Results 1 to 13 of 13
- 03-21-2004, 05:05 PM #1CharlieGuest
My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is in?
Thank You,
Charlie
› See More: Do new phones get better reception?
- 03-21-2004, 05:14 PM #2Lawrence GlasserGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
Charlie wrote:
>
> My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is in?
One should never look at the number of "bars" as any indication of
signal strength. They're put there by the manufacturer of the phone.
One manufacturer might decide that a weak signal deserves one bar,
while the next thinks two would be more appropriate. Etc., etc. Not
only is there no standard between manufacturers, there's not even a
standard between phones from the *same* manufacturer.
Having said that, the new phones typically do perform better than
the old.
Larry
- 03-21-2004, 05:37 PM #3Bob SmithGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Lawrence Glasser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Charlie wrote:
> >
> > My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> > He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> > good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> > Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is
in?
>
> One should never look at the number of "bars" as any indication of
> signal strength. They're put there by the manufacturer of the phone.
> One manufacturer might decide that a weak signal deserves one bar,
> while the next thinks two would be more appropriate. Etc., etc. Not
> only is there no standard between manufacturers, there's not even a
> standard between phones from the *same* manufacturer.
>
> Having said that, the new phones typically do perform better than
> the old.
>
> Larry
Especially with battery life ...
Bob
- 03-21-2004, 10:27 PM #4TechGeekGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Charlie" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is in?
> Thank You,
> Charlie
Like all electronics, they wear down. Heat generated internally
weakens the inside components and performance will degrade.
Use, abuse, over use, etcc.. all contribute to this wear and tear.
The batteries also wear down, performace on that end will be noticably
different after roughly 18 months.
With that aside, also with each generation of phones, the
manufacturers do try to improve the overall performance of the phone
from signal reception to better battery life (but all the extra
features like color screen, web, GPS, pictures etc.. take away battery
life).
While the 8500 (imo) was one of the best phones we ever carried,
phones today *should* perform better for many reasons.
- 03-21-2004, 11:21 PM #5planeGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<%[email protected]>...
> "Lawrence Glasser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Charlie wrote:
> > >
> > > My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> > > He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> > > good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> > > Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is
> in?
> >
> > One should never look at the number of "bars" as any indication of
> > signal strength. They're put there by the manufacturer of the phone.
> > One manufacturer might decide that a weak signal deserves one bar,
> > while the next thinks two would be more appropriate. Etc., etc. Not
> > only is there no standard between manufacturers, there's not even a
> > standard between phones from the *same* manufacturer.
> >
> > Having said that, the new phones typically do perform better than
> > the old.
> >
> > Larry
>
> Especially with battery life ...
>
> Bob
Could it be that some of the older brands of phones weren't as good as
others. I have read posts by sprint techs, who say the 8500 was the
last good phone that samsung made--I used several of them for years,
including briefly a 8500--till I accidently got hooked on the sanyos
because of the speakerphone on the 4700's--bought a beat all to hexx
one from ebay, which was the best operating phone I had owned till
that time--haven't owned a sam since--I dep reading that the sams have
improved---IMHO they had a lot of room to improve--but even they may
have been superior to to motorola's which I used prior to the
sams---the battery life on the motos were horrible, horrible--, and a
lot of what I read, says they still are.
BAtteries on the new *smaller* phones are also small (er), and do not
usually have as much capacity as the somewhat larger ones; some models
use what they have better than others--and have power draining
components--I use as an example the sprint snayo models fromt he 4700
forward; the larger 4700 without the color screen would last for days,
the 4900 less, and the clam shell 5300 models forward with their std
batteries are womewhat limited on talk time; my solution there was to
add a larger battery to the 5500 etc.
On my verizon line, I still use a samsung t-300, which is hugh by
today's standards, but the talk time is still fairly good,the
reception seems good, and I am not seeing too many user reviews raving
about the great talk time of most new units--but they are really cute,
but I want the phone to talk with.
ARe you finding any of the newer models which will last a couple of
days of fairly heavy use without something to charge it with, etc?
- 03-22-2004, 05:59 AM #6Robert M.Guest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
> "Charlie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> > He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> > good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> > Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is in?
> > Thank You,
> > Charlie
>
> Like all electronics, they wear down. Heat generated internally
> weakens the inside components and performance will degrade.
Can also cause a screen to fail, but then that's labelled Customer Abuse.
