Do I need a new phone or?....

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

jt wrote:
>
> I'm still using my StarTAC 7868w. Doesn't have the 'features' of the
> new phones but I like the sound quality and that the speaker is in a
> cup so I don't have to carfully aim it at my ear canal, but i
> digress...
>
> Latly it seems others around me are able to get signal and make calls
> when i can't. I have to immagine that the technology gets better and
> since there hasn't been a software update for this phone for a while,
> do I need to start thinking of getting a new phone to get better
> signal?
> TIA
> jt

Does *228 apply to your area and phone?

LB

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"jt" <jeeptop2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5faf7c00.0411241723.4fb3c0f5@posting.google.com...
> I'm still using my StarTAC 7868w. Doesn't have the 'features' of the
> new phones but I like the sound quality and that the speaker is in a
> cup so I don't have to carfully aim it at my ear canal, but i
> digress...
>
> Latly it seems others around me are able to get signal and make calls
> when i can't. I have to immagine that the technology gets better and
> since there hasn't been a software update for this phone for a while,
> do I need to start thinking of getting a new phone to get better
> signal?
> TIA
> jt

My buddy also likes the 7868 and has a couple spares he can rotate. He is
also complaining about not being able to make calls at certain times and
other issues. The other day we were at a large event and he said "looks like
they have a jammer here" because his phone had no service. My phone and two
other friends phones who have VZW had 4 bars. This was not a PCS issue
because VZW is 800 MHz in this area.

I think it can only be one of 2 things. Either the phones in question are
old and getting funky or there is some sort of timing or other
characteristic of the newer cell equipment that favors newer phones.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

LB@notmine.com wrote in message news:<41A5379E.C71307AA@optonline.net>...
>
> Does *228 apply to your area and phone?

Yes, and I use it every couple of months

jt

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:<nqadnb-LyJkIYzjcRVn-vA@adelphia.com>...
>
> I think it can only be one of 2 things. Either the phones in question are
> old and getting funky or there is some sort of timing or other
> characteristic of the newer cell equipment that favors newer phones.

Yeea, that's what Ii thought too. But can't see how it is the phone
going funky. I just wondereed if there were changes to transmiters
thata need a newer phone to take advantage of.

jt

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

jeeptop2000@yahoo.com (jt) wrote in message news:<5faf7c00.0411251905.295899e3@posting.google.com>...
> "George" <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:<nqadnb-LyJkIYzjcRVn-vA@adelphia.com>...
> >
> > I think it can only be one of 2 things. Either the phones in question are
> > old and getting funky or there is some sort of timing or other
> > characteristic of the newer cell equipment that favors newer phones.
>
> Yeea, that's what Ii thought too. But can't see how it is the phone
> going funky. I just wondereed if there were changes to transmiters
> thata need a newer phone to take advantage of.
>
> jt

A tech once told me that older 3 watt bag phones had electronic parts
that would degrade over time and effect call quality. IIRC she
mentioned "capacitors" degrading? It doesn't seem most modern phones
are being designed to much more than 2 years. Sometimes it turns like
much less 

What I have discovered through years of informal tests... is the
digital reception of many newer phones is superior to the startac.
Could simply be better technology in the base station/phone uprades.
Cellular technology has come a long way, especially in compression
schemes to pack in more capacity. Compression has not neccessarily
improved overall voice quality, compared older phones, just lets many
more users talk on a limited spectrum, without dropping calls. I got
out a few early digital phones and made some test calls... found the
voice quality to be surprisingly good. Wider range and less digital
artifacts.
The Startac is still one of the best sounding phones. Love the earcup
too! What a great design.
And I love those ergonomic, hinge "ears", for lifting the phone from
the clip. Now, the the replacement v60i is pretty and sleek, and very
slippery 

I remember Motorola use to make some the equipment for cellular base
stations (or was that switches?), but it seemed like legacy equipment
from the "old days", Who is making new CDMA equipment, for Verizon's
base stations these days? Switches?

