Must choose one: 6610, t600, t68i, r520m, P280, v66?

In Dreams I Walk With You <[email protected]> wrote:

> The 6610 is exactly the same phone, feature-wise, as the 6100.
> I owned both but liked the design of the 6100 better. Btw one of both
> has radio, the other one doesn't.

I am not the original poster but an interested lurker. Was it the
ergonomics of 6100 that you liked better (a subjective matter), or was
it the technical side of the design (presumably more objective)?

I am rather confused by Nokia's numbering convention. Is there a
pattern that I am unaware of? For example, is one of these phones
supposed to be "higher up" according to Nokia itself?

A.

---

› See More: Must choose one: 6610, t600, t68i, r520m, P280, v66?

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:37:53 GMT, Kiran <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Not to mention participants tired of your many threads and excessive
>> cross-posting. Kindly stick to one thread with less cross-posting.
>> Thanks for your consideration.
>
>What is it about usenet that attracts all sorts of crabby individuals?

You must be relatively new to this group or Usenet. Navas has been
making friends all over newsgroups for years

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:41:22 GMT, "Avanti"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:28:26 GMT, "Avanti"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Kiran" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:130820041236075386%[email protected]...
>> >> Avanti <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> > further more I am demonstrating that this is without prejudice.
>> >>
>> >> And here is an example of the lack of prejudice:
>> >> > > > Avoid Nokia s like a dose of the herpes
>> >>
>> >> I have no idea why crabby people feel compelled to respond to posts, it
>> >> is not like anyone is forcing them.
>> >>
>> >> To Newbie:
>> >>
>> >> SE t68i is a good phone but, as John Navas said in another thread, has
>> >> RF problems.
>> >
>> >So let me get this straight, nokias don't have problems that the newbie
>> >should concern himself with?
>> >
>> >For utmost reliabilty avoid the nokia!
>> >
>> You're on low-grade crack if you'd recommend these SE models over a
>> Nokia. Real-world experience just says differently.
>
>The only time I have had crack is when I owned a Nokia !
>
Maybe you should ask yourself why you have trouble and millions of
others, who make Nokia the No.1 maker of handsets worldwide, do not.

"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:41:22 GMT, "Avanti"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:28:26 GMT, "Avanti"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Kiran" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:130820041236075386%[email protected]...
> >> >> Avanti <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> > further more I am demonstrating that this is without prejudice.
> >> >>
> >> >> And here is an example of the lack of prejudice:
> >> >> > > > Avoid Nokia s like a dose of the herpes
> >> >>
> >> >> I have no idea why crabby people feel compelled to respond to posts,
it
> >> >> is not like anyone is forcing them.
> >> >>
> >> >> To Newbie:
> >> >>
> >> >> SE t68i is a good phone but, as John Navas said in another thread,
has
> >> >> RF problems.
> >> >
> >> >So let me get this straight, nokias don't have problems that the
newbie
> >> >should concern himself with?
> >> >
> >> >For utmost reliabilty avoid the nokia!
> >> >
> >> You're on low-grade crack if you'd recommend these SE models over a
> >> Nokia. Real-world experience just says differently.
> >
> >The only time I have had crack is when I owned a Nokia !
> >
> Maybe you should ask yourself why you have trouble and millions of
> others, who make Nokia the No.1 maker of handsets worldwide, do not.

The same reason you forget to mention Nokia s lead is reducing drastically
and are heading for trouble due to poor quality handsets, face facts I think
Nokias are ****, and they are not as good as you would like to think they
are.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <130820041442400976%[email protected]> on Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:37:53 GMT, Kiran
<[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Not to mention participants tired of your many threads and excessive
>> cross-posting. Kindly stick to one thread with less cross-posting.
>> Thanks for your consideration.
>
>What is it about usenet that attracts all sorts of crabby individuals?

Pot ... kettle ... ;-)

>What excessive cross-posting? I see no cross-posting to music or food
>or literature groups. The guy is going to India, and is considering
>cellular phones from Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc, and those are the
>groups he is posting to. What exactly is your problem?

1. Six groups

2. soc.culture.indian (which has nothing to do with cell phones)

>Frankly it is posts like yours and avanti's that ruin the groups.

You are of course entitled to your opinion.

>I
>suggest you take a break and not return until you can manage ordinary
>civility. And please do learm to speak only for yourself. Thank you for
>that consideration.

I suggest you take your own advice. (Now there's a thought!

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:53:01
GMT, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:37:53 GMT, Kiran <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Not to mention participants tired of your many threads and excessive
>>> cross-posting. Kindly stick to one thread with less cross-posting.
>>> Thanks for your consideration.
>>
>>What is it about usenet that attracts all sorts of crabby individuals?
>
>You must be relatively new to this group or Usenet. Navas has been
>making friends all over newsgroups for years

You don't lub me anymor?!

