Database Users

AT&T doesn't want you using grandfathered unlimited data plans! MUST READ!

Ok, so here’s my story:
Not too long ago, I bought myself a Samsung Galaxy Tab 7”. Ever since the device was announced by Samsung, I thought this was one of the coolest ideas since sliced bread. I could have a device roughly the size of a small book that pretty much did everything the iPad could do, and then some (like take pictures and run flash). On top of that, it was capable of making and receiving phone calls and text messages. Finally, a device that literally would do EVERYTHING I needed; no more need to lug around a netbook, a phone, a GPS in my car, or an iPod.
Not all was as peachy as I would have hoped however. Initially, it didn’t look as though this wonderful piece of technology would make it to American soil at all. Then, when it did, it was deliberately crippled for the North American market so that its native ability to make or receive regular phone calls and text messages was disabled at the software level. What a terrible thing to do! I was so disappointed by this news that I nearly abandoned any desire to head down to my local AT&T store to buy it. To add insult to injury, the only way AT&T offered the Tab was on a no-contract pay-as-you-go data plan, which is ludicrously expensive, particularly when compared with the fact that I’m one of the lucky customers who is grandfathered in to an unlimited data plan.
Eventually, however, my desire to own this device got the better of me, so I finally dished out the cash (and it was not cheap either!) for an unlocked and unbranded Tab which had the phone calling and texting abilities right out of the box. I popped the SIM card from my AT&T smartphone into my new Tab, fired it up, and started enjoying what was, up until recently, the best mobile user experience I have ever known.
I started referring to my Tab as my “Do-Everything-Device,” because it literally DID do everything I needed right from one device! It replaced my netbook, my phone, my GPS, my iPod, my Kindle, and the CD player/Radio in my car! It was so liberating not to have a phone attached to my hip and a bag on my shoulder for everything else I used to have to lug around with me. Sure there were occasions where carrying around a phone the size of a small book would have been ridiculous, but that’s what swapping SIM cards is for right? I’d simply switch back to my smartphone when the situation called for it.
Then things took a turn for the worse when AT&T started getting involved… Apparently this kind of quality user experience was not meant to be. I had received an automated text message one day telling me that I needed to be on the “proper data plan,” and that if I weren’t my service could be changed or suspended. Being a loyal paying customer to AT&T in its various previous incarnations for about 11 years now, and having an unlimited data plan on my line (which I should note I was NOT abusing; I generally used about 4 – 5GB or so per billing cycle), I was perplexed as to why I would have been receiving that message. So I called into customer service to inquire.
Upon some minor investigation on the customer service rep’s part, I was informed that the issue was that I was swapping back and forth between my Galaxy Tab and my smartphone (which it may be noted is a Samsung Captivate), and that I should stop doing that. Stop swapping out my SIM card between two of my most used devices? Really? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having a SIM card in the first place? Still perplexed as to why this was an issue, I brought the matter to the attention of AT&T’s Office of the President to hopefully find some resolution to the problem. The gentleman I spoke with said he would investigate further and get back to me with his findings. A week later, get back to me he did! At first I thought, “Great! The highest level of customer service has come to bring me good news of a fair and reasonable compromise or resolution!” Little did I know he came to bear me bad news indeed…
The representative informed me that the issue wasn’t that I was swapping my SIM card per se, but rather the issue was with my Galaxy Tab specifically. Basically, I was told that AT&T’s intended use for the Galaxy Tab, regardless of where it was purchased, and regardless of whether it was carrier locked or unlocked or any of that, was that it was to be used as a data-only device, and furthermore as a pay-as-you-go data only device! I was basically given the option to get a pay-as-you-go SIM and use my Tab as AT&T intended it to be used (not as Samsung intended), or not use it at all, sorry. I was directed to the service agreement for “Specified Device Session-Based Plans.”
Excuse me? Sorry, but I don’t want to pay-as-I-go for data! I’m already paying for unlimited data, and there is nothing in those terms of service that say I can’t put my SIM card in whatever device I want, provided I’m not violating those terms! The representative proceeded to tell me that a user such as myself only accounted for a minority of the people subscribed, and that the current data plans AT&T offers caters to the majority. Ok, fine, cater to the majority. I get that. However, even as a lucky customer who has an unlimited data package, and even as a minority who chooses to stay informed about the latest technology, I should still be catered to as well. I mean, that’s what customer service is right? Making sure your customers’ needs are catered to? He said that the reason AT&T doesn’t still offer unlimited data is that “The average user only consumes about 2 or less GB a month.” Sure, that may be true for the average user currently, and it may be true furthermore for the average user who cares more about phones calls, text messages and Facebook updates more than frequently browsing rich web content and going to Youtube on their phone etc. However, with the much faster networks that are being deployed, and with more data intensive and media rich web content available today and tomorrow, that 2GB is going to be a bite-sized portion to the “average user” very shortly…
In my frustration, I argued that I am paying for the service to the SIM, not service to the device itself (otherwise what’s the point of the SIM in the first place?). As such, there shouldn’t be any issue with my circumventing AT&T’s artificial limitations on their branded Galaxy Tab’s hardware by buying directly from the manufacturer at a premium. I should be able to use my SIM in any device of my choosing, so long as I’m not violating the terms of service to that line, which I’m not (as I mentioned earlier, there was nothing in the Terms of Service that explicitly said I couldn’t use my SIM card in a tablet device.) Furthermore, I argued that the only real differences between the hardware in my Tab and the hardware in my Captivate were screen size, battery size, and the presence or absence of a front camera. For all the times I was told “Yes sir, I understand,” it really didn’t seem like he really understood…
It seems AT&T (and indeed any other US carrier which supplies a crippled Tab, or any other device) doesn’t want you to have a “Do Everything Device.” It’s bad for business! Why would they support a device that does everything your tablet or netbook does and everything your smartphone does, all on your single line subscription? Of course they’re going to cripple the Tab, because they want you to buy separate devices with separate line subscriptions and more money in their pockets! Not to mention, AT&T probably doesn’t want something that would have, up until recently, directly competed with the iPad, and frankly outdone it in some ways (when’s the last time you could make carrier phone calls, not SIP or VoIP, and text message on your iPad right out of the box?). I suppose that’s corporate America for you… What ever happened to providing superior service at the best value though?
So, if you are on AT&T, and you own a Galaxy Tab or are interested in getting one (or any other tablet on AT&T for that matter), here are some things to watch out for and speak out to:
AT&T is sweeping their network for devices by their IMEI, and if your device does not match up to whatever plan they want you to be on based on that device, your service could be changed or suspended.
If you have a grandfathered unlimited data plan, AT&T is doing the best they can to get you OFF of that plan by being very specific about what devices can be used with those plans.
I am only one person, and as one person, my voice has fallen upon the deaf ears of a very large company. As such, I urge you to speak out as a collective to AT&T, tell them about this situation, and others which likewise are upsetting to you as a customer. AT&T can ignore one person, but not a crowd…
Don’t contact customer service. Go straight to the source! Call AT&T’s office of the president at 866-751-5784 (option 1). Also, speak out on their Facebook page. Talk to your friends and family, spread the word!
EDIT: Here's a petition to sign.

