My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
the signal fades in and out, so one can't understand what the other
person is saying. I live on a 3rd floor of a modern-construction
(1989) building, two blocks from the center of town. I never had
such problems with my previous phone (an LG VX10). This problem
has become much worse in the last two weeks (right after the 15-day
grace period after I bought the phone, interestingly enough).
The short version of my question is this: Is there a better phone
than the LG VX5200 from the point of view of indoors reception?
***
I took my phone to the tech support desk at the Verizon store were
I bought it. The children I spoke to there did not inspire much
confidence. This one kid first said that one is not supposed to
use wireless phones indoors, adding, as if to prove his point, that
"that's why they're called 'wireless'." Later on, when I said that
for years my cellphone had been my only phone, but if I can no
longer use it in my apartment, I may have to get rid of it and get
a land line, since I can't afford both, he tried to discourage me
from doing this, arguing that "land lines are an obsolete technology."
When I pointed out that this last statement together with his
previous statement about the unsuitability of cellphones for indoor
use meant that, according to him, there is *no* technology for
indoor phone use, his reply was "blame the gummint", for requiring
that cell phones handle less power than they used to.
In fact it seems that "blame the government" was his favorite reply.
He claimed that the reason my service had deteriorated lately was
that Verizon continues to add new customers, but it is not adding
any new towers in my area, and therefore I can expect a steady
increase in dropped calls. He advised me to lobby my city's
government to get them to build more towers. Furthermore, he said
that I'd have the same problems irrespective of carrier or telephone
manufacturer.
Basically he said that I'm screwed and there's nothing I can do
about it, other than perhaps shell out the $175 early cancellation
fee and give up having a telephone altogether.
Maybe all of this is true, but the kid sounded too ignorant and
stupid for me to be able to take him seriously.
After wrangling with Verizon customer service for about 1 hour on
the phone, I managed to get them to agree to let me have a comparable
phone, possibly from a different manufacturer.
The longer version of my question is: is any of what this kid is
saying true? Am I now stuck with a 3-year contract that is almost
completely useless to me?
I look forward to reading your words of wisdom.
kj

Signature
NOTE: In my address everything before the first period is backwards;
and the last period, and everything after it, should be discarded.
> My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
> Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>
> kj
kj,
The tech support desk kid is totally wrong, not to mention ignorant as to
wireless technology.
I have a VX8100 and get 1 bar inside my "tin box" of a home. Read that as
mobile home.
As to your short question. The answer is maybe.
All phones that I have had get less signal indoors as opposed to outdoors.
As to the long question. See the first part of my reply and add to it this.
No you are not stuck. Call VZW and put in a trouble ticket. Tell them that
you have next to no signal indoors and that you would like to know if there
is anything
that can be done.
Also try this link http://www.cellreception.com/index.html
You'll need to know this VZW will be listed as Cellco Partnership.
When you click the little orange things look for that. You could also try
www.wireless.fcc.org
and search that way.
HTH

Signature
Andrew D. Sisson
LG VX8100
VZW>BAM>FRONTIER CELLULAR>ROCHESTER TEL. MOBILE
SID 154
50436
>My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
>Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
>the signal fades in and out, so one can't understand what the other
>person is saying. I live on a 3rd floor of a modern-construction
>(1989) building, two blocks from the center of town.
Poured concrete construction, with steel rebar reinforcement? The
rebar can hamper signal. You didn't say where you live, so we don't
know if you are on an 800Mhz system or 1900Mhz. Building penetration
is much worse with 1900Mhz.
>I never had
>such problems with my previous phone (an LG VX10). This problem
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>The short version of my question is this: Is there a better phone
>than the LG VX5200 from the point of view of indoors reception?
Short answer, if you had better signal with another phone, then yes,
it could be the phone.
>I took my phone to the tech support desk at the Verizon store were
>I bought it. The children I spoke to there did not inspire much
>confidence.
Children. I'm liking this guy more and more.:-)
>This one kid first said that one is not supposed to
>use wireless phones indoors, adding, as if to prove his point, that
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>a land line, since I can't afford both, he tried to discourage me
>from doing this, arguing that "land lines are an obsolete technology."
