Related
I’ve been baffled by what I’ve been hearing and reading about the bootloader is being locked and the late delivery of Android updates for Defy and other handsets from Motorola. I would like to request Motorola to make official statements about the very same concerns almost all their customers have.
In my opinion, Motorola is not being sincere about the mess they are into. Motorola has a long history for being far slower in delivering updates compared to other manufacturers. In my case, after owning my Defy for nearly six months I still don’t have the Android version (Froyo 2.2) I wanted on day one. My handset is now too old and too slow compared to what I can buy in today’s market with latest version of Android on most of them.
I often see people acting as Motorola’s spokesperson by saying the cause of the delay is due to the test mobile network provider has to perform. I would like to see a written statement from Motorola saying just that please. For a company is very easy to hire a small PR Firm to spread rumours on the internet and people often fall in that trap and spread the rumour all for free behalf the company.
Motorola must be aware of its customer frustrations with the late updates. Supposedly, this is the fault of Mobile Network Providers, why then Motorola doesn’t release latest Android with their handsets to avoid comments like mine? This is a clear indication to me Mobile Network Providers cannot be blamed and this must have to do with a policy Motorola has. Why other manufacturers are not affected by the very test process? Didn’t Samsung release a fix update globally for SGII only after weeks?
This is what I understood from manufactures’ spokesperson (users claiming to know everything). Bootloader is locked because of Mobile Network Providers’ demand. I bought my mobile sim-free from a retail, why the bootloader is still locked then? This is another lie from manufacturers, not just Motorola. Has anyone seen an official statement from any manufactures explaining who the decision was made by? I’d predict no one can provide such evidence.
The bootloader fiasco is all about reducing repair cost whilst the handset is under warranty. That means it is possible for a manufacturer to calculate the cost of a handset with locked bootloader and without. Is the saving made by locking the bootloader passed on to the customer?
Motorola is the most arrogant company I have ever dealt with and they should be disgraced with the level of service they have provided for their customers. I have reached to the point that the hardware quality no longer matters to me when I feel being ripped off by Motorola. I have already boycotted Nokia for selling spying equipment (tracking & listening) to countries such as Iran and now I refuse to spend my hard earned money on Motorola’s products for their poor services.
Companies have the right to earn money, but not at the cost of ripping people off or even worst at the cost of endangering people lives.
You are totally wrong.
And if you don't like your defy dont buy motorola again or install cm7
Ov3rd0se said:
You are totally wrong.
And if you don't like your defy dont buy motorola again or install cm7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who are you? Are you playing God in here? Who asked your opinion about my alternative solutions?
Why your first ever post submission (1 post, 25 May 2011) has to do with telling me off? You did not provide any valuable arguments as to why I was wrong.
I think there is a post for a petition in unlocking the boot loader. As for updates. 2.2 has already been released last march. even if motorola is like that, ur defy is still a great phone comparable to the latest phones because you have the support of great developers and forumers here.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
salingpusa said:
I think there is a post for a petition in unlocking the boot loader. As for updates. 2.2 has already been released last march. even if motorola is like that, ur defy is still a great phone comparable to the latest phones because you have the support of great developers and forumers here.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your comments.
UK yet to receive (25 May 2011) Froyo. Motorola claims to release Froyo to select countries in Europe. Another lie from them. The only European country has recieved Froyo is France. Motorola all the sudden turned their attention to East-Asia and started releasing updates in the respective countries and forgot all other European countries. I'm referring to Retail version not sim-locked version of Defy.
Just my two cents but although developers love unlocked bootloaders, truth is the majority of end users (customers) don't need or care about flashing their phone and especially flashing a bootloader to load custom kernals. I believe you're right in the biggest factor for Motorola or any manufacturer locking the bootloader is to keep costs down with regards to repairs under warranty - and can you blame a company for that?
I think it would be nice to see real numbers and costs associated as to how many phones are returned to M (or any other manufacturer) under warranty in where it's believed the user bricked the phone...I know if I owned a business I wouldn't want to dish out free phones every time someone bricked their phone because they wanted to hack it on their own accord.
So - even though a locked bootloader essentially eliminates the ability to flash a custom kernal, there are still tons of amazing custom roms that can be developed and flash away all day without fear of bricking the phone. Kinda best of both worlds, a good compromise...isn't that what life is about
Also - even though a custom kernal can't be flashed...you can still have a port like CM7/MIUI etc so you can keep up with the newest OS even when the carrier/manufacturer is slow to upgrade...although not a true port without the kernal but nevertheless you still are running the newest OS.
If they sold a retail version with an unlocked bootloader, carriers will lose sales. The bootloader issue was known for a long time, if you didn't like the fact that the bootloader is locked, you shouldn't have bought a Motorola android phone.
Suck it up. It's your fault, want to do something useful? send a complaint to Motorola and sign the petition.
confusedfella said:
If they sold a retail version with an unlocked bootloader, carriers will lose sales. The bootloader issue was known for a long time, if you didn't like the fact that the bootloader is locked, you shouldn't have bought a Motorola android phone.
Suck it up. It's your fault, want to do something useful? send a complaint to Motorola and sign the petition.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please point to my comment where I'm complaining about "my phone" being locked and I've been desperate for custom roms? The point of mentioning about the bootloader was to highlight the lies and the unfounded truth some people spread around. I would never use a custom ROM not even with an unlocked bootloader.
On that note, HTC announced today they are reviewing their bootloader policy. You can read more about it here. I guess this news alone proves my earlier point that people are spreading unfounded facts blaming Mobile Network Providers over the bootloader.
Companies has their own rights to manufacture devices under their own policies in term of locking here and there and this normally applied to telco service provider agreements too between them. So pointing Motorola alone is not a good idea as they have their rights all along. Comparing companies like Motorola and another company like HTC is another scenario where different company have different policies they followed or what they wanted they own product be in the market..
If one doesn't like a company policies for being late in upgrading or poor in responding customer feedback. Then there's always another company to choose with. Do survey and then make the purchase when all the details fit you.
And not forgetting that average people doesn't bother with this upgrading software or the hype about bootloader inside out. Most of them just use it the way it is by default when they got it from the shop. Only selective peoples like us here care about these being the first or the last or having the latest software here and there and this is why we have this XDA to support peoples like us. Some of us already running Froyo way back in November last year(if I'm not mistaken) while Motorola might just starting their own Froyo development project on Defy that time.
After all, I do see Motorola did a good job in reviving their phone manufacturing and come back compete with others big companies. So if you buy Motorola phone, you should come here and start flash it and customised it to your own preference as there are a lot of peoples love Motorola and do it freely...
You vote with your wallet, so buying a phone from a company known to deliver few and far between updates with a locked boot loader shows that you don't mind a locked bootloader and are satisfied with the initial state of the phone needing no updates.
And as I've mentioned in my earlier post, if Motorola launches an unlocked bootloader RETAIL version of a phone, the grand majority of power users will buy the retail version and consequently decrease the carriers' sales.
As you mentioned you are not happy with Motorola because of the late update and the locked bootloader. Those 2 issues were known.
IMO the carriers have an upper hand over here, because of the price reduction they can offer. Not everyone can shell out 500-700$ for a high end phone every 6 months. I understand what you mean, its disappointing and not a totally honest move from Motorola. Next time I'll buy a samsung or a SE since they promised more open phones.
who is this sh1t?