honestly what is the point? i feel sorry for you americans - if the tmobile at&t merge goes through then there will only be 1 GSM carrier (i may be wrong) in the US and the rest will be CDMA - and that means that all the foreign visitors will be on 1 bad network.

The problem with any network "merger" is that you always get the lowest common denominator.
Up to the end of last year, I was on T-Mobile UK, but when my contract came up I left and went to Three. Retentions called and asked why I was leaving, and I explained that Three had a truly unlimited data plan and TMo UK had a 3GB FUP (which was pretty good to be fair).
The CS Rep swore blind that TMo UK would never do anything to uphold the FUP, but I stood my ground and left anyway because I *knew* that the merger with Orange could only ever end up with their plans becoming roughly analogous.
True to form, less than 1 month later, TMo UK reduced their "download" allowance to 500MB bringing them roughly in line with their sister brand, Orange.
Regards,
Dave

There are others, see this thread (if you haven't already).
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1000921 (I have a post in there.)
FTR, I'm using AT&T SGT as a phone and data device, just not using 3G (or mythical 4G for that matter) data. You can't swing a dead cat w/out hitting a wireless AP so why hassle with AT&T over their expensive, slow 3G (if you're lucky) connections/data.
I hated AT&T so bad I dumped them years back and went Cingular. Well, I guess they wanted me back so bad...they went and bought Cingular
Thanks for the contact info. I'll rattle the cage.

Thanks for sharing, you have taken this a great leap farther then I have.
I love your justifications, definately will call tomorrow, more people that call, better chance of a change ( I can dream).
Again, I say what about some kind of class action for this, Maybe we should get a bounty going. I would give $100.00 towards the suit. And if more is needed, I would contribute.

Timtown said:
There are others, see this thread (if you haven't already).
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1000921 (I have a post in there.)
FTR, I'm using AT&T SGT as a phone and data device, just not using 3G (or mythical 4G for that matter) data. You can't swing a dead cat w/out hitting a wireless AP so why hassle with AT&T over their expensive, slow 3G (if you're lucky) connections/data.
I hated AT&T so bad I dumped them years back and went Cingular. Well, I guess they wanted me back so bad...they went and bought Cingular
Thanks for the contact info. I'll rattle the cage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Att 3g data is slow? LOLWUT. Have a look at Verizon's 3g speeds.
-Sent from my Galaxy Tab

And to the OP, I just ordered a new phone today from att. They did not once attempt to get me off of my unlimited data plan.
-Sent from my Galaxy Tab

lockheedload said:
And to the OP, I just ordered a new phone today from att. They did not once attempt to get me off of my unlimited data plan.
-Sent from my Galaxy Tab
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The issue (at least for the moment) isn't so much that AT&T will take away your unlimited data plan or not (although that WOULD be an annoyance), the issue is that AT&T doesn't want us using our Galaxy Tab's as phone devices, because that's not how THEY intended it to be used. AT&T would rather we have two SIM cards. One for a tablet device, and one for a phone device; not one SIM card for one device that just "does it all."
If they're artificially crippling the native capabilities of a device in order to force consumers into buying multiple devices to make up for those limitations, then they're price gouging, plain and simple.

