Results 1 to 15 of 20
- 04-22-2007, 12:46 PM #1DickGuest
Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
take into consideration in deciding between them?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
› See More: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
- 04-22-2007, 02:23 PM #2SMSGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
Dick wrote:
> Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
> has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
> the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
> in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
> costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
> 900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
> take into consideration in deciding between them?
If you have no intention of ever roaming or using the phone in Asia or
Europe then the lack of 900 MHz isn't an issue. If you do have that
intention, then the lack of 900 MHz is a deal-breaker.
- 04-22-2007, 04:53 PM #3DickGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 13:23:07 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Dick wrote:
>> Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
>> has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
>> the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
>> in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
>> costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
>> 900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
>> take into consideration in deciding between them?
>
>If you have no intention of ever roaming or using the phone in Asia or
>Europe then the lack of 900 MHz isn't an issue. If you do have that
>intention, then the lack of 900 MHz is a deal-breaker.
I always think it is important to me because my son's family is in
Germany, and I might want to get a German SIM when we are over there.
However, really don't need to as they all have cell phones and we are
always with one of them. I guess other features of the two phones
would be more important.
What about roaming in the U.S.? We travel a lot. Is 900 GSM ever
used here?
Dick
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
- 04-22-2007, 10:55 PM #4John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 13:23:07 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>Dick wrote:
>> Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
>> has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
>> the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
>> in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
>> costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
>> 900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
>> take into consideration in deciding between them?
>
>If you have no intention of ever roaming or using the phone in Asia or
>Europe then the lack of 900 MHz isn't an issue. If you do have that
>intention, then the lack of 900 MHz is a deal-breaker.
Not really, depending on where you're talking about.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-22-2007, 10:56 PM #5John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:02:05 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>Dick wrote:
>
>> What about roaming in the U.S.? We travel a lot. Is 900 GSM ever
>> used here?
>No.
>
>In the U.S., the primary GSM and CDMA band is 800 MHz (sometimes called
>850 MHz for GSM) and the secondary, less desirable band, is 1900 MHz,
>also called PCS.
Both bands are primary and equally desirable.
>In Europe and Asia, the primary band is 900 MHz, and the secondary is
>1800 MHz. It'd be a pain to have to find a European or Asian carrier
>that is at 1800 MHz. They exist in some countries, but the coverage is
>usually not as good.
1800 actually works quite well in many places.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-22-2007, 10:59 PM #6John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:46:41 -0700, Dick <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
>has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
>the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
>in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
>costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
>900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
>take into consideration in deciding between them?
The KRZR K1 is only EGPRS(EDGE).
The RAZR V3xx is HSDPA, which is much faster.
If you care about data speed, then the V3xx is a no brainer.
Or wait for the KRZR K3.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-23-2007, 08:02 AM #7DickGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:59:39 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:46:41 -0700, Dick <[email protected]> wrote in
><[email protected]>:
>
>>Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
>>has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
>>the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
>>in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
>>costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
>>900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
>>take into consideration in deciding between them?
>
>The KRZR K1 is only EGPRS(EDGE).
>The RAZR V3xx is HSDPA, which is much faster.
>If you care about data speed, then the V3xx is a no brainer.
>Or wait for the KRZR K3.
John -
What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
Dick
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
- 04-23-2007, 08:28 AM #8John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 07:02:10 -0700, Dick <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 04:59:39 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:46:41 -0700, Dick <[email protected]> wrote in
>><[email protected]>:
>>
>>>Tomorrow I am going to purchase a replacement for my aging V551 (which
>>>has been a great phone.) I have zeroed in on the Motorola KRZR K1 and
>>>the V3xx. They both appear to be great phones, and have good ratings
>>>in the reviews. The KRZR is smaller and has a 2.0 MP camera, but
>>>costs more. The V3xx has more built-in memory, but is missing GSM
>>>900. Seems like kind of a toss-up between the two. What should I
>>>take into consideration in deciding between them?
>>
>>The KRZR K1 is only EGPRS(EDGE).
>>The RAZR V3xx is HSDPA, which is much faster.
>>If you care about data speed, then the V3xx is a no brainer.
>>Or wait for the KRZR K3.
>What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
>here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
>characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
>V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
The ZRZR K1 and RAZR V3xx performed roughly the same for me, and both
are at least as good as the V551, but the V3xx has the advantage of 3G,
which gives it better coverage in some parts of Northern California than
non-3G handsets.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-23-2007, 08:44 AM #9SMSGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
Dick wrote:
<snip>
> What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
> here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
> characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
> V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
If you cared about fringe area performance you'd be on whatever the 800
MHz CDMA carrier is in your area.
