Quote: Originally posted by Beeru: Hi all, I'm not exactly a big cell phone person, but I got a Nextel branded i1000 plus from teh folks. It needs activation. I don't care for Nextel and want to use another service. I'm a cheap bastard and I hate contracts, but which type of plans will be better for my situation? I don't see myself being a heavy cell user. What exactly is a Moto i1000 capable of? Is is a good phone? ![]() It seems less than brand new. Is it a model still worth using? Thanks for the help. Check here for all your cell needs and answers. Check the Motorola forum and also the Service Provider forums. If you get a plan, you probably will become a heavy cell phone user. It's like crack. ![]() Look into newer GSM phones if you do ever want to commit. The account is tied to the chip, not the phone, and even though all US vendors discourage this, you can hack your password and move your chip between phones (or multiple chips into a single phone.) If you go with AT&T initially and then switch to say, Cingular, in theory all they/you have to do is yank the AT&T chip and put in the Cingular one. The US is very backwards with allowing people to have this degree of power, but it's getting much better and this sort of network switching is more common internationally. Quote: Originally posted by Semi On: The 'i' refers to iDen, their satellite based walky-talky phones(which I still don't get for anyone but field crew). Personally, I'd sell it on eBay because I see no use for the added walky talky functionality, especially since no one I know has the service as well. The phones also tend to be significantly bigger as a result and Nextel usually is a bit more expensive. Man semi i'm not sure where you get your info form but must of it is all wrong 1. ![]() Nextel does not use satllites for there phones. They use towers just like every body else. The phones are more expensive mostly becuase moto has no compition form anybody else in the iden market. Quote: man semi i'm not sure where you get your info form but must of it is all wrong No. I made one mistake because I wasn't thinking about what I was typing. Nextel does not use satllites for there phones. They use towers just like every body else. You're quite right. Teach me to talk telco while drinking! The phones are more expensive mostly becuase moto has no compition form anybody else in the iden market. I never said anything about the cost and they absolutely do have competition. Verizon isn't using Mot exclusively on their packet based system. Connect in less than a second and get more done now with Nextel Direct Connect, only from Sprint. Nextel Direct Connect provides instant push-to-talk communication. On June 30, the Nextel iDEN service goes offline, sticking Sprint with a heck of a lot of network scrap. Sprint, however, isn't just throwing it all in a. At 12:01 AM on June 30, though, those still using an iDEN phone will suddenly find themselves with a dead device. Sprint store photo courtesy of Shutterstock. Certain mobile phone features are dependent on the capabilities and settings of your service provider's network. Additionally, certain features may not be activated by your service provider, and/or the provider's network settings may limit the feature's functionality. Always contact your service provider about feature availability. Mot just has an exclusive with Nextel. FWIW, it's 'dead' technology. TDMA is going down fast and I forsee GSM doing the same considering WCDMA isn't that far off. ![]() ![]() Hell, even Siemens, who normally is hardcore GSM is on the WCDMA bandwagon. I myself prefer Sprint's network to any other (though, their billing and customer support could use some work) with Verizon being second. I won't touch an ATT GSM phone as the network in our area SUCKS. And the TDMA network isn't much better. Of course, all of that being said, forget about the phone. If you want a cellphone, shop around. No matter what carrier you want to go with, you're going to have to sign a contract and thus, more often than not you get a free (or heavily discounted) phone to go with it. IMO one of the nicest phones out right now is the Sanyo VM4500 (aka 5500). I've been carrying it since mid November and it's been absolutely amazing. Check out phonescoop.com for details on phones etc. Quote: Originally posted by LordAthens: lol. FWIW, it's 'dead' technology. TDMA is going down fast and I forsee GSM doing the same considering WCDMA isn't that far off. Hell, even Siemens, who normally is hardcore GSM is on the WCDMA bandwagon. I myself prefer Sprint's network to any other (though, their billing and customer support could use some work) with Verizon being second. I won't touch an ATT GSM phone as the network in