Dissappointed with V3xx sensitivity

I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.
I upgraded from a Motorola V551 to a Razr V3xx about a week ago.
So far, I am unimpressed with the receive sensitivity.

The V551 would occasionally show no signal strength when I pulled it out of
my pocket, but I would almost always be able to make calls.

The V3xx shows no signal, and call attempts fail, in the same places
around the house. The web browser is almost useless, rarely able to
display a page in places where the V551 would work.

I think I'm going to return the V3xx and get something else.
What would be a good model?

I thought 3G was good, but I don't have 3G near me.
I like EDGE and Bluetooth. The camera doesn't matter.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

---

› See More: Dissappointed with V3xx sensitivity

[email protected] wrote:
> I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.
> I upgraded from a Motorola V551 to a Razr V3xx about a week ago.
> So far, I am unimpressed with the receive sensitivity.
>
> The V551 would occasionally show no signal strength when I pulled it out of
> my pocket, but I would almost always be able to make calls.
>
> The V3xx shows no signal, and call attempts fail, in the same places
> around the house. The web browser is almost useless, rarely able to
> display a page in places where the V551 would work.
>
> I think I'm going to return the V3xx and get something else.
> What would be a good model?
>
> I thought 3G was good, but I don't have 3G near me.
> I like EDGE and Bluetooth. The camera doesn't matter.

I thought that Hidden Valley Lake/Middletown didn't have Cingular
coverage, that it was through Edge Wireless. Verizon has great coverage
up in that area, at least as I've experienced it going from Middletown
up to Clear Lake.

I am dreading it when the AMPS network goes away. There are vast areas
of the north coast where this is the only available coverage.

I.e. compare Cingular/Edge's coverage:
"http://i16.tinypic.com/6faifso.jpg"

with Verizon's coverage if you have a tri-mode phone:
"http://i19.tinypic.com/5xg52x5.jpg".



[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
non-spam posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name has gone
away, and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding
AT&T's wireless service.]

[email protected] schrieb:
> [...]
> I thought 3G was good, but I don't have 3G near me.
> I like EDGE and Bluetooth. The camera doesn't matter.

UMTS works on different frequency bands than GSM. That means, that a 3G
phone needs to accomodate more antennas than a 2G phone. The more
antennas the engineers need to integrate into the phone housing, the
less freedom they have to optimize their design for each frequency band.
Therefore, 3G phones tend to be less sensitive, and put out less power
on GSM bands, than good GSM phones.

So if you can't use the UMTS functions anyway because you do not have 3G
coverage at your home, then it might be a good idea to go for a 2G
only phone.

Radio performance is measurable. The manufacturers do take such
measurements, they are required to take measurements before they can
sell a new device, but they usually do not publish their results. I do
not live in the US, so I don't know if you can get this kind of
information from e.g. special interest magazines or consumer report, but
if I was out for a new phone, that is where I would check first.

I've set a follow up to alt.cellular.motorola.

Andreas

On 2007-05-28, Andreas Wenzel <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] schrieb:
>> [...]
>> I thought 3G was good, but I don't have 3G near me.
>> I like EDGE and Bluetooth. The camera doesn't matter.
>
> UMTS works on different frequency bands than GSM. That means, that a 3G
> phone needs to accomodate more antennas than a 2G phone. The more
> antennas the engineers need to integrate into the phone housing, the
> less freedom they have to optimize their design for each frequency band.
> Therefore, 3G phones tend to be less sensitive, and put out less power
> on GSM bands, than good GSM phones.

Actually Cingular in the US runs UMTS in the same frequency bands as
GSM. They have no other spectrum. The US V3xx has no support for
2100 MHz at all; they are triband 850/1800/1900 MHz phones, i.e. less
frequency coverage than a V3.

You are right that antenna performance is a problem when space is limited,
but the compromises generally show up in the low frequency bands where
efficient antennas need to be big (and hence the space which can be saved
is largest). The fact that the two V3xx models support either 850 or 900
MHz, but not both, is a likely consequence of being space-constrained
for the antenna. I'm not sure the performance in the higher frequency
bands necessarily needs to be impaired.

Dennis Ferguson

Dennis Ferguson schrieb:
> [...]
> Actually Cingular in the US runs UMTS in the same frequency bands as
> GSM. They have no other spectrum. The US V3xx has no support for
> 2100 MHz at all; they are triband 850/1800/1900 MHz phones, i.e. less
> frequency coverage than a V3.

Wow, you're right, I didn't think about that US specialty. Now I would
really like to see TRP/TIS results on GSM 1900 for a 2G quadband like
the V3 vs the US V3xx and the Euro V3xx...

Andreas

In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.

> I thought that Hidden Valley Lake/Middletown didn't have Cingular
> coverage, that it was through Edge Wireless. Verizon has great coverage
> up in that area, at least as I've experienced it going from Middletown
> up to Clear Lake.