Every once in a while, after getting a new phone, I'll take both my
old startacs and whatever small collection of handsets out to a known
fringe area and make some test calls. Test calls from unactivated
phones can be made using 611.

Although there are many kinds of field performance tests (call
initiaton, call holding, D/A performance, debug screen readings) it's
not too hard to notice which phones require precise alignment of the
antenna, in the direction of the tower, in order to make a call. When
testing several phones at once, while attempting multiple fringe
calls, the standouts or losers become obvious. It takes more time to
rate similar performing phones.

A couple of favorites tests...see how high up out of a valley
dead/fringe spot one needs to climb to make a call. Found the order in
which each phone could get a signal to be consistant. For instance, at
the valley floor, the Nokia 3595i could make a digital call, a little
higher up the v60i and then higher up the startac.
One can force the phone (if a submenu option exists) to analog or PCS,
for testing relative performance in those other bands.

Analog performance _may_ be better on the Startacs.
Modern phones analog performance looks like an after thought. Also
every stub antenna supplied phone has reduced signal performance!

The other favorite test place, my friends fringe area suburban
basement.... Handy because it's dry and indoors and has a couch  If
I can make a native VZW digital call from down there, then phone has
excellent fringe performance, and is on the short list. Then just do
whatever test a half dozen times or more, to get some trending
results.

Note time of day network traffic and shrinking coverage effects during
congested calling times or Peak hours. Mothers Day is one of the
busiest days for landline phone traffic, I assume it would also be for
cellular.

Sometimes a phone that can simply find a usable network the fastest,
without camping out on an unusable signal, would have a clear
advantage in real world use. That winner (smart network aquisition)
was the Nokia 3585/3595i, although I prefer a handset that allows a
manual A/D/PCS choice. Kind of like a stick shift, verses an
automatic.

Side note: The Audiovox 9500 even has the choice of which PCS channel
is used. If the "Channel Number" SPCS uses in a specific SID is known,
then direct entry is possible, byassing the PRL. But how many people
want to play with the phones submenus to make a call?

-
David

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <nqadnb-LyJkIYzjcRVn-vA@adelphia.com>,
George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>"jt" <jeeptop2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:5faf7c00.0411241723.4fb3c0f5@posting.google.com...
>> I'm still using my StarTAC 7868w. Doesn't have the 'features' of the
>> new phones but I like the sound quality and that the speaker is in a
>> cup so I don't have to carfully aim it at my ear canal, but i
>> digress...
>>
>> Latly it seems others around me are able to get signal and make calls
>> when i can't. I have to immagine that the technology gets better and
>> since there hasn't been a software update for this phone for a while,
>> do I need to start thinking of getting a new phone to get better
>> signal?
>> TIA
>> jt
>
>My buddy also likes the 7868 and has a couple spares he can rotate. He is
>also complaining about not being able to make calls at certain times and
>other issues. The other day we were at a large event and he said "looks like
>they have a jammer here" because his phone had no service. My phone and two
>other friends phones who have VZW had 4 bars. This was not a PCS issue
>because VZW is 800 MHz in this area.
>
>I think it can only be one of 2 things. Either the phones in question are
>old and getting funky or there is some sort of timing or other
>characteristic of the newer cell equipment that favors newer phones.

StarTacs speak only CDMA-1; newer phones also speak CDMA-2000 (1xRTT).
It is possible that at that event that they had a mini-cell site that only
spoke CDMA-2000, which the StarTac could not see. CDMA-1 and CDMA-2000
can be intermixed on a given band (such as 800MHz cellular). They would
like to use CDMA-2000 since it provides roughly twice the voice capacity
as does CDMA-1 (in addition to the higher-speed data).

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

1X phones are designed to use less bandwidth. The main reason for this is
so that the carrier can accomodate more simultaneous calls with the same
amount of licensed spectrum which effectively saves them money. It's a
feature we like because lower bandwidth-utilization translates into the
ability to place, keep, and receive calls in areas with weak signal
strength. Sound quality of the 1X phones I've used is decent, and sound
about the same as other non-1X phones I have used.