When I bought the Defy, I knew about the slow update policy of Motorola, I knew about the locked bootloader. I knew that if I would buy an HTC phone I would have updates sooner, I would have custom roms with custom kernels. I also knew that would cost me about 100 euros more, give me lower sound quality, a more vulnerable phone. So I had to make a choice, en chose the Defy. You could have known the same, regardless of what companies say. Just read about different phones on forums like this.
Hardly any company will be 100% honest about their money-making policies. Just use your common sense and you'll know that almost every buisness has only one core buisness: to make money. Some companies will give you more service, other companies give less service to be able to lower the prices of their products. It's up to you to make a choice what you value more. I chose for a lower price and some restrictions in customizing and a tougher phone. You maybe should have chosen to pay a bit more to have more freedom.
confusedfella said:
You vote with your wallet, so buying a phone from a company known to deliver few and far between updates with a locked boot loader shows that you don't mind a locked bootloader and are satisfied with the initial state of the phone needing no updates.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bought Defy base on the promise of Froyo but didn't expect six months of wait. Why it takes a global company about six months to release an update? It is not like they are doing all the Android development, is it?.
I don't understand why you are blindly defending Motorola. Without our money Motoroal would be nothing. I will survive without a Mobile phone but does Motorola survive without our money?
confusedfella said:
IMO the carriers have an upper hand over here, because of the price reduction they can offer. Not everyone can shell out 500-700$ for a high end phone every 6 months. I understand what you mean, its disappointing and not a totally honest move from Motorola. Next time I'll buy a samsung or a SE since they promised more open phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least in the UK, with 24 months contract you are not saving anything on the handset itself. Some plans actually work out even more expensive. Please name a business that passes on the savings to the customers? They are greedy and you are happy to defend them all for free.
Fotogravin said:
When I bought the Defy, I knew about the slow update policy of Motorola, I knew about the locked bootloader. I knew that if I would buy an HTC phone I would have updates sooner, I would have custom roms with custom kernels. I also knew that would cost me about 100 euros more, give me lower sound quality, a more vulnerable phone. So I had to make a choice, en chose the Defy. You could have known the same, regardless of what companies say. Just read about different phones on forums like this.
Hardly any company will be 100% honest about their money-making policies. Just use your common sense and you'll know that almost every buisness has only one core buisness: to make money. Some companies will give you more service, other companies give less service to be able to lower the prices of their products. It's up to you to make a choice what you value more. I chose for a lower price and some restrictions in customizing and a tougher phone. You maybe should have chosen to pay a bit more to have more freedom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those people bought Motorola CLIQ were promised updates but Motorola didn't deliver. I guess that is ok by you because Motorola didn't force them to buy anything from them in the first place. And the millions of dollars Motorola spends advertising is just to show off their products to other companies not to encourage us consumers to depart from our money.
My friend, there is no relation between you are being happy with your purchase from Motorola and the rest of us has to shut up about not being happy.
I'm not going to mention the Defy's earpiece fiasco.
csharpheaven said:
i’ve been baffled by what i’ve been hearing and reading about the bootloader is being locked and the late delivery of android updates for defy and other handsets from motorola. I would like to request motorola to make official statements about the very same concerns almost all their customers have.
In my opinion, motorola is not being sincere about the mess they are into. Motorola has a long history for being far slower in delivering updates compared to other manufacturers. In my case, after owning my defy for nearly six months i still don’t have the android version (froyo 2.2) i wanted on day one. My handset is now too old and too slow compared to what i can buy in today’s market with latest version of android on most of them.
I often see people acting as motorola’s spokesperson by saying the cause of the delay is due to the test mobile network provider has to perform. I would like to see a written statement from motorola saying just that please. For a company is very easy to hire a small pr firm to spread rumours on the internet and people often fall in that trap and spread the rumour all for free behalf the company.
Motorola must be aware of its customer frustrations with the late updates. Supposedly, this is the fault of mobile network providers, why then motorola doesn’t release latest android with their handsets to avoid comments like mine? This is a clear indication to me mobile network providers cannot be blamed and this must have to do with a policy motorola has. Why other manufacturers are not affected by the very test process? Didn’t samsung release a fix update globally for sgii only after weeks?
This is what i understood from manufactures’ spokesperson (users claiming to know everything). Bootloader is locked because of mobile network providers’ demand. I bought my mobile sim-free from a retail, why the bootloader is still locked then? This is another lie from manufacturers, not just motorola. Has anyone seen an official statement from any manufactures explaining who the decision was made by? I’d predict no one can provide such evidence.
The bootloader fiasco is all about reducing repair cost whilst the handset is under warranty. That means it is possible for a manufacturer to calculate the cost of a handset with locked bootloader and without. Is the saving made by locking the bootloader passed on to the customer?
Motorola is the most arrogant company i have ever dealt with and they should be disgraced with the level of service they have provided for their customers. I have reached to the point that the hardware quality no longer matters to me when i feel being ripped off by motorola. I have already boycotted nokia for selling spying equipment (tracking & listening) to countries such as iran and now i refuse to spend my hard earned money on motorola’s products for their poor services.
Companies have the right to earn money, but not at the cost of ripping people off or even worst at the cost of endangering people lives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
listen fast judger , i don't care about the update that what is about to be released , the point is that you can work smoother than iphone.
Second thing is you will never get the full control of any other company such as samsung and htc.
Each one has it's on bad staff ,so if you feel damn bad just try others and live the disappointing.
CSharpHeaven said:
I’ve been baffled by what I’ve been hearing and reading about the bootloader is being locked and the late delivery of Android updates for Defy and other handsets from Motorola. I would like to request Motorola to make official statements about the very same concerns almost all their customers have.
In my opinion, Motorola is not being sincere about the mess they are into. Motorola has a long history for being far slower in delivering updates compared to other manufacturers. In my case, after owning my Defy for nearly six months I still don’t have the Android version (Froyo 2.2) I wanted on day one. My handset is now too old and too slow compared to what I can buy in today’s market with latest version of Android on most of them.
I often see people acting as Motorola’s spokesperson by saying the cause of the delay is due to the test mobile network provider has to perform. I would like to see a written statement from Motorola saying just that please. For a company is very easy to hire a small PR Firm to spread rumours on the internet and people often fall in that trap and spread the rumour all for free behalf the company.
Motorola must be aware of its customer frustrations with the late updates. Supposedly, this is the fault of Mobile Network Providers, why then Motorola doesn’t release latest Android with their handsets to avoid comments like mine? This is a clear indication to me Mobile Network Providers cannot be blamed and this must have to do with a policy Motorola has. Why other manufacturers are not affected by the very test process? Didn’t Samsung release a fix update globally for SGII only after weeks?
This is what I understood from manufactures’ spokesperson (users claiming to know everything). Bootloader is locked because of Mobile Network Providers’ demand. I bought my mobile sim-free from a retail, why the bootloader is still locked then? This is another lie from manufacturers, not just Motorola. Has anyone seen an official statement from any manufactures explaining who the decision was made by? I’d predict no one can provide such evidence.
The bootloader fiasco is all about reducing repair cost whilst the handset is under warranty. That means it is possible for a manufacturer to calculate the cost of a handset with locked bootloader and without. Is the saving made by locking the bootloader passed on to the customer?
Motorola is the most arrogant company I have ever dealt with and they should be disgraced with the level of service they have provided for their customers. I have reached to the point that the hardware quality no longer matters to me when I feel being ripped off by Motorola. I have already boycotted Nokia for selling spying equipment (tracking & listening) to countries such as Iran and now I refuse to spend my hard earned money on Motorola’s products for their poor services.
