I need phone help

I would go with Verizon personally as I've had nothing but trouble with my service from AT&T here. Doesn't mean that in your area that service will be good though. You can try a phone for up to 30 days and only have to pay a usage fee and possibly a restocking fee on the phone. The kiosk at my local Sam's Club has no restocking fees so you should look into places like that. If you can get a phone from a particular service I would walk around with the Field Test Mode enabled and check out the signal at the areas you frequent (like your house, school, job, mall, downtown strip, etc.) Great signal is anywhere from 0 to -65 db and anything over -95 starts to get really bad with silences and dropped calls. Enabling Field Test Mode is different for every cell phone so you'll have to google that with the model of phone to figure out how to do it. Also most 2 year contract plans will cut the cost of a phone drastically and most services allow you to upgrade the phone every 18-24 months.

As for phones just visit the service's website and look around. Most have advanced search options to customize what your looking for and it shouldn't be too hard. The more advanced phones will require data plans which you may not want and they should say on the site if it does or not.

The quality of service you're going to get from carriers will vary region to region. I would ask friends and family to see what carriers they use and how they feel about their service to get a general feel for which carriers to avoid.

Verizon has been coming out with a lot of great new phones this season, so I would definitely look into what they have to offer. I have generally only heard great things about their service in the midwest area, but their individual plans are a tad pricey. T-Mobile doesn't really have any boast-worthy phones, but their saving grace is the relatively cheap price of their plans. As for AT&T, I think this one's a gamble. In addition to their shaky service, they are no longer offering an unlimited data plan... So if you think you're going to be using your phone heavily, I would be wary of that.

So if you're cost-conscious, I would check out T-Mobile. Their plans are significantly cheaper than the other two, and their phones aren't too shabby. If you want a phone that has solid specs and can afford the extra cost, I'd look into Verizon first, and then AT&T.

You can't get the iPhone 4 in the US if you want your own plan. I recommend the Samsung Galaxy S. It's THE Android phone to get in our current market.

Practically looks like the iphone too lol

I use a Samsung GT 5230. It is by far the best phone I've ever used.



Be advised that I use this phone mainly in business environments. I want a serious phone for serious people, no app-wielding games&gizmos bullshit. The iPhone is an example of a hilariously terrible toy to me. If you think otherwise, you'll hate this phone!

Pros:
- Exceptional connectivity, even here in the mountains.
- Slim, fits into every pocket.
- No moving parts - can't break. As opposed to clamshell/slider designs (YES THAT ONE MEANS YOU, YOU TERRIBLE NOKIA OGRES OF DESIGN)
- Great interface usability. If you forgo all "widget" crap, it's super-usable. Beats the fucking shit out of, say, a Nokia communicator. Or any other phone on the market, really.
- Reliably long battery life.
- Great voice quality.
- Didn't cost me a red cent. My carrier literally BEGGED me to accept this phone (they offered to send me three more) as a gift, because I've accrued so many bonus miles.

Cons:
- TOO MANY WIDGETS. I wish I could just delete them all.
- External buttons can't be reprogrammed.

Haha, the Galaxy S is an Android phone. It's completely different. And all modern multi-touch smartphones were influenced by the original 2007 iPhone. It's natural they look similar.



Seriously, your phone is the toy when you compare it to phones of the iPhone's calibre. Your phone is a whole World lower than the iPhone, Android phones, WinMo7 phones and Blackberries. Your phone isn't even a smartphone. Its platform isn't even a C-based Operating System, rendering it useless in our current age of C-Based phones. Before saying that Windows Mobile 6 sucks, your phone doesn't even have a real OS to start of with. If your Business prefers Java and a WAP browser over C and WebKit, then your IT guy needs to be fired.

Even if you disregard the Operating System (the most important part of a phone), even hardware-wise, it's hugely mediocre for a 2009 phone. That TFT display is practically useless under direct sunlight. If you put it beside a Galaxy S's Super AMOLED or the iPhone 4's IPS Retina Display, it'll seem like CRT put beside an LCD. And what about its processor? What's its RAM? And the Graphics processor? It doesn't even tell you because it's not a smartphone. It's a toy. Even the original iPhone released in 2007 is better than your phone.

You think it's battery is good? Your 1000 mAh doesn't hold a candle against the iPhone 4's 1420 mAh. You think your phone is thin? The iPhone is only 9.7mm in thin. Your phone is 11.9 mm. Don't even get me started on the iPhone's specs compared to yours. They're in two different Worlds.

I'm sorry, I usually don't put down phones or computers. I believe that people can use whatever they want. I have nothing against normal phones. I just don't like it when people speak out when they know absolutely nothing about what they're talking about. Try doing your homework before saying that another product sucks.

Priceless.



It's a phone, not a TV. If you aren't planning on watching movies and playing games on it, the clarity of the screen is pretty much inconsequential.



The iPhone being a smartphone and thus notoriously power-hungry, I suspect that the battery is depleted far more quickly regardless.



Oh my. Sorry if this is a revelation, but in the above context, what you need =/= what everyone else needs.

Everything, from the OS's power management techniques, the availability of applications (and thus the phone's functions) to the readability of content on a high pixel density display, you've simply thrown them aside as if you don't need them. This leads me to the conclusion that you don't own a smartphone, or own one but doesn't use it as one. Then in that case, my final paragraph applies - don't criticize something unless you know about it.

The OP also specifically stated he did not want a Java browser. That, along with his interest in the iPhone 4 indicates that he's after a smartphone. This thread is about him, and therefore that suggestion of a dumbphone, and using it to dismiss a smartphone, is a mistake.

