding used in SMS for texting. there is no article about it. (talk) 19:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


Why is there a subsection under Vulnerabilities called "SMS"? This whole article is about SMS. Ordinary Person (talk) 05:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

spoofing -- "the only sure way" is an assertion that seems biased Gregcohn (talk) 19:22, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Number of "active users"[edit]

This page states that SMS text messaging has "over 5 billion active users," citing a February 2010 CNET article. It then goes on to say that that 5 billion is "74% of all mobile phone subscribers," without a citation. That 2010 article states that at the time the number of all "cell phone subscribers" was to hit 5 billion. So how can 74% of 5 billion be 5 billion?

Also, the number of "cell phone subscribers" is in no way the same number of "active users" of SMS text messaging. Many people use a cell phone without texting.

Can this be corrected/clarified? Nabelekt (talk) 19:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, please do some research and get the latest numbers, then feel free to make edits and provide references. Help is always welcome! --KarlB (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


saalam — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Bar graph[edit]

A bar graph showing a trend whose last data point is 2008 is not really useful. This should be updated or dropped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:54, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 15 March 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus EdJohnston (talk) 19:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Short Message ServiceShort message service – per Wikipedia:Naming conventions for capitalization 2607:FB90:5CE8:DE66:5DB2:40A9:A290:77CF (talk) 17:53, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose. It's a proper name. --В²C 19:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Neutral For me,there is no reason to object and support.--Tr56tr (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Propose moving to SMS, who says "short message service" nowadays? SMS already redirects to the article. Timmyshin (talk) 22:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Move to SMS: As with DVD and CD, this topic is primarily encountered in its abbreviated form, and (although there are other topics identified at SMS (disambiguation)) this topic appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "SMS". SMS has redirected here for 5 years and was the title of the article before that. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 23 March 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:21, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Short Message ServiceSMS – per WP:COMMONNAME. This was suggested in the previous just-closed RM with no objection. There was a prior RM in 2009 that moved the article to "SMS", and I'm not sure how it got moved back to where it is. As with DVD and CD, this topic is primarily encountered in its abbreviated form, and (although there are other topics identified at SMS (disambiguation)) this topic appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "SMS". SMS has redirected here for 5 years and was the title of the article before that. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Support. As far as I can tell, this article doesn't even really use "Short Message Service" outside of the lead. Appears to be the common name and primary topic. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:14, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose I would agree with both posters above. However I believe that WP policy then overrules all three of us, and not without reason. SMS is an acronym for Short Message Service. It is the function of the article title to be canonical, and thus the full form is what's needed here. SMS is, of course, already a redirect. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • But how often are they called "SMS"? If they're used in the "populist short form", that would be "text". Andy Dingley (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • That has been discussed before, and there is a different article at text messaging. SMS is not really synonymous with text messaging. Even on mobile phones, without using something like Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, or Viber, the text messaging often does not use SMS. For example, they may often use MMS, and as the article on that topic says, "MMS messages are delivered in a different way from SMS." As long as it is better known as "SMS" than by its current title, I think the move is appropriate. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • So the article on "texting" should be called "SMS", because SMS often isn't used?? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • No, I never suggested that the article at "texting" (which is a redirect to text messaging) should be moved to "SMS". That doesn't seem like it would be a good idea. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • WP:ACRONYMTITLE says "In general, if readers somewhat familiar with the subject are likely to only recognise the name by its acronym, then the acronym should be used as a title." I think that is the case here. Most people who are familiar with using SMS on their mobile phones probably don't know (or don't remember) the unabbreviated form of the term. Quick, without looking somewhere else, is it "Short Message System", "Short Messaging System", "Short Message Service", or "Short Messaging Service"? —BarrelProof (talk) 16:28, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Support move. SMS is the common name for the service.  ONR  (talk)  08:34, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on SMS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)