Samsung Galaxy S2 or HTC Sensation?

[Old Faithful]

If you want a phone with good reception and you're in a fringe area, I suspect you're going to go be disappointed in both phones. Samsung phones have always been on the lower end for reception, although I have not used the SG2S, in particular. As for the HTC Sensation, it has junk recpeption. While the Sensation's RF performance may be fine for many people, it is poor compared to some other models and suffers greatly from death grip. Ironically, I find the the software user expreience on this model to vastly superior to most other phones.

Thanks for the warning, computergeek! Not only does it have poor reception compared to my old dinky HTC Touch, but yesterday I discovered, to my dismay, that it has awful crackling bluetooth audio when on WiFi and it is barely audible at best with WiFi off, using my beloved Plantronics Discovery 975, which is so clear sounding on the HTC Touch and so comfortable that I wear it all day long.

Although I managed to get what I consider to be the best plan I've had for the money I pay, considering my use, and only have kudos for the hard working CSRs "code masters" who were able to dig out obscure rebate codes and plan combos to get me the best service at the lowest price, if I can't use it reliably as a phone, it's going back, and I'm going to reactivate my old HTC Touch.

Now that you've read that far... Do you think I'd have better luck with the HTC Raider? Better yet, are there any android smartphones that have good reception in fringe areas and that work well on bluetooth, at Bell?

[Rogido]

@ Old Faithful. That is a pretty decent plan you negotiated. Does it include Anytime Minutes? 200? 300? And I assume it also includes unlimited eve & weekends?

If I could get a plan like that, I'll port my remaining line with Rogers, which has My 5, with 500 anytime minutes, but I'm paying $50 after adding the 100MB data.

[Old Faithful]

@ Old Faithful. That is a pretty decent plan you negotiated. Does it include Anytime Minutes? 200? 300? And I assume it also includes unlimited eve & weekends?

If I could get a plan like that, I'll port my remaining line with Rogers, which has My 5, with 500 anytime minutes, but I'm paying $50 after adding the 100MB data.

Here are the details:

Fab 10 Promo 45 - 100MB - 36M :
- 200 minutes anytime. Not much, perhaps, only 6 minutes per day calling out to anyone during prime time that is not in your Fab10 list, but sufficient for me. I only once exceeded 200 minutes in my 3 year contract, and that was without any Fab numbers.
- 10 free "Fab" numbers Canada wide. For me it covers all my most called numbers, my family, friends and those I talk to most and longest, any number in Canada, from anywhere you happen to be in Canada, so it means, incoming as well as outgoing, wherever you happen to be in the country, no long distance charges.
- Unlimited texting with picture and video. That requires the phone to have a data capability, WiFi won't work!
- Evenings start at 6PM and end at 7AM. That should cover customer service calls we all end having to do for warranty service, which tend to take a long time, since most of these tend to be open till 9PM.
- Email & Internet 100MB Flex, to cover extraneous data these smartphones may use. Pretty close to what I used to use with my HTC touch after the first 6 months, in other words, that should covers the internet use I used to have on the HTC Touch. And you can always load a mobile optimized browser such as Opera Mini, which uses 10% of the bandwidth of standard browsers

Promo 1: unlimited incoming minutes over the duration of my contract, something I've had for the past 10 years or so, a must for my business (people call me, not th other way around), costs nothing extra within my local calling area, which basically covers 95% of my business territory, but usually less than 1% of my calls.

Promo 2: something that should be standard on any phone: call display, plus voicemail, for the duration of the contract. Call display is a MUST, voicemail is useful when calls get dropped, you're in an area where reception is poor, or you're in a meeting and can't be disturbed. For me, that's probably 2% of my calls, good to have for the odd time you may otherwise lose a business opportunity. One lost job because you don't have it is enough to pay for it for the whole year...

Promo 3: $5 off the 100MB Flex plan for the duration of my contract.

Total, $40 plus 991 fee (0.40) and, of course, our great 14.97% tax. I am also eligible for a new phone at a reduced rate, just not as good as if I had a true data plan. Ergo, a phone that one may get free with a data plan, I have to pay $100-$400.

Taking into account purchasing the Samsung Galaxy S2, it means an extra $7 per month over three years, which I would have accepted, if the phone actually worked reception wise and bluetooth wise!

In other words, considering the purchase of the SGS2, it would have cost me $47 plus taxes per month over the next three years. in other words, it should cover it all and not cause me overages. Plus if you know you may have to call a particular number often in a given month, you can make it one of the Fab10s for that month. Easy as pie, considering our notoriously gouging cell phone industry.

[Rogido]

^ Nice plan. Like I said, if Bell offered it to me, I would port my Rogers line, and save a few dollars. Yes, the anytime minutes is less (500 vs 200), but the Fab 10 more than makes up for it. My daughter uses this line, and most months she racks up less than 25 anytime minutes anyway. By far the bulk of her calls are in the My 5, and the unlimited incoming to a lesser degree. One month she had over 1000 minutes on the My 5!

If signal strength and reception quality are important to you, maybe you should try a Nokia phone. Say, for example, the Nokia Lumia 710 on Windows Phone 7 os. It's a Rogers phone, but no-contract price is only $255 and another $15 will get it unlocked.

[Old Faithful]

^ Nice plan. Like I said, if Bell offered it to me, I would port my Rogers line, and save a few dollars. Yes, the anytime minutes is less (500 vs 200), but the Fab 10 more than makes up for it. My daughter uses this line, and most months she racks up less than 25 anytime minutes anyway. By far the bulk of her calls are in the My 5, and the unlimited incoming to a lesser degree. One month she had over 1000 minutes on the My 5!

For her first phone, my daughter immediately went for a similar plan with unlimited text, precisely because her friends are what's most important in her life, and I believe it's pretty much the same for all girls out there It's indeed a great plan for most people, I find.

If signal strength and reception quality are important to you, maybe you should try a Nokia phone. Say, for example, the Nokia Lumia 710 on Windows Phone 7 os. It's a Rogers phone, but no-contract price is only $255 and another $15 will get it unlocked.

Did I just read Windows Phone 7 OS? That OS deliberately designed to prevent the user from actually running his own machine? That OS deliberately designed to to control users and sandbox them in within politically correct fences and prevent independent thinking? You must be kidding! It's already hard enough to make the latest incarnations of Windows do what was previously clear and simple, to serve THE USER and not CORPORATE INTERESTS!

Sorry for the rant, Man, but... Where's my C prompt?! Where's my File Manager?

For now it's going to be Android, even if I hate the cloud paradigm and the loss of user control (and the outrageous data charges that come with it)... If I could, my phone phone would be running a nano version of Windows 95, with its start button opening up the REAL File System, not some virtual overlay consisting of shortcuts, either!

There you have it! I'm quite passionate about OS Design and how much we've lost our way since the start of the Personal Computer Revolution...

[computergeek541]

Thanks for the warning, computergeek! Not only does it have poor reception compared to my old dinky HTC Touch, but yesterday I discovered, to my dismay, that it has awful crackling bluetooth audio when on WiFi and it is barely audible at best with WiFi off, using my beloved Plantronics Discovery 975, which is so clear sounding on the HTC Touch and so comfortable that I wear it all day long.

Do you think I'd have better luck with the HTC Raider? Better yet, are there any android smartphones that have good reception in fringe areas and that work well on bluetooth, at Bell?

Honestly, I do not believe that HTC knows how to to make a phone with good reception or they would have done it by now. HTC has always been known for poor RF but the only way to know if you'll be happy with the Raider would be to try it. I also get stange static noises, both while listening to music and during phone calls. It's interference of some type that appears to happen if I place my hand near the earpiece speaker grille. I really like my Sensation (using a non-Bell version on Wind) because of the software interface and because of the features but the amount that wifi and cellular reception are affected by hand placement is simply unacceptable.

Android phones with good reception? There aren't many. Forget about Sony Ericsson, Samsung, HTC, and LG. They're all pretty low-end when it comes to antenna quality, even on expensive models. If you want good reception from an Android phone and the reception is the number 1 key important and only factor, the only thing I would consider would be one of the Motorola models.

[Old Faithful]

If you want good reception from an Android phone and the reception is the number 1 key important and only factor, the only thing I would consider would be one of the Motorola models.

Thank you for your advice. I am hesitant about the Motorola because apart from my first "Flip" (do you remember those? That's when I went modern, from my Nokia LX12 Bagphone, hehe..., I had a clamshell model that was horrible reception wise...
Would you consider the XT860 to be significantly better than the Samsung reception wise and bluetooth wise?

Thanks for your feedback!

[computergeek541]

Thank you for your advice. I am hesitant about the Motorola because apart from my first "Flip" (do you remember those? That's when I went modern, from my Nokia LX12 Bagphone, hehe..., I had a clamshell model that was horrible reception wise...
Would you consider the XT860 to be significantly better than the Samsung reception wise and bluetooth wise?

Thanks for your feedback!

Motorola > samsung, reception wise: not even close

I have not personally tired the XT860 but almost every Motorola phone ever made has had stellar reception. Motorola is in the same class as Nokia, although the Nokia N97 that Bell sold was a rare exception of a Nokia model with terrible reception. Samsung is usually just as bad as HTC. From the Motorola Android phones that I've tried, there's always been a noticable 5 to 10dBm improvement in signal readings in certain places compared to Samsung and HTC phones (when making comparisons within minutes of each other, phones at same place, same sim card, same network, etc.).

[Old Faithful]

Motorola > samsung, reception wise: not even close

I have not personally tired the XT860 but almost every Motorola phone ever made has had stellar reception. Motorola is in the same class as Nokia, although the Nokia N97 that Bell sold was a rare exception of a Nokia model with terrible reception. Samsung is usually just as bad as HTC. From the Motorola Android phones that I've tried, there's always been a noticable 5 to 10dBm improvement in signal readings in certain places compared to Samsung and HTC phones (when making comparisons within minutes of each other, phones at same place, same sim card, same network, etc.).

Indeed, I noticed that the dBm readings I made when the Galaxy S2 was activated indicated a generally weaker (by 5 to 10 ) and sometimes significantly weaker signal (15) than what I typically get with the HTC Touch in the same location, which has always had excellent reception.

However, I also noticed that the Galaxy would be able to measure past -110, sometimes even -115, before indicating loss of signal, whereas the Touch would typically indicate loss of signal around -110.

I wonder if this could not indicate the problem is with the HSPA network, more than a problem with the phone itself. If the phone could be set to work in 1X/EVDO mode, I would know for sure, but if I understand correctly, the Galaxy S2 can't be set to that network, as W-CDMA is a totally different beast from CDMA...

Are there any new phones available from Bell that can be set to work on 1X/EVDO mode? If not, I guess my only choice would be to blind purchase a Motorola XT860 (since no stores have any to showcase) and go through another round of testing...

[Old Faithful]

I've though a bit further along the lines of network technology and signal strength and found a few interesting things in my search:

if I understand correctly, the Galaxy S2 can't be set to that network, as W-CDMA is a totally different beast from CDMA...

I haven't been able to get any definitive answer as far as the Samsung Galaxy S2 is concerned, but as far as the Wikipedia's entry about the Samsung Galaxy S2 is concerned (and other sources, may I add), states that the phone is compatible with "CDMA2000/EVDO", so, presumably, it should be able to work with Bell's well established 1X/EVDO transmitters, but that hasn't been the case from my limited experience with this phone, as the only choice of network is either GSM or W-CDMA.

Now, upon further reading, this Wikipedia article states that W-CDMA is NOT a superset of CDMA as it uses a completely different transmitter technology.

In other words, the Samsung Galaxy S2 from Bell does not have the ability to operate using Bell's CDMA network at all, and therefore cannot benefit from its superior deployment and signal strength in more remote areas.

Are there any new phones available from Bell that can be set to work on 1X/EVDO mode?

The question I have therefore remains, and is open to all that may answer: is this a technical limitation of the handset by virtue of software or firmware, or is it simply because the hardware simply does not exist in Bell's version of the phone?

Furthermore, the broader question remains: are there any new phones offered by Bell that can be set to use the mature, established CDMA network with what appears to be its superior signal quality, at least as far as remote areas are concerned?

[Mark I]

Still an interesting thread, I was actually hoping that you'd find out some new information regarding the whole MMS and data situation but it appears my earlier comment was true and Bell must restrict access to the MMS servers to only their cellular data network.

I agree with computergeek541 on his reception comments. My last three phones have all been from Motorola and they've all had great signal, voice, and build quality. Motorola makes great hardware, it's their software that is usually pretty crappy.

I'm always impressed with the features of the newest Samsung & HTC phones and have often contemplated upgrading to one - then I remember that I need my phone to be usable as a phone first and foremost. I'm hoping the whole Google owning Motorola Mobility someday produces a Motorola built Nexus with pure Android.