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
Ok, so here’s my story:
Not too long ago, I bought myself a Samsung Galaxy Tab 7”. Ever since the device was announced by Samsung, I thought this was one of the coolest ideas since sliced bread. I could have a device roughly the size of a small book that pretty much did everything the iPad could do, and then some (like take pictures and run flash). On top of that, it was capable of making and receiving phone calls and text messages. Finally, a device that literally would do EVERYTHING I needed; no more need to lug around a netbook, a phone, a GPS in my car, or an iPod.
Not all was as peachy as I would have hoped however. Initially, it didn’t look as though this wonderful piece of technology would make it to American soil at all. Then, when it did, it was deliberately crippled for the North American market so that its native ability to make or receive regular phone calls and text messages was disabled at the software level. What a terrible thing to do! I was so disappointed by this news that I nearly abandoned any desire to head down to my local AT&T store to buy it. To add insult to injury, the only way AT&T offered the Tab was on a no-contract pay-as-you-go data plan, which is ludicrously expensive, particularly when compared with the fact that I’m one of the lucky customers who is grandfathered in to an unlimited data plan.
Eventually, however, my desire to own this device got the better of me, so I finally dished out the cash (and it was not cheap either!) for an unlocked and unbranded Tab which had the phone calling and texting abilities right out of the box. I popped the SIM card from my AT&T smartphone into my new Tab, fired it up, and started enjoying what was, up until recently, the best mobile user experience I have ever known.
I started referring to my Tab as my “Do-Everything-Device,” because it literally DID do everything I needed right from one device! It replaced my netbook, my phone, my GPS, my iPod, my Kindle, and the CD player/Radio in my car! It was so liberating not to have a phone attached to my hip and a bag on my shoulder for everything else I used to have to lug around with me. Sure there were occasions where carrying around a phone the size of a small book would have been ridiculous, but that’s what swapping SIM cards is for right? I’d simply switch back to my smartphone when the situation called for it.
Then things took a turn for the worse when AT&T started getting involved… Apparently this kind of quality user experience was not meant to be. I had received an automated text message one day telling me that I needed to be on the “proper data plan,” and that if I weren’t my service could be changed or suspended. Being a loyal paying customer to AT&T in its various previous incarnations for about 11 years now, and having an unlimited data plan on my line (which I should note I was NOT abusing; I generally used about 4 – 5GB or so per billing cycle), I was perplexed as to why I would have been receiving that message. So I called into customer service to inquire.
Upon some minor investigation on the customer service rep’s part, I was informed that the issue was that I was swapping back and forth between my Galaxy Tab and my smartphone (which it may be noted is a Samsung Captivate), and that I should stop doing that. Stop swapping out my SIM card between two of my most used devices? Really? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having a SIM card in the first place? Still perplexed as to why this was an issue, I brought the matter to the attention of AT&T’s Office of the President to hopefully find some resolution to the problem. The gentleman I spoke with said he would investigate further and get back to me with his findings. A week later, get back to me he did! At first I thought, “Great! The highest level of customer service has come to bring me good news of a fair and reasonable compromise or resolution!” Little did I know he came to bear me bad news indeed…
The representative informed me that the issue wasn’t that I was swapping my SIM card per se, but rather the issue was with my Galaxy Tab specifically. Basically, I was told that AT&T’s intended use for the Galaxy Tab, regardless of where it was purchased, and regardless of whether it was carrier locked or unlocked or any of that, was that it was to be used as a data-only device, and furthermore as a pay-as-you-go data only device! I was basically given the option to get a pay-as-you-go SIM and use my Tab as AT&T intended it to be used (not as Samsung intended), or not use it at all, sorry. I was directed to the service agreement for “Specified Device Session-Based Plans.”
Excuse me? Sorry, but I don’t want to pay-as-I-go for data! I’m already paying for unlimited data, and there is nothing in those terms of service that say I can’t put my SIM card in whatever device I want, provided I’m not violating those terms! The representative proceeded to tell me that a user such as myself only accounted for a minority of the people subscribed, and that the current data plans AT&T offers caters to the majority. Ok, fine, cater to the majority. I get that. However, even as a lucky customer who has an unlimited data package, and even as a minority who chooses to stay informed about the latest technology, I should still be catered to as well. I mean, that’s what customer service is right? Making sure your customers’ needs are catered to? He said that the reason AT&T doesn’t still offer unlimited data is that “The average user only consumes about 2 or less GB a month.” Sure, that may be true for the average user currently, and it may be true furthermore for the average user who cares more about phones calls, text messages and Facebook updates more than frequently browsing rich web content and going to Youtube on their phone etc. However, with the much faster networks that are being deployed, and with more data intensive and media rich web content available today and tomorrow, that 2GB is going to be a bite-sized portion to the “average user” very shortly…
In my frustration, I argued that I am paying for the service to the SIM, not service to the device itself (otherwise what’s the point of the SIM in the first place?). As such, there shouldn’t be any issue with my circumventing AT&T’s artificial limitations on their branded Galaxy Tab’s hardware by buying directly from the manufacturer at a premium. I should be able to use my SIM in any device of my choosing, so long as I’m not violating the terms of service to that line, which I’m not (as I mentioned earlier, there was nothing in the Terms of Service that explicitly said I couldn’t use my SIM card in a tablet device.) Furthermore, I argued that the only real differences between the hardware in my Tab and the hardware in my Captivate were screen size, battery size, and the presence or absence of a front camera. For all the times I was told “Yes sir, I understand,” it really didn’t seem like he really understood…
It seems AT&T (and indeed any other US carrier which supplies a crippled Tab, or any other device) doesn’t want you to have a “Do Everything Device.” It’s bad for business! Why would they support a device that does everything your tablet or netbook does and everything your smartphone does, all on your single line subscription? Of course they’re going to cripple the Tab, because they want you to buy separate devices with separate line subscriptions and more money in their pockets! Not to mention, AT&T probably doesn’t want something that would have, up until recently, directly competed with the iPad, and frankly outdone it in some ways (when’s the last time you could make carrier phone calls, not SIP or VoIP, and text message on your iPad right out of the box?). I suppose that’s corporate America for you… What ever happened to providing superior service at the best value though?
So, if you are on AT&T, and you own a Galaxy Tab or are interested in getting one (or any other tablet on AT&T for that matter), here are some things to watch out for and speak out to:
AT&T is sweeping their network for devices by their IMEI, and if your device does not match up to whatever plan they want you to be on based on that device, your service could be changed or suspended.
If you have a grandfathered unlimited data plan, AT&T is doing the best they can to get you OFF of that plan by being very specific about what devices can be used with those plans.
I am only one person, and as one person, my voice has fallen upon the deaf ears of a very large company. As such, I urge you to speak out as a collective to AT&T, tell them about this situation, and others which likewise are upsetting to you as a customer. AT&T can ignore one person, but not a crowd…
Don’t contact customer service. Go straight to the source! Call AT&T’s office of the president at 866-751-5784 (option 1). Also, speak out on their Facebook page. Talk to your friends and family, spread the word!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not on AT&T network any more I moved to sprint a few months before the Iphone came out its been that long, However AT&T is well with in there right to limit what device is allowed to do what on there network. Its sad that they would do that but in there contract agreement it is listed there.
Since this has completely ticked you off I would suggest you move carriers if you truly want to show them how unhappy you are with there service. Calling and complaining really isnt going to do you any good since you are in the minority of users that do what you described.
just my 2 cents

