dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
569
share rss forum feed

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

Nexus 4

Well,

Network locks can be damned. The Nexus 4 is a beginning of the "universal" phone, where you can have the relationship directly w/ the phone vendor, and choose the network of your choice, NOT the ass backward way we have it today.

I bet you a billion dollars if Verizon or T had to compete on postpaid w/ universal phones you would see android updates come at a staggering pace, and prices go DOWN.

Within a year the major radios will be able to do many of the LTE bands, GSM/CDMA, etc so if an MVNO offers LTE (like Sprint is beginning) then the phone is tuned to the correct network.

As for postpaid, the ONLY reason they put locks on them are three fold:

1. To prevent you from going out of country and using a prepaid SIM, to gouge you for talk/data.
2. To prevent or slow the migration of said equipment to prepaid.
3. You have to manually go through a process to unlock (many don't), and this turns the phone into junk or remains locked. This is where the law will really bite. Resellers are punished big time on this. This is of course to slow (2).

These are both anti-consumer, and the stooges in the government are the enablers. As a libertarian I support SIM locking (you don't have to buy it) if the carrier wishes, but after you buy the phone you should be able to do anything you want w/ it, otherwise it's not your phone but simply a service fee...


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

SIM locking should not be a carrier wish though. Or well more specifically, When the contract expires the system should automatically send out an unlock code as the user has completed their end of the bargain by staying in for the 2yrs.

Though really the users can just unlock their phones, it is only against the DMCA and that is worth less than the speed limit on the Turnpike.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports



delusion ftl

@comcast.net
reply to elefante72

Sim locks are from carriers who see themselves as champions for bringing X phone to market. And they think they are entitled to the fruits of that phone in the market. Meaning when ATT brings the Blackberry torch to market that because ATT worked so hard and was so diligent in allowing their customers to purchase the torch, that the torch should be stuck on their network, and theirs alone. Forever. If anyone uses a BBery torch ATT should bet getting some money somewhere from it.

This is the bulk mindset behind sim locks. It has little to do with contractual obligations. You may agree with the carriers, you may disagree. I just feel that people ought to know why before they make their decisions.

When you bring up devices like the nexus 4. It throws carriers for a loop as it's not "The nexus 4 brought to you by AT&T", or "The iphone 5 brought to you by AT&T". Instead it's a 299 dollar high end smartphone directly from the producer. Now when an ATT subscriber buys a nexus 4, they look at their 96 dollar a month plan and wonder why they are paying so much when they buy their device outright. I've been told that even the subsidized nexus 4 sold through T-mobile on contract is unlocked. That should blow away anyone's notion that sim locks are required for contracts to function properly.



JasonOD

@comcast.net
reply to elefante72

YOu are missing the point.... Maybe not you, but most American's like having carriers eat 2/3 of the cost of a phone up-front and amoritizing the discount over a contract period. If the subsidy model is going to work, there has to be a way for carriers to secure the 'loan'.

One can argue whether ETF's are enough, but there is nothing wrong with 'locking' the phone to one carrier if that's what the carrier chooses. They're giving out the subsidy (loan), they get to set the terms. The customer can choose whether it's worth it for them.


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to Kearnstd

Locks have nothing to do with contracts as was extensively explained in the above text your apparently did not read.

So why should they be unlocked automatically after the contract expires when they have nothing to do with recouping the cost anyway?


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to JasonOD

Did you even read the above text? Subsidizing the phone has nothing to do with it and locking the phone has nothing to do with securing a loan or making sure they get their money back. And if it was, they have plenty of legal avenues to already take.

Example: I go to ATT and get their locked iPhone . After 3 months I decide I dont like ATT and so I decide to go to Verizon and get their locked iPhone. After 5 months I decide they suck as well and decide to go to Sprint and get their iPhone. How did "securing that loan" stop me from taking my business elsewhere?

Sure I just paid a crap load of ETF's, but ultimately I still have 3 phones (2 of which I will sell) but nothing secured me from doing the above. Locking only caused me to get another phone with the other carriers. It did not stop me from discontinuing service with anyone and making sure they were fully reimbursed. If I was an idiot with poor credit already, I would not have paid the ETF's either and then where would that have left them?



Conan Kudo

join:2013-03-04
Clinton, MS
reply to elefante72

Well, like all Verizon LTE phones, T-Mobile's subsidized Nexus 4 is SIM-unlocked. So there is that, at least.



AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1
reply to elefante72

the nexus 4 don;t work on sprint, and there is no LTE interoperability between the major US carriers.
--
* seek help if having trouble coping
--Standard disclaimers apply.--


elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
reply to Conan Kudo

Verizon devices can move the SIM because as part of the spectrum deal they HAD to allow it, not because they are good guys... Their phones are still carrier locked. You also can't go to another carrier because LTE is incompatible between carriers today.

The TMO N4, is truly unlocked, you can pop any SIM in there, from any carrier that supports the pentaband, and that means internationally also.

I have a Verizon 4g myfi. Never used it. $50 a month wasted (or at least my employer). I wanted to buy a new ipad and throw that SIM in there. Verizon wouldn't let me buy an ipad WITHOUT activating a plan, so I told them to screw. I went to the Apple store and bought a "Verizon" ipad, spent 3 minutes cutting the SIM, and voila I was now using data.

My point is that Verizon is still in their bad habits, because they shouldn't care if I use my 5GB data plan on a myfi or ipad, just that I am paying them every month. They want you to pay per device EVEN if it is unsubsidized (ipad)... I'm not going to pay for both, when the ipad can act as a hotspot if I need it.



ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA
reply to Skippy25

And to further your comments, this is also good for the phone manufacturer.
ake your example of 3 iPhones. Apple has just sold three units and not just one that was moved from carrier to carrier. So there COULD be a push for the locking from the manufacturers also.



Iridium
Premium
join:2003-04-02
Los Angeles, CA
reply to elefante72

said by elefante72:

Well,

Network locks can be damned. The Nexus 4 is a beginning of the "universal" phone, where you can have the relationship directly w/ the phone vendor, and choose the network of your choice, NOT the ass backward way we have it today.

No the Nexus 4 is not the beginning. Unlocked phones have been available for years, direct from phone manufacturers. The problem was that most people didn't know about them. I've been buying unlocked Nokia phones directly from Nokia for about 10 years now. Google was the first US company to successfully sell unlocked phones. They stumbled a bit with the original nexus, but killed it with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus and the LG Nexus 4. I really hope the trend continues.
--
My next laptop will be an Apple, I am fed up with PC's and Windows.

Androidian

join:2012-12-14
Purcellville, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to JasonOD

said by JasonOD :

If the subsidy model is going to work, there has to be a way for carriers to secure the 'loan'.

I'd hardly call the subsidy model a "loan". Loan payments eventually go away after the loan is paid off. I've never seen a wireless bill go down after completing a 2 year contract and sticking with the same phone. If it was a loan, the part of the bill reflecting the installment payment would be eliminated.
--
A sane approach to our federal budget: NO tax increases / 15% cuts across-the-board / defunding of all ObamaCare-enacted programs.


Lone Wolf
Almost Retired
Premium
join:2001-12-30
USA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
reply to Iridium

Agreed!

As soon as I learned about unlocked phones I began buying them. I bought my phones from places like Pemix and WElectronics for over 10 years. Some were unavailable in the US and came from Singapore or the Philippines and all were unlocked.

Here's an earlier unlocked phone of mine that I have never seen another person have: »/showpic/cellp···0863&1=1



mulp

@Level3.net
reply to ropeguru

Then we should lock cars to the driver's license, or the State.

That will be good for automakers because you will be required to scrap your car and buy a new one if you need a different one, or move to a new State.



ATTPerson

@sbc.com
reply to Skippy25

WOW! Somebody actually gets it! If you bail on AT&T, ETF and all, and go to Verizon, you get the same phone discount that, by the math, zeros your perceived "loss" on an ETF, and it's a brand-new device every single time.

I will also point out that, in a situation where the FCC is clearly trying to convert the ENTIRE NATIONAL TELECOMM INFRASTRUCTURE TO WIRELESS (that goes for your home internet service, too), the only way relevant data about usage loads can be collected is for users to stay with one carrier for a long enough duration to collect information about data transfer loads on the wireless network.

The fact that the ENTIRE wireless spectrum has to have its bands re-defined by the FCC, to accomodate a hundred million people using wireless data that all need unique broadcasting frequencies - well, your mobile data plans are capped and throttled not because carriers are trying to rip you off, but because LTE is so fast (and in rural areas, even HSPA+ is fast compared to landline broadband options) that unrestricted use would presently have negative implications on everything from interference of wireless communications (to the point they'd simply stop working) to the business interests of everybody that transmits video or voice media wirelessly to your phone, vehicle, or television.

