Related
My SGS phone app has this button to make a video call, and I'm totally curious about this functionality. I haven't seen anyone posting on the forums about it, and it's barely mentioned in the phone's user manual. Anyone successfully placed video calls with the default phone app?
Anyone know how it works -- what protocols/technologies?
Does it rely on your carrier having implemented something in order to work, or does it work over the internet?
Does it only work to other SGS phones, or can it work with other phones or video conferencing applications?
BTW, my SGS came from SingTel and is currently running JG1, but the option to make video calls was present in the original firmware, too.
if you are in USA or Canada, you can forget about it.
our networks currently does allow / provide that feature.
if you are in Europe or Asia, you should have no problem using it with another person that has the same feature on their phone.
there are 3rd party applications that uses Video Call of IP phone, google it
Just tried it, videocalled my girlfriend on her Nokia E52, worked splendidly
Hah Apple - videocall just other apple-people? Lame.
this sounds like functionality supported by carriers outside the US... (I'm in the US.) so I'm curious, how do you establish the call? Do you simply dial her regular mobile phone number and press the video call button and then everything else just works? in other words, no typing in IP addresses, no logging in to 3rd party services like Skype, nothing other than simply dialing a mobile phone number?
I can confirm that it works quite well. Most European carriers have been offering this feature for years (I could place video calls with my old Nokia N80 4 years ago), and sometimes they don't cost extra if you call a subscriber of the same carrier.
You just select video call instead of normal call, and if the other phone supports it you'll get video, as long as the other person chooses to enable it. I've tried a few calls with the SGS and I've been told that the quality of the received image is pretty good.
If the other phone doesn't support it, or is not under 3G cover you'll get a 'video call currently not possible' error.
darnap said it quite well
Remember trying in on my old N95 many years ago, but didn't see any real use for it
Yeah I had this on my NEC E313 phone like 5 years ago, curiously we somehow managed to do it over the phone network, on phones that are like pocket calculators now. I wonder if Steve really had to swallow his pride when he made such a big thing of it, and it only working over WiFi.
Like others I tried it a few years ago, simply dialing the number and choosing video call. However, the price of video calling was like 4, 5 or 6 times the price of a normal call(I forget the pricing, but it was quite a difference)... I've only used it like 3-4 times, and that was just for me or others to try it out. I don't know, nor have I heard of, anyone who uses it on a regular basis. It's just a "Ooh! Shiny feature! Must try it out" kinda thing. Gets old REAL fast imo.
Regards
my old HTC Athena can do it, i'm surprised Windows Mobile actually made that work
again it only works in Europe and Asia AFAIK, when i try it in America it doesn't do anything
America doesn't have video calling yet? Sheesh, even Austraila has had it for years! Although it costs almost a dollar a minute to use...
mstrandbo; said:
Just tried it, videocalled my girlfriend on her Nokia E52, worked splendidly
Hah Apple - videocall just other apple-people? Lame.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Be aware that Fring and Skype are fighting each other so they can't call each other.
Also iPhone 4 can video call any other phones such as SGS too, using applications such as Fring.
Actually, their video call method is way more superior to ours. They don't need cell minutes which means they can do video call even on an airplane. The performance is also superior. I wish some Android developers come up with a video call application using that protocol soon. I also like to see video call application using thus protocol on desktop computers.
wont be superior for long unless said person is grandfathered into an unlimited data plan. However, you could still video call with wifi when its available for no cost. I have to add that skype is coming to android later this year and apparently its going to be the best thing in video calling. I hope they deliver.
navmanyeah said:
America doesn't have video calling yet? Sheesh, even Austraila has had it for years! Although it costs almost a dollar a minute to use...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup! it sucks to live in America... we always get the oldest technology here... they dare to call themselves "1st" world countries...
for the past 10~20 years we've always had the junk phones from Europe/Asia basically anything that was new for you guys 5 years ago, is "new" in America.
it was not until iphone launched, that people realized all the stuff they've been missing.
I've been playing with smartphones 5~10 years before the iphone band wagon started, it's funny that people never realized that the features in iphone was looooooooong available on phones that were already available elsewhere in the world.
anyways Amen, finally carriers are starting to bring in the latest on smartphones to America
unfortunately like CARS, they are crippled to fit the "American's Needs" most Japanese import cars are crippled if you compare them to the same car made in Japan.
another example our SGS i9000 phones, the American version is crippled as well... sigh...
anyways.... i'll rather move to anywhere in Europe instead, unfortunately work are the cost of living are more expensive in the UK, maybe I should try Spain or Italy, or France
AllGamer said:
yup! it sucks to live in America... we always get the oldest technology here... they dare to call themselves "1st" world countries...
for the past 10~20 years we've always had the junk phones from Europe/Asia basically anything that was new for you guys 5 years ago, is "new" in America.
it was not until iphone launched, that people realized all the stuff they've been missing.