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:30:20 GMT, "Avanti"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:41:22 GMT, "Avanti"

>> Maybe you should ask yourself why you have trouble and millions of
>> others, who make Nokia the No.1 maker of handsets worldwide, do not.
>
>The same reason you forget to mention Nokia s lead is reducing drastically
>and are heading for trouble due to poor quality handsets, face facts I think
>Nokias are ****, and they are not as good as you would like to think they
>are.

No, as usual you are dead wrong. The reason for Nokia's shrinking lead
is largely two fold. For starters, they've never been big in the
"clamshell" design which many people prefer. Also, they were
relatively late to the CDMA handset game which hurt their lead in the
U.S.

Really, Marty, do some research. You're making yourself look terrible.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:00:12
GMT, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:30:20 GMT, "Avanti"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:41:22 GMT, "Avanti"
>
>>> Maybe you should ask yourself why you have trouble and millions of
>>> others, who make Nokia the No.1 maker of handsets worldwide, do not.
>>
>>The same reason you forget to mention Nokia s lead is reducing drastically
>>and are heading for trouble due to poor quality handsets, face facts I think
>>Nokias are ****, and they are not as good as you would like to think they
>>are.
>
>No, as usual you are dead wrong. The reason for Nokia's shrinking lead
>is largely two fold. For starters, they've never been big in the
>"clamshell" design which many people prefer. Also, they were
>relatively late to the CDMA handset game which hurt their lead in the
>U.S.
>
>Really, Marty, do some research. You're making yourself look terrible.

Hmmm...

Nokia market share falls sharply
Gartner survey cites rocky relationships, lack of new models
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5165657/>

Nokia's share of the global cell phone market fell sharply in the
first quarter of 2004, hurt by a lack of new models and a rocky
relationship with mobile phone service providers, a survey found
Tuesday.

Though the industry leader shipped more phones than in the first
three months of 2003, its market share slid to 28.9 percent from 34.6
percent, market research group Gartner found, as Nokia lost ground to
all of its top six rivals.

Gartner also noted that the overall handset market was growing
strongly, with shipments rising 34 percent to 153 million units in
the first quarter as consumers in emerging markets embraced mobile
communications.

"The big story is in Western Europe, where Nokia has lost 10
percentage points of market share," said Gartner analyst Ben Wood.

"Nokia has two fundamental problems. One is its relationship with
operators to provide them with personalized phones, and the other is
a product portfolio that is not competitive with the models offered
by its rivals," Wood said.

[MORE]

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:17:32 GMT, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:

>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>In <[email protected]> on Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:00:12
>GMT, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 23:30:20 GMT, "Avanti"
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>"Cyrus Afzali" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>> On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:41:22 GMT, "Avanti"
>>
>>>> Maybe you should ask yourself why you have trouble and millions of
>>>> others, who make Nokia the No.1 maker of handsets worldwide, do not.
>>>
>>>The same reason you forget to mention Nokia s lead is reducing drastically
>>>and are heading for trouble due to poor quality handsets, face facts I think
>>>Nokias are ****, and they are not as good as you would like to think they
>>>are.
>>
>>No, as usual you are dead wrong. The reason for Nokia's shrinking lead
>>is largely two fold. For starters, they've never been big in the
>>"clamshell" design which many people prefer. Also, they were
>>relatively late to the CDMA handset game which hurt their lead in the
>>U.S.
>>
>>Really, Marty, do some research. You're making yourself look terrible.
>
>Hmmm...
>
>Nokia market share falls sharply
>Gartner survey cites rocky relationships, lack of new models
><http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5165657/>


Hmmm, nothing. How does ANY of what you posted differ from what I
said??? As usual, you continue to be the king of pompousness.

Nokia is being beaten in the design category by Samsung and others and
basically is suffering the damage of being asleep at the switch for a
while.

But, since you apparently have a reading comprehension problem, the
original remark to which I replied said that "Nokias are ****." Anyone
who would type such a thing is beyond education. A lack of popular
handset models, which is the primary reason Nokia's performance has
been poor of late, has absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with the
quality of the handsets they make.

Some might claim that if any company deserves to be slammed both on
performance and design, it would be Motorola.

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:21:14
GMT, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:17:32 GMT, John Navas
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>In <[email protected]> on Sat, 14 Aug 2004 03:00:12
>>GMT, Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>No, as usual you are dead wrong. The reason for Nokia's shrinking lead
>>>is largely two fold. For starters, they've never been big in the
>>>"clamshell" design which many people prefer. Also, they were
>>>relatively late to the CDMA handset game which hurt their lead in the
>>>U.S.
>>>
>>>Really, Marty, do some research. You're making yourself look terrible.
>>
>>Hmmm...
>>
>>Nokia market share falls sharply
>>Gartner survey cites rocky relationships, lack of new models
>><http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5165657/>
>
>Hmmm, nothing. How does ANY of what you posted differ from what I
>said???