Companies have the right to earn money, but not at the cost of ripping people off or even worst at the cost of endangering people lives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think ur very disappointed with Companies like Motorola for Locked Boot loader and no Updates and ur Phone lags.....So why don't you buy Nokia 3210..No bootloader problem and no Update problem and it never Lags...
I believe they will soon. If another don't why they need to.
Samsung : Unlock
LG : Unlock
SE : Able to Unlock
HTC : Reviewing
CSharpHeaven said:
I’ve been baffled by what I’ve been hearing and reading about the bootloader is being locked and the late delivery of Android updates for Defy and other handsets from Motorola. I would like to request Motorola to make official statements about the very same concerns almost all their customers have.
In my opinion, Motorola is not being sincere about the mess they are into. Motorola has a long history for being far slower in delivering updates compared to other manufacturers. In my case, after owning my Defy for nearly six months I still don’t have the Android version (Froyo 2.2) I wanted on day one. My handset is now too old and too slow compared to what I can buy in today’s market with latest version of Android on most of them.
I often see people acting as Motorola’s spokesperson by saying the cause of the delay is due to the test mobile network provider has to perform. I would like to see a written statement from Motorola saying just that please. For a company is very easy to hire a small PR Firm to spread rumours on the internet and people often fall in that trap and spread the rumour all for free behalf the company.
Motorola must be aware of its customer frustrations with the late updates. Supposedly, this is the fault of Mobile Network Providers, why then Motorola doesn’t release latest Android with their handsets to avoid comments like mine? This is a clear indication to me Mobile Network Providers cannot be blamed and this must have to do with a policy Motorola has. Why other manufacturers are not affected by the very test process? Didn’t Samsung release a fix update globally for SGII only after weeks?
This is what I understood from manufactures’ spokesperson (users claiming to know everything). Bootloader is locked because of Mobile Network Providers’ demand. I bought my mobile sim-free from a retail, why the bootloader is still locked then? This is another lie from manufacturers, not just Motorola. Has anyone seen an official statement from any manufactures explaining who the decision was made by? I’d predict no one can provide such evidence.
The bootloader fiasco is all about reducing repair cost whilst the handset is under warranty. That means it is possible for a manufacturer to calculate the cost of a handset with locked bootloader and without. Is the saving made by locking the bootloader passed on to the customer?
Motorola is the most arrogant company I have ever dealt with and they should be disgraced with the level of service they have provided for their customers. I have reached to the point that the hardware quality no longer matters to me when I feel being ripped off by Motorola. I have already boycotted Nokia for selling spying equipment (tracking & listening) to countries such as Iran and now I refuse to spend my hard earned money on Motorola’s products for their poor services.
Companies have the right to earn money, but not at the cost of ripping people off or even worst at the cost of endangering people lives.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude.. What the hell are you talking about?? When the froyo update gets released in UK and when you flash it you will not notice any difference between the stock eclair and the froyo.. Dont simply go by the versions of android that gets released.. Check what the version of Android offers you.
Coming to your bootloader issue, What if its locked or unlocked? why the hell a layman care if he has a locked or an unlocked BL? All he wants is a fancy phone which he can use for his purpose, If the BL is not locked developers might even port windows 7 to defy but thats not what a layman wants or cares.
And coming to your policy for making money.. All companies try to make money and you talk as though samsung and nokia shell out there money for charity..
Your defy is the best mid range Android device you can get in the market, I visited tons of forums before I decided to buy it. If you are not happy with the service call the service desk or mail them.. Dont waste your time showing your agitation on Moto here.
Motorola is going to use every last days in Q2 to make sure Froyo is not released for Defy to increase the sale of their newer handsets with Froyo. I'm not happy about this dirty tactic from a company that already got my money. I suspect they will use the same dirty tactics with Atrix that I used to keep my eyes on for. I'm not going to let them trick me twice.
Exercising my rights to speak is so wonderful. Thank you XDA team for the opportunity.
CSharpHeaven said:
I bought Defy base on the promise of Froyo but didn't expect six months of wait. Why it takes a global company about six months to release an update? It is not like they are doing all the Android development, is it?.
I don't understand why you are blindly defending Motorola. Without our money Motoroal would be nothing. I will survive without a Mobile phone but does Motorola survive without our money?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know why it takes them so long, but you knew they tend to stretch update schedules, so why the hell did you buy a motorola phone? You said it right there "without our money motorola would go bankrupt" so thats why you don't buy motorola phones if you think they are doing it wrong, they'll have to adapt(better customer support,unlocked bootloader..etc) to overcome a potential crisis. They promised Froyo and you will get it, but when I don't know. You're blaming a company for your bad choices no one is making you buy their phones.
Im pretty satisfied with my purchase, It has an awesome screen size, is pretty fast and small. And for a small price. If you can't wait anymore for froyo, flash an official rom or go buy another phone. I learned it the hard way.
okay guys, I so I've been arguing with my mom for weeks now about rooting my e4gt even though it already is ... but she constantly asks how I did something to my phone, change battery color, bootscreen, etc., and I can tell her I rooted my phone because she said she'll take it because rooting is illegal.
I told he rwhoever said this is stupid sprint can't make laws, but she's saying that it is against her contract rules she signed with sprint contract.. can anyone argue with this, I highly doubt that this is true..
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
They will only terminate because of too much roaming and tethering ...ie downloading torrents or Xbox ps3 gaming .. go get sprint tos . According to dept of justice there is a exception in the digital millennium copyright law that allows for jailbreak and rooting.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/26/technology/iphone_jailbreaking/
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Nothing about rooting in the contract. Zero. Make her show you where it says that
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I work for Sprint, and there is nothing in the contract about what you do to your phone. As you said, there's nothing illegal (that would imply some sort of court action for doing it) but some Sprint techs will not work on a phone that is rooted.
Really the contract basically just says you will have service for the two years, if you cancel early, you pay a fee. The contract does not mention anything about the specific phone you have (i.e. whether it is an android or a blackberry, etc), does not mention what plan you have (because this can be changed at any time without a contract renewal.), and does not mention anything about modifying the software of your device. As mentioned above, if you over-use roaming, sprint may end your contract for you, but that is actually way more rare than people make it seem.
Also, arguing with the one that controls your cell service is not good advice. She has the ability to data and SMS restrict your phone, or suspend service on it altogether by just calling up customer service.
So, rather than telling her you rooted it, tell her you installed a Sprint ID. If she's smart enough to ask which one so you can install it on her phone, just root hers too.
If you check m+p they can't refuse to work on it because its rooted .
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Epix4G said:
If you check m+p they can't refuse to work on it because its rooted .
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can check M&P all day long, but I know techs in the area that say that if there is a software issue with a rooted device, it has to be reverted back to stock before they will look at it. Hardware issues are a different story though.
krisI0N said:
okay guys, I so I've been arguing with my mom for weeks now about rooting my e4gt even though it already is ... but she constantly asks how I did something to my phone, change battery color, bootscreen, etc., and I can tell her I rooted my phone because she said she'll take it because rooting is illegal.
I told he rwhoever said this is stupid sprint can't make laws, but she's saying that it is against her contract rules she signed with sprint contract.. can anyone argue with this, I highly doubt that this is true..
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First, I hope you've thanked your mom for getting you such a great phone and paying your bill.
Second, it's her account and her right to be concerned.