I've been playing with smartphones 5~10 years before the iphone band wagon started, it's funny that people never realized that the features in iphone was looooooooong available on phones that were already available elsewhere in the world.
anyways Amen, finally carriers are starting to bring in the latest on smartphones to America
unfortunately like CARS, they are crippled to fit the "American's Needs" most Japanese import cars are crippled if you compare them to the same car made in Japan.
another example our SGS i9000 phones, the American version is crippled as well... sigh...
anyways.... i'll rather move to anywhere in Europe instead, unfortunately work are the cost of living are more expensive in the UK, maybe I should try Spain or Italy, or France
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good Riddance.. .
eaglesteve said:
Be aware that Fring and Skype are fighting each other so they can't call each other.
Also iPhone 4 can video call any other phones such as SGS too, using applications such as Fring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, my point was that with all other phones you don't need third party applications such as Fring.
mstrandbo said:
I know, my point was that with all other phones you don't need third party applications such as Fring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true.
Everyone that you calls would have made their own decisions on whther they would use Skype or Fring. So if you want to call them, you have no choice but to also have to use the same third party applications such as Fring or whatever one which is compatible with the other party's. If you're really into video calls, I suspect you need to have every popular third party applications installed on your own phone.
What? No.. If I'd want to videocall any one of my friends that don't have an iPhone, we've wouldn't have needed any third party application such as Fring or Skype - that's my point.. If I were to videocall friends with iPhone 4, we'd have to use Fring/Skype.
This is at least as long we're here in Europe, where videocalls have been something "all" mobile phones and networks have had for years.
Your last sentence I'm agreeing fully with though.
The point is that videocalling is a basic UMTS feature, so you don't need any extra application to use it. Most UMTS phones support it out of the box as it is a standard, so they are all compatible across vendors and models. The iPhone (even the iPhone 4) is one of the few phones that lacks the UMTS video calling capability, so it needs a third party app to do it.
mstrandbo; said:
What? No.. If I'd want to videocall any one of my friends that don't have an iPhone, we've wouldn't have needed any third party application such as Fring or Skype - that's my point.. If I were to videocall friends with iPhone 4, we'd have to use Fring/Skype.
This is at least as long we're here in Europe, where videocalls have been something "all" mobile phones and networks have had for years.
Your last sentence I'm agreeing fully with though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right here.
(double posted this to try and get help as quick as possible since the phone needs to ship out ASAP)
Hi everyone. I'm an American living in Sweden. I have a unlocked galaxy note 3 that I am going to send my TECHNOPHOBIA suffering mother so she van video chat and see my newborn son for the first time live instead of in snail mailed pictures. She has agreed to try her best to learn because after 4 years of us not seeing each other she is willing to the anything
so here is the advice I need.
Best way to *safety proof* (don't want to call my mom a idiot) the phone.
A way for me to remotely restore the phone to MY settings when she accidentally messes something up and calls me freaking out.
Advice on a service plan. I have good credit in the usa and a social security number. she lives in 70647 Iowa, Louisiana. w
We would like to be able to video chat on skype on demand. But she will not be streaming video or downloading anything but content from dropbox. I would love if there was the option for her to be able to send an sms/mms to my mobile in sweden.
I would like yo put the phone in some *easy* setup. similar to the one included in 4.4.2 BUT my mother will only be using the phone for a few things. Skype facebook and dropbox. Also receiving sms/mms from me only. I would like her to have the ability to call our foreign cellphone numbers though in case of an emergency.
The phone is already rooted and updated to samsung version of 4.4.2. I would happily use another ROM if someone can recommend one that would best suit my needs.
I have a windows desktop running win 7 and an extra note 3 that I will be keeping here to use as well.
Help a lady out please! I desperately want to see my momma.
lindadhnorman said:
(double posted this to try and get help as quick as possible since the phone needs to ship out ASAP)
Hi everyone. I'm an American living in Sweden. I have a unlocked galaxy note 3 that I am going to send my TECHNOPHOBIA suffering mother so she van video chat and see my newborn son for the first time live instead of in snail mailed pictures. She has agreed to try her best to learn because after 4 years of us not seeing each other she is willing to the anything
so here is the advice I need.
Best way to *safety proof* (don't want to call my mom a idiot) the phone.
A way for me to remotely restore the phone to MY settings when she accidentally messes something up and calls me freaking out.
Advice on a service plan. I have good credit in the usa and a social security number. she lives in 70647 Iowa, Louisiana. w
We would like to be able to video chat on skype on demand. But she will not be streaming video or downloading anything but content from dropbox. I would love if there was the option for her to be able to send an sms/mms to my mobile in sweden.
I would like yo put the phone in some *easy* setup. similar to the one included in 4.4.2 BUT my mother will only be using the phone for a few things. Skype facebook and dropbox. Also receiving sms/mms from me only. I would like her to have the ability to call our foreign cellphone numbers though in case of an emergency.
The phone is already rooted and updated to samsung version of 4.4.2. I would happily use another ROM if someone can recommend one that would best suit my needs.
I have a windows desktop running win 7 and an extra note 3 that I will be keeping here to use as well.
Help a lady out please! I desperately want to see my momma.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I saw different people using Android phones and have to say that especially Samsung phones are extremely difficult to use in terms of responsiveness and features. I haven't seen any rom which is "easier" to use than the build in easy mode. We gave our grandparents and parents an iPhone and ipad since they are easier to use. Coming from an Android fanatic.
