Related
Has anyone ever taken their phone on a cruise (in the Caribbean) and had cell coverage? I have a Tilt with ATT service and have "International" turned on, but am wondering if the phone will work on the cruise ship and in the various ports (Bahamas, St. Thomas, etc.) Is there anything I can do to make the odds better?
Mine worked while in port at The Gran Camen. But, I didn't have my current phone, it was an older phone, not the new quad band "world phones".
So, your experience may be different.
yggorf said:
Has anyone ever taken their phone on a cruise (in the Caribbean) and had cell coverage? I have a Tilt with ATT service and have "International" turned on, but am wondering if the phone will work on the cruise ship and in the various ports (Bahamas, St. Thomas, etc.) Is there anything I can do to make the odds better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome to the forum
I think this "coverage area" is also limited by your cell provider according to your contract.
On my case, I never tested on a ship, but have been in several places and always having coverage.
Of course this service have a cost.
I{m sure however that sea coverage will be more expensive
Just my thoughts
Well, after thinking about the original question for a sec, the phone won't work while at sea. There are no towers out there!
won't work at sea, but may work at certain ports. you will need to ask at&t about what caribbian cities are roaming covered.
May work at sea using the same technology that they are currrently putting in planes, a pico-cell, which will take the mobile call and then route it via the ships existing satellite connection. Anybodies guess as to the roaming charges though.
Here You Go
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/24/man-charged-28-000-for-using-data-card-slingbox-to-watch-footb/
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/08/19/tuaw-tip-using-your-iphone-on-a-cruise-ship/2
I know for a fact that some ships have built in cell towers that can be activated once you've left shore. However, I do believe it counts as data roaming, SO BE CAREFUL!! At 2 cents a KB, things can get expensive quickly. This article shows what can happen.
Dave
DaveTheTytnIIGuy said:
I know for a fact that some ships have built in cell towers that can be activated once you've left shore. However, I do believe it counts as data roaming, SO BE CAREFUL!! At 2 cents a KB, things can get expensive quickly. This article shows what can happen.
Dave
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be a HUGE shocking bill to get!
But at least the guy didn't have to pay it, but I bet it was a huge hassle to get it all straightened out.
Your telephone will have service on any populated island you go to. Typically you will find carriers like Digicell in the west indies. My knowledge of the northern caribbean is limited, but since the southern (and less developed) countries have decent gsm coverage, you should have no issues when less than 10-20 miles from land. Essentially islands which are within sight of each other should have few coverage gaps if any. When you have a 5 hour cruise over open sea, you will have nothing.
Roaming will depend on your carrier. I use Rogers which has dropped its rates from 5cents/kb to 3.
http://www.rogers.com/web/content/wireless-network/international_roaming
This link will let you select a country, when the little window opens, click the option for a coverage map. International GSM coverage has nothing to do with Rogers, it will just tell you who has coverage where. Obviously ignore the rates, all you can use from this is the map
There's been a whole lot of knocking the Touch Pro 2 on the CDMA network and Sprint (one person referred to shoving a cactus up his a**), so I just want to write and defend it. True, CDMA is kind of backwards and not internationally common, but the phone does include GSM support for foreign travel. I just bought a TP2 on Sprint, and my experience was awesome. I purchased online, and I declined to bring my number with me. Upon receiving my phone I changed my mind, so customer support told me to take my new phone to a Sprint store to get help. Service was quick, friendly, and knowledgable. They even told me it would be at least 3 hourse before I got service with my old number, if not a day, but I had it by the time I left the store. Sure, the phone is $450 upfront, but there is a $100 rebate, plus more if you list a friend on Sprint as a referrer. Plus, I sold my old Tilt for $95, and if you use 'save50' as a coupon code, you get $25 off service for the first two months. Really, not too bad at all. I actually get coverage on Sprint inside buildings where AT&T always dropped. Finally, Sprint's Simply Everything plans are better than any other network's data plans, and on them you can now call any mobile phone in America for free. I know some people trash Sprint like there's no tomorrow, but my experience thus far has been great. I grew to hate AT&T by the time I left, and I don't think I could ever go back to them. Their data prices are ridiculous, store staff are snobs, and although I would never buy an iPhone, their whole handling of that situation has been ridiculous. To sum this ramble up, don't be afraid to make the plunge and jump on Sprint. Just my two bits.