I've told my son for years (he's grown now) and tell my nieces often, it's all in how you present it. If you talk to your mom like she's an idiot, she's likely going to rebuff you and do as monkeyracer mentioned (turn off sms, disable service, etc). I would suggest you show her this forum so some of the informed posters can put her mind at ease.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20011661-38.html
Jailbreaking your iPhone or other mobile devices will no longer violate federal copyright law, thanks to a new ruling that updates the 1998 DMCA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, there are several one-click packages available that will literally restore the phone to the original factory condition with one click of a mouse.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1383678
This One-Click ODIN contains the SHIPPED EG30 Modem, Kernel, and ROM which the E4GT was initially released with.
Being a Factory Reset, this WILL reset all your Android user data. If you'd prefer to keep your user data, use the NoData version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
buy your own phone and brick it all day!
monkeyracer said:
I can check M&P all day long, but I know techs in the area that say that if there is a software issue with a rooted device, it has to be reverted back to stock before they will look at it. Hardware issues are a different story though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those the same idiots that say installing a launcher can mess up your phone ..... sometimes when I need a good laugh instead of going to a comedy club I will go to sprint to listen to what the employees say ......that's funny
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Epix4G said:
Those the same idiots that say installing a launcher can mess up your phone ..... sometimes when I need a good laugh instead of going to a comedy club I will go to sprint to listen to what the employees say ......that's funny
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My wife and I went to the Sprint store to have her number changed and they said they couldn't do it because it was rooted and that alone would prevent them from changing the number. There are good and bad employees at every business but sometimes I wounder if certain ones missed the initial training courses. It's one thing to be say "I'm not sure" if they don't know what rooting actually does. It's another thing to say something so matter-of-fact as if they know what they're talking about.
Actually the terms of service were modified in the last year (I don't know exactly when it happened) to specify that rooting is grounds for terminating your service (prior to that it just said modifications)
I am surprised your mom actually read the tos, the reference is buried somewhere near the bottom 3rd iirc. Is she an attorney or engineer? Those are amongst the few catagories of people who imo might read the entire tos ahead of time, rather than after something happens that affects them.
Anyway, your response to her can be that
1) companies put terms in their contracts which are not enforceable all the time, either to socially engineer you away from some behavior, or set up some pretext to protect their interests in the future
2) no one afaik has ever posted that sprint has tried to use this clause in the tos to terminate service
I am on mobile right now so it isn't convenient to dig up the reference, but if someone is interested I can look it up. It is in the section which says if you are rude or abusive to an agent that is grounds (according to sprint) for termination of service.
KCRic said:
My wife and I went to the Sprint store to have her number changed and they said they couldn't do it because it was rooted and that alone would prevent them from changing the number. There are good and bad employees at every business but sometimes I wounder if certain ones missed the initial training courses. It's one thing to be say "I'm not sure" if they don't know what rooting actually does. It's another thing to say something so matter-of-fact as if they know what they're talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I so hate you for this comment I just busted out laughing at this.
Personally, I don't understand why carriers are even obssessed with controlling our phones. Some of us get the phone (no matter if it's android or iphone) because we are able to root and jailbreak it. If we wanted a basic phone we would get blackberrys. smh sorry for the rant I just feel like corporations seem to want to control the way a consumer should think and what to do with devices.
Epix4G said:
Those the same idiots that say installing a launcher can mess up your phone ..... sometimes when I need a good laugh instead of going to a comedy club I will go to sprint to listen to what the employees say ......that's funny
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll have to try that..sounds like a fun time!!
bsmoove386 said:
I so hate you for this comment I just busted out laughing at this.
Personally, I don't understand why carriers are even obssessed with controlling our phones. Some of us get the phone (no matter if it's android or iphone) because we are able to root and jailbreak it. If we wanted a basic phone we would get blackberrys. smh sorry for the rant I just feel like corporations seem to want to control the way a consumer should think and what to do with devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know why either. If you take a step back and look at the whole picture (government included), minus the genocide, they are modeling their practices after Hitler and many other tyrants of history. Absolute authority and control through trickery of words and the slow implementation of progressively stricter policies. And most eat it up thinking it's for their own good. That's my rant for the day
As far as this rooting issue. Sprint reserves the right to terminate a contract for ANY reason they think warrants it. So in that sense, rooting is no worse than making a phone call. Both could void your contract just the same. Is rooting illegal? It's about as illegal as using 'sudo' in Linux.
Rooting isn't simply gaining access to the naughty parts. It's literally becoming that device since your changing your UID to 0 - which is not a number. And I don't like being some number.
sfhub said:
Actually the terms of service were modified in the last year (I don't know exactly when it happened) to specify that rooting is grounds for terminating your service (prior to that it just said modifications)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read through the Terms and Conditions among other documents, and there is nothing of the sort that I can locate.
Many people who claim to work for Sprint ahve stated that if your have the Equipment Service and Repair program on your account, they are required to work on the device, regardless of whether it has been rooted. If you break it to the point they cannot fix it, you may have to fall back on the Equipment Replacement Program or send it to Samsung.
Also, for Samsung's position, check my post here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1548588
Terms and Conditions: http://shop2.sprint.com/en/legal/legal_terms_privacy_popup.shtml
Privacy Policy: http://www.sprint.com/legal/privacy.html
Acceptable Use/Network Management: http://www.sprint.com/legal/agreement.html#neut
Surcharges, Taxes and Fees: http://support.sprint.com/support/a...d_other_charges/case-ib376964-20090810-135914
Equipment Service and Repair: http://shop.sprint.com/global/pdf/services_solutions/brochure_tep_esrp.pdf
Equipment Replacement: http://shop.sprint.com/global/pdf/services_solutions/brochure_tep_erp.pdf
Basically, you own your device, you can do what you want with it. Just don't expect Sprint to fix it for free if you break it.
Sprint doesn't care if you root as long as you bother them because of it.
Sent don't from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
Mattheyu said:
I just read through the Terms and Conditions among other documents, and there is nothing of the sort that I can locate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://manage.sprintpcs.com/output/en_US/manage/MyPhoneandPlan/ChangePlans/popLegalTermsPrivacy.htm
Our Right To Suspend Or Terminate Services
We can, without notice, suspend or terminate any Service at any time for any reason. For example, we can suspend or terminate any Service for the following: (a) late payment; (b) exceeding an Account Spending Limit; (c) harassing/threatening/abusing/offending our employees or agents; (d) providing false or inaccurate information; (e) interfering with our operations; (f) using/suspicion of using Services in any manner restricted by or inconsistent with the Agreement and Policies; (g) breaching, failing to follow, or abusing the Agreement or Policies; (h) providing false, inaccurate, dated, or unverifiable identification or credit information or becoming insolvent or bankrupt; (i) modifying a Device from its manufacturer specifications (for example, rooting the device); (j) failing to use our Services for an extended period of time; (k) failing to maintain an active Device in connection with our Services; or (l) if we believe the action protects our interests, any customer’s interests, or our networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I mentioned above, it used to just say generic "modifying device" but some time in the past year, they specifically added the rooting clarification.
Also as I mentioned above, companies often put in terms that are not enforceable and also AFAIK, I have never seen someone posting they were terminated due to this term.
I won't argue the merits (or non-merits) of this clause, just pointing out that it does exist.
The techs I am talking about are very good, and they don't refuse to work on rooted phones, but with any software issue (including issues on non-rooted phones) they usually revert the phone back to stock (read: hard reset) so they can rule out external software as the cause of the issue. If the phone is rooted, factory reset is not going to bring it back to stock, and they are not going to unroot the phone for the customer, so what is the answer? The customer has to unroot the phone and bring it back in to be checked again.