Yes, they are so obsolete that just about everyone has one. Certainly
more have them than cell phones. You should have asked him why
Verizon (not Verizon Wireless, you may have to explain to him the
difference) is still in business.
>When I pointed out that this last statement together with his
>previous statement about the unsuitability of cellphones for indoor
>use meant that, according to him, there is *no* technology for
>indoor phone use, his reply was "blame the gummint", for requiring
>that cell phones handle less power than they used to.
Did you go to a VZW store or to a Radio Shack. Just wondering...
>In fact it seems that "blame the government" was his favorite reply.
He's probably just pissed because he just started working and found
out about all those taxes that came out of his check before he got it.
>He claimed that the reason my service had deteriorated lately was
>that Verizon continues to add new customers, but it is not adding
>any new towers in my area, and therefore I can expect a steady
>increase in dropped calls. He advised me to lobby my city's
>government to get them to build more towers.
Ahh, finally. We may be onto something here. This could be a major
part of your problem, as an increasing customer base with the same
number of towers will eventually drown out your phone's ability to
speak with the tower the further from it you get.
>Furthermore, he said
>that I'd have the same problems irrespective of carrier or telephone
>manufacturer.
Manufacturer, maybe. Carrier, bullshit. Some carriers may be better
in your area, some may be worse.
>Basically he said that I'm screwed and there's nothing I can do
>about it, other than perhaps shell out the $175 early cancellation
>fee and give up having a telephone altogether.
Been there, done that. I was successful in getting a new tower put
up, though. You just need to keep on their a.s about your inability
to connect and try to get every VZW customer you know in your area to
do the same thing. It only took us about two years.
>Maybe all of this is true, but the kid sounded too ignorant and
>stupid for me to be able to take him seriously.
Kind of like the kid at Radio Shack trying to tell me *they*
manufactured all of VZW's phones.
>After wrangling with Verizon customer service for about 1 hour on
>the phone, I managed to get them to agree to let me have a comparable
>phone, possibly from a different manufacturer.
Couldn't get any worse, could it? I say give it a try. Your phone
may indeed be a big part of the problem.
>The longer version of my question is: is any of what this kid is
>saying true?
You pretty much knew the answer to that before you posted. If not,
you should now.
>Am I now stuck with a 3-year contract that is almost
>completely useless to me?
THREE years??? I didn't know there was such an animal. You sure it
isn't TWO years?
kj - 28 Dec 2005 17:26 GMT
>>My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
>>Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
>>the signal fades in and out, so one can't understand what the other
>>person is saying. I live on a 3rd floor of a modern-construction
>>(1989) building, two blocks from the center of town.
>Poured concrete construction, with steel rebar reinforcement? The
>rebar can hamper signal. You didn't say where you live, so we don't
>know if you are on an 800Mhz system or 1900Mhz. Building penetration
>is much worse with 1900Mhz.
I live in Cambridge, MA. And judging by the tower locations shown
by www.cellreception.com (thanks to an earlier responder for the
link), I live at the point fartherst from all the towers in the
town. According to http://www.cdg.org/worlwide the system in my
area should be 800 MHz.
The tech support kids at the Verizon store I went to yesterday said
that older phones, such as my previous LG VX10, were design to
handle more power, but newer phone, due to "new gummint rules",
must operate with much less power, for health reasons. According
to these kids, this is why I had no problem with my previous phone.
At any rate, I have seen in several places the opinion that Motorola
phones are generally better at picking up signal than others
(particularly LG ones). I checked a recent Consumer Reports rating
of cellphones and the Motorola E815 comes out on top, but the next
three models in the ratings are all LGs. In particular, according
to these ratings the LG VX8100 has better sensitivity than the
Motorola E815. The only reason the LG VX8100 came in behind the
Motorola E815 in these ratings seems to be that the latter has a
4 1/4 hr talking time, versus 3 1/4 hr for the LG VX8100.
If it weren't for the fact that the phone that's not working for
me at the moment is made by LG, I'd go for the LG VX8100...
I guess the crux of the matter is not knowing whether the problem
I'm having now is due to a bum phone or to a bad model or carrier.
It looks like settling this question is going to take time and
experimentation. (Too bad none of my friends use Verizon...)
