[Q] Contract phones vs non-contract phones - General Questions and Answers

I have a noob question regarding this issue. It's very common today for providers (networks) to offer upgrade phones to subscribed members. That has the benefit for people to grab latest devices at lower prices, compared to buying the phone 'undranded', directly from the manufacturer. Under certain circumstances, those contract bound, 'locked' phones could be 'unlocked' for use anywhere.
As far as I understood, 'locked' or 'unlocked' is facilitated by the use of IMEI, right? Or is there any additional mechanism providers use to allow/restrict use of a particular device in their network? Are there any hardware differences whatsoever between a contract phone and a non-contract phone?

jstoner said:
I have a noob question regarding this issue. Its very common today for providers (networks) to offer upgrade phones to subscribed members. That has the benefit for people to grab latest devices at lower prices, compared to buying the phone undranded, directly from the manufacturer. Under certain circumstances, those contract bound, locked phones could be unlocked for use anywhere.
As far as I understood, locked or unlocked is facilitated by the use of IMEI, right? Or is there any additional mechanism providers use to allow/restrict use of a particular device in their network? Are there any hardware differences whatsoever between a contract phone and a non-contract phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK the Simlock is in the Software of the Device.
Unlocking them is possible AFAIK.
But some Providers lock the bootloader of the Device permanent, so that it cant be unlocked.

As far I picture it in my mind, the software of the device (branded or not) doesn't have to do with the 'lock'. At least not according to this thread. That guy tried flashing with the different ROM, but the lock was still there. So there must be something else that does it. Possibly IMEI (or maybe something else?)
adi2500 said:
AFAIK the Simlock is in the Software of the Device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

jstoner said:
As far I picture it in my mind, the software of the device (branded or not) doesnt have to do with the lock. At least not according to this thread. That guy tried flashing with the different ROM, but the lock was still there. So there must be something else that does it. Possibly IMEI (or maybe something else?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didnt mean ROM with Software, i meant the Ril software

Oh, right, cheers for that. Haven't even head of RIL before
So you mean that contract phones come out with a modified RIL (compared to that of the unbranded version of the phone)?
So that's the part that get's locked. OK, thanks!
adi2500 said:
I didnt mean ROM with Software, i meant the Ril software
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

What I also trying to figure the 'path' that units go through, till they reach the end customer.
For a unbranded phone, that would look like this:
1) Manufactured, put in retail box, sealed
2) Distribution to wholesale
3) Distribution to retailers
4) Customer picks it up (prepaid, pay-as-you-go)
This is phone is 'naturally' sim-free and unlocked to use with any network, worldwide.
Now, how about a contract phone?
1) A network provider, requests 1000 units of a paricular phone model from the manufacturer for use as a contract device
2) Manufactured with whatever options the provider requested. E.g. different firmware, modified RIL (network lock), branding (sticker at the back cover), put in box, sealed
3) Distributed to providers telecom shops
4) Customer picks it up as part of a contract
(Did I got all of this right?)
I am more interested in (2) above. Because I am curious - some of those initially-designated contract phones, somehow become unlocked and offered as unbranded, pay-as-you-go devices. But how all of a sudden do they become unlocked. I have also read somewhere, that even those phones are unlocked, they might be lacking certain features compared to the 'truly' unbranded phones that come directly from the manufacturer. Like for instance been limited to certain bands or traffic classes - which results to a lower QoS under certain conditions (roaming). That's why I m asking if there are any other differences in (2). Hope I clarified things up and not made things more blurry!

Does anyone know what happens if a unit that is destined as an upgrade phone (e.g. EE) gets unlocked to be sim free (therefore breaking the rules of the contract that state that this phone needs to be used for at least a period of 6 months prior unlocking becomes an option)? Is the provider taking any action? Like locking the phone again or any other potential consequences?
Otherwise, any phone is sim-free for like 10-20 quid...?

