View Poll Results: Are you satisfied with the reception which your cellular company provides for you?

Voters
145. You may not vote on this poll
  • I've got Sprint and they ROCK!!!

    42 28.97%
  • I've got Sprint and they're OK.

    23 15.86%
  • I've got Sprint and they SUCK!!!

    7 4.83%
  • I've got Verizon and they ROCK!!!

    9 6.21%
  • I've got Verizon and they're OK.

    5 3.45%
  • I've got Verizon and they SUCK!!!

    4 2.76%
  • I've got Cingular and they ROCK!!!

    15 10.34%
  • I've got Cingular and they're OK.

    27 18.62%
  • I've got Cingular and they SUCK!!!

    6 4.14%
  • No room for others, but by all means, tell us about it in the thread.

    7 4.83%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej
    When I walk into a room and folks see that I have a Treo 650, they all oooooh, ahhhhh, marvel, and even genuflect.

    Thus, clearly my Treo gets a very good reception.
    -- Josh

    Heh...I know what you mean!! If there were a TreoCentral Quotes Hall of Fame, that would be the King of Quotes.
  2.    #22  
    If "regular" people (if you find yourself reading this forum 12 times a day, you're not regular) could hear the voice quality of this phone, I think most of them could deal with spending $300 to get a phone that is almost flawless (only things missing are COBALT and EV-DO, baby; I'd also like to see a clamshell phone for bigger screen and protection....but candybar does have some nice benefits and maybe WI-FI but with reverse DUN (which I still haven't gotten to work yet), I could live without it and with the extra battery life). ANYWAY...If I were regular, I'd be willing to pay $100~150 for a phone that would give me landline reception anywhere in the country....that's halfway to the $300 treo price range.

    I still find it hard to believe that people out there find Sprint service atrocious with this phone. Maybe start sharing what hoods you homies are from if you've got crappy service.
    Last edited by grndslm; 06/28/2005 at 11:12 PM.
  3. jacobh's Avatar
    Posts
    158 Posts
    Global Posts
    166 Global Posts
    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by MagsD
    I actually think it's one of the weakest. I travel all over the US, to many populous places with large cities, yet I seldom get more than 2 bars of reception. In my home and around Seattle I am lucky to get one bar.
    I live near Seattle, and work in Seattle and have pretty much always found sufficient reception on Sprint. Almost never ever get a dropped call. Only times I don't get service are when I am deep in an underground parking garage, or am in a metal elivator in the center of a building. One of the nice things about Sprint is that even with low bars, the calls are still pretty clear. Even so, in various places along my commute I come accross full bars quite regularly.
  4. #24  
    Wash DC, have T-mobile -- good customer service, strong signals...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  5. #25  
    I have been with Sprint since 1999 without a landline in the DC area. No major issues. Have had pretty good signal on all my travels including Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Maine, Puerto Rico, and Tijuana. Great signal in major cities.
    Me = Nokia 5170/Palm III > Kyocera 6035 > Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 700p > Treo 755p > Treo Pro > Palm Pre

    Wife = Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 755p > Palm Centro > Palm Pixi
  6. #26  
    I've been very happy with Verizon's overall coverage, however I'll admit that I don't travel much. I've also been extremely happy with VZW's customer service! I will say that my 650's reception is far worse than any of the last 4 cellphones I've owned.

    I can visually (via the signal strength bars) and audibly hear the difference vs my wife's Motorola V710 in the same exact location. I also now have some spots of poor signal and dropped calls on my daily commute that I've never had before There's about a 1-mile section that's so low, I simply can't use it. If I need to make an un-innterrupted call on the way home, I now have to take an alternate route home.

    A VZW data cs rep I was talking to yesterday told me that the lack of an extendible antenna was to blame for this. Would you agree? My previous phones did have an extendible antenna.

