> In phone reviews and discussions, why is there rarely any discussion of RF
> abilities (signal acquiring/holding) or audio quality? One might assume
> that the reason is that all phones are about equal, so it's just not an
> issue. However, I'm in the U.S. on 1900 and from my experience the phone
> makes a huge difference. The same was true at Sprint (where Sanyos were the
> best in this area).
I am with you.
A long time ago, some magazines tested RF performance and published the
capabilities telling -db values.
But nothing like that for years now...
I would appreciate such an information too.
> Is there a general opinion on brands?
SE has the poorest RF since they use internal antennas.
michael turner - 12 Jul 2004 18:14 GMT
>> In phone reviews and discussions, why is there rarely any discussion of RF
>> abilities (signal acquiring/holding) or audio quality? One might assume
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>>
> SE has the poorest RF since they use internal antennas.
... or rather any phone which uses an internal antenna.
BTW I found a SE t68 gave just as good RF performance as Nokias with
internal antennas.

Signature
Michael Turner
Email (ROT13)
zvxr.gheare1963@ivetva.arg