DS Forums

 
 

Iphone6 - Poor signal signals performance


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-09-2015, 10:29
bartdog
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 92

Hi, ive been an iphone6 user for some time, & for the most part am quite satisfied with the phone.
Ive recently got a caravan thats located in a really poor signal reception area. I recently changed my service provider to EE which provides the best signal. I can now make 2g calls with no problem, but data ranges from 1 blob 3g sometimes, but mostly & ( always inside ) is always 2 blobs on "edge". Needless to say data is so slow & often hangs up.
Ive got wifi enabled on the iphone but that relies on a good hotspot, which this place just isnt!!

Just wondered if anyone can let me know is the Samsung Galaxy S3 any better under weak signal conditions, or is it as i suspect just the same - any info appreciated?
Bartdog>>
bartdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 12-09-2015, 11:06
daveyfs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 871
Samsungs are reckoned to be amongst the worst phones for holding onto a signal. See this thread.

Also, the vast majority of S3s sold here don't do 4G so you'd lose that advantage when in an area with 4G coverage.
daveyfs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 11:24
The Lord Lucan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,965
Samsungs especially the older ones have dire antennas. HOWEVER Maybe look at a Samsung which can take an external antenna if coverage is an issue. However the iPhone 6 has a pretty good ability to hold on to the weakest signal so i doubt things can be improved much for you.

Wifi wise I've found they are much the same.
The Lord Lucan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 13:49
daveyfs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 871
Another thought - you might be better off on Three.

EE and Three share 3G mast infrastructure so the 3G coverage should be much the same as EE. What's significant is that Three tends to hold on to 3G signal much longer then EE does, as it doesn't have a 2G network to step down to. In your situation this might help, as the phone will hold onto the weaker, but usable 3G signal rather than switching down to unusable 2G.

Might be worth getting a Three sim to try it out.
daveyfs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 13:55
The Lord Lucan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,965
Another thought - you might be better off on Three.

EE and Three share 3G mast infrastructure so the 3G coverage should be much the same as EE. What's significant is that Three tends to hold on to 3G signal much longer then EE does, as it doesn't have a 2G network to step down to. In your situation this might help, as the phone will hold onto the weaker, but usable 3G signal rather than switching down to unusable 2G.

Might be worth getting a Three sim to try it out.
Not quite true. EE has better 3G coverage due to less shrinkage because of extensive 4G coverage i.e. less 3G demand and EE still have several thousand 3G masts that 3 do not have access to.. Likely not going to change anytime soon due to recent developments.
The Lord Lucan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 14:10
daveyfs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Swansea
Posts: 871
Not noticed shrinkage myself, indeed in my part of the world I find Three 3G more responsive and faster than EE 3G. That's my experience though, other areas may, of course, be quite different.

I think its still worth his/her while having a go with a PAYG sim.

Then again, the other option is to stick with EE and get a different phone which is able to be locked to 3G. I think I'm right in saying that's possible with all Android phones, maybe Windows phone too?
daveyfs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 14:32
The Lord Lucan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,965
Not noticed shrinkage myself, indeed in my part of the world I find Three 3G more responsive and faster than EE 3G. That's my experience though, other areas may, of course, be quite different.

I think its still worth his/her while having a go with a PAYG sim.

Then again, the other option is to stick with EE and get a different phone which is able to be locked to 3G. I think I'm right in saying that's possible with all Android phones, maybe Windows phone too?
Yeah definitely worth trying. Yes, some phones can be. However i'd rather my phone switched down to 2G mid call than.. drop the call because it's locked to 3G.

The geeky fix would be a Wifi Router with external antenna of some sort with a data sim. Giving them wifi calling.. also would allow them much better data speeds / reliability due to the antenna getting better signal than the iPhone (or any handset) itself.
The Lord Lucan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 17:10
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
Newer phones are concentrating on 4G degrading 2G performance even more.

Denmark and Sweden actually produce data on phone reception if you can find it.
Im not sure if this old post will help
"Here are the phones with the best and worst antennas"
http://meremobil.dk/2013/12/er-mobil...rste-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.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 17:21
Stereo Steve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,373
3 3G definitely snappier than EE around here but that's probably down to lack of 4G and more customers using EE. How about a 3 mifi or something? Get a plan for the phone which gives you calls and basic data and then get something else to act as a hotspot. Or a router or summat? Probably a solution out there. Check your location on all the networks and see what's available.
Stereo Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2015, 18:07
alanwarwic
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
I followed some of those interesting new links. Seems over there, antennagate was predicted well before launch, and the same Gert Frĝlund Pedersen
Professor measures up to a ten fold difference between devices!
It also confirms my 1 step forward, 2 steps back observation on the new stuff.
http://www.strandreports.com/sw5200.asp

It is complcated in that no no one dares publish a league table in English, plus you would need to know the frequency band of your desired network.
UMTS 2100 is a common frequency that some devices are totally useless at.

Its a shame really, in that better consumer knowledge would force manufacturers to use a better antenna.
alanwarwic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:40.