our area SUCKS. And the TDMA network isn't much better. Of course, all of that being said, forget about the phone. If you want a cellphone, shop around. No matter what carrier you want to go with, you're going to have to sign a contract and thus, more often than not you get a free (or heavily discounted) phone to go with it. IMO one of the nicest phones out right now is the Sanyo VM4500 (aka 5500). I've been carrying it since mid November and it's been absolutely amazing. Check out phonescoop.com for details on phones etc Interesting, you are in the same general area as I am (Southeast PA/Delaware) and you have completely different network experiences than I. I have travelled around the country as well as used my phones extensively here and I have always found that Verizon has the best network, followed closely by AT&T (GSM and TDMA, I'd call their GSM network the best in the area from the reception I have gotten), then Cingular, followed by Sprint, and Nextel's stillborn iDEN at the bottom. Interesting that Sprint works so well out where you are. Quote: FWIW, it's 'dead' technology. TDMA is going down fast and I forsee GSM doing the same considering WCDMA isn't that far off. Hell, even Siemens, who normally is hardcore GSM is on the WCDMA bandwagon. As much as I'd love to see GSM die out, I seriously doubt it'll happen. Overall, I think it sucks, but there are some things that'll keep it around. SIM cards are, for lack of a better word, sexy. They're convient, and being able to pull all the numbers out and toss them in a new phone is nice from a consumer viewpoint. There's obviously more to it than just this, but that's what most of the consumers hear about. Also, I had a guy come up to me today at work and ask me if we were getting GSM phones. I explained to him that we were NOT going to change, since the sound quality is inferior to CDMA, and CDMA has a higher call capacity (not to mention the potential of WCDMA). He started whining about the fact that he can use a GSM phone in Europe, and 'how embarassing it is that when I lands in Europe, and all the other businessmen can start using their phones, but I can't use my phone.' Blah, blah, blah. As much as I hate to admit it, he's right. It's another reason GSM is attractive; more roaming options on a global level. IMHO, there are definately advantages to CDMA, but I just don't see GSM dying out in the near future. Now, iDen is a whole different story. Quote: Originally posted by Semi On: quote: man semi i'm not sure where you get your info form but must of it is all wrong No. I made one mistake because I wasn't thinking about what I was typing. Nextel does not use satllites for there phones. They use towers just like every body else. You're quite right. Teach me to talk telco while drinking! The phones are more expensive mostly becuase moto has no compition form anybody else in the iden market. I never said anything about the cost and they absolutely do have competition. Verizon isn't using Mot exclusively on their packet based system. Mot just has an exclusive with Nextel. Man semi some how you confuse me more and more each time i read your posts. Okay for one verizon uses cdma not iden and there are many other compaines that make cdma phones. 2 moto is the only maker of iden phones and nextel uses iden so moto is the only provider for nextel. As to digital pimp GSM actauly has better sound quality then CDMA. The down side with GSM is that it pick up so much that when you get background noise it gets passed right along. Where as CDMA filters out the noise. This filtering out of the noise is part of what cuts down on the amount of bandwith that is used. Part 2 to digital pimp. GSM is going to go to WCDMA not CDMA. CDMA will keep evoling seperatly form wcdma. Cdma has a sim like setup called r-uim, but no us carries have decided to go with it. Lastly verizon is going to release a phone that can roam on the european gsm system and work on the us cdma system. NulloModo - Uhh. I'm on the complete opposite side of the state, i'm south WEST FWIW on that aspect, I carry both Verizon and Sprint. My PCS phone is with me at all times, where my VZW phone stays at home for the most part. Verizons voice quality SUCKS compared to Sprints. Anyhow, when we went to Ocean City, MD from my house to OC it was a 6.5 hour drive. I was off of the network for a total of 3.5 minutes on my PCS phone. My VZW phone roamed (off network. Not extended) for a solid 20+ minutes. While this isn't a clear indicator that Sprint is a better system, it's clear they have better highway road supports. In my area, TDMA is HORRID. And GSM isn't good either. The GSM maps from ATT + Tmobile are extremely misleading. Wapacz - Are you comparing the VQ of