|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cellular phones topics > June 2005 > tMobile, Phila PA - USA Area: Which Freq?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
tMobile, Phila PA - USA Area: Which Freq?
|
|
| (PeteCresswell) 2005-05-23, 10:55 pm |
| I switched to tMobile some months ago and am trying to explain to myself why the
signal is so poor compared to my old Cingular TDMA phones.
One thing that caught my ear was somebody's assertion that one freq or the other
(1900 or 850/900) had superior building penetration.
Building penetration (even in my own house) seems tb a possible explaination bc
once I go outside, I can always get at least a couple of bars.
At my main client's site, I see some people (preseumably on other carriers)
walking around inside talking on cell phones. Never a chance for me and my
tMobile Moto v180...
Any thoughts?
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| Cyrus Afzali 2005-05-24, 10:55 pm |
| On Mon, 23 May 2005 19:17:13 -0700, "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid>
wrote:
quote:
>I switched to tMobile some months ago and am trying to explain to myself why the
>signal is so poor compared to my old Cingular TDMA phones.
>
>One thing that caught my ear was somebody's assertion that one freq or the other
>(1900 or 850/900) had superior building penetration.
>
>Building penetration (even in my own house) seems tb a possible explaination bc
>once I go outside, I can always get at least a couple of bars.
>
>At my main client's site, I see some people (preseumably on other carriers)
>walking around inside talking on cell phones. Never a chance for me and my
>tMobile Moto v180...
>
>Any thoughts?
Motorola is generally regarded to have poorer RF characteristics than
Nokia and other brands. IOW, if you're in a "fringe" signal area, you
may find you do better with a Nokia.
Have you tried the 3390 or any other Nokia in the same area and made a
comparison?
| |
| (PeteCresswell) 2005-05-24, 10:55 pm |
| Per Cyrus Afzali:
quote:
>Motorola is generally regarded to have poorer RF characteristics than
>Nokia and other brands. IOW, if you're in a "fringe" signal area, you
>may find you do better with a Nokia.
>
>Have you tried the 3390 or any other Nokia in the same area and made a
>comparison?
I just copied my v180's phonebook to SIM an then moved the entries to a 3595
that I keep as a spare/on-the-water phone.
The Moto was at zero or one bars and had to try a couple times to register
itself on the nework.
The Nokia came up immediately registered on the network and is showing 1-2 bars,
occasionally 3.
Tomorrow morning I'm going up to a client's site that's 100% undoable with the
v180 - yet has the occasional person walking around inside talking on a cell
phone. Then we'll see...
Thanks for the tip.
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| (PeteCresswell) 2005-05-28, 10:55 pm |
| Per Cyrus Afzali:
quote:
>Motorola is generally regarded to have poorer RF characteristics than
>Nokia and other brands. IOW, if you're in a "fringe" signal area, you
>may find you do better with a Nokia.
>
>Have you tried the 3390 or any other Nokia in the same area and made a
>comparison?
My #2 daughter's using the 3390 - because of it's simplicity she prefers it over
the other two I offered up.
Per the other post, I tried a 3595. At first I thought I was getting another
bar or so at home, but at the client site it, too, offered zero bars.
I'm still wondering about the 850/900 vs 1900 thing - not so much because of the
client site, which most people find pretty poor, but more because of the spotty
performance at home.
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| John S. 2005-06-07, 4:55 pm |
|
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid> wrote in message
news:ga3591dtmbg1470
lcdk0aqurobi3etq1bh@
4ax.com...
quote:
>I switched to tMobile some months ago and am trying to explain to myself
>why the
> signal is so poor compared to my old Cingular TDMA phones.
T-Mobile is 1900 ONLY.
quote:
> One thing that caught my ear was somebody's assertion that one freq or the
> other
> (1900 or 850/900) had superior building penetration.
The lower the frequency, the better the penetration.
quote:
> Building penetration (even in my own house) seems tb a possible
> explaination bc
> once I go outside, I can always get at least a couple of bars.
Sounds like at least part of the problem!
| |
| John S. 2005-06-07, 4:55 pm |
|
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid> wrote in message
news:56ei91tj0ai5k72
37gvsgp4l6tlfs2ko3a@
4ax.com...
quote:
> I'm still wondering about the 850/900 vs 1900 thing - not so much because
> of the
> client site, which most people find pretty poor, but more because of the
> spotty
> performance at home.
It is definatly a possibility, however, keep in mind that T-Mobile ONLY has
1900 PCS frequencies.
|
|
|
|
|