PS This was all written on my TP2; this phone rocks! If you've been debating, stop, just buy it.
I will have to agree with trogdor1138
I was a AT&T customer for 4 years, and hated the last year and a half of service! You might ask why only the last year and the half. It all stated when I leased a new office building and got 1 to 0 bars of Edge service, my brother who was on Verizon had 5 bars of 3G. Which made for a really crap experience during the whole office phone transition. I don't even want to get into AT&T's customer service because its no existent. I got my Touch Pro2 from Sprint on the 8th and all I have to say is WOW! At my office I get 5 bars of service and I have yet to find a place in my everyday travels where Sprint doesn't have great coverage. And the best part is my cell phone bill when from 129.99 a month on at&t to 99 bucks. So yeah I paid a bit more for my phone but those poor guys on at&t will pay out their nose for the service!
I need to jump on this band wagon. My experience with AT&T and Sprint is exactly like the first two posts. I could not use my AT&T phone in my house or office or more than a mile away from the interstates (out side of metro areas). Sprint covers the whole state, (WI) has better customer service and is about 20% cheaper than what I was paying AT&T. And to top it all off, my TP2 is rock solid. I've never had a phone that was this easy to use and at the same time this versatile.
I am glad to see some support for Sprint! I have had Sprint for 8 years and my service has only got better over time. I always have signal and when I don't I roam on Verizon. Sprint has a credibility problem that was self imposed-no getting around it. But Sprint has been making the right moves for a couple years now and I hope it continues.
This reply was also typed on my Touch Pro 2.
I just switch from t-mobile to sprint. I was with t-mobile for 5 years. Thought about getting tp2 with them but there always behind everybody else and i did like all the changes they made to the tp2. What were they thinking. Anyway besides that they didn't have any of the extras internet services like internet TV,music and radio like all the other carriers do. With sprint i get all that in it's only costing me about $5 dollars more a month. So i ported my number and it only took 1 day to get the phone and have it activated with my ported number. No regrets at all.
This is soo nice after posting charts of of data throughputs of carriers proving sprints better- posting data charges from carriers where sprint wins every time - and Now 4G (yes WiMAX in my area as of sept1) it does me happy to see the light in others - sad that no matter what you say no matter what proof you provide others continue to defend spending more for getting less
AT&T was and still is horrible in my area. I canceled within the trial period. Sprint has much better service, and in my opinion better customer service.
I was with T Mobile for 8 years
I switched to Sprint from T Mobile at the begining of this year. I just couldn't wait for 3g any longer here in Salt Lake City. I am very happy with Sprint. I like both Sprint and T Mobile but I have to say that I don't feel I miss T Mobile at all.
Before I got Sprint I asked a few people about it and they told me that some times their bills were bigger than others, I am thinking this might be because I have found my phone goes into roaming but it doesn't affect me since I'm on the Everything Plan.
I think Sprint is a great company and I'm happy with them.
Battery life vs data transfer
For the US:
If you don't travel heavily, don't need broadband and live in an area with good GSM coverage then GSM is a no brainer. The battery life is better and you don't have to fiddle with phonebook transfer programs and the like.
If you need coverage and broadband then CDMA is the way to go.
My gripe with CDMA is that it takes forever to get good phones. You wait and wait for someone to make a CDMA phone that has year old GSM features.
If CDMA could fix the talk time and get manufacturers to make phones for it I would say that CDMA wins, period. As it stands though, if you live outside of the US, or live in the US and don't travel or just use your phone for talking, SMS and the occasional MMS then GSM is for you.
