Related
Hey guys,
I just logged into their chat here:
https://motorola-global-portal.custhelp.com/app/chat/chat_launch
and asked how to unlock the bootloader. They said I cant, and I simply said i was going to return the phone. They ended the conversation.
Do they even care? Once they sell a phone to att, does it belong to att for refubs?
I would encourage as many people to chat with them as possible, regardless of your intent to return the phone.
chatting with first level support - not going to do much good.
The X has a locked boot loader and people still buy it.
I don't think they really care either, but that's ok, I have a calendar appointment every friday morning and I ask about the bootloader solution on every available outlet I can find. Support forums, dev forums, chat, facebook, twitter, phone call. I'm also asking the question at all their developer webinars and meet ups. Patience and persistence is key. Lets all remember the phone has only been out for a week and a half.
There's a moto dev webinar about the atrix on the 29th of march, you can bet i'll be online bugging them there.
Did no one watch XDA developer TV last week. We are suppose to send Motorola a message by not buying or developing for their products so they start playing by the community way. Releasing source code, updating devices that they promised to update, etc. Just saying if we are going to work as a community we should all follow the advice of others that are recommending a complete boycott of said devices. What do you think?
INTEL INSIDE. X86. Will buy this device when devs start to release roms. And motorola is changed i think, they relased sources. INTEL, you can unlock bootloader,INTEL, and they use intel processors INSIDE! lol
Trolling mode off: Tell me, why i have to boycot motorola? Best materials, best signal strenght, best radio, best SoC. They relased sources, the opened a site wich in you can unlock the bootloader. Please explain.
(sorry for my terrible english)
vvveith said:
Did no one watch XDA developer TV last week. We are suppose to send Motorola a message by not buying or developing for their products so they start playing by the community way. Releasing source code, updating devices that they promised to update, etc. Just saying if we are going to work as a community we should all follow the advice of others that are recommending a complete boycott of said devices. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Motorola gave 5 free RAZR M Developer editions to US power-users (including myself and P3Droid).
Motorola has always released their source code for kernels... more timely than some but still could use some upload checkers hehe.
I got jellybean leaks for the RAZR M and RAZR HD.. and hopefully soon for RAZR i.
My bootloader is unlocked...
Boycotting this doesn't make sense. The old Motorola yes. Verizon yes. The new Motorola? Not so much. Every device released since they announced their unlock program has an option to be unlocked, and for Verizon they had to make a separate Developer Edition since they are the bad guys here. If anyone should be boycotted its Verizon for requiring locked bootloaders for retail devices and killing unlimited data.
Cheers
You can boycott them if you want, but I'll continue to buy Motorola devices. They rival HTC in build quality, and the radios can't be matched. Plus, they actually make form factors that I want. Motorola was the only one to make a portrait QWERTY with decent specs (and they were the first at all, as far as I can remember). That gave me 2 more years before I had to make the switch to a stupid slab. Now, they're the only ones making a small device with high end specs. Samsung's attempt at that, announced on Thursday, is a joke.
If all on xda boycotted Motorola I doubt they would notice? Anyway, no use cutting your nose off to spite your face. I certainly agree that their radios are by far better than their competitors. Now under the wing of Google I'm hoping they have changed. Time will tell!
Sent from my XT890 using xda premium
I watched this video.
paul89rulez said:
INTEL INSIDE. X86. Will buy this device when devs start to release roms. And motorola is changed i think, they relased sources. INTEL, you can unlock bootloader,INTEL, and they use intel processors INSIDE! lol
Trolling mode off: Tell me, why i have to boycot motorola? Best materials, best signal strenght, best radio, best SoC. They relased sources, the opened a site wich in you can unlock the bootloader. Please explain.
