I am debating between these two cell phones. There are not very many
review for them. The reviews that I found seam to contradict each
other. I don't know if I should flip a coin a buy one or base it on
something more factual. They are both very similar starter type of
cell phone. Just wondering if there is a good reason to pick one
over the other. My problem is I don't like to make random choices
with no reasoning behind it, its a quirk of mine. Thanks.
What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
down over Samsung.
lbbss wrote:
> I am debating between these two cell phones. There are not very many
> review for them. The reviews that I found seam to contradict each
> other. I don't know if I should flip a coin a buy one or base it on
> something more factual. They are both very similar starter type of
> cell phone. Just wondering if there is a good reason to pick one
> over the other. My problem is I don't like to make random choices
> with no reasoning behind it, its a quirk of mine. Thanks.
>
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:51:44 -0500, Mike Berger <berger@shout.net>
wrote:
>What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
>down over Samsung.
seconded.
>
>lbbss wrote:
>> I am debating between these two cell phones. There are not very many
>> review for them. The reviews that I found seam to contradict each
>> other. I don't know if I should flip a coin a buy one or base it on
>> something more factual. They are both very similar starter type of
>> cell phone. Just wondering if there is a good reason to pick one
>> over the other. My problem is I don't like to make random choices
>> with no reasoning behind it, its a quirk of mine. Thanks.
>>
Mike Berger wrote:
> What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
> down over Samsung.
My Motorola V188 is a piece of junk. Fit-and-finish-wise, Motorola phones
have been crap at least since I owned my CDMA StarTAC 7760 several years ago,
and the software is buggy.
On the other hand, I've had very good experiences with Samsung phones.
I got the V188 because it was free, but I should have gotten the Nokia 3220
T-Mobile was giving away (which was also free, but didn't have a couple
rebates that the V188 did at the time through Wirefly).
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, CA
Resident of Southern California -
the home of beautiful people and butt-ugly traffic jams
"Andrew White" <nospamers@allowed.at.all.net> wrote in message
news:udh442t0ir0l0dsisp3fcckp63hsm2p87h@4ax.com...
> Mike Berger <berger@shout.net> wrote:
>
>>What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
>>down over Samsung.
>
> That's an idiotic statement that shows you're totally clueless! There
> are several junky low-end Motorola models that are good only as
> paperweights. Just like there are several Samsung models that are
> praised by the electronics community as being the best and most
> innovative products in their class. You're obviously still living in
> the year 2000.
>
<snip>
I am on my second Motorola phone and while it is only about a month old, I
am very happy with it. I have had a Samsung phone and though that it was a
damn good phone. If I would had been offered a Samsung this time around, I
very well may have gone with it. I feel that Samsung makes good phones, but
I feel that their TV's, VCR's, DVD players, etc are so-so.
Somewhere around Sun, 16 Apr 2006 13:26:57 GMT, while reading alt.cellular,
I think I thought I saw this post from Andrew White
<nospamers@allowed.at.all.net>:
>Lawrence Glickman <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:51:44 -0500, Mike Berger <berger@shout.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
>>>down over Samsung.
>>
>>seconded.
>
>Another clueless moron.
Perfect usenet response. It's textbook quality:
1. Someone asks a question.
2. One or two people give an answer.
3. Some dumbass attacks the two giving an answer, without contributing any
answer or reason for the attack.
4. Entire discussion degrades to a flamefest, with no useful information.
Flame on.
--
Marty - public.forums (at) gmail (dot) com
"Those are my principles, and if you don't like them...
well, I have others." - Groucho Marx
Marty wrote:
> Somewhere around Sun, 16 Apr 2006 13:26:57 GMT, while reading alt.cellular,
> I think I thought I saw this post from Andrew White
> <nospamers@allowed.at.all.net>:
>
>> Lawrence Glickman <Lawrence_Glickman@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 09:51:44 -0500, Mike Berger <berger@shout.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What are your criteria? For quality I'd always pick Motorola hands
>>>> down over Samsung.
>>> seconded.
>> Another clueless moron.
> Perfect usenet response. It's textbook quality:
> 1. Someone asks a question.
> 2. One or two people give an answer.
> 3. Some dumbass attacks the two giving an answer, without contributing any
> answer or reason for the attack.
> 4. Entire discussion degrades to a flamefest, with no useful information.
>
> Flame on.
>
I think my response got eaten by the web demons. Second try.
Check out reviews for the SAM on ZD NET. See site below. If my link
doesn't work go to ZDnet.com and search for yourself. They probably
have a review on the MOTO also, again, do a search at ZD.
Finally, bought one myself, I'd give it a 7 out of 10 with 10 being
highest, as long as you realize that it is a basic phone. Good
reception and that is my primary "thing."
Have it and a MOTO Raz-R V3, both on T-Mobile and the Samsung seems to
pull in the signal a little better than the Raz-R
If the link doesn't work, go to ZDnet.com and search for the SGH-X497.
The probably have a review for the Moto also, but I didn't check.
Personal experience, bought it for my daughter. Doesn't have a lot of
the bells and whistles, but it works fairly well, good reception and
five months later no problem. She likes it. I'd give it a 7 of 10 with
10 being tops. Again, check the ZD reviews as noted above.....
timbirr@mailcity.com wrote:
> I think my response got eaten by the web demons. Second try.
>
> Check out reviews for the SAM on ZD NET. See site below. If my link
> doesn't work go to ZDnet.com and search for yourself. They probably
> have a review on the MOTO also, again, do a search at ZD.
>
> Finally, bought one myself, I'd give it a 7 out of 10 with 10 being
> highest, as long as you realize that it is a basic phone. Good
> reception and that is my primary "thing."
>
> Have it and a MOTO Raz-R V3, both on T-Mobile and the Samsung seems to
> pull in the signal a little better than the Raz-R
Both manufacturers have good and bad models. I used a CDMA SPH-A620 and a CDMA SPH-A660 on Sprint. The A660 was nothing special, but the 620 could hold
a signal inside a metal cave.
I suspect the higher-end Motorola handsets do better than the lower-end
handsets too. (The A660 is an entry-level phone; the A620 wasn't.)
--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Apple Valley, CA
Resident of Southern California -
the home of beautiful people and butt-ugly traffic jams
Linear Mode
