What is it with the Sanyo's?

What is it that makes these phones so darned tenacious with holding on
to a signal? The reception ability of these phones is unparalleled.
Why? How do they do it?



----------------------------
To email me, remove the zz.

---

› See More: What is it with the Sanyo's?

I don't think they are any better than my Samsung. My wife and I just got
new spcs phones. I got the Samsung VGA100, she got the Sanyo 8100. Last
week we were driving into an area where we knew we would loose a signal. I
told her to pull her Sanyo out and to tell me exactly when she lost the
signal. I watched my Samsung as she watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually
held the signal for about 2 seconds longer, which probably only equated to
about 50 feet at the speed we were driving at the time. The results were
repeated on our way back through the area, when both of our phones picked
the signal back up within 1 to 2 seconds of each other as we drove back
through the area. I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo, at least
not over my Samsung.
Matt

"RexYBlue" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> What is it that makes these phones so darned tenacious with holding on
> to a signal? The reception ability of these phones is unparalleled.
> Why? How do they do it?
>
>
>
> ----------------------------
> To email me, remove the zz.

Matt wrote:
> I don't think they are any better than my Samsung. My wife and I
> just got new spcs phones. I got the Samsung VGA100, she got the
> Sanyo 8100. Last week we were driving into an area where we knew we
> would loose a signal. I told her to pull her Sanyo out and to tell
> me exactly when she lost the signal. I watched my Samsung as she
> watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually held the signal for about 2
> seconds longer, which probably only equated to about 50 feet at the
> speed we were driving at the time. The results were repeated on our
> way back through the area, when both of our phones picked the signal
> back up within 1 to 2 seconds of each other as we drove back through
> the area. I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo, at least
> not over my Samsung.
> Matt

I think that most recent cases of reported superiority of the Sanyo phones
is simply a matter of the "feel good" effect of more bars displayed on the
Sanyo than the Samsungs for the same signal.

Tom Veldhouse

I don't think it's just the "bar effect" with the Sanyo's; they really do
seem to grab and hang onto a signal. Here in DC, Sprint doesn't have a
signal in the Metro. With other phones, I would have to wait until I got
out to the street to get a signal. With my Sanyo 8100, I consistently get a
useable signal as soon as I hit the bottom of the escalators. If anyone has
been to the Dupont Circle station, with its unbelievably long escalators,
getting a signal down there is quite impressive.

My only complaint with the Sanyo's is that they don't have anywhere near as
many accessories available as Nokia, Motorola or even Samsung. It doesn't
help that they keep changing the connectors so that third party developers
can't keep up.

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Matt wrote:
> > I don't think they are any better than my Samsung. My wife and I
> > just got new spcs phones. I got the Samsung VGA100, she got the
> > Sanyo 8100. Last week we were driving into an area where we knew we
> > would loose a signal. I told her to pull her Sanyo out and to tell
> > me exactly when she lost the signal. I watched my Samsung as she
> > watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually held the signal for about 2
> > seconds longer, which probably only equated to about 50 feet at the
> > speed we were driving at the time. The results were repeated on our
> > way back through the area, when both of our phones picked the signal
> > back up within 1 to 2 seconds of each other as we drove back through
> > the area. I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo, at least
> > not over my Samsung.
> > Matt
>
> I think that most recent cases of reported superiority of the Sanyo phones
> is simply a matter of the "feel good" effect of more bars displayed on the
> Sanyo than the Samsungs for the same signal.
>
> Tom Veldhouse
>
>

They are definitely better than older Samsungs. I don't know about
the VGA100, but my coworker has a Samsung and when we travel together,
the reception different is remarkable.

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:14:33 GMT, "Matt"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I don't think they are any better than my Samsung. My wife and I just got
>new spcs phones. I got the Samsung VGA100, she got the Sanyo 8100. Last
>week we were driving into an area where we knew we would loose a signal. I
>told her to pull her Sanyo out and to tell me exactly when she lost the
>signal. I watched my Samsung as she watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually
>held the signal for about 2 seconds longer, which probably only equated to
>about 50 feet at the speed we were driving at the time. The results were
>repeated on our way back through the area, when both of our phones picked
>the signal back up within 1 to 2 seconds of each other as we drove back
>through the area. I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo, at least
>not over my Samsung.
>Matt
>
>"RexYBlue" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> What is it that makes these phones so darned tenacious with holding on
>> to a signal? The reception ability of these phones is unparalleled.
>> Why? How do they do it?
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> To email me, remove the zz.
>

I'd guess Sanyo's performance edge might be a combination of small =
things.
One small feature on some (not all) Sanyo phones is the dual antenna.
Some Sanyos have a resonant helical stub atop their pull-out antenna,
which is separately excited by its own little metal sleeve when in the =
retracted position.

