Tonight I did some more EVO 3D download speed tests on the 3G network, at the same time of day in the same place I'd done my EVO 4G tests. This evening, the results for the 3D were actually better than the results I'd gotten with the 4G: 522, 526, and 543. I don't think this proves that the 3D is "faster" than the old 4G, I think it just shows there is enough variability (probably based on what is going on in the Sprint network, and possibly on all sorts of stuff that might include atmospheric conditions, minute variations in how I hold the phone, other radios operating in the vicinity, and the presence of hostile UFOs) that I don't believe it is possible to read anything into most variations of download speed. I don't know enough to accept or reject the criticisms of the Xtreme Labs download speed app that were mentioned earlier, but they may also play a role. I still stand by the conclusion that I reached within the first few hours of using this phone, it is quite usable for surfing the net or making calls, and the ability to get and hold a signal is at least competitive with the original EVO!
One thing that mildly mystifies me is that I DEFINITELY consistently get slightly lower signal strengths showing for the voice radio on the 3G compared to the higher readings I got with the 4G. This applies across three different apps I've tried that measure signal strength. But I'm skeptical that the weakness carries over to the 3G radio. I suppose it is possible that voice calls in areas on the fringe of coverage might be more difficult or lower quality on the 3D, if the readings these apps are giving me are valid. I've not had any trouble with calls I've made, though most of them have been in areas with excellent signal anyway. I did get one call today in an area of weak signal--In my office inside a large, tall old-fashioned building that attenuates the snot out of the signal, I received a call from Best Buy asking when I wanted to come pick up the EVO 3D that I'd pre-ordered a month or so ago! I told her that I'd received one early from Sprint, so they could sell it to someone else. Though the signal wasn't very good, we both understood each other perfectly.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to TheHoodedClaw For This Useful Post:
You've performed an excellent test from the few measurement tools at your disposal. I've taken the liberty of adding your data to a few graphs. (Note, in the first graph, lower means better signal; in the second, higher is better.)
Some other statistics:
3G signal reception quality of the EVO 3D was roughly 9.61% better than that of the EVO 4G across the performed tests.
Wifi signal reception quality of the EVO 3D was roughly 32.0% better than that of the EVO 4G.
(Standard deviations are not provided due to lack of sufficient sample sizes.)
Pretty cool.
Edit: Wait a minute. When you mention your phone's "signal" and the "towers" -- are you talking about 3G data or just voice radio signal? I looked at the EVDO and thought, ah, you must be testing the 3G network's signal. But then I saw your subsequent posts about not being able to perform such tests, so I was wondering.
Last edited by fattank; June 23rd, 2011 at 11:02 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to fattank For This Useful Post:
As it's all CDMA, I simply refer to it as voice and 3G for data, trying to avoid confusion. Sorry that I caused some instead.
Does that clarify?
Heh, fair enough. I was trying to refer to it being 2G in that the icon at the top changes from 3G to 1X, but yes, you got me. I guess I should also be more clear when trying to correct something I think is wrong.
I'm not quite sure whether to fault Sprint or the 3D for my 3G test results so far. I am not in a great coverage area, bars fluctuate from 1-4, more often in the 2-3 range (not that I pay much attention to the bars). Last night I conducted several tests with 3G in various locations, it was fairly consistently showing about 500ms ping and upload/download speeds of 120kbps.
Today I've gone through the same series of tests. The best result was 135ms ping, and 265/457kbps. Not too bad, I can live with that (I use wifi unless there is a power outage), but get this: I moved two steps to the right (6 feet) and re-ran speedtest. 938ms ping, 22kbps download, 17kbps upload. I haven't seen those speeds since the early '90s.
Is there a valid explanation why it would fluctuate so greatly? Would you place blame more on the network (and my distance from tower), or the phone hardware?
Just a quick check in. My first 3vo was found to be defective with Sprint's RF service test. In Open Signal at my desk, it showed the same signal - on average - as my Evo, but I had every problem with GPS and 3G downloads, and I had signal fluctuations of +2/-8 dBm from my norm. (And random tower handoffs.) My replacement unit is another matter entirely.
Evo: -75 dBm, 19 asu solid and fluctuating to -73 dBm, 20 asu
3vo: Identical
3G downloads -
Evo with proxy fix: 1.2 Mbps down/700k up
3vo w/o proxy fix: 1 Mbps down/600k up
Given the known improvements for the proxy fix (I'll have to apply that after I get my MSL), I'm going to simply declare my _working_ 3vo identical.