GSM to VZW CDMA or PCS CDMA? IMHO, VZW'a VQ totally blows compared to Sprint. I have both, so I can make an honest opinion on it. The few GSM phones i've used (primarily T-Mobile) sounded far better than TDMA, but again, IMO couldn't touch Sprint's VQ. Back to the whole WCDMA GSM thing. It may be a moot point with Vodafone comming it and attempting to do a hostile takeover on VZW (considering Vodafone already owns 45% of VZW). They want to convert Verizon over to GSM and already have specs on a few Tri BAND (GSM CDMA AMPS) Quad MODE phones. The next month or 3 should prove to be very interesting. Cingular + ATT, VZW + Vodaphone. It's going to put Sprint and TMobile just about off the map (and I don't consider Nextel on the map ). Quote: lastly verizon is going to release a phone that can roam on the european gsm system and work on the us cdma system. Well.yes, we're getting a CDMA/GSM phone. It'll be made by Samsung, and if it's anything like the current gear that they offer, then it'll probably be worthless. Quote: I can't see Vodaphone converting Verizon to GSM. I mean that's a HUGE cost undertaking for no real benefit as far as I can tell. I've been hearing the Vodaphone rumor, about them taking over VZW, but I find it rather difficult to believe that they're going to convert our entire network to GSM. Alright; after a little research, here's what it comes down to, as I understand it. The biggest diff between CDMA and GSM is how the signal is encoded. Also, CDMA, by it's nature, is a more secure standard. One other thing; CDMA hands off differently than GSM; it uses a 'soft-handoff' technique, that lets it do it's handoffs as seamlessly as possible. As far as WCDMA, the overall theory, as I understand it, is that eventually, (8+ years) most companies will be going to it. GSM is just pretty TDMA; eventually, it starts hitting it's limits. Everything above is from what I've read. However, from my own experience, most of the GSM phones I've listened to sound like crap. Quote: Okay for one verizon uses cdma not iden and there are many other compaines that make cdma phones. Quote: 2 moto is the only maker of iden phones and nextel uses iden so moto is the only provider for nextel. Again, no shit. However, iDen is not the only voice packet technology and Verizon DOES offer a packet service. Just like Nextel, you press a little button, and send your voice comm in walky-talky fashion. Declaring Mot a monopoly in this functionality is incorrect. Quote: As to digital pimp GSM actauly has better sound quality then CDMA. The down side with GSM is that it pick up so much that when you get background noise it gets passed right along. Where as CDMA filters out the noise. This filtering out of the noise is part of what cuts down on the amount of bandwith that is used. Further explanation: Cell phones work by building models of the voice rather than actually transmitting the conversation in its original waveform. The phone's DSP attempts to identify mathematical values that can be used to model the user. It then translates that back into a waveform and compares it to the original. It continues to refine the mathematical formula until it produces something close enough to the original to transmit. The GSM handset manufacturers favors reproducing the original mic input as close as possible. Qualcomm's efforts attempt to reproduce just the voice. It's a different design philosophy, both of which have good and bad elaments. In a perfectly quiet environment, GSM would be ideal (in this regard specifically) but I live in a crowded city as do most cell phone users as far as I'm aware so Qualcomm's philosophy makes far more sense to me. Quote: part 2 to digital pimp. GSM is going to go to WCDMA not CDMA. CDMA will keep evoling seperatly form wcdma. Careful with your terminology. WCDMA IS CDMA. CDMA being Code Division Multiple Access and referring to multiplexing multiple calls at the same frequency by encoding them with a specific value that makes it relatively simple to de-multiplex the signals on said frequency. Both WCDMA and CDMA2000 (the networks) are using CDMA (the multiplexing technique). This was the heart of the statement the original poster made so he was absolutely correct in his statement. By way of completion, I should explain the technique used by GSM networks. TDMA, or Time Division Multiple Access, is the multiplexing technique employed by GSM. Essentially, each phone gets a very small period of time in which to transmit its call. The network switches between all the phones on the network in turn until it comes back to the original phone. That phone then transmits its next chunk of conversation. This happens fast enough that you don't perceive the pausing, but it's