[RaphiePS]

I don't think anyone has mentioned this: in my mind, the whole point of calling a business is getting an immediate response.

Most of us are conditioned to treat text as a fundamentally asynchronous medium. Texts aren't something you have to reply to now -- you should get to them eventually, but they don't demand attention in that moment. Much like email, the sender really has no idea when, if ever, the receiver will respond.

Phone calls are different in that they're totally synchronous. The receiver responds immediately, and you're not left in the dark wondering if they're busy. Even if you're put on hold, someone usually answers the phone first to let you know they'll be with you soon.

Phone calls are comforting -- you know for certain that you've been heard, and you get your answer right away. I can't think of a way for text to provide this, but I'd love to be proven wrong.

[chrisBob]

How old are you? I am 32 and I agree, but my younger siblings consider a text to be similar to a phone call that demands an immediate response.

I you aren't in a hurry you send a similar message over email.

[RaphiePS]

17. At least in my social circles, it's polite to respond to texts (and Facebook messages) within a couple hours. Texting definitely carries more expectations than email (for example, I'd consider it rude to text back the next day, yet emailing in the morning is A-ok), but it's certainly not on the level of calls.

[rabbyte]

Good point. I would hope that part would be automated so that if a person isn't going to respond within the next 45 seconds requestor gets a message and maybe even an ETA for when they'll have their answer.