Hmmm...

Cyrus (rudely): Gartner (research):
1. Not big in clamshells 1. Rocky relations with carriers
2. Late to CDMA 2. Lack of new models

From the part you snipped:

"The big story is in Western Europe, where Nokia has lost 10
percentage points of market share," said Gartner analyst Ben Wood.

No CDMA in Europe. (Oops.)

From another part of that same article:

In mature markets, Gartner said older handsets were replaced with
newer models featuring colour screens and cameras. ...

Europe is of course a mature market, and nothing about clamshells in the
Gartner story.

Hence your claims were totally different from the Gartner assessment, making
your snide remark about doing "some research" more than a bit silly.

>As usual, you continue to be the king of pompousness.

As usual, you continue to attack others, which only serves to discredit what
you have to say.

<scramble mode>

>Nokia is being beaten in the design category by Samsung and others and
>basically is suffering the damage of being asleep at the switch for a
>while.

</scramble mode>

Nothing about clamshells there either. What happened? ;-)

>But, since you apparently have a reading comprehension problem, ...

Just the opposite. ;-)

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

"Avanti" <[email protected]> climbed onto an orange crate
and shouted:

>
>"In Dreams I Walk With You" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Newbie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:130820040200377505%[email protected]...
>> > Dear friends, cell phone experts, lurkers,
>> >
>> > I am most, most, most grateful for your help during the past several
>> > days. I have learned so much about gsm and cell phones. As you know, I
>> > have to be in India by early September and must make a choice now.
>> >
>> > Through various channels---Ebay, other auction places, dealers, and
>> > offers from private individuals---I have the opportunity to purchase
>> > the following phones:
>> >
>> > Motorola P280 V66
>> > Nokia 6610 6100
>> > Sony Ericsson R520M t68i t600
>
>Whilst I have a V600 without a doubt your best bet from you list is the T68i

Excuse me, but his original post specified "Should receive poor
signals, and send out good ones both to the tower and to my ears."
The criterion of good RF performance absolutely disqualifies the T68i.

If the original poster is serious about his specifications for
ruggedness, RF performance, and voice quality, his choices are the
P280 and the R520m.

The V66 is not really rugged, and the T68i has RF performance that is
at best mediocre. The Nokia 6100 is acceptable but its RF performance
is not to the high level of the P280 or R520m. While the 6100 is more
stylish and has far more bells and whistles than the P280 or R520m,
the poster did not specify style as a consideration.

Notice, by the way, that the R520m is Ericsson, not Sony-Ericsson.
There are those who say quality turned for the worse after the
transition to Sony-Ericsson.

I don't know anything about the Nokia 6610.


--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we." - GW Bush, 5 August 2004

"Charles Hawtrey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Avanti" <[email protected]> climbed onto an orange crate
> and shouted:

[snip]


> Notice, by the way, that the R520m is Ericsson, not Sony-Ericsson.
> There are those who say quality turned for the worse after the
> transition to Sony-Ericsson.
>
> I don't know anything about the Nokia 6610.

You are absolutely correct about SE going down since getting into bed with
each other, I would truly love a handset to replace the T39M which served me
so well for so long,

Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:

> You must be relatively new to this group or Usenet. Navas has been
> making friends all over newsgroups for years

I scan often, read sometimes, and post rarely.

John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> 2. soc.culture.indian (which has nothing to do with cell phones)

This guy is going to India and looking for a phone that will work well
there. The Indian newsgroup is a legitimate, even smart choice. If I
needed a gadget for Japan, I 'd certainly seek advice in the Japanese
group.

> >suggest you take a break and not return until you can manage
> >ordinary civility. And please do learm to speak only for yourself.
> >Thank you for that consideration.
>
> I suggest you take your own advice. (Now there's a thought!

I do. I post very little, and at no point do I presume to speak for
other "participants".

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.ericsson - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <%[email protected]> on Sat, 14 Aug 2004
06:35:39 GMT, "Avanti" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Charles Hawtrey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "Avanti" <[email protected]> climbed onto an orange crate
>> and shouted:
>
>[snip]
>
>> Notice, by the way, that the R520m is Ericsson, not Sony-Ericsson.
>> There are those who say quality turned for the worse after the
>> transition to Sony-Ericsson.
>>
>> I don't know anything about the Nokia 6610.
>
>You are absolutely correct about SE going down since getting into bed with
>each other, I would truly love a handset to replace the T39M which served me
>so well for so long,

I loved my T39m, but I'm pretty happy with the Z600.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>