Why the RAZR is killing Motorola

DTC wrote:

> I just upgraded my Motorola 557 to the V3xx phone now. The sound quality
> of listening to people appears to be not as good as I find myself asking
> them to repeat what they are saying...something I hardly never had to do
> with the 557.

As far as RAZR's go, the V3xx is supposed to be an improvement over
previous models in terms of voice quality. There have been complaints
about the speakerphone, and about some tinnieness, in the reviews, but
compared to earlier RAZRs, they are better.

> Over the next few days I'll swap the SIM cards on the two new V3xx
> phones and the 557 and call different people and see if there really is
> a problem.

The V557 has very good voice quality. The CNET review stated:

"Audio quality was spotty at times, which is typical with the Cingular
network in San Francisco. We had several dropped calls, as well as calls
that went in and out. When working correctly, the handset itself has
solid sound quality."

"http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-v557/4505-6454_7-31313291.html"

Are you comparing apples to apples here? Maybe you were using the V557
in an area with better coverage than where you were using the V3xx. The
AT&T/Cingular network in the San Francisco Bay Area is not all that
great, as CNET noted.

The deal killer for the V3xx, as CNET stated, is that it isn't a world
phone. "It's disappointing that the phone is not fully quadband like the
Razr V3. As such, it won't have as much coverage outside of the United
States. It's a baffling change to say the least, and one that makes the
phone significantly less consumer-friendly."

"http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-razr-v3xx/4505-6454_7-31987377.html"

LOL, can someone explain the difference between "not fully quadband" and
simply "not quadband." Looks like the CNET writer needs to take some
writing classes.



[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]

SMS wrote:
> DTC wrote:
>
>> I just upgraded my Motorola 557 to the V3xx phone now. The sound
>> quality of listening to people appears to be not as good as I find
>> myself asking them to repeat what they are saying...something I hardly
>> never had to do with the 557.

> Are you comparing apples to apples here? Maybe you were using the V557
> in an area with better coverage than where you were using the V3xx.

Pretty much all the same areas about town. Had a call an hour ago and I
simply could not understand what the guy was saying...even after having him
repeat himself several times. He sounded very horse, as the other calls.

"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:464cb1fa$0$27175$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> DTC wrote:
>
>> I just upgraded my Motorola 557 to the V3xx phone now. The sound quality
>> of listening to people appears to be not as good as I find myself asking
>> them to repeat what they are saying...something I hardly never had to do
>> with the 557.

Make sure you have removed the tiny piece of round plastic protective
sheeting that covers the small round earpiece on the phone when shipped.


>
> As far as RAZR's go, the V3xx is supposed to be an improvement over
> previous models in terms of voice quality. There have been complaints
> about the speakerphone, and about some tinnieness, in the reviews, but
> compared to earlier RAZRs, they are better.
>
>> Over the next few days I'll swap the SIM cards on the two new V3xx phones
>> and the 557 and call different people and see if there really is a
>> problem.
>
> The V557 has very good voice quality. The CNET review stated:
>
> "Audio quality was spotty at times, which is typical with the Cingular
> network in San Francisco. We had several dropped calls, as well as calls
> that went in and out. When working correctly, the handset itself has solid
> sound quality."
>
> "http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-v557/4505-6454_7-31313291.html"
>
> Are you comparing apples to apples here? Maybe you were using the V557 in
> an area with better coverage than where you were using the V3xx. The
> AT&T/Cingular network in the San Francisco Bay Area is not all that great,
> as CNET noted.
>
> The deal killer for the V3xx, as CNET stated, is that it isn't a world
> phone. "It's disappointing that the phone is not fully quadband like the
> Razr V3. As such, it won't have as much coverage outside of the United
> States. It's a baffling change to say the least, and one that makes the
> phone significantly less consumer-friendly."
>
> "http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phones/motorola-razr-v3xx/4505-6454_7-31987377.html"
>
> LOL, can someone explain the difference between "not fully quadband" and
> simply "not quadband." Looks like the CNET writer needs to take some
> writing classes.
>
>
>
> [Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular posts
> to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away, and
> alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's Wireless
> Service.]

On Thu, 17 May 2007 12:50:19 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <464cb1fa$0$27175$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>DTC wrote:
>
>> I just upgraded my Motorola 557 to the V3xx phone now. The sound quality
>> of listening to people appears to be not as good as I find myself asking
>> them to repeat what they are saying...something I hardly never had to do
>> with the 557.
>
>As far as RAZR's go, the V3xx is supposed to be an improvement over
>previous models in terms of voice quality. There have been complaints
>about the speakerphone, and about some tinnieness, in the reviews, but
>compared to earlier RAZRs, they are better.

The V3xx (including sound and build quality) actually gets very good
reviews, both from reviewers and from users, as I know myself from
personal experience. You haven't actually used it, so you have no idea
what you're talking about (as usual).

>> Over the next few days I'll swap the SIM cards on the two new V3xx
>> phones and the 557 and call different people and see if there really is
>> a problem.
>
>The V557 has very good voice quality.

Good, but not as good as the V3xx, either in terms of quality or in
terms of volume.

>Are you comparing apples to apples here? Maybe you were using the V557
>in an area with better coverage than where you were using the V3xx. The
>AT&T/Cingular network in the San Francisco Bay Area is not all that
>great, ...

It actually is good in the Bay Area, arguably the best of any carrier.

>[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
>posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
>and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
>Wireless Service.]

All that does is trash attws with partial threads, making is _less_ (not
more) usable. Kindly stop.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

On Fri, 18 May 2007 11:48:35 -0400, "Jackson" <jacksonx@no_spam.z> wrote
in <v-6dnZroJYJWV9DbnZ2dnUVZ_q6vnZ2d@comcast.com>:

>"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>news:464cb1fa$0$27175$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net.. .
>> DTC wrote:
>>
>>> I just upgraded my Motorola 557 to the V3xx phone now. The sound quality
>>> of listening to people appears to be not as good as I find myself asking
>>> them to repeat what they are saying...something I hardly never had to do
>>> with the 557.
>
>Make sure you have removed the tiny piece of round plastic protective
>sheeting that covers the small round earpiece on the phone when shipped.

Yep! That seems to be a common mistake. On my V3xx it was blue.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>