Could the iPhone be good news for Nokia fans in the US

This is a retarded comment. As i said, i have got better reception hiking in North of Sweden and Norway than I have in most american cities. And if you think those places are "5 miles from th nearest city" then you are pretty ignorant.

As for the pathetic excuses about vast areas, it doesnt explain why I still have crap coverage in the middle of NYC or other cities.

As is said if you have verizon Sprint and cingular all putting separate independent and incompatible networks that they are not willing to spend the money to cover adequately - well theres half your problem there.

Bottom line is North Americans have low expectations for the money you pay your phone company on ridiculous 2-3 year contracts. So hey keep wasting time on irrelvancies the "RF" - all these phones are fine - its the mobile phone companies you should be examining.
 
Obviously you don't understand what RF means in huge coutries in North America. US alone spread out freakin 3000 miles from coast to coast. I will take billions of $ to put towers all over.
Take it easy dude
 
First, I'm American and I have travelled throughout US and Canada for work. at one point I used to on the road for 3-4-5 days a week for about 4 years. Used T-mobile and Cingular - both horrendous. Used Verizon, I could throw up. Avoided Sprint, thank God. But thanks for the geography lesson.

I dont think you understand therefore how dumb it is to have duplication of 3-4 different and incompatible networks on Sprint/verizon/GSM in North america, instead of them spreading the infractuture cost over one type of network, would would allow for a more intelligent investment pattern - and better phone reception.

So blame any reception issues on the regulators and the phone companies that chose this situation - and delivered this crap reception to you.And no it isnt any surprise that they then want to lock you into 2 year contract when that poor product is all they have to offer you. But its hogwash to expect Nokia, SE or anyone else to obess over RF. The rest of the world doesnt becuse they built their networks correctly instead of trying to steal consumers money and then not provide the service consumers paid for.
 
I agree. But I cannot control cell phone infrastructure & their 2 years nasty agreements. The only thing in my control is to get a good RF phone which can pickup the signal even if it is weak & hence the importance to RF!!!
 
And the phones all have good RF reception. Thus this excercise is a waste of time. The determining factor is the network - and you already know the network sucks.

So just get on with it. You either use a GSM phone and live with it or you use Verizon/Sprint and you have a shiny - and silent - lump of metal in your pocket when you travel outside the country.

This is what I had to deal with when I was there and it aint any different now.
 
That is not true. Not all phones have the good reception! Well, let me rephrase it.. All Nokias have good RF but not SE, Moto. which is another debate.

Let me tell you my expererice.. Initially back in 1998 I started using cell phone with Sprint as there were no GSM providers at that time & had to live them though their coverage was crap. As soon as AT&T started GSM around 2001 I switched immediatly to AT&T and I could see big difference in the coverage & quality. Then in ~2005 when Cingular bought AT&T .. I ened up moving to Cingular. Ever since I switched to ATT(GSM) I had no issues wrt to coverage or dropped calls. I travel a lot from coast to coast almost every 2-3 weeks. It is not that bad as you say it here. But we always want more & better coverage even in buildings & basements, hence the gripe!

Going to back my point on RF. It is not just my view here.. ask any hofo member in US/Canada.. they will tell you how it matters with good RF phone. They all agree that not all phones have the same RF.

Let's move on with other important things now.. no RF & no apple phone
 
I have to say I kind of agree. I do think it is very over priced. For the average person I do not know if they need all that this phone has. I think if they would have just done a 20mb or more MP3/video player with a cell phone and maybe about $350-$400 range it would be a lot better. I am not sure if the average person is going to want to pay for the media plan if they are not going to realy use it.
 
Phone is not priced or targeted for the "average person", though. It is priced and targeted for people who have money to throw away, ie people who yes, could very well buy a media plan and not use it, just to have a shiny new Apple phone.
 
I've been carrying an i-Mate PDA2K arround in my pocket since it hit europe. The one thing that I love about it that has prevented me from switching - despite the fact the Win Moblie pisses me off in a new way EVERY DAY - is the wifi. Choices for a smartphone running bluetooth and wifi are slim, and mostly they are priced VERY high. Nothing out there that supported wifi was enough of an upgrade to the PDA2K that I was willing to front that kind of cach.

I also carry around an iPod Nano (4GB).

As soon as this thing is available unlocked (or someone finds a way to unlock it), I'm grabbing it up. It is WAY smaller then the PDA2k, and a significant hardware upgrade. The convinience of carrying only one device is also worth a lot.

Contrary to an above post, btw, it does include a camera. Only 2.0 Megapixel, but that's better then the 1.3Megapixel one in the PDA2K.

... I want one! I think they should have found a way to incorporate a GPS into it as well, but I've already got one of those in my car, so I'm cool. Google maps just isn't as good as a real GPS.

As to it being too confusing - compared to every other smartphone currently being sold, it's VERY easy. I got my much loathed iMate off a guy who found it too confusing, and I have no doubt he'll have absolutely no trouble with the iPhone. I think you guys are trying to poke holes in a good thing for spite or jealousy or a sheer hatred of Apple when you say something like that.
 
i think all yall might be missing out on one of the most important points
and i think it was even mentioned in another thread somewhere
RECEPTION (RF)
sonyericsson still hasnt gotten their rf levels as good as your avg nokia, motorola does ok but they still cant compete with nokia imho
isnt this the most important aspect of any phone? it is to me.
its like they say about buying real estate: 'there are only 3 important things when you buy real estate - location, location and location'
when you buy a cell phone there are only three really important things about it that you should make sure it has reception, reception and reception!
cant wait for the apple iphone rf sensitivity tests
 
Back
Top