In europe the wireless operators are selling services - like phone calls and data. In US they are selling devices capable of calling or having data.
This diffrenece means that in eu if I don't like something I can move to difirenet operator and keep devices. In us you can't. that is why are people complaing that at&t is messing with them. Cause if they go to other provider they need to pay again for every device. In my home country hspa+ is still caled 3g, dataplan 12Gig for 19eur/month included all taxes

icreepin said:
Since this has completely ticked you off I would suggest you move carriers if you truly want to show them how unhappy you are with there service. Calling and complaining really isnt going to do you any good since you are in the minority of users that do what you described.
just my 2 cents
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would gladly switch carriers if it weren't for the fact that I do a lot of international traveling, and Sprint/Verizon both being CDMA carriers is a deal-breaker for me. I'm with AT&T because of the GSM bands it supports, and that's it. If it weren't for that, if Sprint and Verizon were GSM carriers too, just like most of the rest of the world, I'd have switched a long time ago without a doubt.
The other thing is, for the most part I'm not entirely unhappy with the service AT&T provides, when it's providing service to the equipment I use as that equipment was designed. I only have an issue when it's clear that they are imposing artificial schemes which force customers into a price gouging situation.
Crippling the native features of one device (i.e. phone calling on the Tab) in order to force the consumer into buying ANOTHER device and ANOTHER line subscription in order to fulfill that function, which was artificially crippled on the other device, THAT to me is price gouging.
AT&T absolutely has the right to lay out their own criteria for HOW their network is used. Likewise, the customers have the right to make enough of a fuss to AT&T about WHAT they can use on their network, particularly when they're not violating the HOW part of the ToS.
If we all as consumers are complacent and passive enough to just lay down and go with the attitude of "Oh well, it's their network, and they can treat us however they want with it..." then AT&T (and any company for that matter) will take advantage of that and gouge us for as much money as they can get.
I'm arguing that we've reached an "Enough is enough" point from the customer's perspective, and I am urging as many people as I can to speak out in a common voice to say "This is what we want. Please deliver."
If you don't like something, don't just say "Oh well..." and keep it to yourself. Express yourself, and make your issues known, and band together with people who share the same concerns, otherwise nothing will ever change for the betterment of the user.

Ok I think you need a better example what is fundamentally wrong with your wireless providers. Lets say the you would buy and electric drill and you use it as screwdriver as well. The power company would you charge $ more for that. And if you say no I go to someone else they say you need new drill cause it does not work on our grid. And cause of that some has made a standard power gird. Or am I wrong? If you solve this problem you get better service.

monoko said:
In europe the wireless operators are selling services - like phone calls and data. In US they are selling devices capable of calling or having data.
This diffrenece means that in eu if I don't like something I can move to difirenet operator and keep devices. In us you can't. that is why are people complaing that at&t is messing with them. Cause if they go to other provider they need to pay again for every device. In my home country hspa+ is still caled 3g, dataplan 12Gig for 19eur/month included all taxes
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly! And that's the thing, in America, we're in a largely CDMA network environment, where you can't just so easily keep on piece of hardware and jump from one carrier to another like you can with GSM using a SIM card. I mean you can still jump from one CDMA carrier to another using the same hardware, but it's a big hassle... Nowhere near as simple as popping in a different SIM card.

