[Q] why HOX is 700euros in cypru??? - HTC One X

i just wonder 700euros only in cyprus???
i realy love this phone but cammon

people can charge whatever they want. that's why you're supposed to go on the internet to search for the lowest price. i don't think anyone here is going to know the person you're talking about, so it's just cluttering the forum with another post. there are people on ebay with listings over $1000 for this phone. i paid 619usd and that included UPS ground shipping. i did not pay taxes. if you want to know the answer to your question, then ask whoever you're talking about why they are charging that much. who knows? it might have s-off or a full accessory kit.

Related

Are O2 acting legally to refuse to supply unlock codes?

I'm not sure of the legal basis for O2 refusing to supply onlock codes (which they have done with me 3 times now, despite others' success), so I have decided to complain to OFCOM.
1) I don't see how they can control what I do with a phone I have bought privately, SIM free on the open market.
2) I have no contract with them, so they cannot bind me to anything. They have tried telling me I can have the unlock code when I have had my PAYG SIM for a year; however, this is nothing to do with the xda. These were two separate transactions. There is no term in my SIM contract relating to a particular phone.
3)the original owner still has a contract with them and is using his SIM in his new phone, thus they are not losing out. Furthermore, by refusing to unlock it they are getting two customers from one contract.
4) It is anti-competitive, as I cannot choose to go to a cheaper network (I want to use T-Mobile for the free voicemail). They could raise their PAYG tariff astronomically, and I would still have to use O2 or my phone would be useless. I am also unable to use a foreign SIM card when abroad, thus am tied in to expensive international calls, with the money going to O2.
5) What would I do if O2 go bust or cease to trade, or fail to get their licence renewed, etc? My phone would be absolutely useless.
Below is the link I have used to register my complaint. If they are inundated with complaints, hoefully they will do something about it.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/contact_ofcom/general_complaint
Cathy
I guess I am playing Devil's Advocate, but I have to say that I see there point.
Otherwise, ANYONE could buy an XDA2 for just one example, sell it on at a high profit from the subsidisation cost he/she paid/will pay through the contract term, and make a tidy profit there and then, whilst still selling it to you for less than an unlocked SIM free handset from the likes of eBay.
I appreciate your views, BUT, to the letter of the law, UNTIL the original purchaser fulfills his 12 months, its technically not even HIS to sell to you.
Its a grey area, but to the letter of the law, that's the situation.
We ALL know that in reality it doesn't work that way, and we all sell stuff on before the 12 months is up, knowing that we as the original owner are liable to ensure we see out the 12 months.
BUT, in your case however, you are not talking about a day to day ownership, but arguing a point of law because of the difficult situation you are in.
And as I outlined, this is one of the very reasons why, to the letter of the law, its not even meant to pe permissable to even sell it on to you.
It becomes the property of the original purchaser, only at the point he has satisfied his 12 month term, and only then is he really meant to sell it.
We all know this isn't what happens, but it DOES mean we are not in any position to argue law, if we choose to agree to buying it.
Otherwise, i could buy a £120 XDA2 from onestop, with a contract bringing it to £360 all in, over a year, BUT sell it straight on to you now for £400, unopened, sealed, brand new in effect, sim free, and make a tidy profit of £40, AND spread the rest of my repayments to O2, IF they were to then instantly agree to give you the unlock code.
An unlikely scenario to say the least.
(All this of course aside from the fact that the XDA2 can easily be unlocked using any of the tools on this site - including the latest ROM version I beleive - so I am not sure waht the purpose of the post is Cathy - why not just unlock it like I did, to use it on Orange?)
im with you Shadamehr. Why bother complaining when its so easy to unlock it anyway. i unlocked mine without problem using the tools available on this website.
...However, there have also been posts from people who have used the download tools and have then experienced problems. I have the ROM version that requires the hard reset and using bootloader mode, or whatever it is. I am not a computer expert, and I have forund from experience that tampering with things that are at present working is not a good plan. It is very time consuming, and I don't feel competent to deal with any problems that arise.