4aces said:
I saw different people using Android phones and have to say that especially Samsung phones are extremely difficult to use in terms of responsiveness and features. I haven't seen any rom which is "easier" to use than the build in easy mode. We gave our grandparents and parents an iPhone and ipad since they are easier to use. Coming from an Android fanatic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty much stuck with the galaxy note 3 for her a phone. I am trying out Big Launcher right now. I LOVE the 'Easy Touch Wizzard' except that I wish you could edit the main screen's applications. And Big Launcher is nice but I wish you could have slightly smaller icons so I could fit everything in one screen. *sighs* I need to learn to program.
Can anyone recommend any data programs that are great for mostly video calling on skype (or hangouts/chat on since they are both note 3 phones)? Would love if they had some intentional sms options as well.
lindadhnorman said:
I'm pretty much stuck with the galaxy note 3 for her a phone. I am trying out Big Launcher right now. I LOVE the 'Easy Touch Wizzard' except that I wish you could edit the main screen's applications. And Big Launcher is nice but I wish you could have slightly smaller icons so I could fit everything in one screen. *sighs* I need to learn to program.
Can anyone recommend any data programs that are great for mostly video calling on skype (or hangouts/chat on since they are both note 3 phones)? Would love if they had some intentional sms options as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
US data programs? I used to have cricket in CA which is kinda less expansive. If your mom has a cellular plan I would ask if there is any combination possible. Are u looking for a cheap or very good data plan?
And sorry I completely forgot to mention launchers; )
4aces said:
US data programs? I used to have cricket in CA which is kinda less expansive. If your mom has a cellular plan I would ask if there is any combination possible. Are u looking for a cheap or very good data plan?
And sorry I completely forgot to mention launchers; )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm looking for VERY good. And It needs to be on AT&T or T-mobile to get the best coverage, as well at LTE (verified with IMEI, and LTE bands).
I am willing to sign a contract OR to get prepaid, as long as I can pay it online with a VISA, or Mastercard. My mom's current phone is one of those elderly social security phones. Basically only for receiving calls, OR emergencies. So there is no option for data.
lindadhnorman said:
I'm looking for VERY good. And It needs to be on AT&T or T-mobile to get the best coverage, as well at LTE (verified with IMEI, and LTE bands).
I am willing to sign a contract OR to get prepaid, as long as I can pay it online with a VISA, or Mastercard. My mom's current phone is one of those elderly social security phones. Basically only for receiving calls, OR emergencies. So there is no option for data.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For Skype calls u need a lot of gb. 8 gb on t-mobile go down pretty fast when u are video calling. If at&t or t-Mobile and the price doesn't matter go for at&t with 20 gb.
Doesn't your mom have wireless router? Would be a lot more convenient than a data plan on the cell phone.
Nope no access to Internet what so ever lol. She wouldn't know how to use one even if I could get one to her.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using XDA Free mobile app
If I was in charge of developing the Note 4, I would do this:
1. Make it duo sim card compatible
I don't know if it is possible but with duo sim cards you can have 2 phone numbers. One phone number can be for work/business and another for personal use. That way, when you get a phone call, different ring tones would let you if the call is coming from work or from personal calls.
2. Make the Note 4 unlockable to all carriers like the iphone 6. The iphone 6 (the t-mobile version) from the Apple store is essentially unlocked and it can be used with Verizon, AT&T, and T-mobile. It does have some issue with Sprint at the moment though. Anyway, if the Samsung web store can sell extra batteries and other accessories, then it can certainly sell and unlocked Note 4 at full price and there would still be a lot of people willing to buy it.
To cut down the cost, the Note 4 can eliminate some of the less than useful sensors such has a heart monitor, a UV sensor, and others. How often do you use the UV sensor and you can check your pulse with your fingers on your wrist with a stop watch or a regular watch with seconds counter.
This was the official link to purchase the developer edition, gone??
http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SM-N910VMKEVZW
Yeah it has been down for about a week or so. Looks like the end for them new from Samsung. Shame because I checked the stock on them the day before it was pulled and they still had over 80 of them.
Note Edge DevEd is gone too.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Just when I finally decide to buy the developer edition it disappears from their site. It's getting harder and harder to find newer devices on Verizon that can be rooted and has external storage/removable battery.
Are they going to offer a Note 5 DE?
Get a unlocked phone off of tmobile and you can have removable back battery and sd card and you can put a verizon chip and root.
Sent from my SM-N910V using XDA Free mobile app
Confirmed by Samsung - no more developer note 4's for sale. off the website about a week ago.
good news though. there will be Galaxy S6 Developer Editions, this year, and there will be a Note 5 developer edition (next year)
rob
anticloud said:
Confirmed by Samsung - no more developer note 4's for sale. off the website about a week ago.
good news though. there will be Galaxy S6 Developer Editions, this year, and there will be a Note 5 developer edition (next year)
rob
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, a non replaceable battery is a deal breaker for me.[emoji20]
Extra Virgin said:
Unfortunately, a non replaceable battery is a deal breaker for me.[emoji20]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking the same thing. Especially if they go with an even smaller battery then what the N4 has, like rumors state.
I haven't been using the spare battery for mine. Just to see if it would be a total inconvenience or not. Hasn't really been at all. Though they never decide to die until it is a major inconvenience haha.
