|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: V60 antenna - horrible (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
I am at 14,820 minutes so far on my V60 and I still am using the same anetnna.
However, I have seen a replacement that is a small button instead of the tall antenna. That is an easy replacement if you are having problems.
|
Mar 04 '03
8:49 am PST
|
|
V60 antenna - horrible (Reply to this comment)
by crackrat
Look, let's get it out in the open: The V60 is probably the best phone on the market, but the V60 also has a serious antenna problem.
I've gone through 2 antennas already. Of course, I made the mistake of putting the phone in my pocket (perhaps I should staple it to my forehead instead).
When I'm not ordering replacement phones, the V60 is hands down, without question, the most reliable phone out there. I've tried them all.
-HC
|
Mar 03 '03
11:27 am PST
|
|
A contender for the throne: Ericsson T39m (Reply to this comment)
by knilaus
Wow! It seems like your review has generated a lot of flak. Personally I think you've written a very informative review that surely must have been of great use for many prospective buyers.
However, because of the great attention that your review has attracted, I feel urged to address a few of the points that you're making in your article by pointing people's attention in the direction of the Ericsson T39m handset, which in terms of features would seem to tackle the v60c heads on.
It is tri-band, it features the personal organiser that you were discussing and is able to exchange to-dos and contact information with your Palm or other devices via infrared, bluetooth or cable. It also has a voice recorder with a capacity of about 92 seconds. Ring tones may be personalised for every caller. Finally, I have never heard anyone complaining about the (shark fin) antenna breaking off their Ericsson T39m.
There is much more to the T39m - take a look at the details in my review at http://www.epinions.com/content_84517883524
if you're interested.
Thank you once again for a great review. I do understand that you were unable to compare the Motorola v60c with the Ericsson T39m at the time when your original review was written. However, I do think that at present anyone considering the v60c should seriously be considering the T39m as an alternative.
Happy writing!
|
Feb 25 '03
1:23 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Full moon?
Hmm.. seems the freaks really are out today..
Bob.. I think I shall allow you to deal w/ the phone and your orifice yourself.. that sounds like a personal matter...
As for the rest… lol.. your responses surly do show everyone what an expert you truly are..
Now hurry home.. your mommy is calling..
|
Oct 04 '02
8:10 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
I have the V60c which is the CDMA version. From what I understand the V60t does not have a WAP browser that works with AT&T. The two phones are actually quite different.
You may want to check with a service tech at AT&T, because the V60t does have a WAP browser, it seems that the issue is really with AT&T's service.
I will also do some research and respond if I find anything...
|
May 09 '02
9:02 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Verizon actually has some 'no-roaming' plans as well.. and if you check their licenses, they actually have far greater of a roamer area than cingular due to their agreements with alltel, quest, and some others. According to the FCC, the Verizon partnership is the largest in the country.. I would suggest you stay with them..
|
Apr 29 '02
7:13 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by MaximumC2
Dear mnehr,
I recently was enlightened as to how to USE the FM-radio on my phone and the WAP browser...AT&T has been my dream cellular service, I'd never deviate. I just need to learn the phone a little better.
Thanks though,
Chris
|
Mar 26 '02
12:15 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Thanks Chris,
You said much clearer the point I was trying to make...
|
Mar 25 '02
2:15 pm PST
|
|
Re: AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Chris,
I left a comment on your review about this, but I should put it here just in case anyone else has this issue...
You actually are using an V60T instead of a V60C
The lack of WAP and FM radio for you is probably due to a lack of support on AT&Ts TDMA network. I would suggest trying a CDMA or GPRS network service which do support these features, (like Alltel, Verizon, or Cingular (if you are in an area where Cingular has updated to GPRS))
Thanks for the comment...
(
|
Mar 25 '02
2:14 pm PST
|
|
Re: Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by MaximumC2
The V60 a piece of garbage because you had to have the antenna replaced twice. Is it possible you simply purchased a defective phone? I find it amusing that some people find it necessary to act like they are the authority in the review of a product and use their experience as the arbitrary deciding factor in their conclusion that a phone is "garbage." Anotherwards, think before you write, just because your phones antenna broke twice, does not mean that every other V60's antenna is attached tightly. Also, the fact that you're gratiqueing anther gentleman's opinion is another issue in itself - all people have favorites in everything. If this gentleman is partial to Motorola, then did you expect a negative review or even an impartial review? Come'on - this phone is a 5-star phone in Motorola's history books, and I have not found a phone to match it yet. You say antenna is bad, any other of those 12 phones you've owned most likely lacked in other areas that this phone excels in.