monoko said:
Ok I think you need a better example what is fundamentally wrong with your wireless providers. Lets say the you would buy and electric drill and you use it as screwdriver as well. The power company would you charge $ more for that. And if you say no I go to someone else they say you need new drill cause it does not work on our grid. And cause of that some has made a standard power gird. Or am I wrong? If you solve this problem you get better service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the issue it this:
The Galaxy Tab, directly from Samsung and in virtually every other market throughout the world, makes and receives phone calls and text messages just the same as any other smartphone can.
AT&T (and pretty much all other US carriers) have artificially (that is, on the software level, not hardware) disabled those native capabilities. In essence, they've crippled the functionality of the device.
The consumer is therefore forced to buy and carry two devices with them (a phone AND a tablet) in order to fulfill the complete functionality and user experience desired, in addition to paying for TWO separate lines.
My point is that if there is an option to use ONE device, which when unhindered can fulfill the duties of BOTH phone AND tablet, and AT&T FORCES you out of that option, and therefore FORCES you into paying more money, when you really don't have to, then THAT is price gouging.

icreepin said:
Since this has completely ticked you off I would suggest you move carriers if you truly want to show them how unhappy you are with there service. Calling and complaining really isnt going to do you any good since you are in the minority of users that do what you described.
just my 2 cents
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or we could get a http://www.groubal.com/ petition going and see just how many people are considered minority. I be it is not a minority,
Whos to say the SGT users are a minority.

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
Exactly! And that's the thing, in America, we're in a largely CDMA network environment, where you can't just so easily keep on piece of hardware and jump from one carrier to another like you can with GSM using a SIM card. I mean you can still jump from one CDMA carrier to another using the same hardware, but it's a big hassle... Nowhere near as simple as popping in a different SIM card.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
check ur PM

Jade Eyed Wolf said:
No, the issue it this:
...
AT&T (and pretty much all other US carriers) have artificially (that is, on the software level, not hardware) disabled those native capabilities. In essence, they've crippled the functionality of the device.
....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't understand the point. They can do it cause you have no other easy choise. (anti competitivie)
You should have standard, I am not saying GSM or SIM etc.
But to understand look at europe. (I am european, but that is not the point)
SIM - is external (that is the point of it)!!!... it's easy to change (dead phone... just borrow frends old and you fixed till you get new),
Protocol (GSM etc) is defined for allowed spectrum.
Defined Spectrum and no other. (they still need to buy the spectrum)
This gives you posibility of selling GSM phones without carriers cripple them.
So your US problem is free market. Sorry to say it that way I know you mostly proud of that. (Lest leave this alone... ).
Just I can see competition in this market as a bit virtual. (at least to me)
(check your history about power gird you will find that standards are sometimes needed for better consumer protection.)
Please no flame war.

mine just got blocked.
i got the email yesterday telling me to change it back to my phone or call in to discuss options for the tab. so i did at my first opportunity...
i just got blocked and then an email sent to me saying to call in and that it may be blocked on both devices...
awesome, just awesome...

This is a perfect example as to why i am dreading the att/tmo merger. I am a current tmo customer and i am currently using my tab as a phone like many tmo/att customers. I have called a few times to tmo customer service regarding different minor issues and they know that i am using the tab as my phone, because i have told them, and they have not said anything they just mention how good of a devise it is and all that stuff, no issues.
Basically i am on an unlimited android plan $24.99 and of course the voice is extra. Now since this is supposed to last a year before it goes through (i really hope not) i will probably be at the end of my contract if the merger goes through and i am sure i will be forced to make changes to my plan: first i would need to chose one of their plans (god know what they will be then and how much) and second, forget about even using my tab as i am currently using it. If they do this to their own customers they i dread to think what they will do to the tmo customers that decide to stay with them once their contracts are up.
So my question is what would be the chances of me keeping my original plan on a month to month basis and not sign a new contract? (don't want to sign a new contract as i am planning to move to the UK around 2013 if everything goes as planned), who knows the answer to this but all i can say that it is not looking good for us tmo customers that are used to good customer service.
A sad, sad day for us all!!!!!

honggee said:
mine just got blocked.
i got the email yesterday telling me to change it back to my phone or call in to discuss options for the tab. so i did at my first opportunity...
i just got blocked and then an email sent to me saying to call in and that it may be blocked on both devices...
awesome, just awesome...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and i am sure there is nothing anyone can do about this, either comply or move to sprint/verizon. i feel your pain even though i am not an att customer.

Unlocking now Illegal

I'm not sure if anyone has seen this but I found it pretty cool that they used a picture of our trusty OG incredible...
http://www.longisland.com/news/01-27-13/unlocking-smarthphones-now-illegal.html
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

RepeatUntilTheEnd said:
I'm not sure if anyone has seen this but I found it pretty cool that they used a picture of our trusty OG incredible...
http://www.longisland.com/news/01-27-13/unlocking-smarthphones-now-illegal.html
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn government, always screwing the little guy. Oh well its not like its going to stop people from doing it anyways. I have been seriously thinking of switching my service to straight talk, and this news changes nothing. Tell them to come get me.