(sorry for my terrible english)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I watched this video and always figured that the host was more informed of behind the scene information then I was. So now am I to believe that what he says is not based on fact? Does anyone censor these video hosts to make sure what they say is actually based in reality? I always turn to the community here to decide if I should invest in a certain product or app. I read countless user reviews and listen to XDA developer TV to make a final buying decision. I think that people that are more in the public eye as representatives of the community should be accountable for the information the are allowed to share. I guess this host just has a lot of hot air based in fantasy? That's all I was commenting about, He must be very misinformed. Sad really. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7HrYgO6uP4&feature=relmfu
vvveith said:
I watched this video and always figured that the host was more informed of behind the scene information then I was. So now am I to believe that what he says is not based on fact? Does anyone censor these video hosts to make sure what they say is actually based in reality? I always turn to the community here to decide if I should invest in a certain product or app. I read countless user reviews and listen to XDA developer TV to make a final buying decision. I think that people that are more in the public eye as representatives of the community should be accountable for the information the are allowed to share. I guess this host just has a lot of hot air based in fantasy? That's all I was commenting about, He must be very misinformed. Sad really. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7HrYgO6uP4&feature=relmfu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the information he gave is public, so he's not any more informed than any of the rest of us. He's only more informed than those who don't follow tech news, and those people don't care and weren't going to boycott anyway. Also, all his information is not completely accurate. The $100 rebate is not only for Verizon customers. The list includes several phones that are not Verizon phones. You can verify that for yourself here.
Ultimately, though, he's not misinformed. Motorola did lock bootloaders, they did push updates to an even later date, and they did cancel the updates for a few phones. He just has a different reaction to the information than I, and many others, do. He believes we should boycott Motorola to get them to change. As somebody who has an avenue to get their opinion out there, of course he's going to put his opinion out there. Personally, I think boycotting Verizon would be a better solution, because it's pretty clear that they are 90% of the problem. The new RAZR M/i and RAZR HD are only locked down on Verizon. In every other country they've been released in, they are unlockable. Motorola really doesn't care if you unlock your bootloader or not, because if you do, they don't have to warranty your phone. Verizon, though, for whatever reason, does seem to care.
The truth is, there will never be a widespread boycott of either Motorola or Verizon for this issue. For a boycott to be effective, you have to have a very large number of people upset about something. The number of people upset about locked bootloaders and a lack of updates is pretty low in the grand scheme of things. Most customers have no idea what a bootloader even is, and couldn't care less if they got an update or not. Then there's the fact that Verizon sells far more than just Motorola devices, so even if every Verizon customer that was pissed about the Motorola devices decided to boycott Verizon, it still wouldn't be a majority of those 100+ million customers.
Thank you, Very WELL said!!
freak4dell said:
All the information he gave is public, so he's not any more informed than any of the rest of us. He's only more informed than those who don't follow tech news, and those people don't care and weren't going to boycott anyway. Also, all his information is not completely accurate. The $100 rebate is not only for Verizon customers. The list includes several phones that are not Verizon phones. You can verify that for yourself here.
Ultimately, though, he's not misinformed. Motorola did lock bootloaders, they did push updates to an even later date, and they did cancel the updates for a few phones. He just has a different reaction to the information than I, and many others, do. He believes we should boycott Motorola to get them to change. As somebody who has an avenue to get their opinion out there, of course he's going to put his opinion out there. Personally, I think boycotting Verizon would be a better solution, because it's pretty clear that they are 90% of the problem. The new RAZR M/i and RAZR HD are only locked down on Verizon. In every other country they've been released in, they are unlockable. Motorola really doesn't care if you unlock your bootloader or not, because if you do, they don't have to warranty your phone. Verizon, though, for whatever reason, does seem to care.
