My little Moto E4 is much better than the V20 as far as reception goes. That's embarrassing considering this phone was a flagship phone.I have problems with cell signal reception, too.
That's why I'm thinking in moving to Huawei or Motorola.
My last Motorola, a Moto X Style (Pure), was way better in this.
Maybe, not everyone experience this problem since it's not everyone that goes to under overage areas.
In this, V20 is 3/5 stars.
Motorola has traditionally been known for their superior reception.My little Moto E4 is much better than the V20 as far as reception goes. That's embarrassing considering this phone was a flagship phone.
Yes but what I am trying to show is how a $800 dollar flagship last year is being outdone from a $80-ish dollar phone this year.Motorola has traditionally been known for their superior reception.
I get what you're saying about reception, but overall, the V20 is still a much better package than the E4 in most every other way.Yes but what I am trying to show is how a $800 dollar flagship last year is being outdone from a $80-ish dollar phone this year.
Yes obviously. Except reception.I get what you're saying about reception, but overall, the V20 is still a much better package than the E4 in most every other way.
I had a Moto X Pure Edition prior to my LG V20. Both are unlocked devices I used on AT&T, and I haven't noticed any differences in reception.
The key comment in your post is "unlocked" versions. I have an AT&T V20 and an unlocked HTC U11, the U11 kills the AT&T V20 when it comes to reception / cell signal. Whenever my V20 is getting bad reception it's always on band 30. I had a One Plus 3 that did the same thing, as soon as it latches onto band 30 my signal is garbage. I was going to get a V30 but after the common troubles I have had with AT&T and band 30 I won't buy any phone that has band 30 on it again. band 30 is a really high frequency band like 2300 or around there, it probably can't penetrat a 1/8" piece of sheet rock.