|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Sprint PCS > June 2006 > Re: Flip phones vs. Candy Bar Phones
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 |
Re: Flip phones vs. Candy Bar Phones
|
|
|
|
Juan Pablo Wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:49:41 -0500 (EST),
> popsensation@webtv.net (Eric) wrote:
> -
> It seems like everyone nowadays prefers the flip phone style to the
> original "candy bar" style. Is there anyone else who still prefers
> the
> candy bar over the flip?
>
> Why do you like flip phones? Is it because the size is smaller and
> more
> compact? Do they look more stylish to you? Do they get better
> reception?-
>
>
I think I am the only one who doesn't like clamshell phones! I think it
looks like a hassle to have to open and close them all the time (about
the same effort as locking keys on a bar phone, but I'm used to using
key locks so it doesn't seem bad after all this time). How does that
hinge hold up over time with the way people smack them shut to try to
act cool? I also don't really like the looks of the phones either
(especially when they're open!!!). I just don't see what the big deal
is and I can't see why so many people think clamshells are the greatest
invention ever. And... I think they feel weird to hold.
I understand the argument that the screen is protected and the phone is
smaller overall, but what about those of us who aren't hard on our
phones and carry them is a purse? Bar style phones are small now too! I
wish phone companies would offer a good selection of both, and some
sliders, so everyone can get what they want!
--
z142
| |
| decaturtxcowboy 2006-06-20, 4:33 am |
| > Juan Pablo Wrote:[color=darkred
]
What I'm hearing is the small phones are too small and hard to hold. An
advantage of a flip phone is the microphone is much closer to your
mouth. Performance (reception) has nothing to do with the form factor.
| |
| Thurman 2006-06-20, 10:33 am |
|
"decaturtxcowboy" <none@none.none> wrote in message
news:mvOlg.54249$Lm5.45653@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>
> What I'm hearing is the small phones are too small and hard to hold. An
> advantage of a flip phone is the microphone is much closer to your mouth.
> Performance (reception) has nothing to do with the form factor.
I've had all kinds of handsets. When ATT introduced the first very small
candy bar, I kept dropping it. It wasn't a factor of dexterity as much as
'heft'. There is some weight unknown to me, needed to keep an object laying
comfortable in the palm. One of the LG phones from Sprint was heavy enough
to be handled comfortably, but the recessed window/slider area attracted
lint and pocket trash. I'm clumsy enough I don't want to wear Star Trek belt
appendages.
The biggest advantage of the Razr, is I can flip the lid open to answer,
without looking, using my thumb. When closed, it hangs up, without taking
your eyes from the freeway. My wife has so much trouble determining when her
candy bar is off, she sometimes burns minutes, having left a call connected.
I carry my Razr everywhere but on the riding mower, not wanting to mulch it
if dropped. It's small and flat enough to drop in a pants pocket or the
inside suit coat pocket originally meant for business cards.
Downside to the Razr is the volume. I have discovered people are accustomed
to holding a cell phone >over< the ear. The smaller the phone, the further
the mike is from your mouth, so more ambient noise is collected. With the
Razr, I receive better sound by holding the 'M' icon on the top of the phone
over the ear canal. In my perfect world, I'd like a bone induction strip
where the hinge of the Razr is located. With that technology, there is >no<
ambient noise but your breathing.
On a related note, my unscientific testing shows external antennas provide a
small amount of additional signal strength. In addition, a vertical antenna
on a connection card is even better. If you have been to a self defense or
public safety course, they teach using car keys to protect yourself. An
external antenna is a pretty good substitute. The 3/4" antenna on my PDA
would be a pretty good deterrent in a pinch.
My daughter is considering buying a Pebl for use in a rural area of Oklahoma
with poor coverage by all cellular providers. Smaller phones have smaller
batteries therefore less power or shorter talk times. The CEO of Sprint told
developers in June 2003, Sprint increases tower signal strength to handsets
that are broadcasting weaker signals. The inference was non-CDMA
technologies increase handset signal strength, lowering battery life. I
don't have the background to comment on that technicality.
| |
| me@privacy.net 2006-06-20, 12:33 pm |
| z142 <z142.29oxc7@cellbanter.com> wrote:
>I think I am the only one who doesn't like clamshell phones! I think it
>looks like a hassle to have to open and close them all the time (about
No you are not
I don't like flip phones either
| |
| decaturtxcowboy 2006-06-20, 12:33 pm |
| Thurman wrote:
> I don't want to wear Star Trek belt
> appendages.