Basically I just want a world standard. If that means CDMA has to switch over and I lose some bandwidth, so be it. It look like Europe is flirting with (W)CDMA, so maybe GSM will be phased out. I guess it's market share vs technology at this point.
I agree, I love my TP2 on the Sprint Network. This phone is too hot. Finally a real size screen, best keyboard I have ever used, just a sturdy build for such a device that moves many ways. Money well spent.
I agree! I was a long-time AT&T customer and was quite unsatisfied with the service I was getting. I made the jump to Sprint last week with the TP2. Ordered online Thursday night, and the phone was on my desk early Monday morning. The phone and network has exceeded my expectations--great service everywhere (EVDO service is awesome in WI)--not a single dropped call. As for the phone, battery life is pushing 2 days, which is including the constant data connection for email and occasional music streaming.
Saving $20/month from AT&T to Sprint and gaining features? Yes, please!
Another solid vote for Sprint...
Switched from Suncom (T-Mobile now). I've also had Nextel, Alltel, and AT&T.
As far as I am concerned Sprint is a no brainer.
I haven't found any company that can come close to their prices and they have definitely stepped up their hardware. (TP2 FTW!)
My current plan on Verizon and matching services was around 80 bucks more expensive. When asked why they were so much more than Sprint their answer was "We have the best customer service". Well putting opinion aside for the moment my response was "For 80 bucks a month you had best be at the foot of my bed every morning at 6am, waking me up, and handing me a cup of coffee"
They did not respond.
I also have Sprint and love it. Never a dropped call, or any problems here in s. calif. Was with Verizon for years, but coverage was bad at home and work. The two places I used my phone the most. Tried AT&T for one day. Just terrible. Been with Sprint for a year now...its all good.
trogdor1138 said:
There's been a whole lot of knocking the Touch Pro 2 on the CDMA network and Sprint (one person referred to shoving a cactus up his a**), so I just want to write and defend it. True, CDMA is kind of backwards and not internationally common, but the phone does include GSM support for foreign travel. I just bought a TP2 on Sprint, and my experience was awesome. I purchased online, and I declined to bring my number with me. Upon receiving my phone I changed my mind, so customer support told me to take my new phone to a Sprint store to get help. Service was quick, friendly, and knowledgable. They even told me it would be at least 3 hourse before I got service with my old number, if not a day, but I had it by the time I left the store. Sure, the phone is $450 upfront, but there is a $100 rebate, plus more if you list a friend on Sprint as a referrer. Plus, I sold my old Tilt for $95, and if you use 'save50' as a coupon code, you get $25 off service for the first two months. Really, not too bad at all. I actually get coverage on Sprint inside buildings where AT&T always dropped. Finally, Sprint's Simply Everything plans are better than any other network's data plans, and on them you can now call any mobile phone in America for free. I know some people trash Sprint like there's no tomorrow, but my experience thus far has been great. I grew to hate AT&T by the time I left, and I don't think I could ever go back to them. Their data prices are ridiculous, store staff are snobs, and although I would never buy an iPhone, their whole handling of that situation has been ridiculous. To sum this ramble up, don't be afraid to make the plunge and jump on Sprint. Just my two bits.
PS This was all written on my TP2; this phone rocks! If you've been debating, stop, just buy it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ide have to say my switch from VZW to Sprint was as good. I had a c ouple issues with getting rebates in the begging but Sprint took care of that. Customer service in the stores is normally pretty decent. At VZW.... well... Service was good once you got somone one.
Overall I am very happy I switched. I switched for the Diamond though, not TP2. I did however just purcahse a TP2 and I am loving it!
I too just got my TP2 from Sprint and love it.
Verizon, here in LA, is pretty terrible. I could be at my internship and not get a signal at all - open space with lots of tall buildings around. Additionally, my old apartment in the Valley got almost no reception. Tons of dropped calls.
One complaint though:
My number from Sprint was a recycled phone number. I'm getting four robocalls a day from various political organizations (many of which are in Spanish) and different schools reminding me that my mythical children are about to start school in the next few days.