BTW, if you have ESRP or TEP, there's no reason you would need to contact Samsung. Samsung is really only necessary for warranty stuff for those too cheap to get ESRP or TEP.
KCRic said:
My wife and I went to the Sprint store to have her number changed and they said they couldn't do it because it was rooted and that alone would prevent them from changing the number. There are good and bad employees at every business but sometimes I wounder if certain ones missed the initial training courses. It's one thing to be say "I'm not sure" if they don't know what rooting actually does. It's another thing to say something so matter-of-fact as if they know what they're talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love it when people talk like they know stuff, just because they work somewhere. like baristas at starbucks talks as if they know all about coffees and etc. just like anther sprint worker, who told me galaxy nexus will work with sprint's current 4g(wimax) network.. just pure idiots.. i wish people were more humble.. yes there are ton of clueless customer, but just because you work at a place, that does not make you an encyclopedia of the items and service you offer. the knowledge of the items and service belongs to those who have actually spend some time researching..
So I have a couple general questions I wanted to get your guys take on.
Why does Verizon choose to have there phones locked down? The HTC One in particular but generally as well. Is it a method of preserving/increasing profit? Perceived threat to their network? Something else?
A follow up question which depends on how you feel about the first question. Are Verizon's reasons for locking down phones justified? Do you feel they have a right to do this? If you were a strictly moral person, do you have any dilemmas about this?
PS As a side note, I love having my phones unlocked with custom roms, and I am looking forward to getting my sonic S-Off back.
beardedYoga said:
So I have a couple general questions I wanted to get your guys take on.
Why does Verizon choose to have there phones locked down? The HTC One in particular but generally as well. Is it a method of preserving/increasing profit? Perceived threat to their network? Something else?
A follow up question which depends on how you feel about the first question. Are Verizon's reasons for locking down phones justified? Do you feel they have a right to do this? If you were a strictly moral person, do you have any dilemmas about this?
PS As a side note, I love having my phones unlocked with custom roms, and I am looking forward to getting my sonic S-Off back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People screwing up their phones by crack flashing, and returning them to verizon for warranty when bricked.
Control of tethering.
Yeah, they say it's for the reasons above.
But given that, to begin with, the rooting community is a tiny slice of all mobile phone users, and then Verizon users are an even smaller portion of that. So I don't see why they even care. I highly doubt that even if ever single Verizon customer who does rooting messed up their expensive device it would cost Verizon more than .01% of their revenue, if even that.
It's all about quality control. Even if it is the fact that the vast minority root their phones, it's the minority of users who generate the majority of complaints (and that rule extends FAR beyond cell phone rooting, or cell phones in general). It takes 10 good comments to make up for one bad comment these days, and there just aren't enough good comments to go around.
How likely is it, if your unrooted phone has no physical damage that you'll suddenly find that it isn't booting up? How likely is it that, even if you don't want to do it, factory resetting your unrooted phone will fix whatever problem you're having?
Big Red's reputation, their entire brand, is built on reliability. NOT freedom.
beardedYoga said:
So I have a couple general questions I wanted to get your guys take on.
Why does Verizon choose to have there phones locked down? The HTC One in particular but generally as well. Is it a method of preserving/increasing profit? Perceived threat to their network? Something else?
A follow up question which depends on how you feel about the first question. Are Verizon's reasons for locking down phones justified? Do you feel they have a right to do this? If you were a strictly moral person, do you have any dilemmas about this?
PS As a side note, I love having my phones unlocked with custom roms, and I am looking forward to getting my sonic S-Off back.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey guys feel free to elaborate as much as possible. I'm writing a term paper on unlocking bootloaders/s-off, legalities on our part and Verizon, security risk for us/Carrier, risks taken by us/Verizon, etc.. It's for a Information Security Course. I'll be creating a thread at some point but this is a good start for some sources!
Another point would be that Verizon tries to cater to business/enterprise customers so allowing bootloader unlocking could pose a giant security flaw on devices that have classified data and are meant to be secure
Sent from my One using xda app-developers app
I think it's far less about tethering for free. They fixed that with getting rid of unlimited data. They saw they can make more money on teired data plans with coverages. Plus I am amazed at how many people on here has given up on their unlimited data plans just to get a subsidized phone.
Locked down phones is for more like people who roots and doesn't know what they are doing so they brick their phones and Verizon takes a hit having to replace it under warranty. Plus the security reasons companies are looking for. They don't want a phone that could be hacked in to giving away possible secret info. Last but not least is to keep people from taking their phones and flashing it to another carrier as we seen a few people has done on here and other forums. It's money they are not receiving and they want to put a stop to it.
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk 4
I think they do it for tethering. Although you can use foxfi, root tethering is not stoppable unless verizon uses packet sniffing but even so, unlimited data is unlimited data. They also do it for security reasons as unlocking a corporate phone can be bad.
I will admit, I skimmed all posts and see that most everyone has bought into what they want us to believe.
If it is to prevent unwanted warranty claims, then why would they not allow us to willingly void our warranty via HTCdev when we click the box that says so?
Rather then resort to undocumented or traceable ways of doing so in which case they are stuck with more returns for soft bricks, etc,..and are stuck accepting them because they chose to not take the easy way and let us void our warranty to begin with.
I just think all that warranty replacement crap is a bunch of nonsense and can't be their main incentive.
If it is, then they have their heads buried deeper then I thought and need to realize what I just stated above...
A really good friend of mine has been a tech with sprint for nearly a decade. From what he has told me, about 27 of 100 phones they can't fix are due to installing non official software. While that's not the highest percentage with damage as the worst, it still is very costly for them to replace. Most of the guys he works with can tell if a phone has been "tampered" with. Even with such things as triangle away with the Samsung lines, they still can find out. Having a locked boot loader on this phone is just one way of attempting to slow the numbers.
As he would put it, most people who do try flashing and other modification methods have very little experience with the phones and their inner workings. A lot of these people end up bricking their phones and try turning them in for insurance claims or warranty which he deals with. He actually saved me some coin by getting me a screen for one of my s2's from a completely fried emmc that he says someone tried a bad flash with.
But yeah, keeping the people like that out of the phones is one of the major reasons as it can become costly to them... I call bs though, considering the amount of profit they actually make on each one of our accounts.
Sent from my One in Blue!
You are exactly right.
To be honest, there isn't much of a business case for a carrier, when serving as the reseller of a phone, to offer the freedom of an unlocked boot loader. The savvy of the general populace hasn't yet reached the point where the downside is offset by a marketable upside. Hell, most folks still **** around happily with iPhones which lack any freedom whatsoever.
TidusWulf said:
It's all about quality control. Even if it is the fact that the vast minority root their phones, it's the minority of users who generate the majority of complaints (and that rule extends FAR beyond cell phone rooting, or cell phones in general). It takes 10 good comments to make up for one bad comment these days, and there just aren't enough good comments to go around.
How likely is it, if your unrooted phone has no physical damage that you'll suddenly find that it isn't booting up? How likely is it that, even if you don't want to do it, factory resetting your unrooted phone will fix whatever problem you're having?
Big Red's reputation, their entire brand, is built on reliability. NOT freedom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We can speculate all we want here. Verizon says they lock phones because it's better for the network.
http://bgr.com/2012/03/02/verizon-explains-locked-bootloader-stance-in-letter-to-fcc/
Whether or not anyone chooses to believe that is a matter of opinion, but this is pretty much as close to an answer from Verizon that we'll ever get.
Sent from my HTC One.
Very enlightening.
To comment on wanting the phones to be secure for corporate security... wouldn't the amazing track record of dev's who contribute here and other places sort of fly right in the face of that.