The tiny stub is less efficient than the extended antenna, but it is =
better than
the ordinary *retracted* antennas not equipped with the extra stub.
---JRC---

"Clubdeluxe" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> I don't think it's just the "bar effect" with the Sanyo's; they really =
do
> seem to grab and hang onto a signal. Here in DC, Sprint doesn't have =
a
> signal in the Metro. With other phones, I would have to wait until I =
got
> out to the street to get a signal. With my Sanyo 8100, I consistently =
get a
> useable signal as soon as I hit the bottom of the escalators. If =
anyone has
> been to the Dupont Circle station, with its unbelievably long =
escalators,
> getting a signal down there is quite impressive.
>=20
> My only complaint with the Sanyo's is that they don't have anywhere =
near as
> many accessories available as Nokia, Motorola or even Samsung. It =
doesn't
> help that they keep changing the connectors so that third party =
developers
> can't keep up.
>=20
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Matt wrote:
> > > I don't think they are any better than my Samsung. My wife and I
> > > just got new spcs phones. I got the Samsung VGA100, she got the
> > > Sanyo 8100. Last week we were driving into an area where we knew =
we
> > > would loose a signal. I told her to pull her Sanyo out and to =
tell
> > > me exactly when she lost the signal. I watched my Samsung as she
> > > watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually held the signal for about =
2
> > > seconds longer, which probably only equated to about 50 feet at =
the
> > > speed we were driving at the time. The results were repeated on =
our
> > > way back through the area, when both of our phones picked the =
signal
> > > back up within 1 to 2 seconds of each other as we drove back =
through
> > > the area. I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo, at least
> > > not over my Samsung.
> > > Matt
> >
> > I think that most recent cases of reported superiority of the Sanyo =
phones
> > is simply a matter of the "feel good" effect of more bars displayed =
on the
> > Sanyo than the Samsungs for the same signal.
> >
> > Tom Veldhouse
> >
> >
>=20
>

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

>
> I think that most recent cases of reported superiority of the Sanyo phones
> is simply a matter of the "feel good" effect of more bars displayed on the
> Sanyo than the Samsungs for the same signal.

I'd have to disagree with that. I tried a Samsung VGA1000 recently, and
my experience with it lasted all of a weekend. It dropped the call to
*2 to activate it, twice, in an area where my old Sanyo 8100 (and the
4900 before it) could reliably pulling in a 3-bar signal and ever once
drop the call. And from there, it was just dropping calls all weekend.
It was rare that I could complete a conversation (lasting maybe 5 to
10 minutes at most) without losing the signal. This in Central NJ where
Sprint coverage is actually quite good.

The last straw was on Sunday when I was in a shopping center UNDERNEATH
a Sprint cell tower (I know for a fact it's a Sprint tower, I verified
its location on Sprintsites.com) and my call to someone started cutting
out. It didn't drop, but it was cutting out like crazy. I couldn't
stand it and my next stop was to the Best Buy where I bought the phone
to return it. That evening I was back on my 8100 and once again had no
problems.

This is pretty much similar to the experiences I've had with a lot of
Samsung phones. I've given them many chances, from the N200, to the
N400, and an A400 when Vision first came out. All were plagued with
various problems... mainly signal-holding issues, but also software
glitches, overheating during a call, and poor audio quality from the
earpiece. Not to mention every Samsung I've held in my hands has this
aura of CHEAP construction about them.

That said, Sanyos do perform better than Samsungs in many respects, at
least based on my experiences. It may not be that Sanyo is anything
special in being able to pull a weak signal from the air... rather, it
may just be that Samsungs are exceptionally BAD at pulling even STRONG
signals out of the air. This seems to be borne out by the fact that
Nokias are also getting good reviews, and I haven't too many bad things
about the LG models.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.

Isaiah Beard wrote:

<snipped>

Perhaps your trouble was that the particular phone you were using was
defective rather than Sanyo's being somehow magically superior. Granted,
historically, Sanyos have had better performance, mostly due to more modern
CDMA chipsets in them and probably better materials for the case and
antenna. However, since the release of the Samsung A600 and A620 (VGA1000),
the reports have been overwhelmingly positive about reception ... in
particular compared to that of the Sanyo. Again, judging by reports I have
read here and on some other locations, the reception has been just as good
with the Samsungs (although the bars are known to read lower than the
Sanyos).

Tom Veldhouse

Sorry Isaiah, but if your Samsung VGA1000 was "cutting-out" underneath a
sprint tower, then your phone was defective. Simple as that.
you should have returned it for a properly working model.
good luck to you.
Matt