I've put myself on the Do Not Call registry, both the federal one and the political one, but the calls keep rolling in. Most of the time, if I press 0, it claims my number is erased from their registry, but I doubt that. And if you try to call the number back, they are mysterious ghost numbers that don't connect to anything.
Sprint says there's nothing they can do about it. Luck of the draw, and they've offered to give me a new number (which I'm a little loathe to do, since I've already updated so many people with my new number.) I just wish there were something (maybe even a piece of software for the phone?) that would let me block individual numbers. A lot of the calls I get are repeat offenders.
I have worked for 2 different wireless carriers. The honest answer to the cell phone debate in the US is use what works for you. The ratings you see are typically an average of experiences across the whole US. Most carriers have stronger regions and weaker regions. I have seen poor numbers out west for Verizon Wireless and strong numbers out east and the complete opposite for AT&T.
Network limitations (mainly in-building penetration) may skew your experience from one carrier to the other at the places you use the phone most like your residence and workplace. We are dealing with radio signals that have a very short effective distance, and if you only get one bar of signal, you are going to have a rougher experience with everything than if you had 2 bars or more.
Customer service experiences vary greatly. It depends on who you get when you call. Outsourcing calls makes it a crapshoot. I have heard the horrid Sprint stories, but those were mostly calls that got outsourced and when you reached an actual Sprint rep they were good experiences. At least with wireless carriers they all are trying to provide as good a service as possible due to competition. I wish cable and landline services back in the day had that type of competition. 3 major nationwide carriers minimum in a market and various regional carriers help keeps the competition going, and it is a very competitive market considering the ammount of investment needed to put up a nationwide network in the United States. (Europeans can't quite understand the size of our country and how much empty space there is between major cities). It isn't really quite cost effective to put up a $200,000 tower for 500 customers in a small town, but we expect to have coverage everywhere we go.
Sprint has the good price plans, no denying that. I would put Verizon's network up against Sprint any day though when comparing them nationally. Both EvDO networks are superior to AT&T and T-Mobiles at this point for overall consistancy of service nationwide. But you might live in one of those lucky areas where AT&T or T-Mobile will have their 7Mbps services running well and not overloaded, and they could be the best option. It really comes down to what works best where you use your device and that is going to be different from person to person.
Sprint phone roaming on Verizon?
I am considering a Sprint TP2. I have read differing statements regarding roaming on Verizon. I have several questions:
Basically: does Verizon allow Sprint customers to roam onto their network?
If yes, then: (If... then... an old BASIC programmer, haha)
Can TP2 be "forced" to roam if for example Verizon has a stronger signal a certain area?
When roaming onto Verizon, will you get only the slower speeds and no 3G?
Thanks very much!
I don't really get the knocking of CDMA since it is faster than gsm. If you have a faster network that equals better right? GSM really only has the sim card which i have seen to be a problem actually drop your phone and the sim seems to get creamed fairly often. I have used both CDMA works better and faster. And with programs like My Phone the address book is really a non issue.
my friend been complaing HSPA chew thru battery faster on his phone than my CDMA phone
gliscameria said:
For the US:
If you don't travel heavily, don't need broadband and live in an area with good GSM coverage then GSM is a no brainer. The battery life is better and you don't have to fiddle with phonebook transfer programs and the like.
If you need coverage and broadband then CDMA is the way to go.
My gripe with CDMA is that it takes forever to get good phones. You wait and wait for someone to make a CDMA phone that has year old GSM features.
If CDMA could fix the talk time and get manufacturers to make phones for it I would say that CDMA wins, period. As it stands though, if you live outside of the US, or live in the US and don't travel or just use your phone for talking, SMS and the occasional MMS then GSM is for you.