It's capped and throttled now. I can also tell you that it's so comparitively cheap, in terms of cost of doing business, compared to wired service, that it will not have caps forever (at least, not at the level of the individual user - entities like Netflix and YouTube may, in theory, have caps associated with the amount of broadband they use via local carriers taking those video services to individual users).

I'm an AT&T employee, and this isn't me being an AT&T fanboy. Free-for-all use of mobile data isn't supported by any carrier's network (yet). Allowing it wouldn't cause speed problems like you experience if you try to stream 8x 1080p Netflix movies simultaneously to your home on your 12mbps internet service or whatever.

Instead, the actual "problem" is that every single person using mobile data has to have a unique frequency made available to them, similar to the way local broadcast television and FM radio need the same thing. How many local broadcast television and radio stations cover your metropolitan area?

Well, I can tell you that while maybe there are a total of 20 local FM radio/TV stations in a metro area, there are about a million potential wireless data users in my metro (Kansas City) alone. In my immediate neighborhood, based on population density, you're talking several thousand around one LTE tower, easily.

It's not a corporate screw-job, it's an FCC-guided redesign of telecom, and not limiting initial access to it would make it so terrible from the perspective of data speed and dropped calls that nobody would want it anyway.

"Fiber backhaul" to an LTE tower is the same "fiber to a wireless router" concept that you'd imagine if you had a true fiber connetion running straight into the outside wall of your home. It's also completely stupid to build it out in that manner, because you can just put up micro-cells (think short little cell towers that just cover an individual subdivision or city block or whatever) on existing fiber that presently terminates to VRADS or IPDSLAMs, and give fast service to a bunch of people.

If you want the proof in the pudding, read a recent statement from AT&T about their "VIP" initiative and the deployment of "macro" and "micro" cell towers.

What's actually befuddling to me is the join dates of the members of this site's staff (around 1999 or 2000), which should have implicated that they'd be able to see this trend. Instead, you read paranoid garbage about "stalled U-verse build outs" and "no fair ETFs" and "no fair data caps, throttling, and overage fees".

This site use to be a hub of intelligent discussion about broadband. Now, it has degraded to uninformed and short-sighted paranoia...



AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1

fail ^^^^
nice try tho.



Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to Skippy25

So they can force you are forced to use them as a provider if you want to continue using that phone forcing the customer has to buy a new phone if they want to go elsewhere.

It's really simple to figure out how bean counters think they only care about making money and milking people for everything.
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart


VentShop

join:2009-08-21
Oklahoma City, OK
reply to Androidian

I agree 100% to this and to expand what if you buy a phone outright? If I choose to not be locked into a contract and just pay the cash price for the phone why is it that I don't see a reduced monthly service cost?


steevo22

join:2002-10-17
Fullerton, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·AT&T DSL Service

1 edit
reply to JasonOD

Carriers eat 2/3 of the cost of a phone? Only because that's how their distorted business model is set up.

How much do you really think it costs to build an Iphone in red China?

Look on Dealextreme, there are lots of Iphone clones, obviously built with most of the same parts for $65. A real Iphone cannot cost more than $85 to make.

Why do they price it at $600? To make the contracts seem attractive, that's why.

As it is the carriers keep a stranglehold on the equipment and use that power to keep their customers signed up on long contracts to prevent competition.

They do it intentionally. That's what should be stopped.

The cellphone carriers should be barred from selling equipment at all as a condition of their radio spectrum licenses.

If the cellphone carriers were only carriers you would be able to buy unlocked multi network phones from retail stores much cheaper than now. The manufacturers only sell to carriers now, if they could sell their products at retail there would be much more competition.

Don't you think Motorola, Apple, LG, Samsung and all the rest wouldn't be eager to sell to you? Of course they would. They would have to compete to do it but if they had to do it or go out of business, they'd do it. They are largely hampered by there being only 3 or 4 buyers (cellular carriers) for their products. 100 million buyers would be much better for them. Even if they only sold through Radio Shack, Walmart and other retailers they would have to compete.

Prices for both phones and service would decline and quality would improve. There would be real competition.

No carriers whining about unlocking phones. No carriers advertising phones, they would only advertise their service and how great it is, and without contracts they would have to provide good service or you would take your multi network phone elsewhere.