Related

question about a branded phone

i got a question, i just got interested in buying a phone, and lots of people tell me its of a certain brand name, Vodafone for example. I was wondering, what are my limitations with a branded phone? I want to use the phone in a diferent country, and with a diferent company, is there a way to unlock it, and have all its features availible as if it was unbranded??
Your post is very vague. Basically the phone has a little bit to do with how you can use it and ROM or Operating systems has a lot to do with it. For example, I have an AT&T phone which is a HTC Raphael. The brand on it means it originally is only able to work on the AT&T network. It has features only to be used with AT&T and when it is put on the AT&T network it reports to their servers. The fact that it is AT&T also means the hardware is GSM based (the type of radio in it and how it joins the network space). You can flash a customize from onto this phone to allow for use on any GSM carrier or you can unlock the phone to be only used on any network but you would not be able to use some of the AT&T specific features.
I hope this answered your basic questions.
pegun said:
Your post is very vague. Basically the phone has a little bit to do with how you can use it and ROM or Operating systems has a lot to do with it. For example, I have an AT&T phone which is a HTC Raphael. The brand on it means it originally is only able to work on the AT&T network. It has features only to be used with AT&T and when it is put on the AT&T network it reports to their servers. The fact that it is AT&T also means the hardware is GSM based (the type of radio in it and how it joins the network space). You can flash a customize from onto this phone to allow for use on any GSM carrier or you can unlock the phone to be only used on any network but you would not be able to use some of the AT&T specific features.
I hope this answered your basic questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that is exactly what i wanted to know.. where i am from, i use a prepaid sim, of a foreign company, and everytime i travel, i have a diferent companie's prepaid sim in my phone, i dont want to be bound to only 1 company, i want to be able to use the phone's features, and not be obligated to only use AT&T's sim cards for example. So flashing a Rom, of unlocking, maked the phone become just like the rest of the factory unlocked, if i understood correctly?
A branded or carrier phone by default is typically only locked to the carrier's SIM, and typically has carrier specific software on it, like a media store, or internet portal, ect. If you unlock the phone, and flash an unbranded ROM (i.e. an XDA ROM, or an original HTC ROM) then there is no real difference between a branded phone and an unbranded phone besides carrier added labeling on the faceplate.
sonus said:
A branded or carrier phone by default is typically only locked to the carrier's SIM, and typically has carrier specific software on it, like a media store, or internet portal, ect. If you unlock the phone, and flash an unbranded ROM (i.e. an XDA ROM, or an original HTC ROM) then there is no real difference between a branded phone and an unbranded phone besides carrier added labeling on the faceplate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THank mate, i got it now.. i didnt understand those things since i never had to deal with branded or company slavery

Global Unlock for VZW GS3?

Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?
ancashion said:
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.
ancashion said:
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??
AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon IS screwing us though, again! Look at our bootloader and everyone else's, the rest of the world. And if this phone is a world phone with gsm capabilities, why lock it to begin with then promise to unlock it soon "in the future"? Do you actually believe that crap?
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456, that should unlock it. If it doesn't ask for a code, don't worry about it, root the phone (at your own risk) using the "Root66" method on this forum. Then go to this thread, whether you were able to unlock it with those generic codes or not.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566
Read all the instructions. You should be able to get voice and SMS working for any gsm carrier, and you should be able to get 2G (maybe also 3G and HSPA+ on some gsm carriers) working, you'll have to find their APN settings and manually switch to those using the instruction in the linked page though. 2G has been confirmed working on AT&T and t-mobile, no one has been able to test 3G and HSPA+ on AT&T yet. Good luck.
AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jmorton10 said:
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
§ 27.16 Network access requirements for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787
MHz bands.
(a) Applicability. This section shall apply only to the authorizations
for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787 MHz bands assigned and only if
the results of the first auction in which licenses for such
authorizations are offered satisfied the applicable reserve price.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on
spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the
ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their
choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical
standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the
licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government
regulation.
(c) Technical standards. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this
section:
(1) Standards shall include technical requirements reasonably necessary
for third parties to access a licensee's network via devices or
applications without causing objectionable interference to other
spectrum users or jeopardizing network security. The potential for
excessive bandwidth demand alone shall not constitute grounds for
denying, limiting or restricting access to the network.
(2) To the extent a licensee relies on standards established by an
independent standards-setting body which is open to participation by
representatives of service providers, equipment manufacturers,
application developers, consumer organizations, and other interested
parties, the standards will carry a presumption of reasonableness.
(3) A licensee shall publish its technical standards, which shall be
non-proprietary, no later than the time at which it makes such
standards available to any preferred vendors, so that the standards are
readily available to customers, equipment manufacturers, application
developers, and other parties interested in using or developing
products for use on a licensee's networks.
(d) Access requests. (1) Licensees shall establish and publish clear
and reasonable procedures for parties to seek approval to use devices
or applications on the licensees' networks. A licensee must also
provide to potential customers notice of the customers' rights to
request the attachment of a device or application to the licensee's
network, and notice of the licensee's process for customers to make
such requests, including the relevant network criteria.
(2) If a licensee determines that a request for access would violate
its technical standards or regulatory requirements, the licensee shall
expeditiously provide a written response to the requester specifying
the basis for denying access and providing an opportunity for the
requester to modify its request to satisfy the licensee's concerns.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case
that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application
in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee
shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted
reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in
the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network
restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions
would be presumed reasonable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.
newuser134 said:
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't work the other way around.
roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not as simple as just switching the sim card on Verizon. Unlike the GSM networks, Verizon only allows devices that already have their ESN/MEID in the system.
Yes, should be working with proper steps..
ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566&page=10 has a lot of information. My post #95 details the steps that I have taken, and I can confirm that I was able to get it to work with a T-Mobile card. I am heading to Russia and will test it there in GSM mode with a local card. I have an HTC Incredible 2 world phone as backup which I know works.
The key is that you must use HiAPN to be able to edit/change the internal APN setting to allow for other Sim cards. ALso load Phone Info to change the radio setting. I've already loaded APN's for three different Russian companies and hope that I can just pop them in, change the APN, change the radio and be good to go.
Hope this helps.
Great Post!
My friend do you hang out in the irc channels too?
I have a question:
I am currently using the verizon samsung galaxy s3 (SCH-I535) and will be moving to Japan in September, what can you recommend me to do? I want to be able of use the s3 with either 3g, LTE oe 2g with any carrier in Japan. I know if I unlock the phone via root and unlock I can use the softbank (japan carrier) for call/text 2g not data plan though. But If that is the only thing I can do I will get a pocket wifi so I can have data wherever I go that way.
Any recommendations? I still can't understand about the global unlocking update coming to verizon s3 ?
Thank you in advance!
ancashion said:
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon S3 Global Root Unlock
Can anyone tell me if i did this root and global unlock does that mean i can put a international verizon wireless plan and use it overseas or is this just to be able to use international SIM's?
I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.
ahanecurren said:
I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:
ancashion said:
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?
Imatoasta said:
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be able to provided your radio is compatible with the others network. That was the nature of block c's "openness" or the idea behind it anyways.
Vzw challenged the block c regs in court, after they made the purchase, and lost. I think they are being defiant on purpose.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
How to unlock and set up your SGS3 phone for world use.
I fyou have not yet seen this, go to this post: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1809314 and it will walk you through the steps that worked for me to use the Verizon Galaxy S3 overseas in GSM mode.
If it helps, give a thanks!

[Q] Orange/EE Locked - Unlocking?

Hi,
I have just pre-ordered my S6 through EE.
The thing is, my EE contract is just one I had left over from years ago and thought I'd use it to upgrade. My main number that I use is with O2.
I explained this to EE, and they were as helpful as ever (not) and explained that they will not allow the phone to be unlocked during the 1st six months of the upgrade. Now, this is based on what they have said even with me offering to pay. However, if I was to get the phone unlocked by not going through EE, would this likely cause any problems? I suppose I'm just wondering whether they are able to monitor the IMEI number or anything.
What are people's thoughts?
Sorry, just realised this should have gone in the Q&A section, not the general. If a mod can perhaps move if required.
I'm not 100% on what you are asking so sorry if I get the wrong end of the stick.
If you are referring to unlocking an EE phone they can't really tell, they will just have the details of the purchased device on the system (unless you tell them) so you can swap to whatever network. There shouldn't be any problems as nothing is really changed apart from a few lines of code saying you can use any network. Be careful as some companies provide fake codes to unlock, I have seen a suggestion to use www.samsungcodesource.com but a local shop may offer it where by you wont have to pay if they cannot unlock it.
Good luck :good:
Fill in this form, depending on your circumstances you might have to pay them £8 https://myaccount.ee.co.uk/device-unlock/
I got the code for my S6 in 3 days
forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s6/samsung-galaxy-s-6--s-6-edge-unified-development/kernel-stockmod-kernel-t3100395

