i suppose it's a general rule that if it's popular internationally, then it's not so in America. we send fewer text messages to be different, "individual"

Since people in Europe and Asia use more public transit, they text more and talk less than Americans. We send fewer text messages, on average, because we spend more time driving. If you commute on public transit, your thumbs and eyes are free to bang out text messages. If you drive yourself to work, as most Americans do, you can't (or at least shouldn't) be texting. It's also much easier to talk on the phone in your car ( can you hear me now, What?. Louder?!) than it is on a bus or train full of others.

Just curious why the slant of the article is that text messaging someone is better than talking to them?

I think the author needs to do a little more research before coming to any valid conclusions. First of all there are tons of plans by various cell phone companies with inclusive text messages that are virtually cheap. Example, on sprint's fair and flexible plan, $5 will entitle you to 300 text messages and an additional $2 will earn you 500 text messages. Next, an unlocked phone is useless unless it has a network service. This means a sim card or chip from a network provider. If the network providers stick to their contract plans, buyers might not even have any use for their posh new unlocked phones (all unlocked cell phones require sim cards in order to have network service). In addition, unlocked phones have an elevated price tag hence, it could have a negative impact on purchases. Finally, where exactly is the correlation between buying an unlocked phone and an increase in text messages unless network providers sell sim cards with very cheap text messages? Beware that the pay-as-you-go services currently being offered by say T-mobile and Cingular, have very pricey tags.

I find that hearing someone's voice conveys much more than just reading a text. I use text as a reminder tool- my Yahoo Calendar lets me do that. I don't talk while I drive, it's too distracting.

Text is often better becuse it does not interrupt the receiver, who may have other things to do.

Americans use Blackberrys, voice mail, and email rather than mobile phone text messages. This discussion is a little bit like comparing mobile phone use in the States vs. Europe - in Europe, mobiles were competing against expensive land lines (local call metered) in densely populated areas. In the US, people live more spread out and can call locally for free. Hence, cell phone reception is bad and less needed.

Different demographics and technology history, that's all. I don't buy the "sitting on the subway" argument, the difference is not that big.

Whichever method you use (text or voice) is determined predominantly by your culture and the environment (social, economical, etc) that your society lives in. Clearly, the American, European, and Asian societies are unique in their own ways and we must expect differences in all aspects of their lives. Ones preferred communication method is, but, one of them.

Cheers

I'm going to check out SPRINT's Fair & Flexible plan -- my granddaughter's mobile phone bill (most of it text messaging) was $468 last month.

Behind? An arcane, painful communication method like texting on a teeny-weeny keyboard? Email volume in the US far exceeds other countries including all of Europe. We have very frequent access to PCs and laptops, so "text" information goes through email. We use email on mobile devices like Blackberries and Treos. When forced, we will use the texting features -- but through email, not text. Behind? Don't be silly.