Basically I just want a world standard. If that means CDMA has to switch over and I lose some bandwidth, so be it. It look like Europe is flirting with (W)CDMA, so maybe GSM will be phased out. I guess it's market share vs technology at this point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Default option is only Sprint only and "automatic"
maybe someone can tweak it to roam only
however, if you roam too much, sprint will drop you as a customer
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Leaked-ATT-Letter-Demolishes-Case-For-TMobile-Merger-115652
Yesterday a partially-redacted document briefly appeared on the FCC website --accidentally posted by a law firm working for AT&T on the $39 billion T-Mobile deal (somewhere there's a paralegal looking for work today). While AT&T engaged in damage control telling reporters that the document contained no new information -- our review of the doc shows that's simply not true. Data in the letter undermines AT&T's primary justification for the massive deal, while highlighting how AT&T is willing to pay a huge premium simply to reduce competition and keep T-Mobile out of Sprint's hands.
We've previously discussed how AT&T's claims of job gains and network investment gained by the deal aren't true, with overall network investment actually being reduced with the elimination of T-Mobile. While AT&T and the CWA are busy telling regulators the deal will increase network investment by $8 billion, out of the other side of their mouth AT&T has been telling investors the deal will reduce investment by $10 billion over 6 years. Based on historical averages T-Mobile would have invested $18 billion during that time frame, which means an overall reduction in investment.
Yet to get the deal approved, AT&T's key talking point to regulators and the press has been the claim that they need T-Mobile to increase LTE network coverage from 80% to 97% of the population. Except it has grown increasingly clear that AT&T doesn't need T-Mobile to accomplish much of anything, and likely would have arrived at 97% simply to keep pace with Verizon. AT&T, who has fewer customers and more spectrum than Verizon (or any other company for that matter), has all the resources and spectrum they need for uniform LTE coverage without this deal.
For the first time the letter pegs the cost of bringing AT&T's LTE coverage from 80% to 97% at $3.8 billion -- quite a cost difference from the $39 billion price tag on the T-Mobile deal. The push for 97% coverage apparently came from AT&T marketing, who was well aware that leaving LTE investment at 80% would leave them at a competitive disadvantage to Verizon. Marketing likely didn't want a repeat of the Luke Wilson map fiasco of a few years back, when Verizon made AT&T look foolish for poor 3G coverage.
The letter also notes that AT&T's supposed decision to "not" build out LTE to 97% was cemented during the first week of January, yet public documents (pdf) indicate that at the same time AT&T was already considering buying T-Mobile, having proposed the deal to Deutsche Telekom on January 15. In the letter, AT&T tries to make it seem like the decision to hold off on that 17% LTE expansion was based on costs. Yet the fact the company was willing to shell out $39 billion one week later, combined with AT&T's track record with these kinds of tactics, suggests AT&T executives knew that 80-97% expansion promise would be a useful carrot on a stick for politicians.
While the $39 billion price certainly delivers AT&T customers, equipment, employees, and spectrum, most of T-Mobile's network replicates AT&T's existing resources in major markets, and T-Mobile's network is significantly less robust in rural markets where AT&T would want to expand. While the deal provides AT&T with a shortcut to sluggish tower builds in a few select markets, by and large AT&T will be faced with terminating many redundant positions and decommissioning a lot of duplicative equipment. They'll also have to close a large number of retail operations and independent retailers.
Again, the reality appears to be that AT&T is giving Deutsche Telekom $39 billion primarily to reduce market competition. That price tag eliminates T-Mobile entirely -- and makes Sprint (and by proxy new LTE partner LightSquared and current partner Clearwire) more susceptible to failure in the face of 80% AT&T/Verizon market domination. How much do you think wireless broadband market dominance is worth to AT&T over the next decade? After all, AT&T will be first to tell you there's a wireless data "tsunami" coming, with AT&T and Verizon on the shore eagerly billing users up to $10 per gigabyte.
