What is the best cellphone with iSync?

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
I have a Sony-Ericsson P800, and I wanted

a less bulky phone.



The Motorola RAZR V3 looked cool, but I heard

that it didn't work with iSync very well.



Any suggestions? I really just need a phone

that can save phone numbers from the mac's address

book, and will remind me of meetings (synced from

the mac's calandar).

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    sony ericsson phones sync best, they have the best bluetooth support. middle of the road get a t637 or higher end get an s710a when they are available or an s700i now. you can use them with salling software as well, which is quite awesome!
  • Reply 2 of 12
    e1618978e1618978 Posts: 6,073member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cam'ron

    sony ericsson phones sync best, they have the best bluetooth support. middle of the road get a t637 or higher end get an s710a when they are available or an s700i now. you can use them with salling software as well, which is quite awesome!



    http://gigaom.com/2004/12/16/razr-bu...s-x-sync-hack/



    Anyone used OnSync for their Razr? Maybe I will get

    the motorola phone after all.
  • Reply 3 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by e1618978

    http://gigaom.com/2004/12/16/razr-bu...s-x-sync-hack/



    Anyone used OnSync for their Razr? Maybe I will get

    the motorola phone after all.




    Moto phones require a USB cable to sync, regardless of whether they have Bluetooth or not. This will not change until Tiger, at the earliest (Tiger supposedly has a new sync framework, where a lot of the behind-the-scenes functionality of iSync is pushed down to the OS in an extensible way; whether they will add support for additional devices is a good question).



    Dunno if you can get a cable for the RAZR. According to the reviews, in all other respects (software wise) they are pretty much the same as the V400/500/600. Since OnSync works fine with my V500, I would assume that it would work well with the RAZR. But the other posters' suggestions are correct, if you want to use Bluetooth with a phone like Apple advertises, get a SonyEricsson.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    denmarudenmaru Posts: 208member
    I have a Sony Ericsson T68i, and it never let me down :3

    Syncing works like a charm, and is quite fast (for bluetooth, that is)... plus, it came for free if you signed a contract :3
  • Reply 5 of 12
    I know a lot of people that have used various SonyEricssons with iSync and had no problems, they certainly seem very stable.



    Just on a side note, and no 'bashing' intended, but why do these phones get called "cellphones' in the US (Canada too maybe?)? Most of europe call them mobile phones, don't know about asia. Just an odd difference, don't really care (bit like the Month/Day/Year vs. Day/Month/Year thing I guess), just interested.
  • Reply 6 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chopper3

    I know a lot of people that have used various SonyEricssons with iSync and had no problems, they certainly seem very stable.



    Just on a side note, and no 'bashing' intended, but why do these phones get called "cellphones' in the US (Canada too maybe?)? Most of europe call them mobile phones, don't know about asia. Just an odd difference, don't really care (bit like the Month/Day/Year vs. Day/Month/Year thing I guess), just interested.




    The old analog network was a "cellular" network, e.g. each tower was a cell in the network. So the handsets were called "cellular" phones, and the name just stuck, even though we have moved off of analog (though analog still has nearly 100% coverage in the US, something the digital networks cannot boast).
  • Reply 7 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nguyenhm16

    The old analog network was a "cellular" network, e.g. each tower was a cell in the network. So the handsets were called "cellular" phones, and the name just stuck, even though we have moved off of analog (though analog still has nearly 100% coverage in the US, something the digital networks cannot boast).



    Thank you, I didn't know that, I knew that there isn't 100% coverage (damn huge place after all, and even the UK is 100% covered, 99. something but not 100). Of course the Finns lead the world in mobile telecoms so we should call it whatever they do, but I imagine it's impossible for us yanks/brits to pronounce



    Are any of the US networks (sprint etc) planning 3G networks yet? they've only been out here for a year or so and there's been little take-up, I think the networks are going to lose out big in the short-term. Personally I can't ever imagine wanting a 3G video phone, the last thing I need is my wife knowing where I really am!
  • Reply 8 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chopper3

    Thank you, I didn't know that, I knew that there isn't 100% coverage (damn huge place after all, and even the UK is 100% covered, 99. something but not 100). Of course the Finns lead the world in mobile telecoms so we should call it whatever they do, but I imagine it's impossible for us yanks/brits to pronounce



    Are any of the US networks (sprint etc) planning 3G networks yet? they've only been out here for a year or so and there's been little take-up, I think the networks are going to lose out big in the short-term. Personally I can't ever imagine wanting a 3G video phone, the last thing I need is my wife knowing where I really am!




    If you are in the middle of nowhere, or on some back road, your chances of getting an analog cell signal are pretty good. If you're out of the major cities or not along a major highway, your chances of getting a digital signal are pretty dim. Though most carriers now have coverage to reach 80-90% of the US population (not the same as 80-90% geographic coverage).



    I dunno if Sprint's Vision is considered 3G, but it's been around for a while. They are upgrading to the next level of CDMA, as are the other major CDMA carrier in this country, Verizon. Cingular/AT&T Wireless are trialing out some kind of really high speed 3G (more than EDGE). T-Mobile seems to not have the money and/or spectrum. Shame, since I love their service otherwise.
  • Reply 9 of 12
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    Nokia 6600 here. Works pretty well.
  • Reply 10 of 12
    sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Almost everyone that has tried Bluetooth with SonyEricsson T630 would vouch that iSync kicks ass on it
  • Reply 11 of 12
    I had a SE T610 and it worked great! Now i have a SE K700i, and it's even better.



    Sony Ericssons bluetooth support made me switch from Nokia phones, and i'm happy about it.



    Besides iSync, I use BluePhoneElite (for call and sms management) and the free salling scripts for remote control (keynote, vlc, dvd, itunes). Very cool stuff, and it also provides some nice details such as automatic iTunes muting during calls.



    Edit: I also use it as a mobile modem over bluetooth, but mostly as a backup connection when by main connection is down.
  • Reply 12 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nguyenhm16

    The old analog network was a "cellular" network, e.g. each tower was a cell in the network. So the handsets were called "cellular" phones, and the name just stuck, even though we have moved off of analog (though analog still has nearly 100% coverage in the US, something the digital networks cannot boast).



    Digital networks also work as cells, where each tower is a cell. This is due to the limited range of cellphones. The higher the frequency for a given wattage, the shorter the range, and since nobody want's a high powered phone (due to battery consumption and radiation) the cells get smaller as bandwidth increases.
Sign In or Register to comment.