It seems that every single device that gains enough users has some kind of workaround or vulnerability to allow it to be unlocked. If the corporate world was worried about it, all they are doing is showing just how unable to lock it down the manufactures and carriers are.
Blah, blah, blah.... the network. that is just their excuse. They used it with the FTC to get by with rate limiting the LTE network. Some lame a$$ excuse about the CDMA legacy junk. Don't get me wrong I am sure that the old CDMA stuff may make the network less predictable, but not less stable. It is all about money, and VZW is the 800 pound gorilla that get to control what we have to deal with. Thank goodness we have talented and dedicated developers that almost always get around the blockades these fools put in place.
+1
Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk now Free
From what I was told over at elevate, the biggest problem they don't want to expierence again is our phones not being able to dial to the correct 911 dispatch. There apparently was an incident where a rooting user had a modified dialer apk that didn't allow him dial to the correct dispatch. In an emergency for Verizon that is worse case scenario. Then there's a lawsuit that might be filed to both HTC and Verizon.
CNexus said:
Yeah, they say it's for the reasons above.
But given that, to begin with, the rooting community is a tiny slice of all mobile phone users, and then Verizon users are an even smaller portion of that. So I don't see why they even care. I highly doubt that even if ever single Verizon customer who does rooting messed up their expensive device it would cost Verizon more than .01% of their revenue, if even that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gotta disagree. When you see people in this forum bragging about getting seven replacements, it does add up.
And it really is a PITA to figure out if it was user error or something wrong with the phone. It's all about risk mgmt
Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk 4
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/11/04/samsung-galaxy-note-7-cut-off-by-new-zealand-mobile-networks/ I even do not know how to comment it...
It isn't like one didn't know it was coming. Bound to happen sooner or later.
Sent from my BBA100-1 using Tapatalk
This should be illegal
Enviado desde mi SM-N930F mediante Tapatalk
Before it was just some rep saying it but now its official carriers are going to do this.
Time to backup efs and find a usable imei to change to
statikk1 said:
Time to backup efs and find a usable imei to change to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's going to come to that. I am sure I can find a suitable old phone to clone.
was obvious something like this was coming, they can't afford to legally force people to return the phones but since the recall is in effect they can legally disable them due to safety concerns. it's the same as I was reading the other day certain UK insurance companies are looking to void the insurance if a Note is anywhere near the incident. they are already banned on pretty much every airline, is it really worth putting up with a year of having to avoid people who don't want the phone in any situation it could cause a problem? the local hospitals in my area in the UK actually have a full ban on the Note as well if you are in the hospital with one you will be escorted by security off the grounds of the hospital and not allowed to return until you have got rid off the phone off site.
so yeah if you want to use a service and they have safety concerns and want to ban something that is entirely up to them, if you want to hang onto something that is potentially dangerous and take a chance that is up to you, but end of the day if it's their house it's their rules.
Belimawr said:
was obvious something like this was coming, they can't afford to legally force people to return the phones but since the recall is in effect they can legally disable them due to safety concerns.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but who is the "they" here?
What's in it for Verizon or Vodafone? Samsung can't block IMEI numbers. I'm genuinely puzzled why the industry is so hell bent on getting all of these phones out of circulation. The efforts they are going to are not commensurate with the levels of damage to people and property we have seen. Which incidentally, seem to be declining by the day.
The fact is that a single Note7 is about 100x less dangerous than a single Honda (or any other) motorbike. Does it not strike people as rather weird that all these agencies are trying so hard to get rid of Note7's? It does me.
I would have thought all that was needed was for Samsung to say they there's a problem and that you shouldn't use it and that if you do, it's at your own risk. But they are trying MUCH MUCH harder than this. It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Chippy_boy said:
It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One of the phone has inside key for immortality hidden by one of samsung's engineer and now they try to find it by recalling all of them. Some people new it beforehand and tried to get to the key by smashing phone which then got fire as a result which gave solid base to recall all units by Samsung.
The rep from Verizon explained it to me. He also said Verizon employed some psychic to find the key by simply touching every note 7 before sent it to Samsung...
He said he hates one of the psychic to the guts because he touches iPhones as well and this is not professional.
Chippy_boy said:
Yes, but who is the "they" here?
What's in it for Verizon or Vodafone? Samsung can't block IMEI numbers. I'm genuinely puzzled why the industry is so hell bent on getting all of these phones out of circulation. The efforts they are going to are not commensurate with the levels of damage to people and property we have seen. Which incidentally, seem to be declining by the day.
The fact is that a single Note7 is about 100x less dangerous than a single Honda (or any other) motorbike. Does it not strike people as rather weird that all these agencies are trying so hard to get rid of Note7's? It does me.
I would have thought all that was needed was for Samsung to say they there's a problem and that you shouldn't use it and that if you do, it's at your own risk. But they are trying MUCH MUCH harder than this. It's almost like they know something terrible about the phone and are not telling us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Belimawr said:
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gosh, I hadn't thought of that.
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
pinetreehater said:
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like Australia doesn't outlaw recalled products.
http://www.productsafety.gov.au/news/samsung-galaxy-note7
There is no wording to mention it's illegal rather that ACCC "strongly urges"
pinetreehater said:
I promise you they will get sued and lose if they do that here in the US. It is not the carrier's job to protect citizens, especially if they have no proof the phone is definitely going to burn.
I believe it is against the law to posses a recalled product in Australia and several European countries. Not so in the United States.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no idea where in the world it is legal or illegal to possess a recalled product but I agree wholeheartedly that there will definitely be lawsuits in the US if these phones are blacklisted. Without a doubt....
Question. If I see a robbery, rape, fire or an accident or some other public safety concern, should I attempt to dial 911 to assist or should I shrug it off because I am a rogue accident waiting to happen? Should I shudder in fear so much as to avoid calling altogether?
Should I report myself to authorities?.....lol
I'd say no because I am neither illegal or criminal, get it?
whoofit said:
I have no idea where in the world it is legal or illegal to possess a recalled product but I agree wholeheartedly that there will definitely be lawsuits in the US if these phones are blacklisted. Without a doubt....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having said that, here's me hoping that New Zealand users start suing which will serve to not give anybody else ideas :laugh:
http://www.droid-life.com/2016/11/0...imit-battery-60-continue-remind-users-recall/
Very soon Samsung will block all service.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
As long as Samsung gets replacement phones/refunds to all they promised, I don't mind the IMEI block so much. Problem is that 19 days ago, they promised me a replacement S7E would come "within 21 days". I contacted them yesterday about how this was going since 21 days is almost up, and...They have run out of S7E stock (black Onyx) and don't know when new stock is coming...
This is Australia though, where they have just sent the 60% thing through and no official IMEI block discussed, yet..
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk
Verizon in the USA is also considering flagging accounts and suspending service for those of us who have a Note 7. I purchased it outright for $864 and was totally blown away with how nice the phone is. I don't want to return it.
The first batch was recalled due to a failure of the batteries circuitry to stop the charge. Statistic tell me that if an electrical component were to fail (aka infant mortality) then it would occur very early in the like cycle of a device. My device was always left overnight charging (until I learned about the 80% rule and battery life), and would never even get warm to the touch on either the usb-C or wireless charging. I was confident that my chances were slim to have an issue, but I returned it when they got the second batch of phones.