Thanks you all for all the helpful advice,
kj

Signature
NOTE: In my address everything before the first period is backwards;
and the last period, and everything after it, should be discarded.
If you had been getting a signal, and it suddenly stopped, report that to
Verizon Wireless Technical Support. Could be a tower problem. On the other
hand, my personal experience is that the newer LG phones do not have the
strong reception they were initially known for. Today, Motorola and Nokia
are the choices for areas with weak reception. Motorolas will pull a signal
where nothing else will. Nokia's pretty much also. I do not like LG nor
Samsung for that reason.
> My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
> Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>
> kj
> My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
> Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> has become much worse in the last two weeks (right after the 15-day
> grace period after I bought the phone, interestingly enough).
We got (two) VX5200 phones from Verizon a couple months ago. Both worked
reasonably well. One of them would drop calls frequently when we were at
home. (note just ONE of them) We eventually noticed that the one dropping
calls frequently at home had a really short battery life. (like two days
MAXIMUM standby time)
Luckily, we just caught it within the 15-day trial period. However, when my
wife took the phone to the Verizon store and explained what was happening,
they ran some quick tests on it and promptly replaced her handset with
another new VX5200.
Both have been working fine since.
If your LG VX10 worked fine in the same building, you have a defective
handset. -Dave
Larry - 28 Dec 2005 13:57 GMT
> Luckily, we just caught it within the 15-day trial period. However,
> when my wife took the phone to the Verizon store and explained what
> was happening, they ran some quick tests on it and promptly replaced
> her handset with another new VX5200.
Must have been the RAKE receiver Richard Ness is hawking for us:
A CDMA mobile has a special receiver called a RAKE receiver
that can make estimates of multipath fading and retrieve the
information for a particular mobile. The simple mathematical
steps outline how the receiver works.
SI(t) Information signal for Ith mobile
WI(t) Walsh Code for Ith mobile
R (t) Received signal at RAKE receiver
Hence at any RAKE receiver the received signal
will be (assuming no multipath fading)
R (t) = S SI(t) WI(t)
Let's retrieve the signal for user1
W1(t) R(t) = W1(t) S SI(t) WI(t)
= S1(t) + 0
The orthogonal property of Walsh Codes makes zero the noise
and retrieves the signal.
With no noise it never goes without a perfect call....right?
(c;
Sorry your phones sucked.
The Ghost of General Lee - 28 Dec 2005 18:20 GMT
>> Luckily, we just caught it within the 15-day trial period. However,
>> when my wife took the phone to the Verizon store and explained what
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>The orthogonal property of Walsh Codes makes zero the noise
>and retrieves the signal.
If you are going to copy and paste Richard's words, at least have the
decency to attribute what you lifted, so no one thinks you actually
went to the trouble of researching anything.
> My new LG VX5200 phone barely gets a signal in my apartment.
> Practically every phone call gets dropped at least once, and/or
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> has become much worse in the last two weeks (right after the 15-day
> grace period after I bought the phone, interestingly enough).
....
> In fact it seems that "blame the government" was his favorite reply.
> He claimed that the reason my service had deteriorated lately was
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> that I'd have the same problems irrespective of carrier or telephone
> manufacturer.
Sadly, the budget to fix this has been diverted for legal issues:
"In a decision hearkening back to the days of vendor financing, Lucent
Technologies Inc. (NYSE: LU - message board) was ordered yesterday to
pay $244 million to settle a 2001 case filed by the trustee of former
carrier Winstar Communications.
The ruling was handed down by judge Joel B. Rosenthal in U.S.
bankruptcy court in Wilmington, Del. The trial, in which Lucent was
accused of breach of contract, had ended in June. (See Lucent Could Pay
$244M.)
Back in the day, Winstar combined some of the most glamorous elements
of the telecom bubble: overexuberant investors, LMDS technology, Jack
Grubman, and Lucent's vendor financing. (See Wireless Wonders, Winstar
Secures Another $1.02 Billion, Winstar Investors Sue Grubman, and
Salomon Slammed in Settlement.)
There's a bit of irony to all this. Lucent helped pay for Winstar's
rise, eventually making possible the lawsuit whereby Lucent is now
giving... more money."