Sign the U.S. Petition to prevent carriers from locking our bootloaders

Sign the Petition. Reclaim YOUR device.
http://wh.gov/iGwh4
We all know that AT&T and Verizon have begun the process of "signing" bootloaders. To anyone who doesn't understand, this means you will never be able to upgrade your software on another carrier or root your phone in any way.
I fell this is in violation of the "Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act". Even though wireless carriers are obligated to perform a carrier unlock at your request, they should not be allowed to force you to continue to use their software. AT&T says this is "our branding" and it's not for you to tamper with. Wrong. It's OUR phone and we want your software off of it.
If you ever decide to switch carriers, AT&T and Verizon will be more than happy to let you go. Unfortunately their software goes with you. With a signed bootloader, your new carrier does not have the ability to install their own software on your device. To make matters worse, you cannot perform over-the-air (OTA) updates ever again. The new carrier cannot overwrite AT&T's software OTA, or any other way for that matter. AT&T is directing all their former customers to Best Buy so they can flash their devices with the latest upgrades from now on. These upgrades only update the AT&T/Verizon software. You will have to do this every time there is an upgrade....for the life of the phone. Imagine what this does to your phone's resale value.
Whether this practice violates the "Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act" is up to the government now. Sign the petition and help put a stop to this. http://wh.gov/iGwh4
Wow you didn't read the TOS you agree to do you.
You do know the bootloader is part of their own software right. So even if it got passed they would just leave you with the hardware and you would need to make your own bootloader and use a jtag system.
Yah but to lock up the bootloader, that'll prevent all kinds of mods. Won't it?
X-weApon-X said:
Yah but to lock up the bootloader, that'll prevent all kinds of mods. Won't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh it does and by the TOS people sign it is their right. The bootloader is proprietary software.
On the other hand this completely goes against the law that was just passed recently that allows us to change carriers and for them to unlock our devices at our request. That's got nothing to do with the term of service, it's a law. I figure after 2 years of service to the provider that I paid a two-year contract for, that it's my right to keep on using the device and look for other carriers. And by law they are supposed to make that happen for me if I so wish it. TOS ends when your contract ends.
Hell, this is just apples iboot in miniature and spread across a bunch of different carriers
X-weApon-X said:
On the other hand this completely goes against the law that was just passed recently that allows us to change carriers and for them to unlock our devices at our request. That's got nothing to do with the term of service, it's a law. I figure after 2 years of service to the provider that I paid a two-year contract for, that it's my right to keep on using the device and look for other carriers. And by law they are supposed to make that happen for me if I so wish it. TOS ends when your contract ends.
Hell, this is just apples iboot in miniature and spread across a bunch of different carriers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That law only covers the sim lock. Not anything else. It doesnt cover updates (which the carriers in the US are in complete control over. Heck some phones on their network never even see an update)
The TOS I am talking about is the device TOS. You do know you agreed to one right? When you first start the device you have to agree to it, which by flashing, modding ect violates.
Well then by that definition, anything that they do that interferes with a SIM unlock violate that law. Let's just talk about unmodified devices. Okay, we agreed to that TOS and that if we modify our operating systems either by rooting or jailbreaking, then we have violated that. That's understandable. But if they make any proprietary changes to their firmware which violates the right to a SIM unlock, that shouldn't be done. In which case I support the petition, but only for that aspect of it. And we all pretty much violate the TOS when we flash our devices. As long as we have a way to restore it to factory, that's fine.
Usually that's what you have to do when you change carriers anyway, but if they do something that prevents other carriers from being used then that's a violation of the law, strictly speaking.
X-weApon-X said:
Well then by that definition, anything that they do that interferes with a SIM unlock violate that law. Let's just talk about unmodified devices. Okay, we agreed to that TOS and that if we modify our operating systems either by rooting or jailbreaking, then we have violated that. That's understandable. But if they make any proprietary changes to their firmware which violates the right to a SIM unlock, that shouldn't be done. In which case I support the petition, but only for that aspect of it. And we all pretty much violate the TOS when we flash our devices. As long as we have a way to restore it to factory, that's fine.
Usually that's what you have to do when you change carriers anyway, but if they do something that prevents other carriers from being used then that's a violation of the law, strictly speaking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes we do violate them here. That is why this is a hacking forum and there are warnings in every thread that everything you do to your device here voids your warranty.
You have to understand that carriers also control the devices that are allowed on their networks. Take Verizon for example. They have every right to deny the use of any device on their network.
You can pretty much use the device on any carrier for GSM based devices. As long as it is sim unlocked. This doesnt mean that they also have to provide updates for the device.
This petition has nothing to do with sim unlocks though.
It is about Bootloader unlocking. Which is not covered by that law.
I wouldn't expect firmware updates, as long as there were firmware packages I can use to restore with.
Okay well that's good to know, I know that when I joined Sprint it was CDMA but now the device I have is gsm I believe- and Verizon is also CDMA? I remember seeing Scripts that you could use to flash through your keypad to change a Verizon device so it would work with one of the cheap carriers. But that only works on devices that were CDMA only, like those iPhone 4's with no sim slot.
I suppose the carrier can do whatever they want as far as software they want to load as long as I can modify the device on my own at some later time. But I don't know what this bootloader locking is going to cause , what are they locking into the devices, their lousy boot logos? or is it all of their base software like what Samsung does with all of the stuff that they load? The first Android device I ever worked on was Knoxed Galaxy Tab 3, fortunately a simple restore fixed it.. Is that the kind of thing that they want to lock into their boot loaders?