-Chris
|
Mar 25 '02
7:37 am PST
|
|
AT&T's V60 (Reply to this comment)
by MaximumC2
No Radio, No WAP Brower, No weather/stock quotes - mainly due to the new #121 feature AT&T is pushing.
-Great review
|
Mar 25 '02
7:25 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Actually I did touch on the flimsy antenna issue with my review on the 7868, however because I have not had that problem with my antenna on the v60, I did not mention it.. My review is based on personal experience... Also, there are 4 people in my office with v60s and none of them have had the issues with the antenna. Again, it is an issue on personal experience..
Regarding battery life, again, we are dealing with an issue of personal experience... I am not going to base a review solely on another’s product review or opinion, there is no point of Epinions being Epinions if it is information that can be gleamed from a product manual somewhere. Epinions is a place for personal information an experience. As I see you were a communications major, you should know about targeting your audience and knowing the information your target audience will require. As I stated, for Epinions, it is an opinion based on personal experience. While you may disagree, this still constitutes my target audience and the information I see proper to divulge to that audience.
Even though a CNnet opinion may say that Motorola's batteries are sub-par in relation to their given standards, my personal experience says otherwise. Things like this show the indicators between reviews based solely on someone copying from a product manual and someone giving personal experience on a product.
(Every article and message on the message board of CNet for the v60 has no negative comments on the battery life. Some do mention the antenna, but I see no complaints about the battery life..Anyone who wishes to confirm can go to CNet.com and do a search for all articles on the v60.)
By the way, I can find nothing in Motorola's manual about the battery 'working harder' to find a lower signal.. The listed items that will effect battery life as given are:
* Not using ab EP Performance charging system.
* Having batteries at extreme temperatures such as 14F or 113F, such as keeping your phone in your car during extreme weather
* Inactivity, storing your battery for long periods of time can reduce the operational effectiveness of the battery. (or not charging the battery properly)
* Extended usage. Basically, batteries will wear out over time.
My reference to the UI was a statement of opinion and not an attack as you seem to imply, nor was it necessarily based directly on your comments that I supposedly did not read. What you gave, by mentioning the UI, was an opportunity for one to give reasoning why they have that opinion, and not just say things like 'I like it..'
I don't think I shall respond to your rude comments about my reading (or lack there-of.)
I think each reader will derive their own opinion based on the conversation . I shall stick to a review of the product.
|
Jan 25 '02
12:53 pm PST
|
|
Re: Re: Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by masse78
Lacking an objective opinion. Motorola is known for their flimsy antennas. It is a point you should have touched upon.
As for keeping the phone in my pocket, did you not read my comment closely? I mentioned that first of all, if Motorola makes the phone small enough to fit in one's pocket, then it should be sturdy enough to do so (they sure as heck spent enough upgrading the phone from plastic to metal). Not to mention the fact that I've owned 12 or so phones in the past 3 or 4 years, and NONE OF THOSE ANTENNAS HAVE EVER BROKEN WHILE THE PHONE WAS IN MY POCKET.
If the phone costs $400 and Motorola went through all the trouble of housing the phone in this aluminum casing to make it more durable, why'd they skimp on the antenna?
And as for the antenna draining the battery...if you read your Motorola manual or any wireless manual for that matter, it will tell you that battery life is affected by how hard the phone works to get the signal. If there's no antenna...your phone's going to be working pretty darn hard to get a signal.
As for my battery life, Motorola is also famous for their less than impressive battery life. If you read any other professional review (try CNET) they mention the fact that Motorola and crappy battery life have (at least up till now) gone hand in hand.
And finally, I don't understand why you brought up my point about the UI! Again, if you read my comment closely, you would find that I was impressed with the UI...I didn't say anything or imply anything negative about it.
For a writer, you don't read very well or apparently very much.
|
Jan 25 '02
9:12 am PST
|
|
Re: Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
Hmmmm... were to start...
First of all, I would not call my like of Motorola phones 'a jaded love'. I have worked with hundreds of different wireless phones through out my carreer and have found Motorola phones to be the highest performing in terms of signal, battery life, and reliability. What has 'jaded' my perspective is actual experience.