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
> >
> > I think that most recent cases of reported superiority of the Sanyo
phones
> > is simply a matter of the "feel good" effect of more bars displayed on
the
> > Sanyo than the Samsungs for the same signal.
>
> I'd have to disagree with that. I tried a Samsung VGA1000 recently, and
> my experience with it lasted all of a weekend. It dropped the call to
> *2 to activate it, twice, in an area where my old Sanyo 8100 (and the
> 4900 before it) could reliably pulling in a 3-bar signal and ever once
> drop the call. And from there, it was just dropping calls all weekend.
> It was rare that I could complete a conversation (lasting maybe 5 to
> 10 minutes at most) without losing the signal. This in Central NJ where
> Sprint coverage is actually quite good.
>
> The last straw was on Sunday when I was in a shopping center UNDERNEATH
> a Sprint cell tower (I know for a fact it's a Sprint tower, I verified
> its location on Sprintsites.com) and my call to someone started cutting
> out. It didn't drop, but it was cutting out like crazy. I couldn't
> stand it and my next stop was to the Best Buy where I bought the phone
> to return it. That evening I was back on my 8100 and once again had no
> problems.
>
> This is pretty much similar to the experiences I've had with a lot of
> Samsung phones. I've given them many chances, from the N200, to the
> N400, and an A400 when Vision first came out. All were plagued with
> various problems... mainly signal-holding issues, but also software
> glitches, overheating during a call, and poor audio quality from the
> earpiece. Not to mention every Samsung I've held in my hands has this
> aura of CHEAP construction about them.
>
> That said, Sanyos do perform better than Samsungs in many respects, at
> least based on my experiences. It may not be that Sanyo is anything
> special in being able to pull a weak signal from the air... rather, it
> may just be that Samsungs are exceptionally BAD at pulling even STRONG
> signals out of the air. This seems to be borne out by the fact that
> Nokias are also getting good reviews, and I haven't too many bad things
> about the LG models.
>
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
>

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:35:19 -0500, Isaiah Beard
<[email protected]> wrote:
>The last straw was on Sunday when I was in a shopping center UNDERNEATH
>a Sprint cell tower (I know for a fact it's a Sprint tower, I verified
>its location on Sprintsites.com) and my call to someone started cutting
>out. It didn't drop, but it was cutting out like crazy. I couldn't
>stand it and my next stop was to the Best Buy where I bought the phone
>to return it. That evening I was back on my 8100 and once again had no
>problems.

I snipped a lot of your post, but I wonder if you were using an earbud
or headset when all this happened on the VGA 1000. I tried three of
these phones before I gave up--ALL had defective headset jacks, and
the call quality was just as you described. Without the headset, the
phone was fine. Sanyo's still got 'em all beat with regard to
reception, in my opinion.



----------------------------
To email me, remove the zz.

Matt wrote:
> I don't see this so called advantage by Sanyo,
> at least not over my Samsung.

We agree with you. My wife has a Sanyo 6400 (expensive)
and I have a Samsung N400 (cheap).

We moved recently. To get to our house, we have to over
and then down a *small* hill. We both take this route
multiple times daily. Her Sanyo drops out *every time*
on the home-side of the hill. My Samsung *never*
drops out.

This surprised me. We both had Sanyo 4500's previously
and were satisfied with them.

I believe that both phones have the latest software
versions. The Samsung N400 was a POC before it got
the latest software. Since then it has been great.

In article <ZQCEb.17332$P%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> week we were !!!!driving!!!! into an area where we knew we would loose a signal. I
> told her to pull her Sanyo out and to tell me exactly when she lost the
> signal. I watched my Samsung as she watched her Sanyo. My Samsung actually


DUDE. It's people like you that make the cops want to ban cellphone in
cars period.

Watch the road, not your phone.

Well in my opinion that samsung is junk I had one for a week and it went
back . I'm sticking with my faithful sanyo 4900 , I thought about upgrading
but why I don't use the ready link .

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 09:56:06 -0500, Clubdeluxe wrote:

> I don't think it's just the "bar effect" with the Sanyo's; they really do
> seem to grab and hang onto a signal. Here in DC, Sprint doesn't have a
> signal in the Metro. With other phones, I would have to wait until I got
> out to the street to get a signal. With my Sanyo 8100, I consistently get a
> useable signal as soon as I hit the bottom of the escalators. If anyone has
> been to the Dupont Circle station, with its unbelievably long escalators,
> getting a signal down there is quite impressive.
>
> My only complaint with the Sanyo's is that they don't have anywhere near as
> many accessories available as Nokia, Motorola or even Samsung. It doesn't
> help that they keep changing the connectors so that third party developers
> can't keep up.
>

I have been there and even at union station on my 4900 I was able to get
to the red line before I lost my call. Now in my case I bet I roamed over
to verizon's analog setup(didn't get a roaming sign tho) mid call. As you
probly know they wired the metro with 800mhz digital/analog. Btw there is
a nice cyber cafe near dupont circle, believe p st. and 19th st. not sure,
called cyberstop if I recall :P Great place free wifi access.

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> Isaiah Beard wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> Perhaps your trouble was that the particular phone you were using was
> defective rather than Sanyo's being somehow magically superior.

I find it highly unlikely that the Samsung N200, N400, A600, and
VGA1000's that I've sampled at varies points in time would all just
happen to be "defective." And there s no "magically superior" about it.
It's entirely explainable in that perhaps Sanyo just does a better job
of designing their RF circuitry while Samsung is very willing to cut
costs in order to increase profit margins and sell an inferior product,
believing their users won't know the difference.


> Granted,
> historically, Sanyos have had better performance, mostly due to more modern
> CDMA chipsets in them and probably better materials for the case and
> antenna.

There you go. You've just managed to explain, completely on your own,
how a Sanyo can be "magically" superior.

> However, since the release of the Samsung A600 and A620 (VGA1000),
> the reports have been overwhelmingly positive about reception ...

*shrug* I can definitely give you negative reports on both.



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.