- 04-23-2007, 09:00 AM #10John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 07:44:08 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote in <[email protected]>:
>Dick wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
>> here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
>> characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
>> V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
>
>If you cared about fringe area performance you'd be on whatever the 800
>MHz CDMA carrier is in your area.
Not really -- the RAZR V3xx outperforms CDMA2000 handsets in general
here in the San Francisco Bay Area.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 05-30-2007, 10:43 AM #11Guest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
Dick <[email protected]> wrote:
> What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
> here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
> characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
> V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
I find that the V3xx is not as good as the V551. Some experimentation
seems to indicate that pointing the bottom of the phone toward the tower
gives the best reception, which is not very handy for talking, unless you
are on Bluetooth.
It seems that the Bluetooth conversation suffers in poor
signal areas (H670), although it is fine in stronger signal areas.
--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
- 06-03-2007, 06:26 AM #12jdoeGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
Krazr and V3xx about the same in fringe area. krazr menus are sloooooow and
phone tools refuses to work with it (krazr) while it works just fine with
V3xx or V3.
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Dick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
>> here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
>> characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
>> V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
>
> I find that the V3xx is not as good as the V551. Some experimentation
> seems to indicate that pointing the bottom of the phone toward the tower
> gives the best reception, which is not very handy for talking, unless you
> are on Bluetooth.
>
> It seems that the Bluetooth conversation suffers in poor
> signal areas (H670), although it is fine in stronger signal areas.
>
> --
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5
- 06-05-2007, 05:02 PM #13John NavasGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
On Wed, 30 May 2007 16:43:29 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>Dick <[email protected]> wrote:
>> What about fringe-area performance of the KRZR vs V3xx? Living out
>> here in the wild west, that's probably the most important
>> characteristic for us. We have been reasonably happy with our Moto
>> V551 and V557, but could always use a little more distance.
>
>I find that the V3xx is not as good as the V551. Some experimentation
>seems to indicate that pointing the bottom of the phone toward the tower
>gives the best reception, which is not very handy for talking, unless you
>are on Bluetooth.
You might want to try a different phone before giving up on the V3xx --
my own V3xx has significantly better reception than any of several
V551's I've compared it to, both on voice and on data.
>It seems that the Bluetooth conversation suffers in poor
>signal areas (H670), although it is fine in stronger signal areas.
No such problem with my H700 headset. It really sounds like you've got
a defective V3xx.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 06-05-2007, 08:11 PM #14Todd H.Guest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
"jdoe" <[email protected]> writes:
> Krazr and V3xx about the same in fringe area. krazr menus are
> sloooooow
No, v3c menus were sloooooow. :-) In comparison, the Krazr is
positively zippy.
> and phone tools refuses to work with it (krazr) while it works just
> fine with V3xx or V3.
I'm gonna have to cry "bull****" here I'm afraid. Either PhoneTools
has been fixed since you last used it and you haven't updated, or you
did something wrong.
I say this because I just successfully used an updated Phonetools to
pull photos and videos off two Cingular Krazr K1's on a win2k machine
via usb.
Now, you do have to run updates (from a not intuitively located tools
menu at least once) several times to get the software to the latest
when installing from an older CD though.
In the Motorola Phone Tools go to Menus and then Setup and then click
on Live update. And I think I went through 3 or 4 update iterations
before it said I was at the latest. After that, it found the K1 with
no problem.
Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/
- 06-06-2007, 12:15 AM #15jack flashGuest
Re: KRZR K1 vs V3xx
>> and phone tools refuses to work with it (krazr) while it works just
>> fine with V3xx or V3.
>
> I'm gonna have to cry "bull****" here I'm afraid. Either PhoneTools
> has been fixed since you last used it and you haven't updated, or you
> did something wrong.
>
> I say this because I just successfully used an updated Phonetools to
> pull photos and videos off two Cingular Krazr K1's on a win2k machine
> via usb.
in my personal experience with MPT and KRZR, there is a problem with
earlier revs of MPT updating to v4.51c. My initial MPT copy was 4.04b
and I had one heck of a time getting KRZR working after updating. I now
have MPT 4.51c and it works like a charm. I uninstalled MPT from my
systems and did a fresh install of v4.51c and it is much faster.
Similar Threads
- Motorola
- Motorola
- Motorola
- alt.cellular.attws
- Motorola
Creditare Eficientă
in Chit Chat