My tower distance is 1834 meters.
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
I'm definitely getting a weaker signal with my 3VO than my EVO... losing service in buildings that I wasn't with the EVO and lower signal and losing signal in my home which wasn't happening with my EVO.... Still a great phone but I hope they come out with an update to fix this
I'm definitely seeing 3G performance issues-much slower than the 4G. Have done PRL and Network updates but issue still remains. Software or HW problem?
I'm definitely seeing 3G performance issues-much slower than the 4G. Have done PRL and Network updates but issue still remains. Software or HW problem?
This is not directed at anyone, but needs to be stated.
Ok, I am going to have to pull this over to the pretentious turnpike.
Let me make this 100% clear. All internet speed test are not accurate. It really does not matter what you use, how you use it, or what think is average.
When we do a network speed test, we conduct AT LEAST 148 test per location, every 10 minutes, for 7 days, only the average of all those test, can give you an idea of internet speed. You can not take 1, 2, or 10 test in one location to get a good idea of network performance.
2 test taken back to back with the same phone can offer vastly different speeds. And flash based programs can give you an minor idea of what you speed is, but never give you an idea of the over all speed test.
Ok, now the thing that just gives me a headache.
Cell phones use frequencies on a invisible spectrum. The fcc requires all devices to receive interference from any device. When you place to cellphones next to each, that uses very close frequencies, those devices will start to interfere with each other. Especially when you have the option to boost power in low signal areas. When frequencies bounce off stuff they change there frequency, which makes them bounce.
If you place the phones with in 8-10 inches of each other, but the shear nature of the spectrum used, there will be interference. Lastly, the decibel reported by the phone may or may not be accurate.
We find that the software vs hardware reporting of decibels can be vastly different. In the htc evo 3d, there is some software problems which are causing the radio to power to a lower energy state, even though it in an "active" state. I have not looked fully but it is very common in all radios, just needs a firmware update.
As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.
The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.
But as for speed test, they can not tell you how the cell phone is performing. What it gives you is snap shot. Doing a few test is like taking a random picture of the speedometer and claiming it the maxnium speed of the car or the average speed of the road in your areas. But in the real world, traffic and road contintions will effect your performance more then how fast your car is. Wireless networks are the same.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to RiverOfIce For This Useful Post:
As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.
The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.
Just to clarify, here you mean the Evo 3D, correct?
As to your other comments, I certainly respect your experience in the RF/wireless world here and your information here is quite useful. My only response is that -- despite the extremely flawed nature of our testing -- side-by-side signal tests that interfere with one another and also rely on the phone's self reporting, back-to-back speedtest and other bandwidth testing results, etc., what alternative is there?
If we accept that different phones have fundamentally different RF performances, dependent on their design limitations and tradeoffs, it is fair for consumers to want to evaluate and factor this criteria into their purchasing decisions.
If we're to suggest that there is no comparative value in these tests, all we're left with are gut/superficial impressions which must be invariably worse than any attempts we make at objectively evaluating RF/bandwidth performance. I mean that's how we got here in the first place -- a non-trivial number of reviews have suggested from their purely observational experience that the RF performance in the Evo 3D is inferior.
Prior history with the iPhone 4 shows that sometimes this kind of anecdotal data can reveal actual hardware issues, but it's clear that sometimes they're also untrue.
If these methods are fundamentally flawed, what better methods exist for consumers to compare or verify/validate the RF differences between phones? (not a rhetorical question -- if you can think of/design better test criteria for the common user to implement, I'm sure we would all love to know)
The Following User Says Thank You to NeoteriX For This Useful Post:
As I said in my OP, I welcome comments and criticisms of the methodology. And River gave me some good insight... My favorite takeaway was the speed tests. The only way to get something remotely reliable is to do a ton of trials over a long period of time and get that average. Textbook scientific method.
In my OP, the quick speed test was more a sanity check than a proof.
I will say that with the speakeasy site that I routinely use at work, it's probably the most reliable. At least that's a few variables that I can assume are held constant.
From what I know of my own ISP, my speeds are also very stable. So on any given day if I were to run this test on one of my computers, I get very similar results. So I've proven to myself (if not to others here) that speakeasy and my Fios connection are very stable.