The truth is, there will never be a widespread boycott of either Motorola or Verizon for this issue. For a boycott to be effective, you have to have a very large number of people upset about something. The number of people upset about locked bootloaders and a lack of updates is pretty low in the grand scheme of things. Most customers have no idea what a bootloader even is, and couldn't care less if they got an update or not. Then there's the fact that Verizon sells far more than just Motorola devices, so even if every Verizon customer that was pissed about the Motorola devices decided to boycott Verizon, it still wouldn't be a majority of those 100+ million customers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that's some information I can rap my head around. However, let me add one thing that Verizon does seem to care about besides money: They are one of the only service providers I have found that blocks text scam premium service providers. I recently received a text from some supposed event notifications service that I did not solicit. I of course paid no attention to it and deleted the text off my phone. When I was about to pay my bill I noticed an irregularity in the amount. $9.99 charged for a monthly membership fee. After notifying T Mobile of the fraud, they credited my account and told me if I wanted to block such services that I had to pay them $9.99 a month to have that feature. Or I could accept a block on all messages that come through their premium text services for free. I opted for the second and all of my important financial institutions were than blocked as well. After doing research on the web I found millions of cases of this same thing and the only provider not to have any complaints about it was Verizon! I was thinking of switching over to them when my term with T Mobile ends. But now that you have informed me of something else, I guess I'll stay away from them as well. Any other information that you can share would be very much appreciated. I know that we actually vote with our cash so even though it seems like one person is a small amount of revenue that won't be missed, when millions of us make the same decision I believe it does have an impact. Who knows? I guess I'll renew with T Mobile because it seems like no matter which service provider you choose, there always will be some shady business practices going on. Guess you have to choice the least of two evils, kind of like voting for a president. To bad XDA does not have a mobile provider of it's own with it's own devices as well. LOL
vvveith said:
Now that's some information I can rap my head around. However, let me add one thing that Verizon does seem to care about besides money: They are one of the only service providers I have found that blocks text scam premium service providers. I recently received a text from some supposed event notifications service that I did not solicit. I of course paid no attention to it and deleted the text off my phone. When I was about to pay my bill I noticed an irregularity in the amount. $9.99 charged for a monthly membership fee. After notifying T Mobile of the fraud, they credited my account and told me if I wanted to block such services that I had to pay them $9.99 a month to have that feature. Or I could accept a block on all messages that come through their premium text services for free. I opted for the second and all of my important financial institutions were than blocked as well. After doing research on the web I found millions of cases of this same thing and the only provider not to have any complaints about it was Verizon! I was thinking of switching over to them when my term with T Mobile ends. But now that you have informed me of something else, I guess I'll stay away from them as well. Any other information that you can share would be very much appreciated. I know that we actually vote with our cash so even though it seems like one person is a small amount of revenue that won't be missed, when millions of us make the same decision I believe it does have an impact. Who knows? I guess I'll renew with T Mobile because it seems like no matter which service provider you choose, there always will be some shady business practices going on. Guess you have to choice the least of two evils, kind of like voting for a president. To bad XDA does not have a mobile provider of it's own with it's own devices as well. LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm...I didn't know that about T-Mobile's service. I have that block on my account, too, since I got a fraudulent $9.99 charge a couple months ago. I don't really subscribe to texts from many places, but it sucks if I don't have the ability to.
I had them unblock me again!
freak4dell said:
Hmm...I didn't know that about T-Mobile's service. I have that block on my account, too, since I got a fraudulent $9.99 charge a couple months ago. I don't really subscribe to texts from many places, but it sucks if I don't have the ability to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I now receive text from my financial institutions and was given these procedures to follow if I receive anymore unwanted texts. Forward a copy of the offending text to 7726 immediately followed by a blank text to 4647. That will permanently block the text sender and also get them investigated for legitimacy. So I guess it's a slight pain in the ass but I need to receive important information from my bank or credit institutions anytime there is activity so I can verify that it is me making the activity happen and is approved.
This can probably be ported to the Turbo since it works on a 2014 X
http://bits-please.blogspot.com/2016/02/unlocking-motorola-bootloader.html
https://github.com/laginimaineb/Alohamora
Beaups exploit could be redone as well. He released how. It's mostly no one is doing it.
_ck_ said:
This can probably be ported to the Turbo since it works on a 2014 X
http://bits-please.blogspot.com/2016/02/unlocking-motorola-bootloader.html
https://github.com/laginimaineb/Alohamora
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The vulnerability he is using is old (he first disclosed it ~6 months ago) and does not apply to the turbo.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
mrkhigh said:
Beaups exploit could be redone as well. He released how. It's mostly no one is doing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right. Droid Turbo owners don't need a "new" exploit. The one being used still works!
