|
Recommend me an awesome GSM mobile phone (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Euphorica |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
There is no need to spend extra money to ensure quad band unless you are going to be spending -significant- time outside of North America.
850 is important because that is the frequency which North American GSM providers use (along with 1900). If you do not buy a phone that supports 850 - you are cutting your signal options in half, increasing your chance of poor signal quality (and poor data rx/tx).
Plus frequency is inversely proportional to penetration depth - so 850 will work better inside buildings. |
w3rd my archaic gsm nokia does not have 850 and it sucks..ok its not the end of the world but if going for somethign new , get something that can do 850. |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
| If 850 is so important then why do people bother getting phones without it? Is there a way to perhaps reflash the firmware on a phone so that it may use the 850MHz network(s)? |
|
|
| Euphorica |
they be stupid. When I got my phone there wasnt 850 yet. so :p
its not like the phone is completely useless if thats what you are thinking. its just that much better with it. |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
| It's really that important eh? |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| if I was buying a new phone...it would be one of the top 3 things I wanted. |
|
|
| raveed |
i just bought the nokia 6681 and im loving it so far ... ... theres a 6680 model as well with 2 cameras (1.3 mp at the back and 640* 480 in the front) for video conferencing which i didnt opt for since i dont think i need to be that tech savvy at that price ... anyways i think it has everything you looking for .. check it out..
Key Features
* 1.3 megapixel integrated digital camera with flash and slide for camera protection and control
* Nokia XpressPrint printing solution including PictBridge direct printing
* High-resolution display with up to 262,144 colors
* Convenient email access with attachment support
* Removable 64 MB MultiMediaCard (MMC)
* MultiMediaCard (MMC)/SD memory card reader with USB connection (Europe, Africa, and Middle East only)
* Music player with stereo audio
* High-speed Web browsing over EDGE
* Tri-band GSM phone with global roaming capability
Nokia 6681
Also they going to be coming out with the nokia N series soon ... initially they prolly going to be priced through the roof but from what i read .. they going to take cellular phones to a whole new level
http://www.nokia.com/nseries/ |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by VERTiG0
If 850 is so important then why do people bother getting phones without it? Is there a way to perhaps reflash the firmware on a phone so that it may use the 850MHz network(s)? |
that's not possible since the 850 Mhz capability is built into the hardware of the phone. it's almost like asking if a fireware upgrade can change a non-bluetooth phone into a bluetooth phone.
as to why some people bother getting phones without it .. usually the most common reasons is that the phone might be cheaper or simply because they don't know the difference ! but hey u do now !
the link that Shadowolf posted from HowardForums is really good on the whole 850 Mhz thing so check it out ..
btw. i'd recommend getting on a Fido plan since they seem to be better than the Rogers packages plus u get billed by the second and it's all the same network anyway ! i believe they've got a decent unlimitted data plan too if that's your thing ..
for your complete source on GSM technology check out ..
http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml
|
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: |
Originally posted by treatz
GSM850 and the scientific truth:
courtesy of John Galt
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...e=&pagenumber=4
Here's the god's honest truth, and this is with spectrum analyser and high grade equipment and a strong knowledge of the actual physics behind why this is. (Yes, I can do all of the mathematical proof if you'd like, but it looks like sh*t when typed out on a computer with out a math package on it)
850 is WAY better than 1900 mhz. Why?
It's HALF the frequency.
Why does this matter?
Because the lower the frequency the more it will pentetrate solid objects.
This is why the military uses ULF (ultra low frequency) to communicate with submarines.
Half the frequency = twice the penetration in equal density objects (i.e. water, concrete, trees, drywall etc. etc.). Very very simple mathematical formula (unlike wattage that is an inverse logarythmic (×××× i can't spell that freaking word even now!) scale.
Thus!
850 will always when on the same tower at the same wattage work better when obstructed (almost always on cell networks).
And then of course in 850 you're allowed to double the wattage which will give you a significant increase in signal (2 watts instead of 1 max, but remember that most 1900 mhz phones never actually reach 1 watt, whereas all PC4 850 phones will really reach (I've tested it on a spectrum analyser) 2 watts)
If you want proof of this concept:
Everyone is familiar with 2.4 ghz wireless stuff. (802.11 b/g) Most of you will be familiar with 802.11a (5.3 and 5.8 ghz). Hook up an router that has both g and a and walk away from the router with your laptop.
Here's what you'll find.
In open areas both (assuming that the power is the same and that the radios are of similar sensitivity) will go just as far. (the Netgear WGU624 is excellent (just released) and has equal power radios for the first time. The 802.11a stuff still goes shorter distance though because it doesn't have a real 5.3/5.8 ghz antenna on it... not that the 2.4 ghz antenna is all that great either)
Now do the same thing through a building. 802.11a dies VERY quickly when there is walls in the way and won't survive ANY concrete.
2.4 ghz wireless does not even go through leaves on trees for any distance (I setup long distance WISP stuff all of the time). At any distance I mean more than 300 feet you won't get it through trees without a flaky signal as the leaves move even with a 30 db! (yes 30 db!) antenna. To give you an idea, your cell phone has a 2 db at most antenna on it unless you've bought a 3rd party one. This is why an external car antenna makes such a HUGE difference. It's linear too. So if you're looking at engineering mode, plugged into a 30 db antenna you will have a 28db higher signal than the 2 db one you have by default. (note that this is a 1 metre dish we're talkinga bout here, so you're not going to put this thing on your car!)