Really? Because what I see is an interest in a good phone for a good price, with features secondary. I actually own the HTC Wildfire, which incidentally doesn't have an LED or AMOLED screen or any of that shit. I have no problem with this; the way you seem to treasure 'extra readability' is laughable. He said it'd be cool if it didn't have a Java browser; that seems specifically designed not to rule out any good, functional phones which happen to use one. The Wildfire has power management and 'app killer' apps (plus the less demanding LCD) but that doesn't stop it from being a smartphone, and I thus still suspect that gibbous' example is better on that front. You are making a lot of assumptions.

It's a phone. It does what a phone is supposed to be doing: Handling calls!
And it does that expertly.



I disagree!



I GOT A TWIN.ENGINE HUMVEE WITH A FIFTY GALLON TANK. THEREFORE IT MUST HAVE A HIGHER RANGE THAN THE NISSAN MICRA WITH A FOURTY GALLON TANK LOL. WHATS MPG?????????????????????????????????????????????????????



No, you're just raging because someone isn't being the same fanboy you are. I've used Blackberries, iphones, communicators, etc. pp., even the CEO's nokia gold arte. You have no way of assessing my subjective use experience. Whoops!

Whenever did I ever say that a good screen is necessary for a smartphone? Every single Blackberry ever released only used LCDs, and they're the most popular smartphones. However, if you actually grab a Galaxy S and put the screen beside the Wildfire, you'd be blind if you can't tell the difference. I'm not saying that the screen quality is a must, but it's certainly a desirable feature and I doubt you'd turn it down, and it IS an important feature, especially under sunlight, since the AMOLED is not backlit and readability is vastly improved.

And didn't you just prove my point with your Wildfire that has "power management" and a "C-based operating system" is essential for a good phone experience? You are aware your Wildfire is running Android, right? Don't see how your Wildfire helps to put down my case at all. My case up to now is that the GT 5230 is in no way a good phone, either on software terms or hardware. He pretty much put down all smartphones in his initial comment without any valid reasoning, and I fail to see the reason why you, who owns a Wildfire (which happens to be quite a good smartphone) is helping him and his ridiculous case.



Don't see a sensible response from you yet. Nothing worth replying to.

Yes, but you're assuming that he wants the best technology there is so as to 'stand the test of time', which is ultimately impossible with any electronic. This is subjective, but what I would be (and was recently) looking for is a phone of overall quality and the best suitability for purpose. I don't doubt that an AMOLED screen is vastly superior to an LCD, and I certainly don't doubt that all of the phones mentioned are technically better than that GT 5230. What I am saying:-

1) There are other factors which determine quality - the build, ease of use, call quality, the interface etc. I would have continued using my K800i if I hadn't recently broken the screen, because it's an amazing phone. I considered buying another, but couldn't find a stockist.

2) I wish that there could be more phones, much like the Wildfire, which keep the functionality and some of the defining features of their technophilic counterparts (Sense UI, basic Android OS) but do away with the extras for the sake of price, battery and simplicity. These are the things which I consider important.

I'm not arguing for the GT 5230, I'm merely taking issue with the way you argue against it.

The OP mentioned the iPhone in his post, which led me to believe that he has enough cash to put down for pretty much any phone out there right now. If he had that amount of means, the purchase of a smartphone over a regular dumbphone is mandatory because of its features and value for money, not for being able to stand the test of time, which as you say, is impossible.

Now, not all smartphones are good (especially the Blackberries and those old WinMo6 phones), but certainly, I think everyone will buy smartphones when they have the budget to do so, which again, I believe the OP has.



I'm almost certain that now you're using a Wildfire, you won't want to go back to the K800i. In no way am I saying it's not a good phone. My dad used a K800i before and I've seen it. Its UI is very easy to use and it does what it does as a phone very well. But there's no way I'm going back to using dumbphones against after using the iPhone. After incorporating a smartphone into my life, I discovered that I actually do need to watch Anime, update my Twitter status, open and edit Word documents and check if my bedroom lights are turned off while I'm on the go, on my phone.



That's what everyone wishes for, but that's a pretty tall order. Android, iOS and Windows Mobile are C-based operating systems, so they're pretty much no different to desktop-class operating systems such as Windows and Mac OS X when it comes down to coding. This means that they have significantly higher demand for the hardware, such as the CPU, RAM and GFX. Given our current technology, packing all that power into a handheld device is bound to lead to high expenses.

I'm sure smartphones will become cheaper with time though. It's the same as computers. We're still in the age where only the richer people use smartphones. It will certainly become more widespread within the next few years.



We both use smartphones. We both think Android is a good OS. We both agree the GT 5230 is the worse phone in comparison to the Wildfire, iPhone or pretty much every other smartphone in existence. I don't even see the difference in our opinions at all. I wouldn't even call what we're doing right now an argument. It's more like a discussion.

Also, this is my personal opinion, but if I were in your place, I'd have more of an issue with a person who's comparing cars to phones, and can't even distinguish the Gold Arte's target audience from the iPhone (and every other smartphone)'s.

There is no discernible difference in our opinion of phones, I'm just saying that you oughtn't be arguing against gibbous' suggestion because it's just another way of looking at things. You suggested the best feature phone right now, where as he effectively said 'this is a simple piece of kit, but it's cheap and works brilliantly, so if you aren't fussed about apps etc. then I'd recommend it'. That's just two different ways of approaching the question.

I do value some extras so I'd go for my phone over that one any day of the week, but that's obviously not true of everyone; I don't think gibbous was trying to persuade him that he doesn't need anything fancy, merely making a counter argument. It's a bit like someone wanting a laptop to work on the go, where you suggest a decent laptop and he asks that they consider a netbook.

Apologies for the late reply. :p