If someone doesn't like paying for the packaged solution (Sunshine) that contains that exploit, then repackage it. It's been publicly released.
Oh, but re-coding would require work!
However, the payment in this case is fair to reward the time and money the devs invested. Without them, there would be no solution.
ChazzMatt said:
Right. Droid Turbo owners don't need a "new" exploit. The one being used still works!
If someone doesn't like paying for the packaged solution (Sunshine) that contains that exploit, then repackage it. It's been publicly released.
Oh, but re-coding would require work!
However, the payment in this case is fair to reward the time and money the devs invested. Without them, there would be no solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amen
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
I don't really understand the complaints coming from people about the charge for sunshine unlock. I was happy to find out that I could unlock/root with a few clicks and not worry about doing all the leg work, especially considering I don't have the skill set required to be confident of not brick in my device with a more extensive unlock/root process.
Time is money and some individual(s) put time into developing something that some people are happy to have access to and pay for. Simple fact is, if you have an issue with paying for such a thing, then don't... But don't hate on the guys that are profiting from a skill set that not everyone is capable of, especially if said hater isn't capable or willing to provide an equally usable product.
Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
rg449 said:
I don't really understand the complaints coming from people about the charge for sunshine unlock. I was happy to find out that I could unlock/root with a few clicks and not worry about doing all the leg work, especially considering I don't have the skill set required to be confident of not brick in my device with a more extensive unlock/root process.
Time is money and some individual(s) put time into developing something that some people are happy to have access to and pay for. Simple fact is, if you have an issue with paying for such a thing, then don't... But don't hate on the guys that are profiting from a skill set that not everyone is capable of, especially if said hater isn't capable or willing to provide an equally usable product.
Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem people have had with Sunshine is that root/bootloader unlock methods have traditionally been given for free—because they've been easier to crack.
Recently hacking has become more and more difficult—which makes developers have to spend more, and want more to make up for their losses on modding.
tecsironman said:
Amen
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rg449 said:
I don't really understand the complaints coming from people about the charge for sunshine unlock. I was happy to find out that I could unlock/root with a few clicks and not worry about doing all the leg work, especially considering I don't have the skill set required to be confident of not brick in my device with a more extensive unlock/root process.
Time is money and some individual(s) put time into developing something that some people are happy to have access to and pay for. Simple fact is, if you have an issue with paying for such a thing, then don't... But don't hate on the guys that are profiting from a skill set that not everyone is capable of, especially if said hater isn't capable or willing to provide an equally usable product.
Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed!
Latiken said:
The problem people have had with Sunshine is that root/bootloader unlock methods have traditionally been given for free—because they've been easier to crack.
Recently hacking has become more and more difficult—which makes developers have to spend more, and want more to make up for their losses on modding.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See Above! You get way more value for $20 then was ever given for free... and just because something used to be given away does not imply that it will continue to be in the future. Smart phones are still a relatively new product in the market and with Dev's who have now been through years of the exploiting, modifying, retiring cycle, there has to be incentive for them to stay engaged.
Additionally, I'll remind you that it hasn't been long since bounties were the norm. Everybody would post their promise to pay before and during development, then an exploit would be found and the bounty threads would clear out. Can't blame them for getting wise about collecting.
mng777777 said:
Agreed!
See Above! You get way more value for $20 then was ever given for free... and just because something used to be given away does not imply that it will continue to be in the future. Smart phones are still a relatively new product in the market and with Dev's who have now been through years of the exploiting, modifying, retiring cycle, there has to be incentive for them to stay engaged.
Additionally, I'll remind you that it hasn't been long since bounties were the norm. Everybody would post their promise to pay before and during development, then an exploit would be found and the bounty threads would clear out. Can't blame them for getting wise about collecting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no you don't get more for paid methods. It's a one time unlock, and is device specific.
Let me reiterate that I am in no way complaining about Sunshine. I love the devs' work on our devices.
What I'm saying is that people's disappointment is understandable.
However, the devs already published the exploits and documents; all that's left is for someone to use them.
People have nothing to complain about now.
I get your point and I am in agreement with you. I didn't mean to imply that I'm not.