Anyway, my experiences with 1X phones have all been good, and in a general
sense superior to the older non-1X phones I've used, but not so much better
that I'd buy a phone if I was happy with my current one.

I guess I'd simply say it's safe to buy a 1X phone and expect similar
perfomance to what you have now. If you're thinking of upgrading to get
some other feature, it's nice to know you probably won't lose anything in
terms of the capability you have now.

-Dan

PS: I do not recommend "all digital" phones for use anywhere in the west.
Stick with Tri-Mode phones if you can.

--
Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
http://cell.uoregon.edu

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote in message news:<i7WdnYB2ZYxd8DTcRVn-sA@comcast.com>...
> 1X phones are designed to use less bandwidth.
>
> Anyway, my experiences with 1X phones have all been good, and in a general
> sense superior to the older non-1X phones I've used, but not so much better
> that I'd buy a phone if I was happy with my current one.
>
> PS: I do not recommend "all digital" phones for use anywhere in the west.
> Stick with Tri-Mode phones if you can.

Thanks, Yes, the main feature i like about the SarTAC is the cupped
ear piece. I have small ear canals and a lot of these phones I have to
do aa lot of careful aiming to get decent volumne, even then I don't
think the sound quality is as good.

Feature I'd be most interested in is built in speaker phone. I use the
clip on with the StarTAC and it works well lin the car. Other than
that more ability to call in some areas. And, yea, I'd get "tri-mode".
I still hit some pink areas (analogue only) areas of the map in
Vermont and the Adirondacs.

The Moto v265 peeked my interest. though it doesn't seem to be
getting thhe best reviews here.

jt

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

We've had a 265 for about 10 days, and are very happy with it. Very good
audio, good speakerphone, and much better analog than my v60s.

Dean
________________________________________
"jt" <jeeptop2000@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5faf7c00.0411281738.6d6d8822@posting.google.com...
> "Dan Albrich" <junkmail@shaney.uoregon.edui> wrote in message
news:<i7WdnYB2ZYxd8DTcRVn-sA@comcast.com>...
> > 1X phones are designed to use less bandwidth.
> >
> > Anyway, my experiences with 1X phones have all been good, and in a
general
> > sense superior to the older non-1X phones I've used, but not so much
better
> > that I'd buy a phone if I was happy with my current one.
> >
> > PS: I do not recommend "all digital" phones for use anywhere in the
west.
> > Stick with Tri-Mode phones if you can.
>
> Thanks, Yes, the main feature i like about the SarTAC is the cupped
> ear piece. I have small ear canals and a lot of these phones I have to
> do aa lot of careful aiming to get decent volumne, even then I don't
> think the sound quality is as good.
>
> Feature I'd be most interested in is built in speaker phone. I use the
> clip on with the StarTAC and it works well lin the car. Other than
> that more ability to call in some areas. And, yea, I'd get "tri-mode".
> I still hit some pink areas (analogue only) areas of the map in
> Vermont and the Adirondacs.
>
> The Moto v265 peeked my interest. though it doesn't seem to be
> getting thhe best reviews here.
>
> jt

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

jt wrote:

> Yeea, that's what Ii thought too. But can't see how it is the phone
> going funky. I just wondereed if there were changes to transmiters
> thata need a newer phone to take advantage of.


Yes there is. Verizon switched to CDMA2000 1xRTT a while back
(previously it was on CDMAOne, which is what your phone uses). In
theory voice channels are doubled with a 1x phone is using a 1x network.

It is of course, backward compatible with older CDMA phones, but a side
effect of the upgrade is that there's now a higher "noise floor" on the
network than there used to be. In layman's terms, the network has more
static than before, because more phones are being loaded onto it. While
newer phones can cope just fine with this, older phones cannot and their
performance will degrade.

So yes, upgrading is obviously advantageous.


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