Well, I have to get my Note 4 reflashed back to developer. It's being sent to texas on tuesday. I wasn't thinking, and duked my device with the latest update from Samsung / Verizon. not a good idea, stuck in retail land. I am also planning to get a new screen put in as the one I have has some severe burn-in.
btw - if you are near contract's end, consider this (I am). Don't opt to renew your plan for a new two year agreement just to get a new phone. Verizon, if your plan is expired, will drop your rate 24.99 to keep you. either keep your existing phone, or, pay full retail for your next one.
I know, if you buy a Note 5 (or S6) and want gob loads of memory you pay big bucks. You could also purchase a S5 Developer off of Samsung's site for 599.00 and get the luxury of a new phone plus developer, plus removable battery, plus additional storage.
just a few thoughts your way.
There's this too. Verizon Will Drop Phone Contracts, End Discounted Phones
Yup. No more contracts or contract pricing as of this coming Tuesday. Only options for phone purchase from VZW will be EDGE or full price. If you want a subsidized phone price point, get to the store tomorrow (although it doesn't seem like ANYONE wants more contract... lol)
And, the retail note 4, discontinued...
Sadly the development has never been great for the DE. Lack of root for the retail version has killed an otherwise amazing phone for tinkerers and Nandroiders.
If I am wrong let me know and I'll try to get one used... but until then I stick with my extremely versatile note 2!
Note 5 is a no go for 2 simple reasons: SD and fixed battery.
Samsung Will Feel It.
Telemachus said:
Sadly the development has never been great for the DE. Lack of root for the retail version has killed an otherwise amazing phone for tinkerers and Nandroiders.
If I am wrong let me know and I'll try to get one used... but until then I stick with my extremely versatile note 2!
Note 5 is a no go for 2 simple reasons: SD and fixed battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, Note 5 looks great, but from a distance...
And that's why I picked up a 2nd Note 4, found one, at a Best Buy, who states their inventories are depleting and they are discontinued in their systems. So, as soon as they are all sold out, no more. I had to run to a store far away from my home to get a new one. Yup, it's retail, but of course has the two main features people want. And I'm holding on to it for right now, not sure what I'll do with it.
Samsung most definitely does not have em, and whatever Verizon has they REFUSE to sell one at full price walking out of the store with them - poop-heads
================================================================================================================
But Samsung will feel it, for sure - Hmmm, apple-wanna-bees, maybe we'll call them "Sample", yup, we tried it, doesn't taste so good anymore...
================================================================================================================
On a final note, and what might be regarded by most of you as a "Good luck with that.." attempt - this, is the reason I am named "Anti-Cloud"
I would like to start a petition, in which we, the users of phones, regain 100% control if it's use, who has access to it, what's on it, and with full administrative access rights. I would like that to see the petition be forged into a bill and work it's way up to Washington and become law: it basically puts the business of communication devices on a simple one-to-one basis, a simple business model - which in the end, if a person pays for phone service to make calls, send texts, run apps, browse web etc, that the business relationship is solely between "you" and the carrier - meaning you pay for the service and the carrier can only conduct business scoped to making phone calls sending receiving data / text - no collection of whereabouts, providing location services (which is BS anyway), nor using the phone by any means to sell more services - a simple contract more or less, that all other business conducted, whether the user knows about it or not, is prohibited by law - the phone is a phone, it is not a platform for a carrier / 3rd parties to conduct further business (or the government for that matter).
History / Background - A purchased computer, by any of us, is for the most part, an honest transaction - meaning once we purchase that computer, which may have an operating system / software on it, it is free to do with what we want. We, the user, can decide to employ administrative access to that PC, even go as far as completely remove an operating system. Note, not sure about apple, but with Microsoft, although a bit harder to do with Windows 8/10 etc, the user can still remove virtually anything they don't want in that operating system let alone they can fully preserve administrative access even in the midst of an update of operating system / software...
Phones, are not that way today. The phone's calling / data / text service is a basic service, yet there are many hands / fingers / services nested with a phone as it leaves the confines of the carrier, with the intent to solicit, collect, and control the business conducted of (on) that device - I want an end to it.
You realize that when you walk out of a carrier with your new phone it is not just a phone you can make calls with, send texts, browse the web - using Samsung / Verizon as a base example: It has Verizon, Samsung, Google, and the Government's fingers into it. The device is a platform to do "further" business with, on top of which we, the user, do not have full administrative rights to.
1. I seek to defund the business models (fingers), i.e. amputate - 3rd parties abilities to do ANY business (collect data, or sell) on devices that does not have to do with making phone calls, sending texts, using data (sending / receiving data between the carrier's towers and the device - the raw service, what you pay for)
2. Give the user FULL unadulterated administrative rights to the device with ability to remove ANY / ALL components / software / drivers - and that no non-essential-software shall be "baked-in" to the point that if removed the device becomes in-operable - i.e. NFL football, google maps. The device's ability to make calls, send texts, consume data must be independent of ALL other applications. Essentially, there would be no need for rooting / jail breaking as the phone's will come that way.