The failure of the second batch is being blamed on internal battery layers that are so close that they short out causing the catastrophic shorting of the battery. Again, no one knows how close is too close for these layers as Samsung never disclosed the details of the design much further. My phone gets charged every 30-36 hours since I got it and I have not had any issues. My second (current) Note 7 is even cooler when charging than the first one and as I never charge about 80%, my risk is even less. (what ever "less than less than 1%" is) I figure if my batteries plates were shorting out, I would have known it by now. So I feel my current phone is also safe.
Samsung or Verizon can not force me to return it. What they can do is exactly what they are: constant texts about the recall and now Verizon has stated (the store rep told me this when I went to inquirer about any changes to the return policy) that after November 25th, they will be suspending service. They told me originally the date was Nov 7th, but it got moved back. So take it with a grain of salt. I sometimes think that the reps don't have a clue. They will give owners no choice if they do this. But the question I ask is do we really own this? Verizon has already returned every penny I paid for the phone back to me. So in a sense I have the phone now for free, and that's not quite right either.
With the S8 four months away and a new Note 8 5-6 months after that (if rumors are true), Samsung in Korea is giving some great deals for those of us who stay loyal. (Korean customers if they stay with Samsung not only get the same $100 (equivalent currency) credit we are getting in the USA, but are also getting an opportunity to upgrade with no penalty to the S8 and Note 8. The new S8 and Note 8 will be sold for 1/2 the list price to these customer! I only hope the USA will get this same offer.
I agree that airlines and businesses have the right to ban the phone, and the liability now rest 99.9% with those of us who keep the phone. We have been warned in many ways. Its a slippery slope. Where does our right to keep it cross the line and endanger someone else? I looks at this like the smoking ban in the USA. Restaurants use to allow smoking in the dining rooms. They then morphed into having a "smoking" and "non-smoking" sections. I cant tell you how many times I would be in the non-smoking section that was right next to a smoking section and still had to breath their second hand smoke. I was glad when all restaurants when smoke free as did most businesses. I happen to be on the other side of the fence on this issue.
I only hope someone here extracts the firmware and kernel and can adapt it to say the S7 or another note device. I'm guessing the new 8 series will be very similar.
Belimawr said:
lets say your phone does fail and causes considerable property of physical damage what would you then do? in the majority of cases the person will try to sue Samsung, the carrier or other so these firms are taking every effort to get the point across if you are still holding onto the phone it is entirely on you, if they take every option to stop people using the phone they are 100% free and clear as they have done everything possible to stop the use of a potentially defective device.
now on the other hand looking at all the places and insurance firms trying to discourage use of the phone or banning it, if your phone goes up in say a locker and damages the belonging of several other people would you be willing to cover those damages? because with the amount of action taken to discourage the use of the phone you are at a point where the user is 100% liable and firms will ban it because they know the type of person hanging onto the phone will likely be the type who would try to sue someone rather than admit fault and that is why people are trying to stop the use of the device "in their house" because they know it is likely them who will lose out and have to take legal action to recoup damages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Save your breath... common senses does not apply here. At least to some. Saying anything other than keeping the Note7 will just cause you to be branded as part of the conspirator.
It makes no sense what so ever to keep the phone outside of ego issues. Either "look at me I am a rebel" or "I've got a phone you can't get."
- Alternatives with nearly the same specs are out (Pixel and V20 both outperform the Note 7)
- support is going to be dead, Samsung and 3rd party
- it's not going to receive updates
- it's a hazard, Samsung didn't just kill one of their golden eggs for fun.
- keeping your phone affects more than just you.
I got a notification on Saturday from Samsung with said that on Jan 31st they are issuing another update which will prevent battery charging completely and disable mobile network access.
This is GREAT news, because it means there can be ZERO question of whether I'd be able to get a refund or not when I take my Note7 back when the S8 comes out (or whatever else I decide to change it to.)
Thanks Samsung!
(Of course the update won't affect me, so I'll carry on using my Note7 until then.)
This had also crossed my mind, if one owns Note7 until S8 Note8 is released, will samsung be willing to replace Note7 (a flagship device) for the next best thing equivalent at the time S8 Note8 is launched?
Another question also crossed my mind, regardless if I have everything that came with the phone and I am lawful owner of the phone but have no proof of purchase, will smasung still be willing to replace it for me or thats just a pipe-dream?
To my understanding, samsung cannot refuse to replace Note7 to anything but the best thing available at the time, so when note8 S8 is out etc, they shouldnt be offering S7 as a replacement at the time, what do you think?
Also, another thought (bare with me here) , samsung had 96% of 3million devices sold returned, of which 220000 were taken under very intense testing and investigations to reproduce faults and what not, so look at this now, once all is now done and clear to public, they have over 2.5 million note7 in stock that require a new safe battery replacement issue, reboxing and should sell worldwide or in some limited regions for a discounted price as a safe refurbs (some time soon I guess), they wouldnt just burry all that gold worth pile of Note7's now , would they?
I almost sense a new "Note7S" coming out some time very soon, carrying "S" on the back as being SAFE with probably reworked same capacity safe battery or with some 3000mAh battery and free wireless charging backpack battery pack case that samsung was selling for note7 phones.
Your thoughts?
Chippy_boy said:
I got a notification on Saturday from Samsung with said that on Jan 31st they are issuing another update which will prevent battery charging completely and disable mobile network access.
This is GREAT news, because it means there can be ZERO question of whether I'd be able to get a refund or not when I take my Note7 back when the S8 comes out (or whatever else I decide to change it to.)
Thanks Samsung!
(Of course the update won't affect me, so I'll carry on using my Note7 until then.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi how are you going to manage that this 31st January will not affect you? Please share as I still have note 7.
M.
xxxMJTxxx said:
Hi how are you going to manage that this 31st January will not affect you? Please share as I still have note 7.
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got all the updates blocked mate. Have a search on this forum and you'll find plenty of ways to do that, depending on what updates your phone has had already.
Ok
It had 60 percent battery cap update forced to me overnight last year but I flashed that with older firmware so it went back to 100 percent, I also installed old 6.3 package disabler and blocked all programs mentioned on forum.
Is there anything else would you advice to do additionally?
M.
Thanks
xxxMJTxxx said:
Ok
It had 60 percent battery cap update forced to me overnight last year but I flashed that with older firmware so it went back to 100 percent, I also installed old 6.3 package disabler and blocked all programs mentioned on forum.
Is there anything else would you advice to do additionally?
M.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm no expert mate, but I think you are good to go. You could try No Root Firewall as well I guess, but I haven't bothered. I have decided not to take ANY Samsung updates though - even for things like Smart Switch and Samsung Health etc - just in case the crafty barstards decide to hide something nasty in their apps.
They've been utter sheets about this whole thing. They have TOTALLY forgotten that they DO NOT own MY phone! It is MINE, not THEIRS!
Chippy_boy said:
I'm no expert mate, but I think you are good to go. You could try No Root Firewall as well I guess, but I haven't bothered. I have decided not to take ANY Samsung updates though - even for things like Smart Switch and Samsung Health etc - just in case the crafty barstards decide to hide something nasty in their apps.
They've been utter sheets about this whole thing. They have TOTALLY forgotten that they DO NOT own MY phone! It is MINE, not THEIRS!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha Ha I thought so!
I have no root firewall but not sure how to set it up being honest
I had Samsung Billing pushed to me few days ago but for some reason I cannot find it under applications in my mobile so I hope Evil Sam is not hidden there waiting to reactivate.
So really we will see after 31st what is going to happen, I really would hate to go back to Note 3 I still have, however it was also good mobile for few years back ago.
How many people still are using/own N7 in UK you reckon?
