News Forum Phone database

> New Topic
> Reply
< Esato Forum Index > Sony Ericsson / Sony > General > Which SE phones ( to date ) has the best antennae reception quality? Bookmark topic

@ con

I'm sorry to disagree. My T600 has excellent reception in 900 Mhz and 1800 Mhz.

In Belgium the network coverage is so dense that it is almost impossible to notice differences between phones. It is no issue of importance when buying a phone.

E.g. a A2628s, R600, T600, Nokia 3310, Siemens M50, Alcatel 310, Alcatel 510 etc. do not show any noticeable difference at the same spot where reception is tricky.

Apart from that I find the T39x one of the most beautiful phones ever made and technologicaly the most advanced at its time of release and maybe even today. Too bad this masterpiece is out of the collection. It beats any phone today, even the T600, in style and waw-factor.

--
Posted: 2003-02-27 11:37:00
Edit : Quote


My T28 world (1900mhz) picks up 1 more bar then my T68i ever did. I get great signal strength with, so much it suprises me even . By far better then any nokia I ever had too.
--
Posted: 2003-02-27 12:42:00
Edit : Quote


Just a thought, but doesn't it depend on which service provider you use ? Some areas will be better than others on a particular network.
--
Posted: 2003-02-27 13:56:00
Edit : Quote


@ ppcrockar

I may have been too hasty also, my apologies. Caveman appears to have identified the problem: Network infrastructure. Almost synomous with GSM 1900, the USA providers have created notoriously weak infrastructure with regard to tower placement. I cannot speak to GSM 1900 providers in other countries in the Westen hemisphere. GSM 1900 would work well if the service providers had placed their towers correctly. Currently, two companies, Cingualr and ATT are converting many of their old standard, TDMA 1900, towers, to GSM 1900 or GSM 850 (although ATT is currently more focused on developing their WCDMA-UMTS contract with DoCoMo). GSM 850 has many of the advantages of GSM 900, notably better wave propogation through objects and longer effective distances.
--
Posted: 2003-02-27 15:47:00
Edit : Quote


@ shawnmccall9

Yes, that was what i meant. And with the 850Mhz band the problems with the higher frequency (as you mentioned wave propagation through objects) will disappear (or at least be the same as the 900Mhz). The tower placement is even more important on the 1900Mzh band than on the 900Mhz band beacause of the worse wave propagation through objects.

Also I don't know how well the T68 handles the 1900Mhz band as I've never tried it. It is just that most people complaining about the reception comes from north america, so my guess is that the T68 could be worse than other phones on the 1900Mhz band.



[ This Message was edited by: ppcrockar on 2003-02-27 15:06 ]
--
Posted: 2003-02-27 16:04:00
Edit : Quote


So What US carrier would be the most compatible for SE phone to have the best antennae reception?
--
Posted: 2003-02-28 03:28:00
Edit : Quote


you have 3 choices: T-Mobile, ATT, Cingular. T-Mobile is the best...without a doubt
--
Posted: 2003-02-28 14:31:00
Edit : Quote


the t300 on t-mobile UK has really good reception
--
Posted: 2003-02-28 14:38:00
Edit : Quote


does the t68 really have that bad reception quality? i was going t oget one with t-mobile in boston but now i'm not too sure. first it was the dlay of the p800 now bad reception quality...man should u ever get a SE product?
--
Posted: 2003-02-28 16:33:00
Edit : Quote


yeah man it has to do with the type of gsm service you have
i have t68i on cingular in california, usa and i have great reception.

on the other hand att gsm sucks ass
--
Posted: 2003-03-01 01:22:00
Edit : Quote

---

New Topic   Reply

Forum Index