RepeatUntilTheEnd said:
I'm not sure if anyone has seen this but I found it pretty cool that they used a picture of our trusty OG incredible...
http://www.longisland.com/news/01-27-13/unlocking-smarthphones-now-illegal.html
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know why they picked a CDMA phone for the picture when usually only GSM phones are even unlockable for carriers. Technically flashing an inc on straight talk is not unlocking it.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

tiny4579 said:
I don't know why they picked a CDMA phone for the picture when usually only GSM phones are even unlockable for carriers. Technically flashing an inc on straight talk is not unlocking it.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None of the articles I've read mention the N4, or how comparable the price is to phones on contract. I guess I can't really talk, since I'm still with big red.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

The Nexus 4 comes unlocked. I guess it's above the law then.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app

Ah yes, leave it to the government to try to forbid people from messing with the device that they paid for. Well, it's not as if it'll stop anything whatsoever.

This is kind of disturbing if you ask me...
Sent from my ADR6300 using xda app-developers app

One good thing is that the law only applies to phones purchased after the law goes into affect - so anything before that is fine to unlock.
Sent from my ADR6300 using xda app-developers app

scals37 said:
This is kind of disturbing if you ask me...
Sent from my ADR6300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the gift that keeps on giving to lawyers and corporati.
Incidentally, a few clarifications. I see people making the same wrong assumptions about this ruling again and again.
1.) Unlocking your phone is not illegal. What IS illegal is for you, the end-consumer, to unlock or otherwise edit the firmware/OS installed on the phone from the factory. This means that we, the citizenry of XDA and similar forums, are guilty of violations of the DMCA, because the carriers (Sprint, ATT, VZW, etc) actually hold the copyrights to the firmware's installed on the phone.
1a.) The carriers, however, CAN unlock the phone for you, legally. Most of the carriers have come forward and said that they will still unlock devices so long as you have met your original contract obligations. Now, this is great if you've bought a new device. Unfortunately, it means any Non-pay or otherwise blacklisted phone on Craigslist or ebay is still screwed.
1b.) New, Unlocked devices such as Nexus, Galaxy, and Incredible International are still, and will always remain, legally unlocked. The firmware found on these devices is owned by Google or by the device's original manufacture, and they are unlikely to proactively start locking such devices just to lock out the reseller community.
2.) Any device purchased or unlocked prior to January 26, 2013 can still be legally unlocked and used on any compatible network.
2a.) Carriers won't retroactively kick your device off of their network if it is illegally unlocked. Nor can they impose any special usage fines or taxes of utilizing an unlocked device. A "locked" cellphone is one which has been firmware coded to its own carrier's network.
2b.) The only person or group who can take action against you for illegally unlocking your phone is the Librarian of Congress (who made this ruling and is the conservator of DMCA exception law) or the carrier who originally sold the device to you, as they are the ones holding the copyrights to the firmware. They cannot, generally, tell some other network to not host your device. Obviously they can ASK a competitor not to host your unlocked device, but they can't actually stop them doing so.
2c.) The original vendor of the phone (Sprint, ATT, VZW, etc) can, however, sue you under the DMCA for violating their copyrights. This is identical to lawsuits used to penalize movie and music downloaders. However, since phone unlocks are generally not "shared" in the same way that music, movie, and game downloads are, an aggressive lawsuit by a patent troll or copyright bully holds little potential profit because they'd only be able to claim a single violation, not the sort of perpetual resharing that goes on with torrent users.
3.) While jailbreaking/unlocking/rooting a phone is illegal now, re-romming a phone is still a grey area. IE, completely replacing the firmware on your phone with a homebrew is not illegal in the same way that a simple unlock or jailbreak code is. Since you're not technically changing someone else's copyright protected software so much as simply deleting and replacing it.
3a.) Unfortunately, because most custom roms are still based in one form or another on the factory rom, you MIGHT still be sued unless, as in the case of older devices like the DINC, all original drivers and firmware's have been open-sourced to the community. It's unlikely that HTC would go after someone unlocking an Incredible series phone since you can legally root most HTC devices from their website; but other carriers and manufacturer's may not take the same view in the future.
There is also a division between hardware manufacturer's and carriers. Carriers lobbied long and hard FOR this ruling, because it is in their best interest to keep you chained to them for as long as possible, and a person who just spent several hundred dollars on a device is unlikely to be willing to simply ****can that device at the end of two years in order to move to another carrier and repeat the expensive process with a new device (unless you own an apple product, in which you're already indoctrinated to all of this ). Sell such a device, yes; dispose of it, no. So having a locked device makes you stickier since you'll use it for longer before parting with it, and if you can only use it legally on their network, then you are stuck with them since you can't resell/unlock it to recoup even part of your investment as you can currently by simply unlocking it or having a reseller do it for you.
Device manufacturers, on the other hand, have a vested interest in keeping their units in use as long as possible, regardless of what carrier it is operating on. Having a unit of hardware able to be reused on multiple carriers breeds customer loyalty to the hardware manufacturer in the same way a reliable car or home appliance does, and increasingly people are seeking out devices based not on the name of the carrier but the name of the phone. Already it's a lot less common to ask who a carrier is than what a phone is; particularly when the same device is available on multiple competing networks.
The best we can hope for is that this will all come to a head in 2 years as the first generation of legally locked phones start coming up for resale and people find themselves face with either throwing them away, sticking with their current carrier, or breaking the law.