I'd like to clarify though, what I meant when I said you get more is that downloading an apk, pressing a few buttons, and spending all of 3 minutes to be unlocked is far simpler than it ever was in the past. I'm just pointing out that they went the extra mile to build an apk that's simple and elegant and does the heavy lifting for you whereas in the past we had to boot to recovery, flash, boot to boot loader, run adb, etc. The threads were full of people stuck and confused. Sunshine adds great value to the less savvy user and at least simplicity for the more savvy users.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
mng777777 said:
I get your point and I am in agreement with you. I didn't mean to imply that I'm not.
I'd like to clarify though, what I meant when I said you get more is that downloading an apk, pressing a few buttons, and spending all of 3 minutes to be unlocked is far simpler than it ever was in the past. I'm just pointing out that they went the extra mile to build an apk that's simple and elegant and does the heavy lifting for you whereas in the past we had to boot to recovery, flash, boot to boot loader, run adb, etc. The threads were full of people stuck and confused. Sunshine adds great value to the less savvy user and at least simplicity for the more savvy users.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is great to see as well; however, that makes development that much harder, and o know for a fact the people that whine about Sunshine's cost would deal with the difficulty of using fastboot and adb in order to save $25.
It is great, however, for less experienced people, and it's overall function. $25 is a steal for a fully moddifable device that was locked down so well.
Latiken said:
That is great to see as well; however, that makes development that much harder, and o know for a fact the people that whine about Sunshine's cost would deal with the difficulty of using fastboot and adb in order to save $25.
It is great, however, for less experienced people, and it's overall function. $25 is a steal for a fully modifiable device that was locked down so well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This response below is not necessarily directed towards you, but really for the entire discussion in this thread. I'm just quoting your post as it's a good point to continue the discussion.
1) I can't believe people who are buying $600 phones are complaining about $25 bootloader unlock. And I don't care if you got the phone for $200 on contract or even as a "free upgrade". You are STILL paying $600 for the phone over the course of the contract.
2) No one is forcing anyone to pay for bootloader unlock. Your phone will still work like when you bought it, and you bought locked down.
If you bought this phone, you knew it was locked down and bought it anyway (or should have known). Everyone knows Verizon locks down their phones. Don't buy a Verizon phone if you don't like Verizon's policies. (The XT1250 has free bootloader unlock and is the Droid Turbo under another name, same bands, etc and runs on Verizon. So, I don't want to hear that you NEED Verizon. You may need Verizon but you don't need Verizon phones. Look at the non-Verizon Nexus 6 as another example.) This phone went for an entire YEAR locked down, and people are complaining when there's finally a solution?
3) Someone mentioned the bounty threads.
Droid Turbo Bootloader unlock bounty reached over $5,000 before the op stopped counting.
Running Total: $5,140 for bootloader unlock / $3,370 for root access
http://forum.xda-developers.com/droid-turbo/general/bounty-unlock-bootloader-root-turbo-t2927958
It was actually MORE, but the op gave up counting. Go look at the first post and read some of the amounts... user names are listed.
I want to know if everyone who who pledged $25, $50, $100, even $200 actually bought Sunshine? If they didn't, then they had no intention of ever paying anyway. Sunshine is a way to put your money where your mouth is.
and last...
4) I think people should rant more towards Verizon than devs who overcome Verizon's shortsightedness.
There's no valid reason to lock down the bootloader. None of the other Motorola Quarks have that condition -- same hardware, in at least one case the EXACT SAME FCC ID. Ever since the FCC made Verizon open up their LTE network to other phones not certified by Verizon (the XT1250 U.S. Moto Maxx -- the XT1254 Droid Turbo clone -- runs just fine on Verizon with a Verizon sim card, as does a non-Verizon Moto Nexus 6) and made Verizon also open up their phones to work on OTHER LTE networks (many people are running the XT1254 Droid Turbo on AT&T and T-mobile), what are Verizon's justifications?