'tis true on both counts. I have a cheap corporate account with Cingular,
and Edge Wireless is "an AT&T partner". I thought I was using AT&T because
that's what my cellphone says on the screen, but someone noted that isn't a
good test. I dialed 7070707070 on my phone and received an error message
from Edge Wireless while I had an AT&T display on my phone.

I am disappointed to find, after five years at this location, that I am
not on a Cingular tower. I thought that my arrival here predated Edge
Wireless expansion into the area. Maybe their expansion to south Lake
County coincided with what I thought was an improvement in performance
on the old phone. I used to roam to the pathetic USCellular if I wasn't
on AT&T. So, apparently my "poor coverage" is EdgeWireless poor coverage,
and not Cingular. That eliminates one alternative to Cingular ;-(
The switch to EdgeWireless would just be an increase in my bill, with no
change in performance.

Cingular just shows "partner" coverage, with no gradients in this area.
http://www.cingular.com/coverageviewer/
The Edgewireless map-html doesn't show the area very well, but I would say
it excludes me entirely, which is out of date by several years.
http://www.edgewireless.com/rates/localOrCa.html
Their non-roaming coverage is pretty small, so i liked the arrangement
that I had.

Verizon had no coverage here a couple of years ago, but they came in
with a bang, and now have excellent coverage all over the area. I have
been inclined to stay with Cingular because of the corporate plan,
and because of what I've heard about Verizon phone feature crippling.
Looking at the pricing, I suppose I could suffer with that. I just
signed a 2 year contract with Cingular, but I could cancel that since
it has been less than thirty days.

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/C...type=newsearch

Then I'd have to pick three new phones ;-)

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

In alt.cellular.cingular [email protected] wrote:
> Verizon had no coverage here a couple of years ago, but they came in
> with a bang, and now have excellent coverage all over the area. I have
> been inclined to stay with Cingular because of the corporate plan,
> and because of what I've heard about Verizon phone feature crippling.

I think I also didn't like their data plan policies, and the pricing of a
tethered PC, compared to the lax policies on Cingular.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

In alt.cellular.cingular [email protected] wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Verizon has great coverage up in that area, at least as I've
> > experienced it going from Middletown up to Clear Lake.

> Then I'd have to pick three new phones ;-)

Verizon isn't listed on my corporate discount page, but when I go to
the Verizon web page, I find that I do have an employee discount.

The nice representative on the phone suggests the KRZR because it's new,
all digital, and has cool looks and features, but suggests the v325i for
better radio operation in my area, with the "extended Analog" feature.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

[email protected] writes:

> I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.
> I upgraded from a Motorola V551 to a Razr V3xx about a week ago.
> So far, I am unimpressed with the receive sensitivity.
>
> The V551 would occasionally show no signal strength when I pulled it out of
> my pocket, but I would almost always be able to make calls.
>
> The V3xx shows no signal, and call attempts fail, in the same places
> around the house. The web browser is almost useless, rarely able to
> display a page in places where the V551 would work.
>
> I think I'm going to return the V3xx and get something else.
> What would be a good model?
>
> I thought 3G was good, but I don't have 3G near me.
> I like EDGE and Bluetooth. The camera doesn't matter.


The Krzr K1 has been an excellent performer for me--more so than any
of the other phones I've had. So far (knock on wood), it's never
dropped a call.

Phones I've had previously include the original Razr V3 (which totally
sucked and dropped calls in areas where the K1 has been happy as a
clam).

--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/

In alt.cellular.cingular Todd H. <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.
> > I upgraded from a Motorola V551 to a Razr V3xx about a week ago.
> > So far, I am unimpressed with the receive sensitivity.

> The Krzr K1 has been an excellent performer for me--more so than any
> of the other phones I've had. So far (knock on wood), it's never
> dropped a call.

> Phones I've had previously include the original Razr V3 (which totally
> sucked and dropped calls in areas where the K1 has been happy as a
> clam).

That's two votes for the Krzr. I like the form factor, too. But it's kind
of pricey. I could argue that my wife is happy with my hand-me-down V551,
and I could get the Krzr instead of two v3xx ;-)

Since I am not in a 3G area, and the Cingular Video isn't available, and
the Cingular Radio is $9.99 per month... I would be better off with the
Krzr. If it is also a superior radio, I should go for it.

Staying with Cingular is easier for me this week ;-)

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

[email protected] writes:

> In alt.cellular.cingular Todd H. <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I live in a pretty marginal area for Cingular signal.
> > > I upgraded from a Motorola V551 to a Razr V3xx about a week ago.
> > > So far, I am unimpressed with the receive sensitivity.
>
> > The Krzr K1 has been an excellent performer for me--more so than any
> > of the other phones I've had. So far (knock on wood), it's never
> > dropped a call.
>
> > Phones I've had previously include the original Razr V3 (which totally
> > sucked and dropped calls in areas where the K1 has been happy as a
> > clam).
>
> That's two votes for the Krzr. I like the form factor, too. But it's kind
> of pricey.