Regardless of the motivation behind rejecting 97% LTE deployment, the letter proves AT&T's claim they need T-Mobile to improve LTE coverage from 80-97% simply isn't true. That's a huge problem for AT&T, since nearly every politician and non-profit that has voiced support for the merger did so based largely on this buildout promise. It's also a problem when it comes to the DOJ review, since proof that AT&T could complete their LTE build for far less than the cost of this deal means the deal doesn't meet the DOJ's standard for merger-specific benefits.
Taken from CheezyNutz in the 3d forums.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App
Don't buy this for a second, either way, Sprint won't ever be in Financial position to purchase T-Mobile
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App
Thanks
Nice update to see, I definitely am not a fan and hope this merger/acquisition fails.
if they do, it will end up bad
look what verizon did with alltell a few years ago.
altell exists now as a small farm-towm carrier
I would like to buy a phone with an absurdly large battery. I'm a customer of T-Mobile USA and have no intentions on changing carriers to Verizon. I've purchased the Ascend Mate1 and then the Ascend Mate2, I like them. I want something a little smaller though. Are there any options for me? This phone is for my wife, and I don't want to buy the aging Mate2 (it was launched in January 2014). I think the ZTE ZMAX is really ugly with it's FAT bezels.
Basic criteria:
ABSURDLY large battery (at least 3500mAh)
Support for T-Mobile LTE (700-12, 1900, 2100)
Seems like this cell phone will not be released in the U.S.
Why is there no smartphones that is bigger than 5.7 inches available in the United States Of America?
cryingthug said:
Seems like this cell phone will not be released in the U.S.
Why is there no smartphones that is bigger than 5.7 inches available in the United States Of America?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed this. It seems to be a coordinated effort - almost a conspiracy that phones bigger than 5.7 inches don't make it to the USA and/or receive little to zero promotion and/or support.
It's nice to know I'm not the only one whose been clamoring for a 7" phone since the first Samsung Tab was released! PUT A CELLULAR RADIO IN IT, I said.
I'll be bringing the Zenfone 3 Ultra into the states in a couple of months. Might even have a go at opening up the US LTE bands with the post at the top of this forum.
But Why?
mikkej2k said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed this. It seems to be a coordinated effort - almost a conspiracy that phones bigger than 5.7 inches don't make it to the USA and/or receive little to zero promotion and/or support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nathanotis and mikkej2k,
And if the reviewers do review the phablet many say that the phone is way too big. I am convinced that the people that say that have abnormally small hands. LOL.
My question now is, why do you think that there is nothing over 5.7 available in the U.S?
cryingthug said:
nathanotis and mikkej2k,
My question now is, why do you think that there is nothing over 5.7 available in the U.S?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No risk takers in the American market?
Or,
Simple supply and demand. There's not enough demand. Just stick with what's most profitable.
As more people mature ( grow older ) carriers will be forced to sell/allow larger smartphones on their networks. I believe that Sprint , T-Mobile , Verizon , and AT&T are the biggest stumbling blocks to larger phones. After the carriers I think the manufacturers don't want to go big - if they can charge more for less , why not?
*Older people would want larger screens because they are easier to read.*
Better For The Eyes
mikkej2k said:
*Older people would want larger screens because they are easier to read.*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not old and my eyes are excellent but I agree with the larger screens are easier to read 100%. I very much dislike trying to look at a web page on a sub 6 inch screen. What a horrible experience. If the web page is not designed for mobile you are just scrolling all the time. People are paying all this money to have data on their phones and then having to look at all that tiny font. No thank you. Plus videos and movies look so awesome on the larger size screens.
cryingthug said:
Seems like this cell phone will not be released in the U.S.
Why is there no smartphones that is bigger than 5.7 inches available in the United States Of America?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there is, one that i know for sure is huawei mate 8, a 6 incher, it supports ATT and T-Mo LTE bands in USA.
only gripe - the Kirin 950 SoC, not the performance side of it, but the no source code side of it, meaning no 3rd party roms, OS upgrade and security patches are at mercy of huawei, they are not known to be diligent when it comes to that ..