As for putting phones close together, my assumption (which may be completely wrong) was that any interference between the phones would affect each other somewhat equally. But if not, I swapped their positions as well as did other tests where they were far apart. But what I omitted from my OP was that when I removed one phone and continued to monitor the existing, there was no change in measured signal strength, so any RF interference appeared to be negligible.
What I sought to do was compare signal strength of the E3D relative to another phone, the E4G. I had no interest in measuring the absolute signal quality of either phone. That's just a meaningless number to me. Therefore if the absolute value was wrong, it would be consistently wrong for both phones because I controlled the other variables.
Lastly, a nitpick about River's comment about invisible spectrum: it doesn't matter if it's invisible or not. If I have a device built to transmit and receive data using pulses of visible light, putting two devices close together is going to cause interference all the same because the devices are going to be confused with each other's light flashes.
Actually, if you use visible light to think about how radio works, things start making a LOT more sense. A good thought experiment for those interested: what would the world look like if our eyes could only see in the spectrum where our cell phones (or wifi) worked? Suddenly, things that we know to be opaque will become transparent and vice versa. It might even help you visualize how to position your home wifi routers/access points for max coverage.
I got a little taste of this when I was doing R&D for the TurboChef microwave/convection combo oven back in 1999.
__________________
The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. -Neil deGrasse Tyson
Help me out: Sign up with Dropbox and we both get 250-500MB extra space. Thanks!
Last edited by novox77; June 30th, 2011 at 10:26 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to novox77 For This Useful Post:
I'd like to inject before we get into arguments about RF interference.
novox77 got his phone before I did and I was excited that he was able to perform these trials and I chipped in my 2 cents at the time. I asked him to not only try the two side-by-side but also to separate them by about 3 meters - and to then swap positions when separated.
I had concern of the two units interfering if side by side, but also concerns about RF interference overall where the tests were conducted.
Reviewers were coming out and insisting that the 3vo had no sensitivity compared to decent phones like the Evo. novox77's methods were far more rigorous than theirs and debunked their statements.
Had the results of full engineering test been available - or better still, had the reviewers not made false claims - there'd have been no need of the test here.
novox77's methods reflect best practices for a user without further instrumentation and limited time and resources.
The hypothesis was that the 3vo performs poorly, especially in signal strength, relative to an Evo. Relative to an Evo, using tools and methods that could have been available to the reviewers in question, the statement was proven wrong.
We've already shown elsewhere that - like the Evo - the 3vo is subject to quality issues (requiring phones to be replaced) and that they're finicky about accepting configuration settings (just like the Evo at launch).
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverOfIce
This is not directed at anyone, but needs to be stated.
Ok, I am going to have to pull this over to the pretentious turnpike.
Let me make this 100% clear. All internet speed test are not accurate. It really does not matter what you use, how you use it, or what think is average.
When we do a network speed test, we conduct AT LEAST 148 test per location, every 10 minutes, for 7 days, only the average of all those test, can give you an idea of internet speed. You can not take 1, 2, or 10 test in one location to get a good idea of network performance.
2 test taken back to back with the same phone can offer vastly different speeds. And flash based programs can give you an minor idea of what you speed is, but never give you an idea of the over all speed test.
Ok, now the thing that just gives me a headache.
Cell phones use frequencies on a invisible spectrum. The fcc requires all devices to receive interference from any device. When you place to cellphones next to each, that uses very close frequencies, those devices will start to interfere with each other. Especially when you have the option to boost power in low signal areas. When frequencies bounce off stuff they change there frequency, which makes them bounce.
If you place the phones with in 8-10 inches of each other, but the shear nature of the spectrum used, there will be interference. Lastly, the decibel reported by the phone may or may not be accurate.
We find that the software vs hardware reporting of decibels can be vastly different. In the htc evo 3d, there is some software problems which are causing the radio to power to a lower energy state, even though it in an "active" state. I have not looked fully but it is very common in all radios, just needs a firmware update.
As for person experience with the topic, the htc evo performance about 3 times better in most test I put it through compared to the htc evo 4g, in 4g test. There is also about a 14% increase in 3g performance.
The phone has a tendency to hold a signal longer then the htc evo 4g, but also seems to fluctuate in the -90 to -78 range.
But as for speed test, they can not tell you how the cell phone is performing. What it gives you is snap shot. Doing a few test is like taking a random picture of the speedometer and claiming it the maxnium speed of the car or the average speed of the road in your areas. But in the real world, traffic and road contintions will effect your performance more then how fast your car is. Wireless networks are the same.
