Phone comparison

Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones exceeds
mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola V365.
Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.

HH

---

› See More: Phone comparison

On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:18:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
>question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones exceeds
>mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
>these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
>camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
>interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
>6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola V365.
>Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.

Motorola V365

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:18:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
>>question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones
>>exceeds
>>mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
>>these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
>>camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
>>interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
>>6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola
>>V365.
>>Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.
>
> Motorola V365
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

V365 is tri band - not quad. But I also recommend it.


Bob

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 19:32:33 -0500, "rjdriver" <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:18:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
>>>question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones
>>>exceeds
>>>mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
>>>these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
>>>camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
>>>interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
>>>6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola
>>>V365.
>>>Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.
>>
>> Motorola V365

>V365 is tri band - not quad. But I also recommend it.

V365 is quad band.
<http://business.cingular.com/businesscenter/phones-devices/all-phones>

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

John Navas wrote:
> V365 is quad band.

Not what it says here -
http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification

But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?

--
Peter Headland

"Peter Headland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John Navas wrote:
>> V365 is quad band.
>
> Not what it says here -
> http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>
> But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?
>
> --
> Peter Headland

I'm the original poster. I really don't understand the difference between
tri-band and quad band. I want to use the phone in Europe and Asia. Would I
be shorting myself somehow if I went with a tri-band phone? Would tri-band
be as useable in those regions as quad-band? I'm lost/

HH

On 7 Dec 2006 17:31:51 -0800, "Peter Headland" <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>John Navas wrote:
>> V365 is quad band.
>
>Not what it says here -
>http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>
>But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?

Maybe Cingular doesn't know what they are buying?
Motorola made both tri-band and quad-band V360 models.
I'd be willing to bet the same is true of the V365.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 19:11:04 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>"Peter Headland" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> John Navas wrote:
>>> V365 is quad band.
>>
>> Not what it says here -
>> http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>>
>> But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?

>I'm the original poster. I really don't understand the difference between
>tri-band and quad band. I want to use the phone in Europe and Asia. Would I
>be shorting myself somehow if I went with a tri-band phone? Would tri-band
>be as useable in those regions as quad-band? I'm lost/

US bands: 850 and 1900
Non-US bands: 900 and 1800

Quad-band: 850, 900, 1800, and 1900 (good worldwide)
Tri-band: 850, 1800, and 1900 (good for US)
or: 900, 1800, and 1900 (good for non-US)

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 7 Dec 2006 17:31:51 -0800, "Peter Headland" <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>John Navas wrote:
>>> V365 is quad band.
>>
>>Not what it says here -
>>http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>>
>>But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?
>
> Maybe Cingular doesn't know what they are buying?
> Motorola made both tri-band and quad-band V360 models.
> I'd be willing to bet the same is true of the V365.
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>


From what I understand, V365s sold in the US will have 850,1800, and
1900. Those sold in Europe or Asia it will have 900, 1800, and 1900.
Offering a quad band would have been much simpler for everybody and avoided
this confusion, but it seems the phone offers 3 bands that vary by location.

Bob

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006 22:56:44 -0500, "rjdriver" <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 7 Dec 2006 17:31:51 -0800, "Peter Headland" <[email protected]>
>> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>John Navas wrote:
>>>> V365 is quad band.
>>>
>>>Not what it says here -
>>>http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>>>
>>>But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?
>>
>> Maybe Cingular doesn't know what they are buying?
>> Motorola made both tri-band and quad-band V360 models.
>> I'd be willing to bet the same is true of the V365.
>
> From what I understand, V365s sold in the US will have 850,1800, and
>1900. Those sold in Europe or Asia it will have 900, 1800, and 1900.
>Offering a quad band would have been much simpler for everybody and avoided
>this confusion, but it seems the phone offers 3 bands that vary by location.

Check the Cingular link I posted. It clearly says QUAD band.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Peter Headland wrote:
> John Navas wrote:
>> V365 is quad band.
>
> Not what it says here -
> http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>
> But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?