What I find curious...
In every article and argument I have read; the carriers framed the argument around "Unlocking / Rooting so we can change service providers." If I were a phone carrier, I wouldn't want my customers to be able to leave either. Sounds reasonable on the surface.
However....I think most of us would agree, that the vast majority do NOT unlock and root for the sake of changing carriers. In fact that argument is already very weak and flawed,
With two standards (GSM vs CDMA), some technical differences in phone models that prevent differing networks from connecting with the devices, and only a handful of carriers....you don't have a lot of options...so not much point.
The phone carriers can refuse service to devices they didn't sell and were in no way required to do so, however it would be in their long-term interest.
The steep financial penalty for leaving a carrier before the contract expires easily covers the "subsidy" at the time of purchase.
Basically....rooting just to switch carriers doesn't make sense
What do we unlock/root for?
Control of our devices.
Control of our privacy and data.
"Fixing" the bugs ( ask me about the ASUS Transformer ICS updates...HA!!!)
Excessive bloatware, like three book reading apps on my tablet...(seriously)
Customizing the device to our needs
...the list is long and the consumers don't have a voice in these issues.. Worse yet to my opinion, this legal ruling actually cripples the end user. Without root access the task of managing and monitor apps, permissions, data, etc has more challenges and limitations , especially without any Android "stock" apps for the purpose. I mean, they didn't even make a file manager. I'll spare you all my usual Google rant. Just imagine what the teaming millions of non-tech, non-xda have to live with....when was the last time you had to work with a device without Titanium Backup, Root Explorer and such? (scares me)
Sorry, my point is...they used a bogus argument to get what they wanted, with them in control of our property and data.
Final thought..how long do you think it will take before we see the first "Price gouging/manipulation" lawsuits against the carriers? They price an unlocked phone so high that no one purchases them. I get it, why pay $650 for a phone with no contract, but you pay the same monthly charges.....when you can get one for $50 and two years of contract? Also, for the record, I do believe that the legality of unlocking/rooting only applies to carrier subsidized devices made and purchased after the above date, and not ones sold at full retail, purposefully unlocked. I'm no expert, but just based on the price differences between 3g/4g and WiFi only tablets, you frakkin know the carriers are messing around with pricing.
WOW...sorry for being long-winded and thanks!

Seems the White House agrees that we should be able to unlock our phones.
http://gizmodo.com/5988388/white-house-you-should-be-able-to-unlock-your-phone-if-you-own-it

[Q] Verizon Developer Edition

Ok, so I hope in my searching I didn't miss the answer to my question.
I'm looking at getting the S5 Verizon Developer Edition. I contacted Samsung (no, I don't know why I bothered). I wanted to know if download booster was blocked like on the regular version, what their return policy was, if the electric blue would be an option, what unlocking/rooting would require, etc.
My main question was about the rooting/unlocking and the download booster. Does anyone know what it takes to root/unlock the developer edition? I know it's not locked down like the normal version...but I don't know if it's an option you can just select or if I'd have to find a root/unlock here on XDA.
Any/all info on what the developer edition differences really are would be greatly appreciated!

I contacted them again today to ask. They are now telling me they do believe that Download booster is enabled. BUT...they're telling me I can only return the device if it's new and unopened. I am worried what if I have any issues with activation (which would require me to open the box...duh). They have transferred my call to 4 departments, and no one is sure if they would allow a return under those circumstances. I really don't want to spend $600 on a phone that I can't do anything with.
Does anyone here have any experience with the S5 developer edition??

Not sure if anyone reading this thread is interested as I've gotten no posts, but I did get an official reply directly from Samsung's offices (from the President's office to be exact).
Hello Mr. ____,
Thank you for your inquiry. Please see below responses to the concerns you have inquired about:
“does Download Booster work on this device as Verizon disabled it on their version?” -> The software on the device behaves the same as the consumer version of the Verizon GS5.
“does unlocking the device void the warrantee?” -> The device comes with an unlocked bootloader, the warranty is a 30 day hardware warranty or until the device has been modified beyond factory specifications. If the device requires service we will be able to provide a service estimate on repairs requires outside of the 30 day warranty period.
“My question is if I get the device and Verizon is unable to activate it on their network (which would require me to open the box to test this), can I return it?” ->For this reason the restocking fee can be waived on a case by case basis.
Best Regards,
Office of the President
Samsung Telecommunications America

smokeydriver said:
Not sure if anyone reading this thread is interested as I've gotten no posts, but I did get an official reply directly from Samsung's offices (from the President's office to be exact).
Hello Mr. ____,
Thank you for your inquiry. Please see below responses to the concerns you have inquired about:
“does Download Booster work on this device as Verizon disabled it on their version?” -> The software on the device behaves the same as the consumer version of the Verizon GS5.
“does unlocking the device void the warrantee?” -> The device comes with an unlocked bootloader, the warranty is a 30 day hardware warranty or until the device has been modified beyond factory specifications. If the device requires service we will be able to provide a service estimate on repairs requires outside of the 30 day warranty period.
“My question is if I get the device and Verizon is unable to activate it on their network (which would require me to open the box to test this), can I return it?” ->For this reason the restocking fee can be waived on a case by case basis.
Best Regards,
Office of the President
Samsung Telecommunications America
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for going through the trouble of contacting Samsung on this. I am generally concerned with the ability to root, and of course activate on Verizon network (???). I never thought activation would even be a question. Do you have anything that instigated that concern or are you just being thorough?