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9878/the-huawei-mate-8-review
nathanotis said:
It's nice to know I'm not the only one whose been clamoring for a 7" phone since the first Samsung Tab was released! PUT A CELLULAR RADIO IN IT, I said.
I'll be bringing the Zenfone 3 Ultra into the states in a couple of months. Might even have a go at opening up the US LTE bands with the post at the top of this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Samsung Tab S 8.4 certainly had a cellular radio in it, that was my last cell phone...
I like big phone and I can not lie....
omniphil said:
The Samsung Tab S 8.4 certainly had a cellular radio in it, that was my last cell phone...
I like big phone and I can not lie....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did it work as a phone? Was the size ever a hindrance?
(Just realized you also posted to the other thread I'm watching)
nathanotis said:
How did it work as a phone? Was the size ever a hindrance?
(Just realized you also posted to the other thread I'm watching)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doesn't easily fit in your pocket, but that's really the only size hindrance. I actually still have it and use it in my car as a navigation device. It still preforms quite well..
It was cheap too under $500 when new, which is quite a bit cheaper than any flagship phone at the time.
It seems that the Zenfone 3 Ultra (International version & no warranty) is being sold on a large Internet website but it costs several hundred more than they said it would be. It is priced out of reach at almost $700 it is not worth the money. I am not buying.
cryingthug said:
It seems that the Zenfone 3 Ultra (International version & no warranty) is being sold on a large Internet website but it costs several hundred more than they said it would be. It is priced out of reach at almost $700 it is not worth the money. I am not buying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's priced high because it just came out, if you wait a month it should come down to normal pricing....
cryingthug said:
It seems that the Zenfone 3 Ultra (International version & no warranty) is being sold on a large Internet website but it costs several hundred more than they said it would be. It is priced out of reach at almost $700 it is not worth the money. I am not buying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 4GB/64GB model runs for $630 or so for first hand retail (IE: direct from the original seller). The $700 you mentioned is from a reseller (IE: they paid $630 and are reselling it for a small profit).
The 3GB/32GB model runs for about $460, and is probably more in line with the pricing you had heard announced.
The real trick is finding either model in stock at a first hand retailer, as the resellers are buying them up as quickly as they can.
There is a market for the plus 5.7 phones. Everytime one these phones are announced , people that like smaller phones complain as if they'll be forced to switch. Most of those that prefer smaller phones act as though they don't want the larger phones released.
Why does this bother people that like smaller phones? When the original Galaxy Note came out it was groundbreaking for a mainstream company to release a phone that big. Now it's commonplace ( I'm looking at you Apple - iPhone Plus )
shdwphnx said:
The 4GB/64GB model runs for $630 or so for first hand retail (IE: direct from the original seller). The $700 you mentioned is from a reseller (IE: they paid $630 and are reselling it for a small profit).
The 3GB/32GB model runs for about $460, and is probably more in line with the pricing you had heard announced.
The real trick is finding either model in stock at a first hand retailer, as the resellers are buying them up as quickly as they can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a little I formation for ones that might be looking to purchase the Asus Zenfone ultra (ZU680KL), with 4gb of ram and 64gb internal memory.
I purchased mine new, from EBay with a one year warranty. Purchase price was 593.00, factory unlocked, with free shipping and handling (still higher than originally advertised). Device came from Never-Msrp, out of Houston, Texas.
Slbtrb79 said:
Just a little I formation for ones that might be looking to purchase the Asus Zenfone ultra (ZU680KL), with 4gb of ram and 64gb internal memory.