totally unworkable for high speed data communications such as is demanded of the expected 3G services. Quote: They want to convert Verizon over to GSM and already have specs on a few Tri BAND (GSM CDMA AMPS) Quad MODE phones. Considering that Verizon is spending BILLIONS currently to install a CDMA-2000 EVDO network, I doubt very much that Vodaphone would scrap all that investment. Regards, Semi. Quote: Originally posted by LordAthens: lol. FWIW, it's 'dead' technology. TDMA is going down fast and I forsee GSM doing the same considering WCDMA isn't that far off. Hell, even Siemens, who normally is hardcore GSM is on the WCDMA bandwagon. I myself prefer Sprint's network to any other (though, their billing and customer support could use some work) with Verizon being second. I won't touch an ATT GSM phone as the network in our area SUCKS. And the TDMA network isn't much better. Of course, all of that being said, forget about the phone. If you want a cellphone, shop around. No matter what carrier you want to go with, you're going to have to sign a contract and thus, more often than not you get a free (or heavily discounted) phone to go with it. IMO one of the nicest phones out right now is the Sanyo VM4500 (aka 5500). I've been carrying it since mid November and it's been absolutely amazing. Check out phonescoop.com for details on phones etc got ot say hi to a fellow 5500 user. Quote: Originally posted by DigitalPimp1: quote: lastly verizon is going to release a phone that can roam on the european gsm system and work on the us cdma system. Well.yes, we're getting a CDMA/GSM phone. It'll be made by Samsung, and if it's anything like the current gear that they offer, then it'll probably be worthless. Quote: I can't see Vodaphone converting Verizon to GSM. I mean that's a HUGE cost undertaking for no real benefit as far as I can tell. I've been hearing the Vodaphone rumor, about them taking over VZW, but I find it rather difficult to believe that they're going to convert our entire network to GSM. Was that a crack against Samsung phones in general or just multi-network phones? If it was the former, I'd have to assume you have been smoking something as Samsung consistently makes some of the best mobiles on the market, if it was the latter, I wholeheartedly agree, but don't understand why. It seems every multi-network phone I have come across is a stripped down bare-bones ugly, big, non-intuitive brick. I understand they need to be bigger to accomodate both sets of chips and more battery power, but why not give them the nice displays and all of the features found on the single network phones? In something roughly the size of a PDA you could get TDMA/CDMA/GSM all in one, plus a big full color high res screen, an expansion slot for wifi and bluetooth (if not built in) and all the PDA goodies so you have not only a phone but a portable always connected palm-top. What I wouldn't give for something like that. Quote: i'm declaring that moto has a monoply over all ptt phones. Which is wrong. Quote: I understand they need to be bigger to accomodate both sets of chips and more battery power, but why not give them the nice displays and all of the features found on the single network phones? Because they need to be bigger and require more power. If they didn't strip them down, they wouldn't be able to power multiple chipsets, or larger, more complicated chips for multiple networks for very long at all. Battery time is one of those factors people tend to depend on in their cell phone. It's not a very mobile phone if it requires recharging every few hours. Quote: In something roughly the size of a PDA you could get TDMA/CDMA/GSM all in one, plus a big full color high res screen, an expansion slot for wifi and bluetooth (if not built in) and all the PDA goodies so you have not only a phone but a portable always connected palm-top. If by roughly you mean much larger with bad battery life making it a shitty PDA and a shitty phone. Quote: What I wouldn't give for something like that. You can get single network units now but they cost $600 without bluetooth and suck for battery life. Willing to pay MORE than $600 for one that adds another network? Remember, cell phone prices are augmented by the service providers fronting much of the cost for you. They wouldn't front jack for a phone that wasn't locked to their network and their network only. Quote: Was that a crack against Samsung phones in general or just multi-network phones? If it was the former, I'd have to assume you have been smoking something as Samsung consistently makes some of the best mobiles on the market, if it was the latter, I wholeheartedly agree, but don't understand why. It's most certainly about Samsung phones. Perhaps your