It looks like the cell phone is slowly but surely pushing the landline out of the picture for many U.S. families. According to a government study, the amount of people opting to use cell phones only and ditch their home phones completely has risen 0.5%
I guess I for one am actually suprised that it is "only" 18 percent. I'da pegged it much higher, based on seeing how all the people I hang out with roll, anyway. I'd say I don't know anyone in my 23-26 age group that has a land line at their own residence.
I moved to a cell phone in 2004 because I was leaving town for 3 months and needed a viable option for long distance Rather than pay for a landline where I was staying, it was easier to take a cell phone with me. I haven't really gone back to a landline since.
The only benefit of a landline would be one more redundant safety mechanism. Internet phones need electricity and internet. Cellphones need a charged battery and working cell towers. A true land-line would only need a non-electric phone (the old plug-in kind for you kids). However, at $30-40 a month, it really isn't worth it for the off chance that some freakish weather takes out everything but the phone lines (at that price, you might as well get a satellite phone for backup).
I too am surprised that 82 percent of houses still have a landline, or are they counting internet/cable phones, which aren't the same?
I moved to cellphone only back in 2003 when I took a look at how much the landline was costing vs how much I actually used it.
$40/mo for basic service + $40/mo for long distance + taxes gave me a landline bill of $85/mo.
With 300+ min and free long distance on my cellphone, it became a no-brainer, especially with basic cellphone service being $35/mo at that time. I got back $1,000 a year in lowered phone bills -- which got me some kick-butt PC upgrades.
And ditto on the cellphones in movie theaters. They should have a local area jammer that comes on when the movie starts.
[citation][nom]hyperanthripoid[/nom]I guess i'm becoming an increasing minority, I only have a land line. I'm too cheep[/citation]
The sad part about that is, it's cheaper to maintain a cell phone than it is a land line. I know I personally was getting raped for $60 a month from AT&T for basic local and long distance service. Thats no voice mail or anything, other than caller id and call waiting as options. I don't even think I actually had call waiting. Yet I can pay $40 a month for a cell phone.
There are probably still a lot of places that don't have a reliable enough coverage to ditch landlines. A lot of people around here, myself included, can't get a good enough signal indoors to carry on a conversation. Plus, around here we have Mediacom which offers long distance, call waiting, etc... all for $30/month (in a media package of course) so it's not such a big deal to have a land line and cell.
I'm only 17 and live at home, but I know my dad was thinking about getting rid of the land line and saving some money. But then we have an alarm system, and we need a land line if we actually want the alarm service. So that might be why some people stick with a land line.
The U.S. is still lagging behind Asia and Europe when it comes to cell phone coverage. In Korea and Thailand for example, the cell phones provide fairly good unlimited broadband. So, people don't even bother with DSL or cable internet when their existing phones/service can get HSDPA ( 1.5- 14.4 Mbit/s) or soon 4G/LTE/WiMAX can provide 70-326.4 Mbit/s. Just plug a cable (or bluetooth) from the phone to the PC/notebook. So, when phones in the States catches up, we might find a whole lot more homes without lan-lines.
Well, I completely understand why a lot of folks let the land line die, the savings can be substantial. I have pondered it myself a few times but a few details always get in the way. 1) The signal issue, a land line just sounds a lot better than a cell, no matter how good the signal is indoors. 2) A good cordless phone is just a lot more comfortable to talk on than a cell phone and the speakerphone portion is light years better than the cell speakerphone. 3) Multiple land line phone extensions - it is nice to have a cordless phone in each room of the house. If the cell rings, invariably, I am on the other floor and have to run to catch it and most times I do not make it in time. If the land line rings, chances are, I have an extension right next to me where ever I am in the house 4) Price, I get a deal from at&t for my DSL Pro where the net difference in price between DSL & Land Line or DSL alone ends up being like $23 after package discounts are factored in. For $23 a month I end up thinking I want the other things above more than the price savings. I have tried MagicJack and other VOIP options and always ended up dumping them for various reasons. I think if the cell operators ever offer a home based cell phone tower extension option where you get a box to interface with a cell tower that gives you a better signal than the cell phone alone, I might be persuaded if one can connect a land line style phone to it to use as well as the cell phone. I am amazed they have not done this already. Until then, I guess I just have to continue to pony up for the land line.
As for your issues, I guess those of us renting a 1 bedroom apartment for $1000+ a month (sorry, I'm just bitter about that) don't have to worry about getting the phone in time. Don't you just keep it in your pocket anyways? I only talk on my phone for about 15 minutes at most a day (and mostly not at home) so quality / comfort don't really matter much to me. Landlines are pretty cheap, just for me they are close to useless (plus you need to give people 2 phone numbers).