I purchased mine new, from EBay with a one year warranty. Purchase price was 593.00, factory unlocked, with free shipping and handling (still higher than originally advertised). Device came from Never-Msrp, out of Houston, Texas.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What carrier are you using your phone on? What type of bands will the phone let you access? What type of factory support do you get? ( if any? )
mikkej2k said:
What carrier are you using your phone on? What type of bands will the phone let you access? What type of factory support do you get? ( if any? )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cricket, which is owned by AT&T, also speeds are capped by them at 4Mbps on 4G and 8Mbps on LTE. I get Hsdpa bands and Gsm bands. The phone has LTE bands, but can't be accessed here. I'm hoping to root soon, not sure if the LTE bands can be accessed then. This however is not real important to me or I would have not purchased the phone anyway. I'm getting 3Mbps on download speeds. Was getting 4-5Mbps on my HTC 10, thru Cricket. Have had no problems to ask for any factory support yet. Asus sent paperwork with phone for a one year warranty against defects and workmanship (standard for most phones). I have something thru eBay, not sure for how long. The warranty really does you no good if you root the phone though. I had a one year warranty on my HTC One M8 and have a one year on my HTC 10, but they are rooted, so their warranties we're voided anyway. Never had to ask for factory support on them either. Asus has a website devoted to their phones, with various types of information, even including how to's on bootloader unlocking on many models (including the zenfone 3 deluxe), source codes, etc.
I guess it's a matter of what you want out of a phone. If you want a faster processor and LTE in the US, this is not the phone for you. It's not the phone my HTC 10 was (gave to my wife), because of the processor, and LTE. But I was essentially looking for a 7 inch tablet with 4gb of ram, great camera, video player with a very good sounding dual speakers, external SD card, and has phone ability. Very hard to find many 7 inch tablets with all the above specs together. I get all of the above with this 6.8 screen Ultra phablet. Also the build quality of this phone has really improved over the previous Asus phones. Realy like the metal workmanship. Not quite as good as HTC 10, but getting there. So far very happy with it and hoping they will unlock the bootloader like they did for the Deluxe.
Thanks for the questions. Never knew how to answer in short sentences. I answer this way in person also. Hope it wasn't to long winded for you.
---------- Post added at 05:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:46 AM ----------
Slbtrb79 said:
Cricket, which is owned by AT&T, also speeds are capped by them at 4Mbps on 4G and 8Mbps on LTE. I get Hsdpa bands and Gsm bands. The phone has LTE bands, but can't be accessed here. I'm hoping to root soon, not sure if the LTE bands can be accessed then. This however is not real important to me or I would have not purchased the phone anyway. I'm getting 3Mbps on download speeds. Was getting 4-5Mbps on my HTC 10, thru Cricket. Have had no problems to ask for any factory support yet. Asus sent paperwork with phone for a one year warranty against defects and workmanship (standard for most phones). I have something thru eBay, not sure for how long. The warranty really does you no good if you root the phone though. I had a one year warranty on my HTC One M8 and have a one year on my HTC 10, but they are rooted, so their warranties we're voided anyway. Never had to ask for factory support on them either. Asus has a website devoted to their phones, with various types of information, even including how to's on bootloader unlocking on many models (including the zenfone 3 deluxe), source codes, etc.
I guess it's a matter of what you want out of a phone. If you want a faster processor and LTE in the US, this is not the phone for you. It's not the phone my HTC 10 was (gave to my wife), because of the processor, and LTE. But I was essentially looking for a 7 inch tablet with 4gb of ram, great camera, video player with a very good sounding dual speakers, external SD card, and has phone ability. Very hard to find many 7 inch tablets with all the above specs together. I get all of the above with this 6.8 screen Ultra phablet. Also the build quality of this phone has really improved over the previous Asus phones. Realy like the metal workmanship. Not quite as good as HTC 10, but getting there. So far very happy with it and hoping they will unlock the bootloader like they did for the Deluxe.
Thanks for the questions. Never knew how to answer in short sentences. I answer this way in person also. Hope it wasn't to long winded for you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, as a side note. There is a factory rom and source code for the Ultra ZU680KL on Asus site for download, in case you would have a problem.
Motorola nexus 6 is 5.96 inches FYI.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
If you want to know why manufacturers are not shipping as much to the US lately, look at the patent system in the US. Once you ship any products to the US, you are counting down the time until you get sued by someone in east Texas...
Not worth the money to sell things in the US market until this situation gets under control.