Question SM-S908E/DS IMEI is not valid on AT&T. What are my options?

I own an SM-S908E/DS that apparently is loaded with the firmware from Chile. The global S22U supports a lot of the AT&T bands, though there are some differences.
When I went to the AT&T store to activate the S22U, they told me that they can't register the phone's IMEI.
For now, they registered my S22U phone's new SIM with my previous OnePlus 7 Pro's IMEI. I suspect that I may not get full features (like, connection to 5G) using my old IMEI.
Has anybody experienced this with AT&T? I can't believe I would be the first person to experience this.
Is there a way to get my SM-908E/DS properly registered on AT&T as an S22U?
Did you buy it new or used?
If you were actually able to get your device activated on AT&T they WILL end up kicking your phone off the network at some point. AT&T has blocked international S22/+/U models on their network for basically no reason. This version is not on their weird whitelist of devices which means that they will not allow it on their network.
Maybe when S23 line releases in about a month, they will allow these models since it seems that international versions of the S10-S21 line are allowed on their network. It could also already be on the list but not on that outdated document.
If it is not on that list, you will find out soon enough when your line gets suspended and you have to call to reactivate it.
gernerttl said:
Did you buy it new or used?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought it brand new, off of a eBay reseller who had very high ratings.
The Samsung box was sealed, and looked totally new (identical to my wife's US version), so I know it should be legit.
nnighthawk said:
If you were actually able to get your device activated on AT&T they WILL end up kicking your phone off the network at some point. AT&T has blocked international S22/+/U models on their network for basically no reason. This version is not on their weird whitelist of devices which means that they will not allow it on their network.
Maybe when S23 line releases in about a month, they will allow these models since it seems that international versions of the S10-S21 line are allowed on their network. It could also already be on the list but not on that outdated document.
If it is not on that list, you will find out soon enough when your line gets suspended and you have to call to reactivate it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well ... This sounds depressing. I'm assuming this happened to you? It sounds like the voice of experience.
¿GotJazz? said:
I bought it brand new, off of a eBay reseller who had very high ratings.
The Samsung box was sealed, and looked totally new (identical to my wife's US version), so I know it should be legit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It should be legitimate then. Even so, buying off of Ebay can still be hit or miss.
If they activated the new SIM, then you should be fine for the most part.
The list that nnighthawk posted is AT&T's list of devices that were tested and approved for support purposes. That doesn't mean it won't work. However, if you have connection or service issues, they will tell you that you are using an unsupported device and therefore they can't help you.
Also, from a network security perspective, US carriers (and many non-US) don't like it when people want to use devices that are not tested on their respective networks. Untested models with firmware that is untested/unapproved are potential security risks. Carriers don't make money by selling devices; they make it by selling services. Any potential network breach could cost them billions of dollars in revenue and customer trust. The latter can lead to litigation and government investigations, which costs even more money.

Categories

Resources