|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cellular GSM Technology > March 2006 > Best GSM Phone for Cingular Network?
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 |
Best GSM Phone for Cingular Network?
|
|
|
| I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
these requirements:
1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the reception
is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should be
getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
clear.
2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find hassling
with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
applications. I would still like the option
for a wired headset.
3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a review
that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
type tabulation?
--
Will
| |
|
| Somewhere around Thu, 9 Mar 2006 22:21:19 -0800, while reading
alt.cellular.cingular, I think I thought I saw this post from "Will"
<westes-usc@noemail.nospam>:
>I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
>Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
>these requirements:
>
>1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
>most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the reception
>is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should be
>getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
>clear.
>
>2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find hassling
>with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
>applications. I would still like the option
>for a wired headset.
>
>3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
>definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
>
>4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
>
>What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a review
>that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
>type tabulation?
Nokias are known to generally have good reception quality; I think Motorolas
are also generally good. I'm happy with my V3 RAZR reception, and I think
the bluetooth is good with the right devices.
It's hard to find a bluetooth phone without camera and other high-end
features, though.
--
Marty - public.forums (at) gmail (dot) com
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...
well, I have others." - Groucho Marx
| |
| Bob Walker 2006-03-10, 5:48 pm |
|
"Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote in message
news:PMednbXpKdNfh4z
ZRVn-rg@giganews.com...
>I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
> Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
> these requirements:
>
> 1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
> most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the
> reception
> is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should
> be
> getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
> clear.
>
> 2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find
> hassling
> with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
> applications. I would still like the option
> for a wired headset.
>
> 3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
> definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
>
> 4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
>
> What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a
> review
> that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
> type tabulation?
>
> --
> Will
>
>
I have been very happy with both Motorola V551 and V557. I use a
Plantronics Discovery 640 bluetooth headset.
Bob
| |
| lun4tik 2006-03-11, 5:48 am |
| Just getting a 64k Cingular orange sim will improve your signal.
"Bob Walker" <rowalker@nospam.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:fJjQf.35883$_S7.5711@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote in message
> news:PMednbXpKdNfh4z
ZRVn-rg@giganews.com...
>
>
> I have been very happy with both Motorola V551 and V557. I use a
> Plantronics Discovery 640 bluetooth headset.
>
> Bob
>
| |
|
| For requirement #1, anything from Nokia. We live in a fringe area
and tried many different phones here. Most would not work from
my house. The only phones we tried that did work (and worked
well) were the Nokia 6620, 6230 and Motorola RAZR V3.
"Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote in message
news:PMednbXpKdNfh4z
ZRVn-rg@giganews.com...
>I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
> Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
> these requirements:
>
> 1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
> most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the
> reception
> is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should
> be
> getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
> clear.
>
> 2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find
> hassling
> with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
> applications. I would still like the option
> for a wired headset.
>
> 3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
> definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
>
> 4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
>
> What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a
> review
> that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
> type tabulation?
>
> --
> Will
>
>
| |
|
|
Razr V3!!
...
bamp
"RobR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:9IVQf.233$%b.37@trndny09...
> For requirement #1, anything from Nokia. We live in a fringe area
> and tried many different phones here. Most would not work from
> my house. The only phones we tried that did work (and worked
> well) were the Nokia 6620, 6230 and Motorola RAZR V3.
>
>
> "Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote in message
> news:PMednbXpKdNfh4z
ZRVn-rg@giganews.com...
>
>
| |
|
| Hi Will,
Why not consider Samsung ZX10 when you are getting it for a low
subscriber price? The other applications remain on the phone but what
the hell ..... I am getting it for 99$ ...lol
| |
|
| Unless Samsung phones have changed substantially, since
my wife owned one a few years ago, the ZX10 will not
meet his first criteria, a phone with extremely good
reception.
"USIM" <pramodmr@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142240627.939991.38840@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Hi Will,
>
> Why not consider Samsung ZX10 when you are getting it for a low
> subscriber price? The other applications remain on the phone but what
> the hell ..... I am getting it for 99$ ...lol
>
| |
|
| I just got my first cell phone, a Nokia 6102, works great.
A version with Bluetooth, 6102i, is expected out soon.
"Will" <westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote in message
news:PMednbXpKdNfh4z
ZRVn-rg@giganews.com...
>I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
> Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
> these requirements:
>
> 1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
> most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the
> reception
> is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should
> be
> getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
> clear.
>
> 2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find
> hassling
> with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
> applications. I would still like the option
> for a wired headset.
>
> 3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
> definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
>
> 4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
>
> What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a
> review
> that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
> type tabulation?