Now we have this neato stuff called 900mhz wireless gear. 3 megabit stuff, so it's slow comparitively, because it doesn't have the bandwidth, but it's NON-LINE-OF-SITE! It goes through trees, and even gets bleed over hills, and we're talking 1 watt on both ends with gear that costs < $500 instead of Rogers stuff that the towers are $100,000s! (longest link so far is 34 kms tower to tower on 900 mhz and it's non line of sight and still gets 3 megabit)
If you want to run a subjective test, that will prove this to you, take a phone that has 1900 mhz only and then one that has both. Put them in engineering mode (p280 and a v300 are perfect for this because their 1900 mhz reception/transmittion is about the same). Go into your basement.
Read the DB on the p280 and then read the db on the v300. If you can get the v300 into 1900 mhz mode only, you'll notice that it will read within one db of the p280. However when it's in 850 mode, you'll notice that depending on the site and the thickness of the concrete up to a 20 db difference! (that's what I get. -98 db on the p280 and -78 db on the V300.
This is a combination of two things. Frequency and wattage. Since wattage is not a linear equation and thus doubling the wattage does not result in double the signal, and frequency is, wattage does not account for the difference, whereas frequency does.
The math doesn't lie. Anyone that wants to argue with the math, is a fool ignoring reality (for whatever reason). Mostly it's to do with ego in my experience. The result is still the same. A fool. Fools are fine so long as they don't have influence on other's decisions. When they start to, we have a problem (Hitler, Stalin, to name a few).
If you want to argue this post, then prove it with math. I'm not interested in your subjective results, I"m interested in objective proof. What I have done is use the objective facts of radio waves, given you direct evidence that the formost experts in the world agree with me (the military with submarines) and then given you scenarios that you can verify my assertions your self with. There is no subjectivity here, and the math is not new (100s of years old in fact)
If you compare apples to apples, with the same tower with the same gear 850 mhz will always at least match (line of sight) and most of the time kill (non line of sight) 1900 mhz.
So ask yourselves, how often can you actually see the antennas on the tower that you're receiving off of? Even in the city, that's usually < 10% of the time. I think 90% of your time on your phone is reason enough for 850 mhz.
And remember, Fido's own network proves this. They were fantastic in the areas they were in. Why? Because they had DOUBLE the number of towers in most cases that Rogers did. Why? Because they knew that they had to do it because 1900 mhz sucks so ×××× bad at non line of sight and inbuilding penetration. (proof is in the rogers network too, the holes went away the day they turned on 850 because the towers were all designed for 850, and it's inbuilding pentration, and over-hill bleed.(Yes I know it wasn't over a day that they flipped the switch))
This is also part of what bankrupted them and caused the buyout. They were at such a huge disadvantage over bell and rogers because they didn't have 800 mhz spectrum that they had to spend tons more money to get equal coverage.
Steve, sorry dude, I really like some of your articles, and your site maps are great, but you're just completely and utterly wrong on this one. Time to admit it and move on to something that isn't a closed issue (and has been for a long time).
|
http://www.howardforums.com/showthr...threadid=503115 |
|
|
| Billche |
You want "different" phones?
Nokia 7280
Cellular Technology GSM
Band / Mode EGSM 900, GSM 1800 and GSM 1900
Internet Browser Yes
Bluetooth Enabled Yes
Style Slider
Camera VGA
Nokia 7270
Cellular Technology GSM
Band / Mode GSM 900 / GSM 1800 / GSM 1900
Talk Time Up to 4 hours
Internet Browser XHTML browser (WAP 2.0) over TCP/IP stack
maybe not the most feature filled... but they look damn cool. |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
Now I'm kinda looking at a Treo 600. I know I said no PDA-like things but goddammit it'd be handy as hell and I could get rid of my Jornada. Windows CE.
Treo owners where are you? What would you recommend as a plan? |
|
|
| Möbius |
| quote: | Originally posted by VERTiG0
Now I'm kinda looking at a Treo 600. I know I said no PDA-like things but goddammit it'd be handy as hell and I could get rid of my Jornada. Windows CE.
Treo owners where are you? What would you recommend as a plan? |
Enter E2EK1EL in 5..4..3..2..1......LOL |
|
|
| Tranceplanted |
| quote: | Originally posted by VERTiG0
Now I'm kinda looking at a Treo 600. I know I said no PDA-like things but goddammit it'd be handy as hell and I could get rid of my Jornada. Windows CE.
Treo owners where are you? What would you recommend as a plan? |
Ok, now you've touched my area. If you are going to get a PDA phone, please consider the myriad of very good Windows Mobile 2003 and 2005 options.
Personally I have the iMate Jam, which also goes under the name of the XDA mini, HTC Magician, etc. It is hands down the best bang for your buck, along with the myriad of solid apps for it. The best is that it easily and automatically comes equipped to sync with your Outlook data, so if that floats your boat, it's a better choice.
Secondly, the successor to the Jam has just been released, the HTC Wizard, not sure what the other branded names for the model are yet. Basically all the same goodness, but now with Windows Mobile 2005 vs 2003, and a slide out qwerty keyboard, which really makes text messaging a lot easier. Plus the way it slides out is slick.
Both are smaller than an ipod.
Not saying that the treo is a bad phone, it does have a tough time standing up to the new products that have recently been released since its debut.
Not sure if you have tried it out, but I find Windows Mobile 2003 and 2005 much more stable than Windows CE.
However, if you want more of a phone, you could take a look into the Motorola MPx220, it's a decent phone. The iMate sp3i and sp5 are good as well. These are more phone than pda, but are pretty decent at it, defintely gives you more options than your standard phone in terms of device convergence.
I'd reccommend www.impactwireless.ca, a shop out of Alberta, bought my Jam there, and the prices are pretty fair. They also offer most of the other phones talked about here. |
|
|
|
|