You mentioned a couple of interesting things, regarding your antenna breaking off. First, I would not let one experience 'jade' your entire perspective of a product line. Secondly, I would suggest you use the belt clip instead of putting the phone in your pocket, that is what it is made for. I am not surprised that the antenna, or anything else on the phone would break depending on the circumstances you place the phone in.
Regarding your thought that battery life is reduced because your antenna is broken and thus making the phone 'work harder' to receive a signal; honestly this does not make since. From a physics aspect I cannot see how a lack of an antenna can reduce your battery life. Possibly your signal, but not your battery. The phone does not 'reach out' to find a signal, but instead receives existing signals in that area.
I suspect that your battery life may be due to improper charging, a bad battery, or your picking up analog signals from Verizon. Even though you are only 2 miles outside NYC, that does not mean that you will not receive an analog signal, thus reducing the operating efficiency of your phone.
Currently it has been about 2 days since I charged my phone and I have used it all morning, and I still have at least half my battery life.
Regarding the UI, this is a matter of personal taste.. While companies like Nokia may make their UI prettier, Motorola's is still more 'real-world' functional. For example, scrolling through your phone book takes two button presses with a Motorola, while with a Nokia it is 5. Even with Nokia's 'pretty pictures' on the screen, Motorola's UI is still more functional in a real world setting.
You may consider both my 5 star rating, as well as my spending $400. on this phone as 'deluded', however, I would still give it the same rating and spend the same amount almost a year after I started using my phone.
To some $400.00 is a lot of money, but to others it is worth it when considering the alternative.
By the way, you have yet to experess where my review is 'lacking' as your title suggests. You may disagree, yes, but lacking, where?
|
Jan 25 '02
7:26 am PST
|
|
Great Review, but Lacking... (Reply to this comment)
by masse78
I have been highly impressed with your wireless phone reviews thus far. They are extremely thorough, well researched, and well written. I will most likely put you on my trust list. Reading your reviews,I was struck by how much you love Motorola phones. I was hoping when I clicked on the link to this particular review that I would find you didn't let your love of Motorola phones blind you, but I was disappointed. You see I've had this phone for 3 months and have already had to replace the antenna TWICE. Now in all honesty, I keep the phone in my pocket, but seeing as they made it as small as they did, and seeing how I've owned more than 12 phones in the past 3-4 years and none of those antennas have ever broken while in my pocket, I have to say that this was a major slap in the face by Motorola -- and Verizon. In fact, when I first brought the phone to Verizon to fix the antenna, the technician informed me that "We've had to change so many of these on this phone. It happens all the time." A flimsy, shoddy antenna may seem like a minor problem to some, but to wireless lovers like us, we both know that the antenna is an extremely integral part of any phone. Even if you can receive a signal without the antenna, it will drain the battery much more rapidly trying to get a signal. And while we're on the topic of battery life, I fully understand the difference between digital and analog and their respective effects on battery life, but I live 30 miles outside of Manhattan (and work in Manhattan) and am using the so far impressive Verizon network, and come nowhere close to your battery time. The best phone Motorola has come out with yet? Yes I would agree. They've fixed their UI and it is rich in features. But a five-star review? Your as deluded as I was when I dropped the $400 for this piece of garbage.
|
Jan 24 '02
7:49 pm PST
|
|
Re: Whats+next? (Reply to this comment)
by mnehr
I have not heard anything on the v65 yet so I do not know who would carry it or even the type of service it is made for.. checking Motorola's site there is nothing mentioned anywhere on a 'V65' and on wirelessadvisor.com I could only find one link where someone was asking basically if anyone had heard of it...
As for getting your hands on any model early, it is not all it is cracked up to be.. with a lot of carriers there are bugs to work out... plus I am not sure how an average consumer could get ahold of models before they are released to the public. If you work for on of the big carriers you can work towards getting promoted to their Q&D or Marketing departments.. here is where you usually get ahold of early releases of equipment.. I would recommend, however, avoiding writing reviews before the items are released to the public (I waited about 6 months after public release to write this..) as sometimes major changes are made to a product...
|
Oct 11 '01
11:42 am PDT
|
|
*lust* (Reply to this comment)
by vein
I've had my eye on this phone since I first read about it late last year. I WANT I WANT I WANT. =) Too bad SprintPCS hasn't picked it up yet for their service - there is no way I'm going to deal with the Verizon problems locally just to get the phone.
Great review... Now please send me the phone. Please? *batting eyelashes* =)
|
Jun 29 '01
12:51 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
