|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cingular cell phone service > July 2006 > Best Reception (Clamshell Bluetooth)
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 Reception (Clamshell Bluetooth)
|
|
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-07-24, 10:33 am |
|
Can anybody indicate what the best phone is (GSM ... unlocked is fine) that I
can use with cingular for reception and bluetooth functionality? I largely
prefer the clamshell formfactor with the phone in a leather case. Other
niceties are mobile web [and perhaps occassional tethering ... once every
couple of months at most] and sound quality.
Thanks.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-07-24, 10:33 am |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Can anybody indicate what the best phone is (GSM ... unlocked is fine) that I
> can use with cingular for reception and bluetooth functionality? I largely
> prefer the clamshell formfactor with the phone in a leather case. Other
> niceties are mobile web [and perhaps occassional tethering ... once every
> couple of months at most] and sound quality.
>
By the way .. I am testing with a Nokia 3595 phone (unlocked AT&T Wireless
phone) with a pre-paid SIM for three months. So far, the results have been
pretty good. Even when this thing goes down to zero bars on the display, I
can still make and receive calls ... although there is some occasional audio
dropout. Another note is that the sound quality is no better than that of my
Sanyo 7400 on Sprint PCS ... so I no longer can say that sound quality on GSM
phones is better.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
| Mike S. 2006-07-24, 12:33 pm |
|
In article < 0O6dnXkEPvAhUVnZnZ2d
nUVZ_tadnZ2d@giganew
s.com>,
Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Thomas T. Veldhouse <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>By the way .. I am testing with a Nokia 3595 phone (unlocked AT&T Wireless
>phone) with a pre-paid SIM for three months. So far, the results have been
>pretty good. Even when this thing goes down to zero bars on the display, I
>can still make and receive calls ... although there is some occasional audio
>dropout. Another note is that the sound quality is no better than that of my
>Sanyo 7400 on Sprint PCS ... so I no longer can say that sound quality on GSM
>phones is better.
Dirt cheap, with a poor display and almost devoid of features, the Nokia
3595 is probably the best performer as a _phone_ that has been on the
market for years: incredibly hot RF, superb battery life, *****LOUD******
ringers, and a ******LOUD****** earpiece.
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-07-24, 3:33 pm |
| Mike S. <retsuhcs@xinap.moc> wrote:
>
> Dirt cheap, with a poor display and almost devoid of features, the Nokia
> 3595 is probably the best performer as a _phone_ that has been on the
> market for years: incredibly hot RF, superb battery life, *****LOUD******
> ringers, and a ******LOUD****** earpiece.
>
Yes, it meets my requirements for coverage testing, but it doesn't meet my
requirements for features:
1. Great reception [at least as good as the Nokia 3595]
2. Clamshell [although might consider a candybar stlye in a pinch]
3. Web
4. Bluetooth
5. Battery life is always a plus.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
|
| Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Another note is that the sound quality is no better than that of my
> Sanyo 7400 on Sprint PCS ... so I no longer can say that sound quality on GSM
> phones is better.
Sound quality has always varied more by phone than by technology. A lot
depends on the CoDec being used in the handset. Voice quality keeps
declining as the encoding rate goes down. If you use an SMV Codec (CDMA)
at the same bit rate as an AMR Codec (GSM), the CDMA phone will sound
better than the GSM phone. However it's up to the operator to decide
what bit rate will be used, and an AMR equipped phone could sound better
than a SMV equipped phone, if the the AMR bit rate is much higher.
| |
| Mij Adyaw 2006-07-24, 10:33 pm |
| Tommy TV,
I thought that you were a Sprint Customer? Why the downgrade?
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:HP2dnWGoCqHcI1n
ZnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@gi
ganews.com...
>
> Can anybody indicate what the best phone is (GSM ... unlocked is fine)
> that I
> can use with cingular for reception and bluetooth functionality? I
> largely
> prefer the clamshell formfactor with the phone in a leather case. Other
> niceties are mobile web [and perhaps occassional tethering ... once every
> couple of months at most] and sound quality.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse
> Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
>
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-07-25, 7:33 am |
| Mij Adyaw <mij@thebitbucket.com> wrote:
> Tommy TV,
>
> I thought that you were a Sprint Customer? Why the downgrade?
>
I am testing. I have been working with two clients over the last 12 months
and both are in Sprint PCS holes [and one area is urban]. In one case,
Cingular and Verizon covers well, and in the other Verizon and T-Mobile cover
well. So, I am testing a Cingular pre-paid phone (using an unlocked Nokia
3595) to see if Cingular might be a viable alternative. So, far, it appears
to be a wash with Sprint and Cingular, so I think Verizon may win.
Unfortunately, it isn't as easy to get a prepaid Verizon phone ....
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
| John Navas 2006-07-25, 3:33 pm |
| On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 07:34:09 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
<veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
< HP2dnWGoCqHcI1nZnZ2d
nUVZ_uydnZ2d@giganew
s.com>:
>Can anybody indicate what the best phone is (GSM ... unlocked is fine) that I
>can use with cingular for reception and bluetooth functionality? I largely
>prefer the clamshell formfactor with the phone in a leather case. Other
>niceties are mobile web [and perhaps occassional tethering ... once every
>couple of months at most] and sound quality.
Unlocked Motorola V360. Quad-band version now available.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-07-26, 7:33 am |
| John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 07:34:09 -0500, "Thomas T. Veldhouse"
> <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote in
> < HP2dnWGoCqHcI1nZnZ2d
nUVZ_uydnZ2d@giganew
s.com>:
>
>
> Unlocked Motorola V360. Quad-band version now available.
>
Excellent! Thanks.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
|
|
|
|
|