I have zero arguments with what you say. (What a surprise! )
I will point out only that reviewers were just going by wild claims about bars they were seeing total vs. what they remembered seeing on an Evo - on different days.
I had acceptable voice quality with a unit with something defective in the CDMA radio - going by bars wouldn't have told me I was constantly swapping around for different towers and having my signal fluctuate while showing little or no change in bars.
Based on that, I still believe the tools in question have merit as well as novox77's tests, they alerted me to call Sprint and seek professional help.
My only question is: where were you when we needed you!?!? (just kidding)
It's comforting to know that you tests showed great results for the 3vo.
Now all we need is a software update or two and I'll bet we'll all be happy.
Speaking of signal strength, I'm happy to report that even with 0-1 bars in my 4G connection, using the speakeasy.net/speedtest site on two servers rated me at 8mbps down and ~1mbps up.
Holy cow, folks. My 7mbps Qwest modem maxes out at 5.4mbps no matter where I test it (I tried all the servers and about a dozen on speedtest.net).
So signal "strength" and reception doesn't necessarily equate to reduced speeds. I mean, it can and often does, but it doesn't have to, at least in the form presented on the device's status bar.
the only little issue i had with my phone was the call quality and after a little help using the MSL to fix it this phone has by far exceeded my expectations. its an amazing phone. i thought my OG Evo was bada$$ but this thing is super fast. i now have zero complaints except how often i want to be on it lol. further more i've tried putting my battery through everything i could think of (texts, calls, internet surfing, wi-fi, 3G and 4G) and after 12 hours i still have 65% battery life! how cool is that?
The WHOLE review isn't nearly that bad, and it was tested in NY and NJ (I don't have a clue how coverage is there), but it's certainly not all rosy in this particular reviewers eyes.
i have the E3D, in his review his downloads are fairly slow. i live in the N.Y. & i usually in three of the boroughs manhattan,brooklyn & queens. my average downloads are between 8 to 10mbs in brooklyn, 7 to 11mbs in manhattan & 6 to 9mbs in queens. i see alot of reviews with mostly low speeds & i wonder why. i always have full set of bars except when inside my apt in the 3rd floor of an 8 story building (about 3 bars with 3g & 2 to 1 bar 4g) so reception is good, also you can roam to verizon unlimited 3g if you cant get a signal from sprint. so id say its really good, but from all the reviews it seems either im the only one with fast 4g downloads or theyre biased.
Took my 3D to Sprint today. I complained on line and was told to visit the corp store. While there, my phone was never looked at. I was told there is a known problem with 3D reception and just live with it or for $35 I could choose another phone model. The rep wasn't really interested in helping me in any way, with any of the three problems I brought to them. The 3D, in 3 weeks has already dropped more calls than the 4G did in a year. I can't use a golf gps that I regularly used with the 4G, on the same course. You can do all the testing you want, my 3D does not receive signals as well as the 4G did.At least in my real world use.
The Following User Says Thank You to copperavery For This Useful Post:
I agree, I was talking to my dad in the car while driving home from work which I always did with my evo, call as choppy, muffled, cut out, then dropped the call. I went to a sprint store last sunday and made a call from another evo 3d, and the same thing, choppy. Clearly it seems HTC focused on the HTC Sense 3.0, and 3d experience and basicall said, oh no! we forgot to add the radio, this will do. That's what it seems like. My Evo 4g, never had that problem with reception. I am torn, I have til 7/22/11 to return the phone, was thinking of the photon 4g, now I heard the Galaxy s 2 is coming soon, so I dont know. I do not want to be stuck with a phone for a t least a year if I continue to have trouble hearing people clearly. It's funny because my friend who I talk to everyday tells me "youn sound fine", I said, "well, you don't, thats not the issue. Anyone exchange one and if so, has the call quality been better? I even did the whole msl thing, did nothing.
Bad radios happen, I replaced mine within the first day for 3G and GPS troubles. I don't even know if had call problems or not, but the rest of it was borked.
My opinion is that life is too short to live with a crappy phone. Swap that puppy pronto and if the replacement doesn't work, definitely consider all options right for you.
Im taking my EVO 3d back, I love the speed and the newer software. the problem is reception. It is not as good the signal is not as good as the 4G. Teh little difference is enough to cause problems at both houses I own. The internet worked fine before but now fails most of the time. It drops calls were it rarely did before.
