Printable View
I have both running on T-Mobile. I went to a low signal area (not enough cell towers for all carriers due to HOA backlash) and my GS2 dropped 4G, went to EDGE with 1-3 bars but my 9900 was.. "Searching for signal" - got SOS a few times but it mostly said searching for signal.
Anyone have the two for the same comparison? BlackBerry is supposed to be the ultimate communications device, without excellent reception it really chips away at what a BlackBerry is even useful for.
I'm not sure your caparison is fair. While both phones are marketed as 4G, the 9900 runs on T-Mobiles HSPA+ network while the G S2 is on their improved HSPA+ 42mbps. Beyond doubling the data transfer speeds there is implication on signal quality.
For a fair comparison you'd have to compare the 9900 to another phone running on the same HSPA+ network.
I was on EDGE/GSM
Sorry, didn't catch that part.
If you manually set each phone to only run on 2G do you get the same result?
Also wifi range is bad.
I'm on AT&T instead, but compared to my friends phones (iphones and androids)I usually have the greater signal strength. When they have only one or two bars, I can have the full five and get data and calls through easily.
Maybe it's the carrier you're on that changes the outcome?
I have both devices on the same carrier and the 9900 has the superior signal. The 9900 very very seldom drops below 4 bars and has 5 for the most part but the S 2 is quite often on 3 and rarely full.
I don't worry too much about the signal strength though because I don't have a problem with dropped calls and when using the carrier network (not BIS) both have pretty decent download speeds.
Anyway, the OS' measure signal in different ways and for all I know the 3 bars on the S 2 might only be slightly less or even equal to what the 9900 has. I don't trust these signal meters completely.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
I do agree that the 9900 measures HSPA optimistically. I did not disable 4G. However we're talking no service on my 9900 not a lack of bars.
What OS is on your 9900? Newer OS's have better radio files than some of the older ones. I know I've seen improvements on mine. Right out if the box I was having a terrible time getting and holding a signal at work; i think the third leak I installed finally resolved it, and it's been great ever since.
i fine my phone signal to be running pretty good.. but then when i go underground or something and catch signal again it tends to be a bit more slower then on my previous phone which was the torch 9800
I have 2 friends on TMo with Android 4G phones. My 9900 holds 4G better as well as stays on cellular (any signal) longer than their Androids. Maybe you should either upgrade your OS or try a different 9900.
Oh, is your phone in a case? The 9900 antenna is at the bottom of the phone. Watch where you hold it with your hand.
My 9900 has the same or better 4G reception than my GS2 but EDGE reception is extremely lacking and in low coverage areas EDGE isd all I get not 4G. Note that the Galaxy S II has the best reception of any Android phone on T-Mobile. Just wasn't expecting for the 9900 to be bested by an Android phone for connectivity! WiFi is also not strong as mentioned earlier
My 9930 has awesome reception...I don't remember having a bb that didn't. I always have had verizon too...I'd imagine the carrier could play a big part in this.
Verizon coverage in this part of Las Vegas is atrocious(they only have a limited DAS deployment, no cell sites) so your 9930 on the "most reliable" network would be a brick long before any of the other 3 carriers. Like I said I had coverage with my Galaxy S II so my carrier plays no part in this nor is Verizon any better.