For what it's worth, I got mine at Walmart where they were going for
just $77 with a 2 year extension, $50 more than that for 1 year.

But that might not do you any good depending on where you're returning
your v3xx


--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/

In alt.cellular.cingular Todd H. <[email protected]> wrote:
> For what it's worth, I got mine at Walmart where they were going for
> just $77 with a 2 year extension, $50 more than that for 1 year.

Amazon has a $0 Krzr for Cingular new customers, and for extensions.
But, in reading the fine print, it says I can't upgrade one phone in a
family plan. I might need to talk to them about that.

> But that might not do you any good depending on where you're returning
> your v3xx

I called the Parrot Cellular store in Napa, where Kristina knew far more
about my phone, and what I was trying to do, than any of the phone people I
talked to, including "Premier" support. They can't accept my returned
phone, I have to go back to the web/phone for returns.

I might just return it to the web, and cancel my contract extension, if
it's possible to return me to the plan that I had, which is no longer
offered... Family Talk instead of Family Plan, I think... And then I
could start fresh. I'm not sure that the 30 day cancel is an "undo"
button. I suspect not, given the gyrations Cingular has to go through
every time any change is made.

Or, since I have two phones on the old deal, and want three phones on the
new deal, maybe I could ... I don't know. I absolutely abhor this sort of
"shopping", where the same product varies in price by $500 unsubsidized to
somewhere between $0 and $200 subsidized on the same carrier. The $199
from Cingular verses $0 at Amazon makes no sense to me.

I see the Krzr for $328 phone only, $138 renewed contract, $77 new
contract, online at Walmart. That's actually wallmart.letstalk.com.
I suppose I could do that online, or find a store that sells Cingular.
I'm headed to Ukiah tomorrow. Nope, no Cingular there, according to
letstalk.

Just to annoy me, I can't log in to Cingular this morning. It keeps timing
out... Finally. Now it's AT&T.

http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/go...stores-att.kmz
Gack. I should have bailed to Verizon.

Poor shopping on my part.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

In alt.cellular.motorola [email protected] wrote:
> That's two votes for the Krzr. I like the form factor, too. But it's kind
> of pricey.

I decided $199 was too much for a Krzr. All I really want is voice
communications.

I called to return the V3xx. They said "just use the RMA labels on the
Order Confirmation that came in the box". Right. No such thing. Okay,
we'll mail some RMA labels.

What unit would you suggest? That didn't get much of a response.

How about the Nokia 6126? Okay. Sorry for the inconvenience. We'll ship
the Nokia FedEx Next Day Air at no charge. Of course, it took three days
to get the shipment to go out... The conversation was on Thursday, May 31.
The FedEx label does say Priority Overnight, but the shipping date is
02Jun07 3:47pm. No RMA labels in the box.



I was hoping to say that the Nokia 6126 was head and shoulders better than
the V3xx. It is noticeably better, but I don't think it's any better than
my V551.

The 6126 is thicker, but smaller to hold. It has a weird "switchblade"
effect to opening the flip with a little button on the side.

It holds calls where the V3xx would not. It surfs the web where the V3xx
would not. The free Nokia PCSuite is easier to use than the extra-cost
Motorola Phone Tools.

It has Voice Recognition dialing that is simpler to use than the V3xx.
The only down side so far is that it doesn't use a standard mini-USB cable,
so no charging from the laptop.

And it has a dinky-tiny signal strength bar, so it's hard to see how much
better than the V3xx it is, but the proof is in the surfing and talking.

--
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley Lake, CA, USA GPS: 38.8,-122.5

[email protected] wrote:

> It holds calls where the V3xx would not. It surfs the web where the V3xx
> would not. The free Nokia PCSuite is easier to use than the extra-cost
> Motorola Phone Tools.

It would be hard for any software to be worse than the flaky Motorola
Phone Tools.

> It has Voice Recognition dialing that is simpler to use than the V3xx.
> The only down side so far is that it doesn't use a standard mini-USB cable,
> so no charging from the laptop.
>
> And it has a dinky-tiny signal strength bar, so it's hard to see how much
> better than the V3xx it is, but the proof is in the surfing and talking.

But no HSDPA, only Edge.

At least it's quad band, so it's usable in Europe, Asia, and Australia.

SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

> It would be hard for any software to be worse than the flaky
> Motorola Phone Tools.

I run MPT on my laptop with Windows XP Home, on my desktop with Windows
XP Pro and Vista Ultimate 64, I've never had any problem with
installing, connecting to my E815, synchronizing or transferring files.
MPT has been solid and trouble free for me.

I'm wondering what kind of problems you've had?

--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html