3. Location services can be disabled / removed and are completely free / untethered from the hardware GPS and or the phone's ability to operate - a consumer can, at will, have the ability to remove ALL location features even up to the point of removing drivers which employ the hardware GPS - if they so choose. And, a carrier / 3rd party cannot make the claim of greater accuracy (as that is a lie, complete lie) - using the hardware GPS is by far the most accurate and ALL software models at a minimum should be required to have the ability employ the hardware GPS only with no transmission of location datum to a 3rd party / carrier without the expressed consent of the user / knowledge there of.
4. Device manufactures and carriers MUST give the user a complete freedom from cloud service and or provide an equal means of storing / transmitting user's private data without the intervention / knowledge of a 3rd party provider / carrier - the user must have the choice as to whether to use the cloud or not. No carrier / manufacturer can put a device in service which forces the consumer to use cloud services. and the carrier / 3rd party provider MUST allow the user to move data off / on to the device in a sealed vacuum of privacy.
5. Operating System Providers MUST provide an operating system in which the user can have FULL administrative access to do all the above while maintaining a secure model - meaning carriers / manufactures cannot debilitate a secure service or claim the device is insecure if administrative access is gained by the local user. Secure models must be independent of administrative access - just like a PC!! It is an excuse, 100%, if a provider / carrier insists that security has been compromised if administrative access is gained.
This is a start -
Now, having said that. in a reasonable fashion, a carrier / 3rd party should have the ability to deem a device secure (or not) by virtue of a minimum set of requirements that deem the device safe to transact financial / secure private business - i.e. the user could remove components that defund a device's security model making it vulnerable for attack etc. carriers and 3rd party providers in order to maintain a secure model should be allowed to prevent an application / certain services from transacting if the device is not compliant. We see this in an application like Soft-Card etc. although I contend that a user gaining root access does not constitute a breach in security - if it does, it is because the operating system (or software) is weak - see #5, and providers must ensure that they can achieve a secure platform with administrative access.
any takers?
Ummmm...
Good luck with that!
lexbian said:
Yup. No more contracts or contract pricing as of this coming Tuesday. Only options for phone purchase from VZW will be EDGE or full price. If you want a subsidized phone price point, get to the store tomorrow (although it doesn't seem like ANYONE wants more contract... lol)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to clarify, from what I've been reading if you are on a VZW legacy plan with a 2 year contract you can stick with it and get contract upgrades like normal going forward. I have not seen anything official from VZW on this, but that's the word on the street and I really hope it proves to be true. I still have unlimited data on 4 of my 5 family plan lines and if they steal the contract upgrade subsidies from me I'll be f*#king pissed since it's a value of around $20/month per line.
On a side note I'm looking for a DE Note 4. If anyone has any leads let me know. Those things are like leprechauns these days.
If someone here with a DE wants to move to a different phone I have a contract upgrade available with Verizon so I can trade you any new phone for a DE Note 4.
vmod32 said:
Just to clarify, from what I've been reading if you are on a VZW legacy plan with a 2 year contract you can stick with it and get contract upgrades like normal going forward. I have not seen anything official from VZW on this, but that's the word on the street and I really hope it proves to be true. I still have unlimited data on 4 of my 5 family plan lines and if they steal the contract upgrade subsidies from me I'll be f*#king pissed since it's a value of around $20/month per line.
On a side note I'm looking for a DE Note 4. If anyone has any leads let me know. Those things are like leprechauns these days.
If someone here with a DE wants to move to a different phone I have a contract upgrade available with Verizon so I can trade you any new phone for a DE Note 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@vmod32 I sent you a PM.
madchainsawer said:
Get a unlocked phone off of tmobile and you can have removable back battery and sd card and you can put a verizon chip and root.
Sent from my SM-N910V using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to repeat what you just said but are you saying that if I get an unlocked phone designed for T-Mobile that I can run it on the Verizon network as long as I put the Verizon sim card in? That would be awesome as I want to buy a note 4 developer edition but can't find one.
burbank said:
Not to repeat what you just said but are you saying that if I get an unlocked phone designed for T-Mobile that I can run it on the Verizon network as long as I put the Verizon sim card in? That would be awesome as I want to buy a note 4 developer edition but can't find one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No - this doesn't work as Verizon has to white list the device for it to work on their network.
So is it just sadistic that this page is still up?
http://www.samsung.com/us/support/owners/product/ET-N910VMKEVZW
I just read/heard… source
Now that Google's exclusivity with "Big Red" (Verizon) is done, I have a couple of thoughts and was wondering what this community (or at the very least whomever other users…) thoughts on this were…intelligent (thoughts) or otherwise (meaning I still wish to know even if it might be considered [personally] foolish)…
I'm unsure whether it was at Verizon's insistence or not, but do you think the other (T-Mobile it looks like, but maybe in the future, it could be others…) company/companies would lock their device's bootloader like Verizon does? I remember (at least with the Pixel 2) that, initially, there were instances where Verizon (maybe Google themselves; knowingly or uknowingly) "claimed" to inquirers that their device would be "exactly the same" as the one's sold from Google (website) – I don't have the exact sources, but I'm sure a simple easy search here on XDA and/or on Google would result in enough of them. Of course, now (here in "the future") we know better and it has a definite key difference. Also, the fact that (at least in the first 6 months after the Pixel 2 release) warranty replacements and refurbished units that went to Verizon proved that there was really no "verizon variant" until you activated the device onto the Verizon network (usually via the [Verizon] SIM card); this is how many (including me) were able to lease a Pixel 2 with Verizon and have an unlocked bootloader as well. I could understand if, somehow, there was a different variant that was different in hardware specific to the Verizon ones as well as most likely including their horrid pre-installed "stock" apps (I've seen it happen with "Big Red's" Samsung Galaxies; i.e. varied different but specific hardware that physically included "safeguards" and random apps that came "stock" in hidden in other partitions…) and/or other difference that helped "streamline" the device to the network. But, at the very least, it leads me to believe that initially there was no difference -- even in bootloader "unlockibility" – and Verizon, rather close to launch, changed their minds and forced Google's hands to lock it down; in "fear of" (doubtful; probably bs claim) unlocking and screwing with the phone which would cause broken devices and headaches "for Verizon" – most likely just wanted to force lease and market share opportunities. Either way, do you think other company/companies (like T-Mobile) would follow the same line of thinking and also follow suit?
I doubt I'd leave Verizon, but let's say I was willing; knowing that T-Mobile's variant would not lock down the bootloader like Verizon does and it would be closer (or an exact duplicate) to a direct Google variant would help me choose in changing to their service and/or lease with T-Mobile and also enjoy added bonuses for starting a new line and leasing with them...
Or, might the exact opposite be true and, to follow suit of T-Mobile and Google, Verizon would stop being foolish and simply do the smart decision to keep it as close to Google's variant as possible…? (yea….I find this highly doubtful as well…but it is a thought, isn't it?)
In any case, I most likely will be "going for" the upcoming Pixel 4 & Pixel 4 XL; especially if it got rid of that god-awful god-forsaken notch and went with the "pinhole" design that's supposedly like the Samsung S10. For whatever it's worth, if it continues on as with the Pixel 3 and includes a similar notch (as with the 3), I will further skip this model and wait yet another year for Google to "wise up"… But, because of the planned purchase, and because I (myself consider) made a mistake in not purchasing/leasing directly from Google and wish to do right/correct this time around, these are thoughts that would inevitably come up (especially considering the breaking news) and have to be considered…
Some other thoughts…
Reading the androidpolice article (SOURCE), the writer does make a good point that this "move" by Google is a good way to expand and position itself to cater to the "mid-level crowd" where its (Google's Pixels) presence above the cheap rather awful $30-ish smartphones but below the very premium (with its definitely "premium" price; I'm looking at you Samsung and Apple); where I believe is a really great "niche" to cater to; it's why me and my wife love their device! But, then again, there are many, many, MANY others who consider even the Pixel line (most especially the XLs) to be at already a "premium" price (MSRP $800 for Pixel 3, $900 for XL or 128GB, and 4 digits for the 128GB XL) which makes having/including a sub-par [insert here] (whatever prejudice [justified or not] you or another owner you know) a big blow (too much of a big blow in some cases that some owners have refused to purchase or even returned their Pixel) and a definite travesty that a big company (Google, which is "ginormous"!) and "premium" product would dare to have such a sub-par part! But, with it moving on to another (and possibly more, maybe in the future) company/companies, do you think this is a good "move" – at least in the right direction – and/or a positive sign/signal towards good things to come? Or the exact opposite?
In whatever case, again, with the (breaking) news, it inevitably caused some thoughts to come to mind and I thought I'd ask my highly regarded and preferred community here what they might think and their further thoughts on the subject…
simplepinoi177 said:
I just read/heard… source
Now that Google's exclusivity with "Big Red" (Verizon) is done, I have a couple of thoughts and was wondering what this community (or at the very least whomever other users…) thoughts on this were…intelligent (thoughts) or otherwise (meaning I still wish to know even if it might be considered [personally] foolish)…
I'm unsure whether it was at Verizon's insistence or not, but do you think the other (T-Mobile it looks like, but maybe in the future, it could be others…) company/companies would lock their device's bootloader like Verizon does? I remember (at least with the Pixel 2) that, initially, there were instances where Verizon (maybe Google themselves; knowingly or uknowingly) "claimed" to inquirers that their device would be "exactly the same" as the one's sold from Google (website) – I don't have the exact sources, but I'm sure a simple easy search here on XDA and/or on Google would result in enough of them. Of course, now (here in "the future") we know better and it has a definite key difference. Also, the fact that (at least in the first 6 months after the Pixel 2 release) warranty replacements and refurbished units that went to Verizon proved that there was really no "verizon variant" until you activated the device onto the Verizon network (usually via the [Verizon] SIM card); this is how many (including me) were able to lease a Pixel 2 with Verizon and have an unlocked bootloader as well. I could understand if, somehow, there was a different variant that was different in hardware specific to the Verizon ones as well as most likely including their horrid pre-installed "stock" apps (I've seen it happen with "Big Red's" Samsung Galaxies; i.e. varied different but specific hardware that physically included "safeguards" and random apps that came "stock" in hidden in other partitions…) and/or other difference that helped "streamline" the device to the network. But, at the very least, it leads me to believe that initially there was no difference -- even in bootloader "unlockibility" – and Verizon, rather close to launch, changed their minds and forced Google's hands to lock it down; in "fear of" (doubtful; probably bs claim) unlocking and screwing with the phone which would cause broken devices and headaches "for Verizon" – most likely just wanted to force lease and market share opportunities. Either way, do you think other company/companies (like T-Mobile) would follow the same line of thinking and also follow suit?