Unlocking the bootloader through Motorola -- as I have done with two of my three Quarks -- acknowledges you are voiding any warranty claims. So, that's actually LESS liability and cost for Verizon in support if they allowed users to unlock bootloader. It's a nonsensical leftover from a bygone era when Verizon tried to lock their devices to only their network.
Until Verizon realizes they need change their intransigence, we need devs to help. And for devs to invest tremendous time and money, they need to be reimbursed for bricked phones and time invested they could be doing other things.
ChazzMatt said:
This response below is not necessarily directed towards you, but really for the entire discussion in this thread. I'm just quoting your post as it's a good point to continue the discussion.
1) I can't believe people who are buying $600 phones are complaining about $25. And I don't care if you got it for $200 on contract or even as a "free upgrade". You are STILL paying $600 for the phone over the course of the contract.
2) No one is forcing them to pay it. Everyone knows Verizon locks down their phones. Don't buy a Verizon phone if you don't like Verizon's policies. (The XT1250 has free bootloader unlock and is the Droid Turbo under another name, same bands, etc and runs on Verizon. So, I don't want to hear that you NEED Verizon. You may need Verizon but you don't need Verizon phones. Look at the non-Verizon Nexus 6 as another example.) This phone went for an entire YEAR locked down, and people are complaining when there's finally a solution?
3) Someone mentioned the bounty threads.
Droid Turbo Bootloader unlock bounty reached over $5,000 before the op stopped counting.
Running Total: $5,140 for bootloader unlock / $3,370 for root access
http://forum.xda-developers.com/droid-turbo/general/bounty-unlock-bootloader-root-turbo-t2927958
It was actually MORE, but the op gave up counting. Go look at the first post and read some of the amounts... user names are listed.
I want to know if everyone who who pledged $25, $50, $100, even $200 actually bought Sunshine? If they didn't, then they had no intention of ever paying anyway. Sunshine is a way to put your money where your mouth is.
and last...
4) I think people should rant more towards Verizon than devs who overcome Verizon's shortsightedness.
There's no valid reason to lock down the bootloader. None of the other Motorola Quarks have that condition -- same hardware, in at least one case the EXACT SAME FCC ID. Ever since the FCC made Verizon open up their LTE network to other phones not certified by Verizon (the XT1250 U.S. Moto Maxx -- the XT1254 Droid Turbo clone -- runs just fine on Verizon with a Verizon sim card, as does a non-Verizon Moto Nexus 6) and made Verizon also open up their phones to work on OTHER LTE networks (many people are running the XT1254 Droid Turbo on AT&T and T-mobile), what are Verizon's justifications?
Unlocking the bootloader through Motorola -- as I have done with two of my three Quarks -- acknowledges you are voiding any warranty claims. So, that's actually LESS liability and cost for Verizon in support. It's a nonsensical leftover from a bygone era when Verizon tried to lock their devices to only their network.
Until Verizon realizes they need change their intransigence, we need devs to help. And for devs to invest tremendous time and money, they need to be reimbursed for bricked phones and time invested they could be doing other things.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One reason I love Motorola is because of their near-stock Android with actually useful enhancements, and the fact that you can unlock their devices straight from them.
Had I researched and known that the Verizon XT1254 was locked down before purchasing it, I might've gone for another one.
But hey, I got a wicked deal on a $270 blue Turbo, AND we got Sunshine like a month after. I got some serious luck.
ChazzMatt said:
Droid Turbo Bootloader unlock bounty reached over $5,000 before the op stopped counting.
Running Total: $5,140 for bootloader unlock / $3,370 for root access
http://forum.xda-developers.com/droid-turbo/general/bounty-unlock-bootloader-root-turbo-t2927958
It was actually MORE, but the op gave up counting. Go look at the first post and read some of the amounts... user names are listed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the most part bounties don't pay, more often than not it costs me more to buy the phones than I got from the bounties. Exception being the first motorola bounty I collected
jcase said:
For the most part bounties don't pay, more often than not it costs me more to buy the phones than I got from the bounties. Exception being the first motorola bounty I collected
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Out of curiosity. Did sunshine's $25 a pop pay off well? Mind you I'm not asking for dollars and cents. Merely is it a hobby that funds itself. Or a hobby that doesn't? Or is it actually a source of income?