- 03-22-2004, 06:25 AM #7Robert M.Guest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
> While the 8500 (imo) was one of the best phones we ever carried,
> phones today *should* perform better for many reasons.
You know better than that. The original Black Samsung 8500 had a secret
recall, as it wouldn't work in Analog mode. SprintPCS replaced if IF YOU
COMPLAINED with a Sliver Samsung 8500, and only if you complained. It
was all discussed in this newsgroup, and confirmed.
===========================
>
> [email protected] apologized for SprintPCS leaving customers with
> defective phones thusly:
>
> > When a customer called to report the
> > problem, we fixed it.
>
> But they'd be happy to leave you with your defective phone if you hadn't
> realized it was defective yet.
>
> Thats whats wrong with SprintPCS. If a customer had an Samsung Black 8500 they
> might not realize its defective and cant roam in analog mode, until an
> emergency situation, possibly with tragic results.
>
> BUT SPRINT PCS DOESN'T CARE.
- 03-22-2004, 06:39 AM #8Bob SmithGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
>
> > While the 8500 (imo) was one of the best phones we ever carried,
> > phones today *should* perform better for many reasons.
>
> You know better than that. The original Black Samsung 8500 had a secret
> recall, as it wouldn't work in Analog mode. SprintPCS replaced if IF YOU
> COMPLAINED with a Sliver Samsung 8500, and only if you complained. It
> was all discussed in this newsgroup, and confirmed.
Oh stop it Phillipe, that was a general Samsung problem as it happened to
the 3500's as well. Both models had some bad batches released and SPCS
replaced those when the customers brought them in.
Bob
- 03-22-2004, 06:57 AM #9tom ronsonGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Charlie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> My husband has a 3 year old Samsung SCH 8500.
> He travels often and lately has been getting the 4 bars that should be a
> good signal but gets no signal or very poor reception.
> Do the new phones get better reception or is this just the area he is in?
> Thank You,
> Charlie
The one thing not mentioned, yet --- is that the new phones use 3g
technology ---- which helps the sprint end work better --- and by default
the handset should work better.
And, if he likes bells 'n whistles, the new phones are much cooler in that
regard. He'd also be able to move data on a newer phone --- which might be
handy for him.
--tr
.................................................................
Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
>>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<
-=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
- 03-22-2004, 07:02 AM #10Robert M.Guest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (plane) wrote:
> ARe you finding any of the newer models which will last a couple of
> days of fairly heavy use without something to charge it with, etc?
With ReadyLink,GPS and Roaming/Analog turned off the Sanyo 5400 (aka
RL2500) lasts me 3 days between charges. If I have a day I am using it a
bunch, I throw it on my car charger whilst I drive.
- 03-22-2004, 10:05 PM #11planeGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (plane) wrote:
>
> > ARe you finding any of the newer models which will last a couple of
> > days of fairly heavy use without something to charge it with, etc?
>
> With ReadyLink,GPS and Roaming/Analog turned off the Sanyo 5400 (aka
> RL2500) lasts me 3 days between charges. If I have a day I am using it a
> bunch, I throw it on my car charger whilst I drive.
AS I have posted before, I find it very convenient to use an ext
battery with the 5400--it's odd, but the browsing time seems better
with the 5400 vs the 4900 but the talk time is way less--the 5500 is
even more power hungry, due to the camera stuff I imagine--the the
biger battery and the car cord are a good combo---but still yet the
old 4700 (which seems hugh today) would go for several days without
charge.
thanks
- 03-22-2004, 10:56 PM #12JRWGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
> Oh stop it Phillipe
>>You know better than that.
- 03-24-2004, 12:55 AM #13O/SirisGuest
Re: Do new phones get better reception?
In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> With ReadyLink,GPS and Roaming/Analog turned off the Sanyo 5400 (aka=20
> RL2500) lasts me 3 days between charges. If I have a day I am using it a=
=20
> bunch, I throw it on my car charger whilst I drive.
>=20
FYI the so-called "GPS" has virtually nil effect on battery life. =20
It's a passive service that only responds to E911 where active and=20
only where you provide express permission otherwise.
--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them
Similar Threads
- General Cell Phone Forum
- Samsung
- alt.cellular.verizon
- Cingular
- General Cell Phone Forum
The Ukrainian Review
in Chit Chat