Guest nickcornaglia Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 The Cingular 2125 ($299.99 with contract) is a powerful, good-looking smartphone that brings Windows Mobile flexibility to a truly pocket-sized handset. It's a good choice for making phone calls, syncing with PIM data, and surfing the Web. Although it's better-looking than the very similar T-Mobile SDA, we prefer the SDA's added Wi-Fi power. It's always great to see Microsoft Smartphones on the front pages of major tech magazines. PC Magazine raves over the Cingular 2125, but still places it second to the T-Mobile SDA due to it's lack of WiFi...thus only giving it 4 out of 5 stars. Still a nice review and worth a read, especially for American users still on the fence about picking up this dainty little number. I talked the 69 year old owner of my company into buying one and I must say, it's a beautiful little phone...with the power we've all come to know in Smartphones. >>> CLICK HERE TO READ <<<
Guest Pondrew Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 Good to see the Smartphone getting more exposure in North America. I still find it strange how the North American versions of HTC 'phones have the hump added to the design. Is this a signal issue?
Guest petepaxton Posted February 22, 2006 Report Posted February 22, 2006 The 2125 did very well and so did the Tmobile SDA which actually got PC Magazine's Editor's Choice award.
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 Pondrew - yep, its just a larger antenna for the Cingular CDMA network ( believe that is correct!). Most CDMA phones seem to need it (see the samsung i600 or i700) Good news that its finally available over there now.
Guest nickcornaglia Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 Actually, Cingular is GSM. I have no reception problems at all under 850 but am told the 1900 users need the extra little boost the antenna provides. CDMA (like verizon & sprint) need an antenna as well.
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 Ah there we go then, i wasnt sure if i had got it right! It's odd that the 1900MHz would need a bigger antenna over a 850MHz, is there just less 1900MHz coverage generally?
Guest Pondrew Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 Was pretty sure neither the SDA nor 2125 were CDMA. Was the SMT5600 on 1900MHz band too? If so then I guess feedback from users of poor signal is indeed the reason 'the hump' was introduced!
Guest Monolithix [MVP] Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 I would assume so! Tri-band is 900/1800/1900 (Europe/UK/US).
Guest nickcornaglia Posted February 23, 2006 Report Posted February 23, 2006 I am told (and have some expirence w/tmobile(1900)) that 1900 has a harder time indoors. when I had an spv I was under tmobile (1900 in my area) and couldn't qet a signal in my home. Under Cingular (850 in my area, though only 1900 in some) I get all bars indoors.
Guest MadSci Posted March 21, 2006 Report Posted March 21, 2006 I am told (and have some expirence w/tmobile(1900)) that 1900 has a harder time indoors. when I had an spv I was under tmobile (1900 in my area) and couldn't qet a signal in my home. Under Cingular (850 in my area, though only 1900 in some) I get all bars indoors. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yup. That's the case. The 850 band penetrates buildings better than 1900. After aquiring the ATT network, Cingular has had a devil of a time with inconsistant service in areas wserved by a sub-optimal mix of frequencies, so the extra signal strength gained by moving the antenna away from the rest of the phone's electronics can make a real difference. Just junked my MPx200 for the 2125. Signal strength in buildings is night and day. Just another way that switching to the 2125 has changed my life! MadSci
Recommended Posts