Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!bagate!dsinc!telecom-request From: bill%gauss@gatech.edu (bill) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: User's Evaluation of Handheld Cellular: Fujitsu vs. Motorola Message-ID: Date: 13 Mar 91 18:12:32 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 100 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 201, Message 3 of 4 At the outset, let me say that my evaluation is almost purely subjective and is based upon little-to-no evaluation of the engineering details of the respective units. That having been said, I have recently had an opportunity to use both the relatively new Fujitsu Pocket Commander and the somewhat older Motorola Micro-TAC model in daily activities. I'll attempt to convey my impressions of both units. I'll try to stay away from giving engineering specs, because anyone can get those from a dealer or from the manufacturer. Instead, I'll concentrate on my subjective opinion, having juxtaposed both units during the course of approximatly ten days. Please note that both units were used on the 'A' carrier in Atlanta, Pactel Cellular. My thanks to them for letting me evaluate these units. They're hoping I'll buy one, of course! :-) The jury is still out on that aspect. The general pricing of these units is too high for me yet. Here goes: Size: both units are roughly the same size, yet the Fujitsu is smaller. When I looked at each unit separately, I could not notice a size difference. Each unit has two different batteries, a compact and an extended life, which affect the depth. The units are effectively the same size. Weight: each unit causes a noticeable sag in an inside jacket pocket, no matter which battery is attached. I did not have any sense of fatigue when holding each unit to my head during conversation, though. At 12.3 oz., the Motorola is the heavier of the two by .4 oz. My hand and arm could not discern any weight difference between the two when actually in use, however. Range/reception: there was no significant difference in the performance of the units. I used or attempted to use each in similar or identical settings. I phoned from a cell fringe, from an interior room of a metallic building, in the car, on MARTA (rapid rail system) and on the sidewalk in a high-rise downtown area. I called from our computer room and also from my home. The reception was comparable, given the same conditions. The worst coverage for both was at my home. Lots of trees at home to block the coverage. Engineering flash: trees tend to attenuate cellular freqs. Matter o' fact, Atlanta is filled with trees! Cell siting is the key here, though, not so much the phone one would use. Charge life/recharge time: Charge life seemed to be similar here - bear in mind that this is purely subjective in my case. Recharge time? I didn't make a meaningful comparison here. I'd just pop them into the charger at night and pull them out on the way to work. Each got a full workday in, given the applicable mix of talk and standby time. The batteries would have to go into the stand first thing when I got home, though. Features/price: These are individual considerations, each unit has its stregths and trade-offs but they are definitely in the same class. The Pocket Commander seems to have the better price (for the time being), but Motorola has a few models in the DPC line (to which the Micro-TAC has evolved, I presume) which will/do offer competitive pricing with the Fujitsu. Miscellaneous impressions: I liked the buttons and keys of the Motorola much more. The Motorola uses a one-piece sealed keypad which I like a lot. The Fujitsu uses tactile keys ("they click"), but the keys don't seem to be sealed against the elements (they may be sealed under the faceplate - I don't know either way for sure). The microphone for the Motorola is on the fold-out/flip-down piece and seems susceptible to "hissing" when pronouncing the letter 's' sound - just a matter of holding the unit at the proper orientation, I suspect. The mic for the Fujitsi is not on the flip-down piece, but rather it is in the vicinity of the hinge. The sound quality on each is acceptable in my opinion. The Motorola seems more "substantial" to me - very subjective. The Motorola is American-made. I don't know where the Fujitsu is made. Well, that's all that I can think of. Please bear in mind that I have not evaluated these units from an engineering view, but from that of a user. They are very comparable, but my opinions lean toward the Motorola. Bear in mind that the Motorola only allows keyboard programming of the NAM to be done three times before it must be sent to a Motorola service center to be reset - if you use multiple cellular accounts then this is a serious liability. It is a quirk that I'd recommend that Motorola remove. Anyone know why they do this? The Fujitsu did not have such a restriction as far as I could tell. Conclusion? On the basis of my unscientific "tests," I would recommend either unit. It seems to come down to a user's preference for certain features. There is not enough room to delineate the features here, but it's easy enough to call a Motorola or Fujitsu rep and ask them for a sales brochure. If anyone has a specific question about my impressions as a user, please send me e-mail. Engineering questions should be directed toward the respective manufacturers, however. After all, it is their equipment. Hope this has been of use to some of you. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu