4900 and Vision

I use the 4900 for Vision when I'm away from a real network mainly just
to get my email and log off.

But our local Comcast had a fiber cable cut a few days ago, so I was
without cable modem service for a day and a half (boy, you sure don't
know how much you depend on a real network until it goes down). So I
used my 4900 as a temp replacement.

Problem is, it's a *very* poor net connection service for anything more
than a few minutes. The length of time I had a good connection varied
from about two minutes to about 12 minutes. And it didn't seem to
matter whether or not I used my batch file that continually pings
ping.symantec.com -- either way I would either finally get DNS errors or
timeouts, necessitating a disconnect and another reconnect.

This really seems mickey mouse. Is this a phone or a network issue? Do
phones newer than the 4900 work better for tethered Vision?



--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

---

› See More: 4900 and Vision

That doesn't sound like a unique to the 4900 problem, although the 4900 was not
designed to be used for heavy duty surfing.

Three possibilities come to mind.
The Network was too busy,
You were at the fringe of reception area.
The timeout for the DNS is too short.

I would think pinging Symantec would be counter productive, has it helped you
other times?

====================
I don't work for SprintPCS
I won't apologize for them.

"Donkey Agony" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I use the 4900 for Vision when I'm away from a real network mainly just
> to get my email and log off.
>
> But our local Comcast had a fiber cable cut a few days ago, so I was
> without cable modem service for a day and a half (boy, you sure don't
> know how much you depend on a real network until it goes down). So I
> used my 4900 as a temp replacement.
>
> Problem is, it's a *very* poor net connection service for anything more
> than a few minutes. The length of time I had a good connection varied
> from about two minutes to about 12 minutes. And it didn't seem to
> matter whether or not I used my batch file that continually pings
> ping.symantec.com -- either way I would either finally get DNS errors or
> timeouts, necessitating a disconnect and another reconnect.
>
> This really seems mickey mouse. Is this a phone or a network issue? Do
> phones newer than the 4900 work better for tethered Vision?

The 4900 is the worst Sprint phone for Vision. Bad browser. It's best
to make and receive calls.

> The 4900 is the worst Sprint phone for Vision.
> Bad browser. It's best
> to make and receive calls.

Scott, see what Larry - a defacto spokesperson said?

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> ...Larry - a defacto spokesperson...
>=20

Don't question his label, Scott. THE WORD ACCORDING TO PHILL must not=20
be questioned.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

Larry Thomas wrote:

>> Is this a phone or a network issue? Do phones newer than the 4900
>> work better for tethered Vision?

> The 4900 is the worst Sprint phone for Vision. Bad browser. It's best
> to make and receive calls.

Well, I knew the phone's browser was bad for Vision. What I hadn't
experienced before was having it act screwy when attached to a laptop.
Of course, I hadn't used it over a whole day either. I had seen posts
that say the phones (as opposed to the cards) aren't really built for
"tethered" connections, and if you must use them for this, to set up a
constant ping to a ping server. I personally couldn't tell that that
made much -- if any -- difference.

Has anyone here gone from using a 4900 for "tethered" (laptop)
connections to a newer phone and found that the problems went away?


--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

"Donkey Agony" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Larry Thomas wrote:
>
> >> Is this a phone or a network issue? Do phones newer than the 4900
> >> work better for tethered Vision?
>
> > The 4900 is the worst Sprint phone for Vision. Bad browser. It's best
> > to make and receive calls.
>
> Well, I knew the phone's browser was bad for Vision. What I hadn't
> experienced before was having it act screwy when attached to a laptop.
> Of course, I hadn't used it over a whole day either. I had seen posts
> that say the phones (as opposed to the cards) aren't really built for
> "tethered" connections, and if you must use them for this, to set up a
> constant ping to a ping server. I personally couldn't tell that that
> made much -- if any -- difference.
>
> Has anyone here gone from using a 4900 for "tethered" (laptop)
> connections to a newer phone and found that the problems went away?

Do you have the latest software version 1.059SP? I know version
1.055SP updated the browser version but it didn't help a whole lot.

Larry Thomas wrote:

>> Has anyone here gone from using a 4900 for "tethered" (laptop)
>> connections to a newer phone and found that the problems went away?

> Do you have the latest software version 1.059SP? I know version
> 1.055SP updated the browser version but it didn't help a whole lot.

I have 1.056SP. Does the '59' version improve laptop access? (I don't
use in-the-phone browsing except as a very occasional toy.)


--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> So Rob, you agree with Larry's evaluation?

Nope.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

O/Siris <robjvargas@sprīntpcs.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > So Rob, you agree with Larry's evaluation?
>
> Nope.

Rob,

You're saying that the 4900 is a good Vison phone with a good browser? Seriously?

Larry Thomas wrote:

>>> So Rob, you agree with Larry's evaluation?

>> Nope.

> Rob,
> You're saying that the 4900 is a good Vison phone with a good
> browser? Seriously?

My question is *not* about the phone browser! I could care less about
whether the 4900 has a good browser, or whether it even *has* a browser.
I want to know if the newer phones provide more solid laptop
connections. From someone who had the 4900, got a newer phone, and used
both with a laptop.

Anybody? Or have the Phill vs. Rob pissing matches finally chased off
even those with the thickest skins?

--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

[email protected] (Larry Thomas) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> O/Siris <robjvargas@sprīntpcs.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> > > So Rob, you agree with Larry's evaluation?
> >
> > Nope.
>
> Rob,
>
> You're saying that the 4900 is a good Vison phone with a good browser? Seriously?

So what is the reccommended phone for vision?

> So what is the reccommended phone for vision?

Presumably the bigger the screen and the newer the phone the better.

In article <9c02589b.0311101529.4bca9030
@posting.google.com>, Larry [email protected]=20
says...
> You're saying that the 4900 is a good Vison phone with a good browser? Se=
riously?

I wouldn't go that far, either. I just disagree that it's=20
the worst. Despite that slowness, it's been a source of=20
relatively few calls, that's all. Based on the number of=20
phone-issue-based calls I've received, I'd definitely keep=20
it off the bottom.

It's no speedster, but it seems to have been reliable just=20
the same.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
DSL [email protected] says...
> > So what is the reccommended phone for vision?
>=20
> Presumably the bigger the screen and the newer the phone the better.
>=20

Not true. Since *I* was asked, I'll simply state my=20
opinion.

I *do* think the Treo 600 is living up to its hype. So I'd=20
put it at the top. After that, the 8100, then perhaps the=20
A500 once the latest software cleared up its biggest issue.

For me, it gets really murky after that. Lots of phones=20
running neck and neck.

Personally, I love the functionality of the G1000, but I=20
think it's overwhelming size is a minus. The I500 is=20
pretty nice, but it lost me because I was expecting it to=20
be more download compatible than turned out to be the case. =20
And it needs a memory slot. A600 could turn out to be a=20
great "gaming" phone with the pad attachment, plus the=20
rotatable camera. VGA1000 just *feels* solid, although I'm=20
not a fan of where the camera lens wound up.

Except for, perhaps, the Treo 600, I don't think any of=20
them are "far and above" the others.

But I *do* think the N400 and Toshiba 2032 PocketPC will go=20
into the proverbial record books as the biggest=20
disappointments. And I say that even though my own N400=20
has been pretty trouble free.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.