    -jeff
  7. #27  
    My 600 was a Sprint - I had absolutely no / none / nada coverage at, and in the neighborhood around, my house. Travelling across the Pennsylvania towards Ohio service would come and go. Since going to Cingular w/ my 650 I have full service at home, and across PA. No coverage problems w/ Cingular what so ever. Your results, of course, will most likely vary...

    Dunc
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunc
    Since going to Cingular w/ my 650 I have full service at home, and across PA. No coverage problems w/ Cingular what so ever. Your results, of course, will most likely vary...

    Dunc
    I have Cingular w a 650. I Travel occasionally to Trout Run, PA. Unfortunately, Trout Run lies smack dab in the middle of a 50 mile stretch above Williamsport, where there is absolutely no Cingular coverage. There used to be great TDMA coverage there by AT&T. Unfortunately, they decided not to overlay this stretch with GSM, which seems a bit strange since this is the entrance into a very popular ski resort area.
  9. #29  
    bumpda
    <a href="http://www.chocopoolp.com/"><img src="http://www.chocopoolp.com/logos/banner-1.gif"></a>
  10. #30  
    I barely get a connection at my home just 5 minutes from Kansas City. Otherwise 30 minutes in any direction its fine. Verizon was the same way for me.
  11. #31  
    My StarTac 7868W had coverage in places where my Treo drops calls or gets no signal at all. Verizon has great coverage, but the Treo's radio is not very good. I can't believe that an 8 year-old technology bests the Treo, but according to tech support, the StarTac was indeed a better radio.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by slithy
    Surprised only 6 Verizon responses so far. I guess because the Verizon 650 is fairly new. The interesting thing is that almost everyone says their service "rocks" or is "ok". Not many suckies.
    I just switched from a Sprint 650 to a Verizon 650. (My oldest son is buying the old one) I went from Verizon to Sprint some time ago at the request of my kids who were all on Sprint, etc. Coverage in Chicago area & NW suburbs was not great, but around the country I felt like I was carrying around an expensive paperwieght. Now that I'm back with Verizon, I noted the increased access speed for web stuff, better signal strength, clearer connections, etc. To be fair, most experiences seem to be regional one way or the other. This was a definite and obvious comparison and in my geographic areas of interest, Verizon wins.

    Harrumph!
  13.    #33  
    I still can't get over how hilarious steinbej's comment was:

    Quote Originally Posted by steinbej
    When I walk into a room and folks see that I have a Treo 650, they all oooooh, ahhhhh, marvel, and even genuflect.

    Thus, clearly my Treo gets a very good reception.
    -- Josh
    HAHAHAHAHAHA....I'll be laughing for days.
  14. #34  
    "ROCK", "OK" and "SUCK" dont really cover the gamut. I'd give my Sprint coverage a solid "B". "OK" sort of implies "barely good enough to keep me from heaving my phone into the Hetch Hetchy Aquaduct"
  15. #35  
    I travel around the west on the verizon network and went from an LG where i always had a connection and signal to the t650 - Poor reception quality and dropped calls.
  16. #36  
    I went from an unlocked Treo 650 using T-mobile to Verizon. By far, the unlocked 650 with T-Mobile blows the Verizon away. Since switching, I have had more dropped calls, low signal quality and worst of all, 30% missed call rate! Thats right, 30%-----right into voicemail. My wife and daughter's verizon phones blow away the Treo for signal strength. I switched because the unlocked device sucked in terms of resets, lock-ups, etc. The VZW is a little better in that regard but much worse in phone quality. Just my 2 cents.
  17.    #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by mc2714
    "ROCK", "OK" and "SUCK" dont really cover the gamut. I'd give my Sprint coverage a solid "B". "OK" sort of implies "barely good enough to keep me from heaving my phone into the Hetch Hetchy Aquaduct"
    Well....how 'bout this!! Just so we're all on the same page (and I'm pretty sure we are), why not consider letter grades A & B as ROCKin' your socks off, C as OK ankle socks, and D & F as SUCKy long athletic socks. Sorry to offend any sock lovers, just trying to put the grades in perspective.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions