rating of phones' signal strength

[amphibian]

I remember reading an article, probably this month's Consumer Reports, mentioning the phone considered to have had the greatest signal strength was a Samsung (the one that will work the farthest from a tower, I'm thinking). Now that particular Samsung was not even present on the Samsung USA web site as I remember, so the data must have been at least a year old.

I have seen SAR ratings for each phone model that I retrieve from CNET's Wireless channel.

Does someone currently compile a list or make some effort of measuring/comparing a capability that could be called signal strength?

[KevinJames]

Hi amphibian,

I have yet to stick my foot in my mouth today, but the day is young. Lets see what I can do here....

Is this a scholastic question or is it that you are looking to buy the "best performer" on the market?

The reason I ask is that the FCC would probably be the best place for a scholastic question. However, if it is something more personal, I can tell you from what I've seen posted on several boards that the subjective views people have as to performance changes from location to location and based on personal useage and circumstances.

For example, on the Yahoo Group I set up for the Panasonic Allure phone, I have had members who have said it is the best reception phone they have ever had. Then again, I have had members say they used better.

Seeing as the FCC dictates the technical performance of machines, what that leaves us with is

1. Manufacturing quality. (Just like cars, some units are the "cat's meow" while others are lemons--and yet they all roll off the same assembly line.)

2. Location. (Where you are at and how well the system is built out.)

3. Battery strength

4. Other factors

One gentleman that is in the business of selling phones and seems very technically adept is Bill Radio of http://www.mountainwireless.com. You might try writing him and see what he thinks.

Kevin

[Tommyboy]

What I picked up from your post Amphibian is that you want to know what phones have more "power" therefore receiving better signal strength. All phones work at the maximum of .6 watts and should in theory reach around the same distance away from the tower.

What Kevin has pointed out is personal experience is a factor in determining what is considered "good" reception versus "bad" reception.

But I don't think the signal strength changes considerable from phone to phone. BUT, this doesn't imply that all phones are created equal. Some phones will get better reception but that's not based strictly on signal strength. The chips in the phones could be of a higher quality, Qualcomm likes to think so. It could be the technology is better, Sprint would like to think so. And it could be the manufacturer makes a overall better product, Nokia would like for you to think so.

In summary, there are many factors that go into the reception quality of the phone besides signal strength. If your purpose is to find a high quality cell phone that makes clear calls, who doesn't want that, then you will need to continue to do your research but keep in mind one man's reality is another man's perception.

[amphibian]

OK, scholastic in that I was thinking there was a way to actually measure
that quality in a phone. Say to 'isolate' that attribute
from things like "Editors Picks" where weight, battery life, WAP enabled etc.
are the basis for best phone.

But you are describing it as more subjective.

I was assuming, from the singling out of one phone model by that source,
as best able to obtain service was somehow based on something more empirical,
quantifiable like capacity to communicate with tower
farther than any other phone under the same set of circumstances.

And yeah, what I would do with that information would be to shop for next phone.
If you will, I thought signal strength could be a parameter
like braking distance or mpg that I may use
when beginning a search for new automobile.

[Jackstar]

I have been through severaal handsets but used a limited amount of carriers. For PCS carriers (CDMA 1900 mhz) such as Sprint PCS and Qwest Wireless, I have always found that Qualcomm/Kyocera handsets have superior signal strength and clarity of calls. Nokia, which has admitted to CDMA problems in the past is not even close. The Nokia currently has a 3285 version with new software which is supposed to correct any software compatiibility issues. I still think Kyocera works best on this type of network. If you decide to go with AT and T, Cingular, Verizon or Voice stream, I can't really help with those carriers.

I do currently have a 120c Motorola with Verizon and I have no complaints.

[Jack]

When you talk to a wireless carrier they say that all phones will get the same signal strenght in a given spot. Which is not true. Usually the more you spend on a phone the better the reception will be

Jack

[Tommyboy]

Jack,

Why do say that is not true? I have found that to be the case assuming your comparing phones within the same manufacturuer.

Tom