mental_floss magazine
SUBSCRIBE >
GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS >
DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS >
subscriber services >

The LA Times recently delved into the history of the text message — specifically, why text messages are limited to 160 characters. The answer starts in Germany, in 1985, when researcher Friedhelm Hillebrand was thinking about adding a text messaging service to the nascent cellular telephone system. He typed various statements, questions, and brief messages on a typewriter. When he reviewed what he had typed, he saw a pattern: they all fit within 160 characters. Perhaps if he had been a more verbose writer, we’d have longer text messages today — but no, Hillebrand was convinced that his short messages were just the right length. As the LA Times recounts it: “This is perfectly sufficient,” he recalled thinking during that epiphany of 1985, when he was 45 years old. “Perfectly sufficient.” Hillebrand started looking for a way to fit these “short messages” into the existing cell phone network…and the rest is history.
Read a bit more about the early days of SMS (Short Messaging Service):
Initially, Hillebrand’s team could fit only 128 characters into that space, but that didn’t seem like nearly enough. With a little tweaking and a decision to cut down the set of possible letters, numbers and symbols that the system could represent, they squeezed out room for another 32 characters.
Still, his committee wondered, would the 160-character maximum be enough space to prove a useful form of communication? Having zero market research, they based their initial assumptions on two “convincing arguments,” Hillebrand said.
For one, they found that postcards often contained fewer than 150 characters.
Second, they analyzed a set of messages sent through Telex, a then-prevalent telegraphy network for business professionals. Despite not having a technical limitation, Hillebrand said, Telex transmissions were usually about the same length as postcards.
So did Hillebrand get rich from his invention? Not exactly. He’s still working in mobile communications, and recently wrote a book (with a >$200 sticker price!) about his work on early cell phone networks.
(Photo courtesy of Flickr user semarr, used via Creative Commons license.)
what a great post! I’ve always wondered this. This is why I
posted by Casey on 5-7-2009 at 12:46 pm
… to complete my thought. This is why I love mentalfloss.
posted by Casey on 5-7-2009 at 12:47 pm
Having sent some, may I suggest that Telex messages were short for two reasons: they were expensive to send and, more importantly, they were a pain in the fingers to compose. A Telex keyboard is, to put it mildly, clunky.
Perhaps related to this, though, are the limitations of the ASCII character set. “The American Standard Code for Information Interchange (usually abbreviated ASCII) was introduced in 1963 and is a 7-bit encoding scheme used to encode letters, numerals, symbols, and device control codes as fixed-length codes using integers). IBM’s Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code (usually abbreviated EBCDIC) is an 8-bit encoding scheme developed in 1963.” quoted from Wikipedia, but the point is that the IBM product was better. Better does not mean it will be adopted, of course!
posted by Kent on 5-18-2009 at 12:40 pm
I don’t think this article answers the question: “why are text’s limited to 160 characters NOW” Just because someone in 1985 decided 160 was enough! Also if no one wants or needs to do more, why limit it to 160 ? Why not 200 or 400…most people wouldn’t use it. Also, text takes very little bandwidth to transmit
posted by Jack on 9-30-2009 at 10:02 pm