M.
xxxMJTxxx said:
:
How many people still are using/own N7 in UK you reckon?
M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly, I have no clue, but I guess it must be quite a few. They wouldn't be going to the trouble of writing software updates for just a handful of phones would they!
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones? For some clever people, they have behaved like they have the brains of goldfish.
Chippy_boy said:
Honestly, I have no clue, but I guess it must be quite a few. They wouldn't be going to the trouble of writing software updates for just a handful of phones would they!
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones? For some clever people, they have behaved like they have the brains of goldfish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the same update is world wide, altering it for different countries is a minor point as the majority of the changes comes in the form of the bands and network support, if they are removing all network support all they need is something that works on the exynos hardware, also the UK phones are the international phones so they are actually used across a load of countries so it is probably a large portion of the world covered by the same update as the UK.
also as I said there is little need for the networks to do their modifications since they all come in the form of network support that has been removed in this update.
No matter what it's going to be a nightmare. I wouldn't expect it to be as simple as walking into your carrier's store and swapping out for s8 - even though I do remember someone over at Samsung saying there was going to be a discount on "the next big thing". I'm in San Jose so Im going to HQ with mine, f em.
Chippy_boy said:
I wonder why on earth they didn't actually stop to think WHY people are not returning their phones?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're probably paranoid about being sued on the off chance someone else's phone blows up. It would be bad press if it happens again, probably followed by ignorant people saying that Samsung should have tried harder to stop it, etc etc, because some people have probably missed the whole thing till now and haven't noticed anything. Plus, Samsung wants to be able to say 100% recalled and returned.
FYI I don't own this device, just trying to answer this question. Maybe all of you who have it should put "Proud owner of the Note 7. Take that Samsung" or something in your sigs lol. It would be kinda funny to see.
Sent from my Amazon Fire using XDA Labs
in my country, Mexico, there have not been, any sort of batt capping updates, or any threatening messages about anything! as no burning reports here, the consumer bureau has not issued any order or authorization on the matter, here would be unlawful to capp or restrict the use of a legally owned device, so, all very cool over here
Mr.Ultimate said:
samsung cannot
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
BarryH_GEG said:
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All doesnt matter and all goes against the law, just risk of hazard makes them liable indefinitely until its back at their possession and no harm caused during the time.
Im no fain hearted and I dont own 7 figure bank account but I know its not a rocket science to bring giant companies such as apple or samsung to their knees, again, its not for faint hearted, I was talking from a legal stand point.
Darkness and high-cliff edge walking heights are usually appearing dangerous things for most, until they're certain and know there is nothing dangerous/hazardous in the dark and walking the cliff edge not without protections and precautions, metaphorically speaking.
Take a case where mobile phone gets on fire and one or many people suffers fatal consequences, days, months or even years from now, and investigators dig up samsung note7, who they gonna blame? Who has the case against who? Looking from even early state all cards are against samsung where there disaster happens or not samsung should be waist deep to do whatever necessary to sort their clients out. And yes they can try to attempt "write their own laws" warning consumers, threatening with return closing deadlines, refusing to take back dangerous devices back in, blocking devices, etc its their cards their game against everyone, not that they are more than the majority, I call it one against all and no matter how much money they are worth, it can take just few big cases and they will soon realize what wrong turn things can take, not that they would be willing to take such risks when and if case is brought to the round table.
Heck, even a 3 year ago my 10+ year Honda got a safety recall letter warning about potentially defective airbag systems and all was replaced at surprisingly my convenience cost free, even the car was bought second hand and I am probably 3rd or 4th owner of that vehicle, auto manufacturers know about how this game be played out i suppose, has been in this game before or seen it happen, consequences are clear to them if potential event take place, they would not only put someone deep in dirt, they would be there themselves as a consequence, so they took no risks, and I was pleasantly surprised at the same too how much forthcoming they were to sort this out, and note - this is 10+ year old product, not much different case to the one were talking about here, and I believe if they went this far with thing such as this, how much further they would have taken things if they would have found out that these vehicle models would have been a hazardous risk of fire and explosion while driving, parked at house garage etc? Go beat this statement
BarryH_GEG said:
Samsung can do anything they want. If you think whatever that is violates a law or your rights as a consumer its up to you and/or whatever governmental agency is involved to get them to do something different. That could take months. Many months. In the meantime you'll be stuck living with whatever decision they make - whether it's "legal" or not. Fighting multi-billion dollar conglomerates isn't for the feint of heart.
Sadly there are people who've tried to do the right thing that are stuck in Samsung's matrix and no law or governmental agency has rescued them. I can't imagine said agency's will feel a lot of sympathy for people who've held on to a phone declared potentially dangerous by its manufacturer for the length of time being discussed here. "I kept my potentially dangerous phone because I didn't like any of the alternatives" or "I was waiting for the Galaxy S8 to come out" seem like pretty self-serving reasons not to take advantage of all the remedies (including a full refund) Samsung provided. This isn't black and white and certainly not a typical "fit for purpose" issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I reckon you work for Samsung. You must do, or you would have quit your tiresome campaign by now.
And as for "Samsung can do what they like", well let's see how successful they are on Tuesday shall we?
I'll post my update from my unrooted Note7 on Wednesday.
Chippy_boy said:
I reckon you work for Samsung. You must do, or you would have quit your tiresome campaign by now.
And as for "Samsung can do what they like", well let's see how successful they are on Tuesday shall we?
I'll post my update from my unrooted Note7 on Wednesday.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've unrooted Note7 also, dont want to touch any mods yet until its definitely necessary
Mr.Ultimate said:
Im no fain hearted and I dont own 7 figure bank account but I know its not a rocket science to bring giant companies such as apple or samsung to their knees
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
While I'd love to see Samsung getting screwed right back, I can't imagine there won't be a final return date of some sort and them actually exchanging the phone for the new models. They just sound too cheap for that
BarryH_GEG said:
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not going to talk much, but that's not even serious case and analogy is just wrong. Compare this - buying matchbox to light the fire place at home but these matchboxes keep exploding and potentially setting itself on fire on random times (case #1) vs. match box that doesnt have 100% of the content or doesnt light up/doesnt burn every time you strike it (case #2).
Yes, its no brainer about law diminishing returns, if you dont have serious case and intelligent sought trough evidence, plan put together that will be serving to the finish line, and all , dreamland ego and being naive left behind - there is no chance to expect something good coming out of it.
We're talking about life threatening hazardous product here.
Have a great day.
BarryH_GEG said:
Read this. The poor sod has been fighting Samsung since 2015 over his SGS4. At the end of the day you have to put a value on your time. The amount of time you'd have to spend even with legal assistance is probably worth more than what you spent on your Note7. The time some here have spent fighting the fighting noose is probably worth half the cost of their phone.
I'm all for principle but there's also the law of diminishing returns. Life's too short to intentionally seek out battles. At least for me. If I'm going to invest heap loads of my time that could be spent doing other more entertaining and productive things it wouldn't be over a mobile phone. It would be for something far more noble.
https://www.engadget.com/2017/01/20/samsung-cant-use-in-box-warranty-to-kill-galaxy-s4-lawsuit/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Barry, my plan is to take my Note7 back to Samsung when I am ready (and not before) and ask for my money back, which I am very sure they will agree to, since they are obviously so very keen to get it back.
If in the monumentally unlikely event they say, "no, we'd like you to keep it please" (you're not REALLY suggesting that are you???!?) then I can file a small claim online in 20 minutes. It's a total no-brainer.
Sorry to disappoint you.