Guys that have a Bluetooth headset stuck in their ear with a bright
white or blue LED remind me of a BORG.
> The biggest advantage of the Razr, is I can flip the lid open to answer,
> without looking, using my thumb.
I looked at the Razor model from last December and it wasn't a fast
enough class for data. The keys were a little hard to use text
messaging, but then I found I can live without that (text messaging
extra on my plan now).
> My wife has so much trouble determining when her
> candy bar is off, she sometimes burns minutes, having left a call connected.
My mom has forgotten to push the End button on her phone a few times, at
least it disconnects within a few seconds after the other end of the
call hangs ups.
> I carry my Razr everywhere but on the riding mower, not wanting to mulch it
> if dropped.
My Sanyo 8100 acquired a ballistic trajectory after it fell out of my
pocket and under the tractor's brush hog.
> The smaller the phone, the further
> the mike is from your mouth,
Buddy of mine has the small Nokia on Cingular. I asked him to try moving
the phone lower to his mouth while talking to me and then move it back
up to his ear while listening. There was a big difference. Not so much
in the volume of his voice, but it overroad the background noise in his
truck. Two ton diesel duallys with a CD playing loud C&W music ain't the
best environments to use a cellphone.
> The inference was non-CDMA
> technologies increase handset signal strength, lowering battery life. I
> don't have the background to comment on that technicality.
My GSM Motorola V557 is good for several days after one charging, but my
CDMA Sanyo had to be charged every night. When I was analog roaming with
my Sanyo, it wouldn't last the day.
| |
| John Richards 2006-06-20, 3:33 pm |
| "z142" <z142.29oxc7@cellbanter.com> wrote in message news:z142.29oxc7@cellbanter.com...
> I understand the argument that the screen is protected and the phone is
> smaller overall, but what about those of us who aren't hard on our
> phones and carry them is a purse? Bar style phones are small now too! I
> wish phone companies would offer a good selection of both, and some
> sliders, so everyone can get what they want!
Not many of us males carry purses. ;-)
I like the RAZR form factor because it fits in my pants pocket
without showing a funny bulge. Belt clips have never worked
well for me. The smaller candybar phones have the microphone
too far away from one's mouth, causing the caller to speak up
rather loudly and thereby annoying bystanders.
--
John Richards
| |
|
|
John Richards Wrote:
> "z142" z142.29oxc7@cellbanter.com wrote in message
> news:z142.29oxc7@cellbanter.com...
> I understand the argument that the screen is protected and the phone
> is
> smaller overall, but what about those of us who aren't hard on our
> phones and carry them is a purse? Bar style phones are small now too!
> I
> wish phone companies would offer a good selection of both, and some
> sliders, so everyone can get what they want!
>
> Not many of us males carry purses. ;-)
> I like the RAZR form factor because it fits in my pants pocket
> without showing a funny bulge. Belt clips have never worked
> well for me. The smaller candybar phones have the microphone
> too far away from one's mouth, causing the caller to speak up
> rather loudly and thereby annoying bystanders.
>
> --
> John Richards
I have to admit that the razr is cool! That's why I like the idea of
the slvr.
--
z142
| |
| Frank Harris 2006-06-23, 4:33 am |
| I had the same problem with my small Samsung A680 and solved it by
adding strips of a 'grippy' product called eGrips to the back and sides
of the phone. Look at eGrips.com and you'll see packages of universal
shapes and packages shaped for a particular phone. They sell the
universal and iPod shapes at CompUSA and Radio Shack.
Thurman wrote:
<snip>
> I've had all kinds of handsets. When ATT introduced the first very small
> candy bar, I kept dropping it. It wasn't a factor of dexterity as much as
> 'heft'. There is some weight unknown to me, needed to keep an object laying
> comfortable in the palm.
<snip>
--
Frank Harris in San Francisco with a A920
|
|
|
|
|