own experience has been different, but from what I've seen in my dealings with the Samsung phones that Verizon has carrried in the past and is currently carrying, I am far less than impressed. And there's more than just my own impressions. I've gotten some information from others, who are far more knowledable on this matter than I. Their opinions on Samsung gear have been extremely negetive. Perhaps Samsungs GSM gear is nice, but their CDMA phones that I've dealt with leave something much to be desired. Some common sense while designing the user interface would be a good start. Quote: i'm declaring that moto has a monoply over all ptt phones. Not just Nokia like Semi said; the Kyocera KX444 will be a PTT phone as well, and I know there are others on the way. Motorola has a monopoly over iDen phones, since they developed the technology. Quote: Remember, cell phone prices are augmented by the service providers fronting much of the cost for you. Semi is correct; from one of the trade magazines we get at work, last year the cell phone industry spent something like $10 billion on phones, and sold them for somewhere around $3.5 billion. I couldn't find the article, so I can't give exact numbers, but those are close enough to give you an idea. Quote: Originally posted by Semi On: You can get single network units now but they cost $600 without bluetooth and suck for battery life. Willing to pay MORE than $600 for one that adds another network? Remember, cell phone prices are augmented by the service providers fronting much of the cost for you. They wouldn't front jack for a phone that wasn't locked to their network and their network only. Well, this is true, something like this would be a niche product for sure, but could be a profitable one. Multi-network phones in general are a niche product. I have purchased and used PDA phones for around $600 in the past, and been generally happy with the experience, but I have always felt that such a high end item should be lacking nothing, so bring on the multi-network. It could even be multi-network but specific to a particular provider, you can't use AT&T TDMA gear with Cingular, so why would AT&T care if they released a TDMA+GSM phone? Now, CDMA would be a different story as neither company has a CDMA network, but that is just a matter of setting up roaming contracts with Verizon or Sprint. The PDA phones out now aren't much bigger than a regular PDA, and therefore are quite usable. Battery life is very good for PDA usage, and for phone usage is par for the course, several days standby or several hours talking. Setting up the phones software to be able to disable certain networks when you wouldn't need them could help conserve even more, why have the phone searching for TDMA/CDMA when you are in a GSM hot area? Personally, for something about the size of the biggest Palms or Toshiba Pocket PCs that did GSM, TDMA, and CDMA, plus GPRS and CDMA packet data, had bluetooth and wifi built in, expandable memory, nice high res color screen, and all of the other goodies, and ran a real palmpc OS (either PalmOS or PocketPC, not this Symbian junk) I would be willing to pay up to $1000, and I know others who feel the same way. Quote: Personally, for something about the size of the biggest Palms or Toshiba Pocket PCs that did GSM, TDMA, and CDMA, plus GPRS and CDMA packet data, had bluetooth and wifi built in, expandable memory, nice high res color screen, and all of the other goodies, and ran a real palmpc OS (either PalmOS or PocketPC, not this Symbian junk) I would be willing to pay up to $1000, and I know others who feel the same way. I'm sure the marketing people are aware of the concept so there must not be enough of you to justify the business. Quote: Originally posted by Semi On: quote: Personally, for something about the size of the biggest Palms or Toshiba Pocket PCs that did GSM, TDMA, and CDMA, plus GPRS and CDMA packet data, had bluetooth and wifi built in, expandable memory, nice high res color screen, and all of the other goodies, and ran a real palmpc OS (either PalmOS or PocketPC, not this Symbian junk) I would be willing to pay up to $1000, and I know others who feel the same way. I'm sure the marketing people are aware of the concept so there must not be enough of you to justify the business. Probably true. Whiny teenage girls who want cameras, pink cases, games, and animated pokemon backgrounds when their phone is 'sleeping' apparently drive the market. As much as I think IBM Thinkpads are overrated as laptops, IBM making a Thinkpad of palmtops/cell phones would be awesome, all of the performance, connectivity, and productivity features, none of the BS.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2018
Categories |