The battery is nice it lasts about double the 4g and I will miss that.
You know, I'm not really good at giving out kudos that often. But in this case I really want to thank you guys for doing the job that so many professional reviewers didn't seem to.
Maybe their methodologies are better than I give them credit for but their evaluations
seemed lacking in discipline. Maybe they just got a phone with a bad radio (which does happen) but it doesn't seem like any of them took the time to touch base with Sprint about the issue if that was the case.
I've gained more in depth knowledge from this thread than I did from any review I've read so far.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to apinkel For This Useful Post:
You guys are way better than I will ever be at testing. I have noticed since moving over that my speeds seem to be slower (Speedtest.net) I know not accurate but what I am wondering is, maybe there is a combination of things that could be causing my problem. Maybe Sprint has picked up a significant number of new customers in my area? Maybe there are technical issues with a tower(s)? Maybe I have a 3D built on Friday or Monday? I did try the proxy settings fix which used to work wonders for my Evo but every time I apply the fix my speeds get into the double digits. Thanks to Novox, Early Mon, The Hooded Claw and everyone who has taken the time to due some qualitative analysis for those of us technically inept.
Charles
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHoodedClaw
I am using 3g and did tests using speednet as described above. My impression so far is that the 3d is similar to the 4g, maybe very slightly slower. Since I didn't test them side by side, it's hard to be definitive.
BUT, I am comfortable saying that stories that the 3d is sluggish are just not true, at least for my 3d on the network in my town.
Im taking my EVO 3d back, I love the speed and the newer software. the problem is reception. It is not as good the signal is not as good as the 4G. Teh little difference is enough to cause problems at both houses I own. The internet worked fine before but now fails most of the time. It drops calls were it rarely did before.
The battery is nice it lasts about double the 4g and I will miss that.
This is my problem in a nutshell. The three places I use my phone the most my service is lousy, my calls all break up. My Hero, my kids Moments and my wife's Rumor all work just fine in all the same spots, never great reception but I did not have any issues. I am getting my new EVO 3D today and I have a couple of days to see if its better. I really hope that it is because I do not have any interest in the Photon or the Within.
Unfortunately I'm in the same predicament. Lots to love about the phone, but the phone part isn't one of them. I've swapped out two already, both have the same poor call quality next to a Hero and a Samsung Intercept. I can't even get visual voicemail the signal is so weak.
Replacement, sadly, did not resolve any of my issues.
I'll be sitting back now, waiting for Nexus 3, which will hopefully land on Sprint. I too have no interest in Motorola or Samsung.
Well I just sent the email below to HTC. I am very dissapointed about my reception problems.
My new EVO 3D has very pool signal strength compared to my old EVO. I had my EVO for a year and in the same house, same office, and same parts of town I dropped calls on my EVO maybe 2 or 3 times. Well now with my EVO 3D I drop calls weekly if not daily and this is extremely disappointing. Sprint had to install an Air Rave in my house because the service was beyond unacceptable. Last week I exchanged my EVO 3D for a new one at a sprint store thinking I had a bad unit and nope, no difference at all. Still very week signal strength and dropped calls. Also I detest having to use an Air rave in my house because every time you make or receive a call it beeps three times in my ear.
I have one simple problem with this test. The test should be done while it is being held in the hand. This is where most people use their phones and i have noticed a significant drop in dbm while it is held in the hand. Anybody willing to try this?
__________________
Finally a Senior Member!!!!
Dont forget to use that Thanks button, its there for a reason
I have one simple problem with this test. The test should be done while it is being held in the hand. This is where most people use their phones and i have noticed a significant drop in dbm while it is held in the hand. Anybody willing to try this?
You say you noticed a significant drop in dbm... care to provide some actual numbers?
You say you noticed a significant drop in dbm... care to provide some actual numbers?
Sure, and currently where I am, I not touching my phone I get between -93 and -95dbm as soon as I pick the phone up in a normal holding position it drops to -101 to -103dbm. The when I'm home it goes from -86dbm when not touching it to -91dbm and -95dbm when holding it. the evo 4g never had such a severe drop
Got a chance to test both phones. I couldn't duplicate your results. I went as far as cupping both hands around the phones and saw maybe 3-5dbm loss, but hard to say if that was just random fluctuation or not. The difference would hardly account for calls being systematically dropped due to poor signal.