Cathy said:
I have the ROM version that requires the hard reset and using bootloader mode, or whatever it is. I am not a computer expert, and I have forund from experience that tampering with things that are at present working is not a good plan. It is very time consuming, and I don't feel competent to deal with any problems that arise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely agree with your right and demand to get services in such a case. However, for anyone that does not want to go through the unlock process with the bootloader and hard reset (the 'old' method), I advise you to upgrade. As far as I know all major sellers now provide upgrades. These will also upgrade your radio to version 1.10.x, which is a very much improved radio version. Well worth the upgrade. After that upgrade the simple upgrade tool (the 'new' method) works.
Cathy, I never meant to offend - just to point out the basic premise that on a point of law, you have no legal basis to ask for the unlock code, because to the letter of the law, he had no legal right to even sell you it.
It's a bit hard insisting on an unlock code from the netowrk, for a device that the owner shouldn't even have sold you anyway now is it?
I know we ALL do it QUIETLY, but that doesn't make a whole lot of difference when we need to kick up a fuss and publicise it does it?
But believe me, the Unlock method you refer to, if you have radio stack version 1.05, is REALLY easy enough, and in fact, the LEAST dangerous, in that it isn't actually CHANGING anything unlike the others, as it is only working out what the unlock code is - it doesn't actually unlock it - it only works out the code for you, so it could be argued it's the least intrusive/dangerous.
You then just put another network SIM into the XDA2, so it gives the obvious unathaurised SIM message, and then asks you to enter the unlock code - just exactly the same as if it was supplied by the network.
Failing that, and if you still are unhappy, which I understand, then the new GENUINE, OFFICIAL ROM Upgrade is now available from the O2 UK website.
It's a long process of around an hour all in, but it updates to the latest version whereby you can run a simple unlock tool on the phone to do it all for you.
Hope this is of some use, and if any of us can help more, just ask here...
Thank you...
ahhh, but...
I would contend that although the owner no longer has the phone and has sold it, he is in fact meeting the subsidation requirement by maintaining his contract.
I would also contend or pose the question that what if you broke the phone (by mistake)?
As long as the contract period is still upheld by the original owner, than the provider has no right to hold the unlock code of the now, transferred phone. That's why there are cancellation fees and long-term contracts.
JS
If a locked phone presents a problem for a potential customer then they should, at the outset, request that the phone be unlocked and that your signing the contract depends on this, the reason, if asked, is that you may have to use a 3rd party sim in another country and you dont wish to carry 2 phones, or see why you should.
Re: ahhh, but...
wiredup said:
I would contend that although the owner no longer has the phone and has sold it, he is in fact meeting the subsidation requirement by maintaining his contract.
I would also contend or pose the question that what if you broke the phone (by mistake)?
As long as the contract period is still upheld by the original owner, than the provider has no right to hold the unlock code of the now, transferred phone. That's why there are cancellation fees and long-term contracts.
JS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course there IS mate.
Because under UK law, the network is within the law to with-hold the code to the actual contract holder, never mind the person they re-sold the handset on to. (Save for them charging a 'small' admin fee and supplying you with it IF you pay of the equivalent of the remainder of your contract).
So they are WELL within their rights to do what they are doing.
Let's not forget here, we are talking about heavy subsidisation by the networks towards the original handset.
My XDA2 cost £119. With my contract, that will be still only £360 or even less, all told.
i can't even buy an equivalent Pocket PC itself for that sort of money, never mind something as swanky as an expensive XDA2 that would cost loads more.
This is becuase the network is so heavily subsidising the cost of it.
And yet you expect them just to say "certainly sir/madam, with pleasure" when you ask them for an unlock code part way through your contract?
Er yeah, right.
Put it this way, the day they do, is the day our handsets start costing £400 or even £500 WITH A CONTRACT.
Let's be real folks!
Again, im with u Shadamehr :wink: . The networks have every right to deny you the unlock code as technically it is still their phone until the contract is fully paid as the handset is heavily subsidised. the networks would lose a lot if the phone was unlocked out of the box or they gave the code away before the contract was up. As i said previously, why bother complaining to them when there are tools available on this website for unlocking the phone , pre and post update. it is just a waste of time and energy when u can have the code in less time than it would take to get through to them to explain to them why they should giv u the code. im not a phone techy but i followed the instructions on the pre update tool and it worked without problem giving me the code. i put my old Vodafone SIM in and entered the code the tool gave me. it worked without a problem . they obviously arent giving you the code Cathy, so cheat like the rest of us :wink: .