[Old Faithful]

I'm always impressed with the features of the newest Samsung & HTC phones and have often contemplated upgrading to one - then I remember that I need my phone to be usable as a phone first and foremost

Great insight, you said it all in one sentence, never forget the most important

[computergeek541]

Oldfaithful, forget about CDMA phones. It is an outdated and abandoned technology. You're not going to see anything CDMA worth upgrading to, and honestly, Bell may never release another CDMA phone again. Even for Bell's prepaid offerings, they are often using HSPA phones. Even if they do come out with another CDMA phone, it will will surely be a low-priced, entry level phone that offers nothing new compared to the older models. Also, forget about this notion of phones that you can use on Bell's HSPA and CDMA network. They don't exist. There are a few phones that do have radios for both HSPA and CDMA phones but Bell isn't going to allow you to activate any of them on the CDMA network, and quite honestly, I have no idea of why you would want to. As CDMA has for the most part been abandoned by Bell, they're not going to waste any resources in ever improving the network and when there are problems with it, may not even care to fix them. To a certaiin, extent, Bell would much rather just turn the CDMA network off. Bell fully expects most customers will convert over to HSPA by a certain date and if they haven't, will almost certainly eventually force the transition. It's a pretty safe bet to say that Bell Mobilitiy will never release an Android-based CDMA phone. If the CDMA network is better at your location, I would understand you staying on the network but the phone selection will be horrendous.

[Old Faithful]

Oldfaithful, forget about CDMA phones. It is an outdated and abandoned technology. You're not going to see anything CDMA worth upgrading to, and honestly, Bell may never release another CDMA phone again.

Yes, I understand that and agree with you. It's just that, based on the one experiment with that one, high end phone, it failed miserably compared to this old, unassuming CDMA phone. Also, two different people in my area commented it was their experience as well.

However, this is a very small sample and I am confident that HSPA will reach the level of coverage/reliability that CDMA had, maybe even sooner than expected. As a matter of fact, according to a Bell Tech Support Rep I talked to yesterday who looked at the tech notes for my immediate surroundings, the HSPA network is being upgraded in my area right now, so I may not have to wait much longer.

Even for Bell's prepaid offerings, they are often using HSPA phones.

Good point. If they weren't confident in their HSPA coverage, they wouldn't be relying on it for service for their low end phones with presumably lesser radios.

There are a few phones that do have radios for both HSPA and CDMA phones but Bell isn't going to allow you to activate any of them on the CDMA network

Why not?

and quite honestly, I have no idea of why you would want to.

I am assuming from my experience and that of two people I know that CDMA is better deployed and more reliable where we live.

As CDMA has for the most part been abandoned by Bell, they're not going to waste any resources in ever improving the network and when there are problems with it, may not even care to fix them. To a certaiin, extent, Bell would much rather just turn the CDMA network off.

Sure, but what about all the people running CDMAs? In any case, personally I'm all for it (HSPS has superior bandwidth hence also, possibly, much greater voice quality), but you'd have t make sure the signal is strong and reaches at least as well as 1X/EVDO.

Bell fully expects most customers will convert over to HSPA by a certain date and if they haven't, will almost certainly eventually force the transition. It's a pretty safe bet to say that Bell Mobilitiy will never release an Android-based CDMA phone. If the CDMA network is better at your location, I would understand you staying on the network but the phone selection will be horrendous.

I hope you're right about improvement in the network and it may well happen sooner rather than later, but from my experience upgrades have been excruciatingly slow here. But perhaps the $9.95 monthly SAF I've been paying for the past 18 years is going to used for what Bell said it would be used for, improving the network, after all...

[computergeek541]

The only phone that I know that was ever made that could theoretically work on the Bell HSPA and CDMA networks is the iPhone 4s. Why won't Bell allow you activate one of those on the CDMA network? It's just against Bell's rules. They do not allow any CDMA phone not originally sold and branded as a Bell Mobility phone to be used on the Bell CDMA network. There's no real reason for it other than they don't want you to. Also, Bell will not allow you to use the CDMA portion of a Bell-sold iPhone 4s as they consider this to be only for use on its HSPA network.

I know this next part might not be what you want to hear but to some extent, Bell really doesn't care about the people who are still on CDMA. Of course the company does care but not as much as higher customer density places. Bell's HSPA network covers the vast majority of where the current customers are located and such lower populated areas that don't already have HSPA coverage are surely a lower priority for expansion/improvement, for the simple reason that there is less potential return on any investment made. One can only hope that Bell shores up the HSPA network in areas that you need it before any such complete phase out of CDMA.