Regardless of this test, my 3D clearly gets a weaker signal in my house than my 4G did. For the first time ever ive had missed calls due to not having a signal inside.
I got my 4G in February and can honestly say I have never dropped a call on it. I live in a pretty fringe area so I should be a good test subject for the signal quality of the 3D. Just by looking at the signal levels in ##DEBUG#, the 4G and 3D are pretty similar in db levels.
I've had time to do my own testing of the 3D vs. my 4G and my conclusion is this.
Reception seems to be very similar as I have not dropped a single call even when driving in extremely low coverage areas (-100 db and worse).
I think the 4G provided a little bit better clarity to my ears. I've tried EVRC-B and 13k and they both seem to help. 13k seems the best to me, but I thought the 4G delivered better call quality.
3G performance seems very similar as well, but I was mostly concerned about voice.
Been watching and reading a lot of reviews as of lately regarding the EVO 3D. It will be coming to Rogers in august, the question I have is does this phone have antenna issues or reception issues? Most reviews claim that the sensation does not have those issues. As a device I prefer the EVO 3D, but I fear having reception issues and dropped calls and data speed issues. As everyday users do you guys have any of these. The Iphone4 was a nightmare for me regarding dropped calls, just don't want to fall with the same problem again.
Like I said previously my call strength and quality are terrible compared to my other Sprint phones (Hero, Moment,EVO 4g and LG Rumor2) I have eight total.
But I am waiting on a replacement, that was over 2 weeks ago and it's still on back-order? I don't quite understand that, I didn't realize there was a shortage of these phones. Beside the whole actual phone part sucking I love the phone unless it freaks out when I use my aux cable or headphones and it does that almost every time.
Just wondering how the antenna is on the Evo 3D, signal strength wise. Preferably in the Las Vegas area and what kinds of average 3G speeds you get over here.
Anticipating the release of the Evo 3D to Virgin Mobile (hopefully) and I'm trying to determine if I want to jump ship or stay with the Triumph.
Phandroid has this interesting side project called Carrier Coverage and you can search various locations and by various devices to see how signal strength actually is. These reports are submitted by users, not sales representatives, so the results are not skewed. You should check it out
The Following User Says Thank You to jerofld For This Useful Post:
Phandroid has this interesting side project called Carrier Coverage and you can search various locations and by various devices to see how signal strength actually is. These reports are submitted by users, not sales representatives, so the results are not skewed. You should check it out
I was looking for coverage for the Evo 3D in some particular areas but could only find coverage by either carrier or device and not both at the same time. Is there a way I can find how well it picks up a signal in my area?
When I was using my HTC Hero, I became aware of certain "dead spots" in my apartment. Places where if I wandered into them, my cellular signal would get weak enough to lose the call. So I learned to avoid them. Some days I couldn't. It seemed like those areas were like "gaps" that would morph, grow, and shrink in size, sometimes enveloping more space than normal and make it difficult to make a call in places where I'd usually sit while talking on the phone.
Fast forward to today, where I'm now actively using an HTC Evo 3D. A far superior phone in many respects. My expectation was that my reception would either be about the same or improve... not get worse. But I had a call today where it was dropped 3 times, despite my having moved around to "better signal" spots in my apartment. I finally had to resort to standing near a window, the "last bastion" of a decent cell signal.
I'm rather shocked. I would have expected the Evo 3D to be better with call reception. But I won't be quick to blame the hardware (this is a used phone, but in great shape functionally and cosmetically). I'm thinking that perhaps the radio information stored in the phone may not be optimal. I activated it on Ting (an MVNO of Sprint) and all went well. Ting is just an administrative entity that uses the Sprint network, so it's virtually as if I just switched phones directly with Sprint. However, I'm wondering if perhaps some of the radio information wasn't properly or thoroughly updated. The PRL update indicated success yesterday... but is it possible the PRL isn't the "optimal" one? It shows as 22092, which I checked on-line as being the most recent update for 800 ESMR capable phones.
Also, is there anything enhanced in custom ROMs that might help make the phone more efficient for reception?
Sprint continues their EVO line of Android Phones with what is certainly a first for them - a 3D phone. The HTC EVO 3D boasts 3D technology on a beautiful 4.3-inch screen and get this: you don't even need glasses to enjoy the 3D experience!
B... Read More
I guess I should also be more clear when trying to correct something I think is wrong.
)
Disappointing call reception