I doubt I'd leave Verizon, but let's say I was willing; knowing that T-Mobile's variant would not lock down the bootloader like Verizon does and it would be closer (or an exact duplicate) to a direct Google variant would help me choose in changing to their service and/or lease with T-Mobile and also enjoy added bonuses for starting a new line and leasing with them...
Or, might the exact opposite be true and, to follow suit of T-Mobile and Google, Verizon would stop being foolish and simply do the smart decision to keep it as close to Google's variant as possible…? (yea….I find this highly doubtful as well…but it is a thought, isn't it?)
In any case, I most likely will be "going for" the upcoming Pixel 4 & Pixel 4 XL; especially if it got rid of that god-awful god-forsaken notch and went with the "pinhole" design that's supposedly like the Samsung S10. For whatever it's worth, if it continues on as with the Pixel 3 and includes a similar notch (as with the 3), I will further skip this model and wait yet another year for Google to "wise up"… But, because of the planned purchase, and because I (myself consider) made a mistake in not purchasing/leasing directly from Google and wish to do right/correct this time around, these are thoughts that would inevitably come up (especially considering the breaking news) and have to be considered…
Some other thoughts…
Reading the androidpolice article (SOURCE), the writer does make a good point that this "move" by Google is a good way to expand and position itself to cater to the "mid-level crowd" where its (Google's Pixels) presence above the cheap rather awful $30-ish smartphones but below the very premium (with its definitely "premium" price; I'm looking at you Samsung and Apple); where I believe is a really great "niche" to cater to; it's why me and my wife love their device! But, then again, there are many, many, MANY others who consider even the Pixel line (most especially the XLs) to be at already a "premium" price (MSRP $800 for Pixel 3, $900 for XL or 128GB, and 4 digits for the 128GB XL) which makes having/including a sub-par [insert here] (whatever prejudice [justified or not] you or another owner you know) a big blow (too much of a big blow in some cases that some owners have refused to purchase or even returned their Pixel) and a definite travesty that a big company (Google, which is "ginormous"!) and "premium" product would dare to have such a sub-par part! But, with it moving on to another (and possibly more, maybe in the future) company/companies, do you think this is a good "move" – at least in the right direction – and/or a positive sign/signal towards good things to come? Or the exact opposite?
In whatever case, again, with the (breaking) news, it inevitably caused some thoughts to come to mind and I thought I'd ask my highly regarded and preferred community here what they might think and their further thoughts on the subject…
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be honest I feel it is a good move and can potentially be a bad move all in the same. I personally have Verizon service and I admit I didn't do any research before getting my pixel 2 xl from Verizon as in the past I've had the Galaxy Nexus and never had an issue unlocking the bootloader until my Motorola Droid 2 turbo xt1585. To this very day I cannot unlock the bootloader on that device or my pixel 2 xl. I didn't have much of a choice as the xt1585 charge Port took a dump on me and I needed to access text messages for some extremely important codes and such related to one of my 2 full-time jobs I had at the time so I replaced the xt1585 asap. I for one didn't like that the girl upgrading my contract decided to put a Sim card in and proceed to try setup the phone for me and all though I know she was just trying to be nice and all, I'm not one of those people that need that kind of help. Later I find out that I cannot unlock the bootloader and have had to roll with all the updates and am currently on q beta 3 etc. I've noticed with the pie update before q beta was launched they would upgrade the bootloader and again with q beta 3 they update the bootloader. Both Verizon and Google send you in pointless circles when asked about this unlocking the bootloader deal. Not thrilled with either company as they are both full of bull**** and claim they don't don't know what I'm talking about and they both tell you to talk to their tech support. As soon as I'm paid off on this phone all I can say is Verizon had better allow me to unlock the bootloader. Not alot I can do if they don't but regardless when it's paid off I'm switching carriers. I like the service I get with them but that is it. I've been following Google fi and their progress and may try them out. Verizon in my opinion is a good investment stock market wise with the 5g unrolling and where Verizon plans to go with it. T Mobile is a good decision versus Sprint , at&t, or Verizon for what you are talking about. Better than cricket or boost Mobile or metro pcs. As for the Verizon variant deal, well Verizon did buy a nice chunk and I'm sure the bootloader issue is in the vendor files that Google has allowed though I've read that it is at the kernel level though. Not completely sure on it but I am not an expert programmer or developer as I am trying to learn it as a hobby but I'm not a noob either and as far as I have found, the issue with the bootloader is in files that Verizon has control over, as it is a read only file setup that is installed after Google passes it to Verizon. I've gone over everything that Google has multiple times and there is no real difference between Google's and Verizon's version. The pixel 2 and 2xl when first released had individual OTA releases of Oreo but as of June or July of 2018 Google started rolling out one OTA update for all carriers but the OTA doesn't update any of Verizon's files in which the ro.boot.flash.lock, oem_unlock_allowed etc. are located. Eff Verizon and their control issues and eff Google for playing dumb and advocating silently for Verizon, in my opinion, and giving them the control only device oems or device owners should have. I am glad their contract is or will finally be over though the damage is done. Verizon will never openly let people unlock their bootloader's because they don't want that vulnerability on their Network so they say. Sad but true.