>
> --
> Will
>
>
>
| |
| John Navas 2006-03-16, 5:48 am |
| [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <UrwQf.641$%e1.134@trnddc05> on Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:08:04 GMT, "lun4tik"
<lun4tik@verizon.net> wrote:
>Just getting a 64k Cingular orange sim will improve your signal.
Actually not. The 64K ENS SIM only makes a difference in an ENS capable
phone, and even then it only allows Cingular to manually "home" the phone OTA
(over the air) to either the "orange" (old Cingular) network or "blue" (old
ATTWS) network. With or without ENS, phones homed to either network will roam
on the other network. In most cases ENS makes little difference. See the FAQ
for more info.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| John Navas 2006-03-16, 5:48 am |
| [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
Current Samsung phones compare well to other major brands, including Nokia and
Motorola.
In <BgjRf.1362$%b.96@trndny09> on Mon, 13 Mar 2006 18:57:37 GMT, "RobR"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>Unless Samsung phones have changed substantially, since
>my wife owned one a few years ago, the ZX10 will not
>meet his first criteria, a phone with extremely good
>reception.
>
>"USIM" <pramodmr@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1142240627.939991.38840@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| lugnut 2006-03-16, 5:48 pm |
| On Thu, 9 Mar 2006 22:21:19 -0800, "Will"
<westes-usc@noemail.nospam> wrote:
>I was an AT&T Wireless customer in Northern California, which then became
>Cingular. I am trying to identify the best GSM phone currently made for
>these requirements:
>
>1) I need extremely good reception, and this characteristic is by far the
>most important feature for me. I have a Siemens S55 now, and the reception
>is not good. The signal strength fades in an out in areas that should be
>getting great GSM coverage. I need something at least twice as loud and
>clear.
>
>2) I need superb support for a bluetooth wireless headset. I find hassling
>with the wires for a headset to be too difficult in many mobile
>applications. I would still like the option
>for a wired headset.
>
>3) I need some simple SMS and paging capabilities, nothing exotic. I
>definitely don't need to browse the Internet on a cell phone.
>
>4) I don't need fancy colors, or cameras, or any other high end features.
>
>What are some candidates based on these requirements, and is there a review
>that shows reception quality for multiple GSM phones in a consumer reports
>type tabulation?
I live and work in a marginal area where a call could neve
be completed. A couple of months back, I cancelled my
verizon a/c because they made it clear they would not be
providing a better signal in the near future. I set out to
find a carrier/phone combination that would work for going
thru at least a week of the trtial period with each carrier
available here. I found one carrier here with a string
signal. For some strange reason, it did not roam to most of
the other places I also must travel. I finally settle on
the Cingular service as it is fair on coverage but, I still
dropped a call too frequently. The local agent allowed me
to trty every phone he had available which included every
model currentl available from cingular. We ended up with a
Nokia 6010 for my wife because of it's simplicity but, it's
reception is right up there with the 6102 we tried. It
works flawlessly here. I wound up with the RAZR V3 which
had a general problem dropping calls even when a full signal
was available. I stopped yesterday to ask about the problem
and was told my phone was one that had been recall for just
that problem. They gave me a new current phone with no
questions asked. That problem now seems to be corrected
along with an unwillingness to disconnect a call when it was
closed.
Based on my annecdotal testing for my own purposes, I would
say any of the Nokia's or the RAZR are top of the heap right
now for reception. I tried the V557, i think it was, which
was not quite as good as any of the Nokias. The RAZR V3
seems to be on par with the Nokia's. The "feel" of the
phone was the deciding factor. The Nokia flip phones I
tried just have a "plastic feel" to them. The one thing I
definitely do not like about the RAZR is the phone book
which appears to require a completely separate entry for
each name as opposed to being able to enter several numbers
for each name and just tagging one of the as default for
dialing while having the others accessible if needed. In
other words, the RAZR has 1,000 slots available for entries
which sounds like a lot. This may require you to scroll
thru several entries for the same party to get the number
you need and greatly extends the time spent scrolling thru
the list. It does have multiple letter search which helps
but, it would be nice to use the multiple letter search to
get to the party thru a greatly reduced number of names.
Other menu systems may only spec 500 names but, you may be
able to associate 4 or 5 numbers with each name making them
a total of 2,000 or 2,500 actual nuimbers instead of 1,000
total in the RAZR. This is something Moto needs to address.
I would much rather devote memory to this kind of use than
to games or photos or some other relatively useless feature.
Then again, for the price of the RAZR, they should be able
to bump the onboard memory a bit for this.
Lugnut
|
|
|
|
|