Re: ahhh, but...
Shadamehr said:
wiredup said:
I would contend that although the owner no longer has the phone and has sold it, he is in fact meeting the subsidation requirement by maintaining his contract.
I would also contend or pose the question that what if you broke the phone (by mistake)?
As long as the contract period is still upheld by the original owner, than the provider has no right to hold the unlock code of the now, transferred phone. That's why there are cancellation fees and long-term contracts.
JS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course there IS mate.
Because under UK law, the network is within the law to with-hold the code to the actual contract holder, never mind the person they re-sold the handset on to. (Save for them charging a 'small' admin fee and supplying you with it IF you pay of the equivalent of the remainder of your contract).
So they are WELL within their rights to do what they are doing.
Let's not forget here, we are talking about heavy subsidisation by the networks towards the original handset.
My XDA2 cost £119. With my contract, that will be still only £360 or even less, all told.
i can't even buy an equivalent Pocket PC itself for that sort of money, never mind something as swanky as an expensive XDA2 that would cost loads more.
This is becuase the network is so heavily subsidising the cost of it.
And yet you expect them just to say "certainly sir/madam, with pleasure" when you ask them for an unlock code part way through your contract?
Er yeah, right.
Put it this way, the day they do, is the day our handsets start costing £400 or even £500 WITH A CONTRACT.
Let's be real folks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Shadamehr,
Clearly you do not understand. Let's suppose: As you stated, the phone would normally be 360, but since the network subsidize the phone, they sell it for 199. Fair enough. I know I am responsible for a contract term of 1 year. Done.
I have later sold the phone after just 3 months. I am STILL responsible for the one year contract... still paying back their "subsidation!" So, what the BIG deal whether I still own the phone or not--the contract obligations are still being met!... own the phone or not.
Like I said before, WHAT IF I broke the phone? What's the difference, I am still obligated to continue the contract--phone or no phone! AND, they still get their SUBSIDATION!
Geez... and, it's no different in USA!
Don't be so bloody stupid.
No one ever said it doesn't HAPPEN. Or are you blind?
What I CLEARLY said is that just because it goes on, unspoken, quite regular, doesn't help one little bit when it comes to wanting an unlock code from the network provider within year one.
May I suggest you re-read my post again?
And PLEASE - if you are in the USA, dont make the mistake of assuming that things must automatically be the same.
If you buy a car on H.P. (slightly different, admittedly), then you CANNOT automatically sell that car on in the UK, if you are still paying back the H.P. on it, and to do so can be illegal. That is a simple given fact that most people in the UK know about - so please don't assume for one second that things have to be the same.
If you want to settle this definitively, then feel free to ring OFCOM, and then post your response here for us to share. But I offer you don't need to, as I already posted what the situation is in the UK.
Besides, let me end by saying as LOUD as I can, as you seem to have missed it...
The day that the networks start giving out Unlock codes within the first 12 months, is the day our handsets suddenly cost 100% more money to obtain, even WITH a contract included.
YOU might want that mate...
But us sensible sorts in the rest of the world surely DON'T want to see an average cost increase of at least £100 on an XDA2 for example, just to cover those people who want an unlock code from the start.
There is a method already in existance for getting a phone network free...
It's called BUYING SIM FREE/UNLOCKED. And if you are going to tell me that it costs MUCH MORE to buy it that way, as opposed to on a contract, now why on earth might that be I wonder... now let me think...?
Oh dear me - not because on contract the networks heavily subsidise them by any chance - well there you go - would you look at that!
Sorry for being flippant, but isn't that what I already said in my post, and I now find I am repeating it here...
(And as an EDIT to this post, as I realised it hasn't sufficiently covered your post, let me remind you that one little detail - no matter whether you DO continue to pay your bills in respect of it, as the original owner. UNTIL the subsidisation period is met, even with you still happily paying for a phone you sold, then the networks do not give out the unlock code, and are within their rights under UK law to do so - so your argument has no merit, or productive outcome anyway - it doesn't make a jot of difference to the new owner anyway, until YOU have paid your 12 months - which is also covered in my post).
Shadamehr said:
Don't be so bloody stupid.
