Mobile phone reception
Forum Member
✭✭
In the past when I have had intermittent or no mobile reception, I have usually assumed it is down to the network having poor coverage.
However, on holiday in a poor area, I was able to compare the phones of different family members, all using the 3 payg sim.
Huawei Y300. Very, very poor. Barely ever picked up a usable signal.
Nokia 520. Marginally better, but still not great.
Nokia 2730. Excellent. Good reception at all times.
Nokia 5800. Also excellent at all times.
These were all using the same network.
This got me thinking. When I next get a phone, how will I be able to find out beforehand which are likly to have reliable reception in difficult/marginal conditions like the 5800 or 2730, or which are likely to be poor like the Y300?
However, on holiday in a poor area, I was able to compare the phones of different family members, all using the 3 payg sim.
Huawei Y300. Very, very poor. Barely ever picked up a usable signal.
Nokia 520. Marginally better, but still not great.
Nokia 2730. Excellent. Good reception at all times.
Nokia 5800. Also excellent at all times.
These were all using the same network.
This got me thinking. When I next get a phone, how will I be able to find out beforehand which are likly to have reliable reception in difficult/marginal conditions like the 5800 or 2730, or which are likely to be poor like the Y300?
0
Comments
I've found my wife gets a far better signal on her galaxy s4 mini than I do on my normal s4, both on tmobile /ee.
Since coming across this problem. while away on holiday in Dorset, I checked the reception at several points on the journey back. Most were OK, with good reception on all devices. However, at one point in the back of beyond, when I tried, again the Y300 and the Nokia 520 failed whereas the other 2 (initially more expensive - and therefore better????) phones performed faultlessly. A similar problem in a roadside cafe, where just the Huawei Y300 failed.
When I next get a new phone, I'll want to check the specifications. Some things (eg screen resolution, memery size, etc are easy. Also, I can view screens side by side and make sure the image is to my liking/satisfaction. However, I see no way of knowing the effective usability, countrywide.
Also, it seems that part of the issue with the weaker phones may be problems with being inside a building, as they are less able to punch through the cladding - we were in an aluminium clad static caravan when I first noticed the problem - ie it was the handset, not the service provider, that was letting me down. This has got me thinking about a check I might do when I return to work tomorrow. All our company phones use the same mobile provider. However, we don't all have the same handset. People like me, down the pecking order, have Nokia 2730s. The higher ups have various blackberry style sets I'm not sure of actual models. I have no problems using my phone regardless of where I am in the building. My manager, however, always has to move around, and usually go outside, to get an adequate reception.
It really is impossible to say whether a phone will have better reception than another in every instance.
http://meremobil.dk/2013/12/er-mobilerne-med-de-bedste-og-vaerste-antenner/
As it says, 3db difference doubles the signal. So you can see that on 2G the plastic iPhone 5c is up to 4 times better than the iPhone 5s, and whilst some top end Nokias do well, so do Samsung and Sony.
I'd say that in the middle of nowhere 2G is most important as it might it also be in edge areas.
I guess none of it matters if you never have to make calls in fringe areas.
Very useful chart - but I think its safe to say 2G = 900mhz, which in the UK can often provide 3G on O2 and sometimes on Vodafone - and there is no listing for 1800mhz. (EE 2G).
Very likely, depending on the network.