And here too: "http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=969"

It's a good phone for domestic use, be that domestic use in Europe and
Asia (where it is 900/1800/1900) or in North America (where it is
850/1800/1900). But it's not a good world phone because in each case it
lacks the most popular GSM frequency for non-domestic use. This type of
phone is the older technology, from before the U.S. had 800 (or 850
MHz), and they couldn't offer both 850 and 900 MHz with the chipset they
used.

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:42:29 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:

>Peter Headland wrote:
>> John Navas wrote:
>>> V365 is quad band.
>>
>> Not what it says here -
>> http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>>
>> But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?
>
>And here too: "http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=969"
>
>It's a good phone for domestic use, be that domestic use in Europe and
>Asia (where it is 900/1800/1900) or in North America (where it is
>850/1800/1900). But it's not a good world phone because in each case it
>lacks the most popular GSM frequency for non-domestic use. This type of
>phone is the older technology, from before the U.S. had 800 (or 850
>MHz), and they couldn't offer both 850 and 900 MHz with the chipset they
>used.

Open mouth. Insert foot.
The Cingular link I posted clearly states QUAD band.
Motorola made both tri-band and quad-band V360 models,
even though its website only showed the tri-band model.
This is marketing and microcosting, not technology.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:42:29 -0800, SMS <[email protected]>
> wrote in <[email protected]>:
>
>>Peter Headland wrote:
>>> John Navas wrote:
>>>> V365 is quad band.
>>>
>>> Not what it says here -
>>> http://www.motorola.com/consumer/v/i...lSpecification
>>>
>>> But maybe Motorola don't know what they are making?
>>
>>And here too: "http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=969"
>>
>>It's a good phone for domestic use, be that domestic use in Europe and
>>Asia (where it is 900/1800/1900) or in North America (where it is
>>850/1800/1900). But it's not a good world phone because in each case it
>>lacks the most popular GSM frequency for non-domestic use. This type of
>>phone is the older technology, from before the U.S. had 800 (or 850
>>MHz), and they couldn't offer both 850 and 900 MHz with the chipset they
>>used.
>
> Open mouth. Insert foot.
> The Cingular link I posted clearly states QUAD band.
> Motorola made both tri-band and quad-band V360 models,
> even though its website only showed the tri-band model.
> This is marketing and microcosting, not technology.

Here's a Cingular link that clearly says TRI, John:
http://www.cingular.com/cell-phone-s..._sku=sku200002

And one from Motorola, also:
http://motorola.digitalriver.com/DRH...uctID=50457900

Perhaps you can give Cingular a call and straighten out what appears to be
conflicting information at their site.

Bob

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:18:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
>>question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones
>>exceeds
>>mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
>>these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
>>camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
>>interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
>>6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola
>>V365.
>>Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.
>
> Motorola V365
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
> John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Do I read this discussion to mean that, to be sure that I have the best
phone for use both in the US and abroad, I should stick with a quad band
phone and not risk a tri band? If so, what about the LG CU500 or Cingular
Sync by Samsung (a707)?

HH

On Fri, 8 Dec 2006 15:10:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:

>
>"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:18:57 -0800, "HH" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>Please help me decide on a phone upgrade. I know that this is a basic
>>>question, but I value the opinion of those whose knowledge of phones
>>>exceeds
>>>mine. In addition to the standard functions, I want a phone that includes
>>>these features: flip phone, GSM, quad band, Bluetooth, reasonably good
>>>camera, accepts miniSD (not critical), good sound quality. I'm not
>>>interested in games or music. I have been looking at the LG CU500, Nokia
>>>6102i, Cingular Sync by Samsung (a707), Motorola RAZR V3, and Motorola
>>>V365.
>>>Any observations or recommendation would be most appreciated.
>>
>> Motorola V365

>Do I read this discussion to mean that, to be sure that I have the best
>phone for use both in the US and abroad, I should stick with a quad band
>phone and not risk a tri band?

Yes.

>If so, what about the LG CU500 or Cingular
>Sync by Samsung (a707)?

I would instead recommend a Motorola RAZR from Cingular, or an unlocked
quad-band V360 from a 3rd party (e.g., on eBay).

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>