EnigmaRaptor said:
Thanks for going through the trouble of contacting Samsung on this. I am generally concerned with the ability to root, and of course activate on Verizon network (???). I never thought activation would even be a question. Do you have anything that instigated that concern or are you just being thorough?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I didn't have a reason to think the activation wouldn't work other than being cautious.
I just know that when you buy an item and there are no returns once opened, I get worried that when some other company gets involved, it'll become a blame game and Verizon would say "We didn't sell it".
The more I play with other peoples S5's, the less I see a need to upgrade personally though. I'm running a great ROM right now on my Galaxy Nexus. I just want a phone that as everything, and his (and all phones) seem to be lacking in a few areas. I really wish I could just call them (Samsung, HTC, etc.) to tell them what I want in my phone!

smokeydriver said:
No, I didn't have a reason to think the activation wouldn't work other than being cautious.
I just know that when you buy an item and there are no returns once opened, I get worried that when some other company gets involved, it'll become a blame game and Verizon would say "We didn't sell it".
The more I play with other peoples S5's, the less I see a need to upgrade personally though. I'm running a great ROM right now on my Galaxy Nexus. I just want a phone that as everything, and his (and all phones) seem to be lacking in a few areas. I really wish I could just call them (Samsung, HTC, etc.) to tell them what I want in my phone!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am surprised that you can live with the Galaxy Nexus. I have one as well (with Verizon's extended battery), and the battery life is completely abysmal. the GS5 is a new world of long battery life and I can actually turn on ALL of the features I wan't without being chained to a charging cord. I had a retail S5 for about 3 weeks before selling it to pay for my Dev version. It was a monumental upgrade over my GNex in every regard, except I missed rooting too much to keep it.

Yeah, I hate the battery life. I have 2 of the extended batteries, and I keep one in my pocket at all times. The batter life is a joke...between waking up and leaving the house an hour later, I can be down to 70% battery life fairly often.
I do want the battery life of the newer high end devices (S5, M8), but I'm hoping the S5 active has everything I really want (3 GB RAM, image stabilization, Snapdragon 805, replaceable battery, memory card slot, etc. etc. etc).

If only...

With the Samsung Galaxy S8 (T-Mobile, US version) comes buyer's remorse. "If only" is the operable phrase. If only I had done more research. If only I'd given more time to compare other mobile phones.
Perhaps I am not the ideal customer for T-Mobile. But, years back when I switched from Sprint, I seemed to be. It was because T-Mobile was supportive of customers having full ownership and control of the mobile phone. Rooting was, if not encouraged, at least not dissuaded. Support was better in-store than by phone. The purchase experience was soft-sell and congenial. The unlimited data plan was indeed unlimited (not throttled as it is today).
Switch to present day, where T-Mobile, in my view, has become quite the opposite. The purchase experience was high-pressure. Costs are high. Disclosure minimal. And now, too late to turn around.
The Galaxy S8 is a superb mobile phone. The stock Android is great as is the integration. Unfortunately Samsung adds bloat-ware, including that awful "Bixby" thing, and leaves me, the owner, no control over my device. Yes, I can turn Bixby off, but otherwise cannot root, which I use to prevent being overloaded with spam and ads, and to provide greater control over features, such as re-mapping the Bixby button, which I learn will be lost with the next update. Turning off access to that re-map is an ARROGANT expression from Samsung and T-Mobile. A raised middle finger. Not good.
All this I might live with, but now my mobile phone is intermittently refusing to fully charge (80%). It also triggers a repeating and annoying alert that charging has been discontinued due to high temperature (indeed, simply sitting in a stock Samsung wireless charger, it has issued this warning). I've also seen the warning while mobile.. somewhat understandable in the sunshine. Even charging at home by cable has triggered this warning.
I called Samsung and their "solution" was to do a factory reset.. a tedious process to restore everything that's installed, plus passwords! That's no way to solve a problem, and lowers confidence that they know what they're doing.
In summary, if only I had done more work before purchase, I probably would NOT have chosen this mobile phone and may have switched carriers.
I'm looking forward to switching in the next year. Others with similar remorse, please share your story and what you might have done to solve it.

Hi there. I am not feeling the fuzzies for T-Mo, or Samsung but felt writing to support and discuss other options likely worse.
On this device the S8Plus. I am using Samsung Pay consistently - and very happy that it works on standard vendor hardware.
Now T-Mo has increased rates and screwed me over my plan- that is bad. I am still on the fence on moving because Verizon and Sprint require branded devices. My bro had a hard time working my standard Nexus 6P on Sprint.
So open Network is a benefit. Tho Sprint seems less expensive at the moment.
Only regret I have is If I had waited, I could have bought the unlocked 6 gb version for the same price.
Good Luck with the charging problem. I would recommend the reset so you can find out if that's what it indeed is or does the device have additional issues. and it needs to be replaced .
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Google exclusivity ending with Verizon...thoughts?

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