I'm often curious the stats of bootloader unlocks/roots performed but in this instance that would be an invasion of privacy...
mrkhigh said:
Out of curiosity. Did sunshine's $25 a pop pay off well? Mind you I'm not asking for dollars and cents. Merely is it a hobby that funds itself. Or a hobby that doesn't? Or is it actually a source of income?
I'm often curious the stats of bootloader unlocks/roots performed but in this instance that would be an invasion of privacy...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SunShine funds further research, its not my job, much of the research goes no where, much of it results in dead phones, sometimes it works out. Would be right for me to discuss numbers, I'm not the only one involved.
I'm not sure if this has already been posted or not. But I just had a small chat with a Google rep and it's confirmed that both phones (not the Verizon version's) will have unlocked bootloaders. I'll just put it here since the pixel 2 doesn't have it's own forum yet.
Also I'm not sure is any of you are curious about the fast charging. But Google isn't doing us dirty like Apple is doing their folks. The fast charge wall adapter will be included in the box with the phone. So we will not have to buy extra hardware to fast charge our phones.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Cant read the convo.. seems compressed or thumbnail.. so your thinking the google store versions are all bootloader unlockable?.. i wouldnt buy the verizon version not sure why you would cause if you already have a verizon sim your good to go. And future updates could make the Verizon version unlockable like the orig verizon pixel
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
stinger4321 said:
Cant read the convo.. seems compressed or thumbnail.. so your thinking the google store versions are all bootloader unlockable?.. i wouldnt buy the verizon version not sure why you would cause if you already have a verizon sim your good to go. And future updates could make the Verizon version unlockable like the orig verizon pixel
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I uploaded the original uncompressed screenshots. And she said that only the Verizon version's ain't have the unlocked bootloader.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
So for clarification Verizon's BL will be locked at some point. Maybe out of the gate?
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
No, Verizon's BL will not be unlocked.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Wow.. read the convo.. DON'T GET THE VERIZON MODEL
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
in other news
water gets you wet
stinger4321 said:
Wow.. read the convo.. DON'T GET THE VERIZON MODEL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean don't buy from Verizon or don't pick the Verizon model from Google store?
Also, the bootloader will be locked
You have to unlock it manually
So you're kinda wrong. The pixel 2 xl will have unlockable bootloader. It won't come unlocked
flex360 said:
Also, the bootloader will be locked
You have to unlock it manually
So you're kinda wrong. The pixel 2 xl will have unlockable bootloader. It won't come unlocked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bro, do you really have ANYTHING constructive to say? Both posts on here are condescending. You know exactly what I was saying in this thread. You gotta be that one up guy? Go be a smart ass somewhere else bro. People like your are toxic. Go take your attitude and you're condescending news comments elsewhere.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
lucky_strike33 said:
You mean don't buy from Verizon or don't pick the Verizon model from Google store?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both Verizon versions you will be unable to unlock the bootloaders... So bootloaders permanently locked with any Verizon version....
If its like last time there was a SKU for the unlocked Playstore version and a different SKU for the Verizon sim card version.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
MacTheRipperr said:
Bro, do you really have ANYTHING constructive to say? Both posts on here are condescending. You know exactly what I was saying in this thread. You gotta be that one up guy? Go be a smart ass somewhere else bro. People like your are toxic. Go take your attitude and you're condescending news comments elsewhere.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I said was actually more constructive and accurate than your OP. You were wrong and I corrected you. Plain and simple. And I don't know what you were trying to say.
The phone coming with an unlocked bootloader and having an unlockable bootloader are two different things. Don't get offended when someone corrects you, this is not grade school.
Well perhaps people with verizon pixel 2 can try to turn on first time without verizon sim and maybe the unlock button is not greyed out.
con4n007 said:
Well perhaps people with verizon pixel 2 can try to turn on first time without verizon sim and maybe the unlock button is not greyed out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That didn't work on the Pixel 1 so no reason to think it will here. There is only one way to unlock the bl if you want. Buy the Google version.
