Which phone out now has the best reception??

for the NA market i would have to say nokias... for the 900/1900/1800 band... sharp has one of the best... tested and proved!... took it w/ me when i went to India! son of a gun had no less then 2 bars no matter where i went!
 
Nokia 3320 is a TDMA/analog phone. I found analog phones does have strong RF capability, but you might have to live with shorter battery life, poorer voice quality, etc.
Get a phone with 850 on Rogers would help a lot. One of the best I have is Siemens A56. I have also tried Motorola V190 and V186 and both are good. I just sold a pair of 6310i and plan to use the money to get quad band phones.
 
I guess you didn't notice that you listed several DESIGN aspects of a phone that affect reception, including the antenna.

Once again, reception also depends on the phone you are using, to say otherwise is extremely naive. Why do you think people rate rf when reviewing a phone? All phones are not equal, end of story.
 
my 3220 makes calls clearly and consistently on 1 bar, and this is something that i have not seen in other phones i have had. it seems to either have complete, clear reception, or none at all when at zero bars. my razor would sometimes be breaking up with 2 bars!!!, and the free nokia gets reception, although only displaying 1 bar. it seems the indication is much more accurate, and it also seems to be able to pick up weaker signals and hold on to them (nokia)--sucks that it looks like noone is giving it away anymore... :(
 
Neil, I see you have had a c61. Mine didn't get the greatest reception, but my 3595 (6010) had the best reception I have used! Even \better than my w600i, razr, z500a, c1300, and c61.
 
Both great phones... I've had the S710a and K750i. But I found the RF better on the K750i... not to mention the camera is fabulous for a phone. But why bother with them now? They're old... wait for the K790 if you want SE.
 
I am currently looking for a phone with good reception as well. I used to have a Motorola e398 and I recently picked up a SE k750i. I love a lot of things about the Sony Ericsson phone except for the reception. I got better reception on my Motorola phone. Any type of recommendations on a phone with similar features as the k750i, yet better rf? I now have Cingular as my provider, living in CA, so a quadband phone would be preferred.
 
The Nokia 6010 has awesome reception compared to any other phone I've used. I have a Motorola RAZR that gets one bar off and on where I live. It always drops calls and has terrible clarity. I put my sim into an old Nokia 6010 and it was like a dream come true. 3 bar signal, perfect clarity and never drops calls. Not to mention the battery life on the phone lasts forever. I can barely make it through the day with my crap RAZR phone.


Whoever in here said all phones are equal in theory is full of crap. If your signal sucks where you live go get a Nokia 6010 and you will be set. I don't think any retail stores sell them anymore so you will have to buy it online.
 
I've had my share of Nokias, Sony Ericssons, Motorolas, Sanyos, Samsungs, and more...and will agree that the Nokias, and some of the latest Motos (V8/V9) are pretty stellar performers in the reception wars...

But, I have truly been totally blown away by the reception from my BlackBerry devices...almost across the board, the 83xx Curve being the best so far. RIM puts a hell of a phone radio in their product!! :2thumbs:
 
hi guys I am in between phones and i have had a few friends lend me some phones and every single one has died... I had a samsung raven and it worked great until it lost its back then i was drunk and threw it cause i was pissed. but now i have used i think four different phones... 2 razors both have crapped out on me, one garbage lg walmart-like phone that was intended for a midget to use, and i cant remember the other. I would just like a suggestion for a new phone that will get good reception, user friendly, and will stand the test of time. And my service provider is AT&T/Cingular. Feel free to pm me as well.
 
Can't say I've had much experience using many other phones out there, but, both my Nokia 6120/3120 has never fallen below 4 bars in terms of reception.
 
meatballs said:
Actually, it is right. Theoretically. Also theoretically, load speeds for internet are 2.4 ghz, when really they are 300-500 kb. QUOTE]

I just happen to browse some old messages and I found this that requires reply if someone didn't do it before.

GHZ is a mesuare of the frequency not a measure of speed
kbps is a mesure of speed

So whatever point you wanted to make ,I guess, has not valid foundation. :disappoin
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top