i really wanted to write my own run on sentence/paragraph but i dont have the energy lol... instead ill just copy paste an article i found. Following a report from 9to5Google this morning, we were able to independently corroborate that T-Mobile plans to sell Google's current Pixel 3 and 3 XL smartphones, as well as add that the upcoming (and still unannounced) Pixel 3a and 3a XL will also be available in T-Mobile stores. The exact sale date is unclear, but my guess is that it will be timed against the launch of the new 3a devices, which we're expecting on May 7th. T-Mobile being added to the Pixel roster isn't just news in the sense of T-Mobile, though - it's a pretty big deal in regard to the larger strategy with the Pixel brand and what the end of Verizon exclusivity means, as well. Verizon was the launch partner for the original Pixel three and a half years ago, and it's been the exclusive carrier for the devices since. While they've been available on Google's Fi MVNO nearly as long, no one in the industry considers Fi much of a threat to Verizon, and Google probably worked out a deal Verizon was happy enough with to allow what probably just amounted to a market share rounding error. But Fi has continued to grow, and late last year graduated from "Project" status to a full-fledged service. Thanks to Sprint, Project Fi even has a 5G roadmap - and that does probably ruffle Verizon's feathers. Equally possible is that the timing is just a coincidence, and Verizon and Google's exclusivity deal had a previously agreed expiration date that's come and gone. Regardless of the reason for the exclusivity breakup, no one is going to mourn it - exclusives limit consumer choice.Verizon's Pixel exclusive has held for three generations - it seems like the fourth may be the end of the line. T-Mobile as Google's first new partner makes sense, and their mutual desire to cooperate hasn't been a secret: T-Mobile has long wanted very, very badly to sell Google's phones. It has advertised compatibility with Pixels from the beginning, and would offer yet another avenue through which T-Mobile can siphon customers from Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T. Sprint would be a pretty terrible choice, by comparison, with its stagnant growth and icky phone "leasing" schemes (which I absolutely revile). And AT&T, while massive, has among the worst device update policies of any carrier in the business, one for which I think Google would require an opt-out that to date only Apple has received. Fast and frequent updates are a huge part of the Pixel brand's appeal, and while Verizon has played gatekeeper for the Pixel OTAs on its network, they've always been pushed through Google's update framework and kept on the same update track as the unlocked phones. AT&T exerts far more control over the OTA process, and from an outside perspective, often seems slower to get updates certified. With a growing subscriber base and a strong brick and mortar retail presence, that leaves T-Mobile as not only the best fit for the Pixel, but probably the one most likely to generate success. Then there's the question of what happens on Verizon going forward - will the Pixel continue to receive special treatment like limited launch exclusives? Until the Pixel 4 is announced, we really won't know, but my guess is that Google wouldn't partner with a new carrier unless it would be on equal footing with Verizon (after all, even Fi gets the phones at launch now). And while Verizon has certainly put some marketing muscle (and dollars) behind Google's phones, there was no doubt that they'd also become the single biggest limiting factor for growth. Google Fi is fine for some people, but most aren't even aware it exists, and Verizon simply doesn't have a reputation as a value operator that T-Mobile does.
The book editor in me just died seeing this thread. Posting a single obscenely long paragraph as shown in the first response doesn't help people who might want to read your thoughts. It just encourages them to tune you out. If you expect to be taken seriously and have your thoughts actually be read, you've gotta break down your stuff into discrete chunks. It isn't just what you have to say that matters, but how you say it.
Strephon Alkhalikoi said:
The book editor in me just died seeing this thread. Posting a single obscenely long paragraph as shown in the first response doesn't help people who might want to read your thoughts. It just encourages them to tune you out. If you expect to be taken seriously and have your thoughts actually be read, you've gotta break down your stuff into discrete chunks. It isn't just what you have to say that matters, but how you say it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Word
Haha ':-\ I'll try to keep this post short and simple...
Thanks for all the thoughts (I guess...), but I'd like to still ask, do you guys think that getting the Pixel 4 (I haven't done research on the 3a's, but including them if this hasn't been established) and future models from carriers will mean that the bootloader is locked like it initially has been done from the Pixel OG to Pixel 3's? Or will the exact opposite maybe come true and Verizon will stop the practice following suit that the other 3 US wireless carriers will not/won't lock the bootloader?
simplepinoi177 said:
Haha ':-\ I'll try to keep this post short and simple...
Thanks for all the thoughts (I guess...), but I'd like to still ask, do you guys think that getting the Pixel 4 (I haven't done research on the 3a's, but including them if this hasn't been established) and future models from carriers will mean that the bootloader is locked like it initially has been done from the Pixel OG to Pixel 3's? Or will the exact opposite maybe come true and Verizon will stop the practice following suit that the other 3 US wireless carriers will not/won't lock the bootloader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the past is any indication of the future, then I surmise that all the US carriers will keep the bootloaders locked. However, should google NOT partner with any specific carrier, then I would think it would negate the need for different versions of upcoming devices, hence, allowing the user to unlock the bootloader if we choose to do so. Then again, that's all just spec on my part