Damn, So I ordered the Verizon versions, launch day.
If I'd have ordered the unlocked version, any issues with it working on Verizon?
Thinking about calling them and switching..
I called Google, to change my pixel orders to the pay store unlocked version.
Was told that the Verizon version they sell is only with a Verizon sim, and some Verizon apps, but with an unlockable bootloader. Varying from the version you'd buy directly from Verizon that has a locked BL. And assured "only pixels sold from Verizon directly" will have encrypted bootloader.
Called twice, same response..
Told them I accidently ordered the Verizon sim version, and that I was a t-mobile customer. And that I needed an unlocked version for development purposes.
What are the chances I was fed a line of BS? Never dealt directly with Google.
-Michael_ said:
I called Google, to change my pixel orders to the pay store unlocked version.
Was told that the Verizon version they sell is only with a Verizon sim, and some Verizon apps, but with an unlockable bootloader. Varying from the version you'd buy directly from Verizon that has a locked BL. And assured "only pixels sold from Verizon directly" will have encrypted bootloader.
Called twice, same response..
Told them I accidently ordered the Verizon sim version, and that I was a t-mobile customer. And that I needed an unlocked version for development purposes.
What are the chances I was fed a line of BS? Never dealt directly with Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting.. someone else shared a chat with google saying that you could not unlock the verzion version bootloader from the playstore...hmm.. well i guess there is a 10 day return policy.. we will find out once these phones begin shipping
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
-Michael_ said:
I called Google, to change my pixel orders to the pay store unlocked version.
Was told that the Verizon version they sell is only with a Verizon sim, and some Verizon apps, but with an unlockable bootloader. Varying from the version you'd buy directly from Verizon that has a locked BL. And assured "only pixels sold from Verizon directly" will have encrypted bootloader.
Called twice, same response..
Told them I accidently ordered the Verizon sim version, and that I was a t-mobile customer. And that I needed an unlocked version for development purposes.
What are the chances I was fed a line of BS? Never dealt directly with Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The customer service representative was likely correct, but they only know what they are told.
99% of them have never even considered unlocking the bootloader, or even really know what that means.
Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk
Edit:
21 Oct 2017
Verizon model direct from Google cannot be bootloader unlocked.
See https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=74271638&postcount=86
-Michael_ said:
I called Google, to change my pixel orders to the pay store unlocked version.
Was told that the Verizon version they sell is only with a Verizon sim, and some Verizon apps, but with an unlockable bootloader. Varying from the version you'd buy directly from Verizon that has a locked BL. And assured "only pixels sold from Verizon directly" will have encrypted bootloader.
Called twice, same response..
Told them I accidently ordered the Verizon sim version, and that I was a t-mobile customer. And that I needed an unlocked version for development purposes.
What are the chances I was fed a line of BS? Never dealt directly with Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's an excellent question. I mean, does it make sense that they would sell the "Verizon" version with Verizon bloat on it and not have Verizon's deal with their encrypted bootloader? On the other hand, maybe Google wants as many people to but through them directly and if they do then the bonus is the unlockable bootloader. So many questions. To be honest, I would try to get it changed to the carrier free version with no Verizon ties. That's just my opinion.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
-Michael_ said:
I called Google, to change my pixel orders to the pay store unlocked version.
Was told that the Verizon version they sell is only with a Verizon sim, and some Verizon apps, but with an unlockable bootloader. Varying from the version you'd buy directly from Verizon that has a locked BL. And assured "only pixels sold from Verizon directly" will have encrypted bootloader.
What are the chances I was fed a line of BS? Never dealt directly with Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is a very good question, but I do believe they are telling the truth. Google didn't sell the Verizon version last time around afaik, so this is new. I would think the only difference is the sim and programs installed. I'm not sure but certainly curious to know. I'm also not sure why they are doing this. Why would you buy a VZW model from Google in the first place? Why not go directly to Verizon? Maybe they are trying to be sure distribution isn't messed up like last time. If Verizon sells out you can get it from us, finance it through us, return it to us if it messes up.
edit: Ninja'd by 2 minutes.
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