I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
V9m because it is thin.
I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
- activate voice command software (?)
- register applications (?)
This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
servers have probably been shut down.
This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
I already have a small collection of Moto phones
- v325i
- W755
- W766
I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
In article <jb6nds$btv$1@reader1.panix.com>, arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) wrote:
> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
> V9m because it is thin.
>
> I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
> frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
> - activate voice command software (?)
> - register applications (?)
> This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
> servers have probably been shut down.
>
> This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
> market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
> handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
> want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
> with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
> be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
>
> I already have a small collection of Moto phones
> - v325i
> - W755
> - W766
> I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
I have had several v9m's and they all fractured on the front screen.
Yes, they are thin but you need the extended battery to use it which
takes away much of the thinness.
But I kept replacing them because I liked them until VZW got the iPhone.
Do you want 2 or 3 v9m's with cracks?
On 11/30/2011 9:05 PM, David Arnstein wrote:
> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
> V9m because it is thin.
>
> I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
> frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
> - activate voice command software (?)
> - register applications (?)
> This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
> servers have probably been shut down.
>
> This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
> market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
> handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
> want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
> with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
> be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
>
> I already have a small collection of Moto phones
> - v325i
> - W755
> - W766
> I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
I think that the Verizon Wireless store is a good place to start looking.
This is about the *last* thing I would want to do at this time of year!
You'll fight your way through the Christmas shopping crowd and
prices will be high. If you can wait till the new year you may be able
to get a better deal.
"David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:jb6nds$btv$1@reader1.panix.com...
>I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
> V9m because it is thin.
>
> I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
> frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
> - activate voice command software (?)
> - register applications (?)
> This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
> servers have probably been shut down.
>
> This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
> market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
> handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
> want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
> with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
> be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
>
> I already have a small collection of Moto phones
> - v325i
> - W755
> - W766
> I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
> --
> David Arnstein (00)
> arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
> ^^
Used the V9m for a couple years. Still have it but it's inactive.
Good phone from my perspective (then). Thin is good, easy to carry in your
pocket. Reception and call quality very good. Moto phones on Verizon seem
to be known for that. Battery life was so-so, which I think was shortened
by leaving bluetooth on all the time. BT worked fine for me, although I got
tired of that thingy in my ear and just started using the speaker phone,
which also worked well. Good luck.
> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like
> Motorola's V9m because it is thin.
The V9M might be the best phone ever made. Competition is limited to
the E850 and the V3M. Nothing else ever came close in call quality,
etc. I hacked my V9M to the generic Moto UI which made it an even
better phone.
I sold my last one some time back and I still regret it...
> arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) wrote:
>
>> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like
>> Motorola's V9m because it is thin.
>
> The V9M might be the best phone ever made. Competition is limited to
> the E850 and the V3M. Nothing else ever came close in call quality,
> etc. I hacked my V9M to the generic Moto UI which made it an even
> better phone.
>
> I sold my last one some time back and I still regret it...
As regards the Moto V3 -- any hope to restore the 'vibrate' mechanism
once it's seemingly stopped being willing to vibrate?
We've got one like that that we'd love to get back to normal again.
Needless to say, out of warranty for far too long to try that avenue :-{ .
TIA; and cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
> As regards the Moto V3 -- any hope to restore the 'vibrate'
> mechanism once it's seemingly stopped being willing to vibrate?
>
> We've got one like that that we'd love to get back to normal
> again. Needless to say, out of warranty for far too long to try
> that avenue :-{ .
I've seen V3Ms on Ebay and Craig's List recently, might take a look? I
don't know if a repair shop could fix it economically since they're
fairly inexpensive on ebay...
"XS11E" <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9FAF729C51C26xs11eyahoocom@127.0.0.1...
> tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> wrote:
>
>> As regards the Moto V3 -- any hope to restore the 'vibrate'
>> mechanism once it's seemingly stopped being willing to vibrate?
>>
>> We've got one like that that we'd love to get back to normal
>> again. Needless to say, out of warranty for far too long to try
>> that avenue :-{ .
>
> I've seen V3Ms on Ebay and Craig's List recently, might take a look? I
> don't know if a repair shop could fix it economically since they're
> fairly inexpensive on ebay...
Yes, V3Ms are generally available at a reasonably price. I've picked up
several over the years. Good, basic phone for voice use.
Well I use a moto q9c. Bought a couple on ebay. Noticed you are on Panix
also.
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011, David Arnstein wrote:
> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
> V9m because it is thin.
>
> I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
> frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
> - activate voice command software (?)
> - register applications (?)
> This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
> servers have probably been shut down.
>
> This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
> market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
> handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
> want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
> with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
> be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
>
> I already have a small collection of Moto phones
> - v325i
> - W755
> - W766
> I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
> --
> David Arnstein (00)
> arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
> ^^
>
I forgot to say, that the phone I spoke of earlier is a smart phone, but
Verizon dosn't require a data plan.
On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, stevev wrote:
>
> "David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:jb6nds$btv$1@reader1.panix.com...
>> I am one of the few that does not want a smart phone. I like Motorola's
>> V9m because it is thin.
>>
>> I bought one on eBay and it had its quirks. For example, it would
>> frequently attempt communicate with a remote server in order to
>> - activate voice command software (?)
>> - register applications (?)
>> This is a hassle because I don't have networking service. Anyway, these
>> servers have probably been shut down.
>>
>> This particular V9m proved to be defective, so I am once again in the
>> market for a thin dumb phone. Is the Verizon V9m known to be a bad
>> handset? Is there a better choice for me? Apart from form factor, I just
>> want to complete a phone call, with maximum probability of success and
>> with maximum audio quality. A superior bluetooth implementation would
>> be a bonus. I don't care about other features.
>>
>> I already have a small collection of Moto phones
>> - v325i
>> - W755
>> - W766
>> I like Motorola handsets. But I will try to keep an open mind.
>> --
>> David Arnstein (00)
>> arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
>> ^^
>
> Used the V9m for a couple years. Still have it but it's inactive.
> Good phone from my perspective (then). Thin is good, easy to carry in your
> pocket. Reception and call quality very good. Moto phones on Verizon seem
> to be known for that. Battery life was so-so, which I think was shortened by
> leaving bluetooth on all the time. BT worked fine for me, although I got
> tired of that thingy in my ear and just started using the speaker phone,
> which also worked well. Good luck.
>
>
> --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to
> news@netfront.net ---
>
How is (was) Verizon's V9m? 
Linear Mode