No one ever said it doesn't HAPPEN. Or are you blind?
What I CLEARLY said is that just because it goes on, unspoken, quite regular, doesn't help one little bit when it comes to wanting an unlock code from the network provider within year one.
May I suggest you re-read my post again?
And PLEASE - if you are in the USA, dont make the mistake of assuming that things must automatically be the same.
If you buy a car on H.P. (slightly different, admittedly), then you CANNOT automatically sell that car on in the UK, if you are still paying back the H.P. on it, and to do so can be illegal. That is a simple given fact that most people in the UK know about - so please don't assume for one second that things have to be the same.
If you want to settle this definitively, then feel free to ring OFCOM, and then post your response here for us to share. But I offer you don't need to, as I already posted what the situation is in the UK.
Besides, let me end by saying as LOUD as I can, as you seem to have missed it...
The day that the networks start giving out Unlock codes within the first 12 months, is the day our handsets suddenly cost 100% more money to obtain, even WITH a contract included.
YOU might want that mate...
But us sensible sorts in the rest of the world surely DON'T want to see an average cost increase of at least £100 on an XDA2 for example, just to cover those people who want an unlock code from the start.
There is a method already in existance for getting a phone network free...
It's called BUYING SIM FREE/UNLOCKED. And if you are going to tell me that it costs MUCH MORE to buy it that way, as opposed to on a contract, now why on earth might that be I wonder... now let me think...?
Oh dear me - not because on contract the networks heavily subsidise them by any chance - well there you go - would you look at that!
Sorry for being flippant, but isn't that what I already said in my post, and I now find I am repeating it here...
(And as an EDIT to this post, as I realised it hasn't sufficiently covered your post, let me remind you that one little detail - no matter whether you DO continue to pay your bills in respect of it, as the original owner. UNTIL the subsidisation period is met, even with you still happily paying for a phone you sold, then the networks do not give out the unlock code, and are within their rights under UK law to do so - so your argument has no merit, or productive outcome anyway - it doesn't make a jot of difference to the new owner anyway, until YOU have paid your 12 months - which is also covered in my post).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The debate was a discussion of whether network should indeed allow unlock codes to be made available before the contract term--of which I replied.
My comments addressed your arrogant, definitive statements surrounding why carriers do not release unlock codes. That is, and what you believe to be, a dependency between contracts and subsidation. However, my opinion was simply the two are mutually exclusive.
Law is the law. While you might prefer subsidation and being locked into a carrier, others may prefer the contractless freedom--of which, some are available.
In addition, I think your condescending, rude and utterly poor communication skills are of an entirely new thread. I suggest a filter between your brain and keyboard as clearly your intuition to write without consideration is overwhelmingly powerful.
It is simply a discussion.
Best regards,
JS
Mmm - I've spent seven years as a die hard internet user, from forums, to newsgroups, to chat rooms and all in between.
I learned a LONG time ago, that the rudest, most arrogant and obnoxious posters are never the brainless ones, but rather, just like you so emphatically prove, the ones that try and hide their attacks behind smooth words, and flowing language.
Consequently, I'll grant you one thing mate... You probably the rudest and most offensive to post to me, in a wee while.
Another thing I learned a long time ago, is not to bother arguing.
I will simply say, the post, the entire thread, is there for all to see, and more importantly, all to judge as they see fit.
Whilst I have no reservation in saying this thread is indeed one of my more flippant posts, compared to the help I try and chip in with round here, I have no suspicions whatsoever that I will be the one judged to be the perpertrator round here - after all, I merely pointed things out. Its not MY fault that you don't LIKE what I had to report. Hey, I never even said that I LIKED it either - I'm merely messenger, pointing out a few home truths.
And not letting you get away with it that easily, I would just remind you that once again, if people DO wish to prevail themselves of a handset that is NOT network locked, the facility already exists for them to do so, and its called BUYING SIM FREE.
Or did you miss that yet again.
Making it as clear as possible for you, in case you haven't worked out yet that I have NO reason to defend the networks per se, nevertheless mate, if a Network heavily subsidises a handset, provided you agree to stick with them 12 months, not tariff change until after 4 (or 6) months, and not get an unlock code until after the twelve months, then it couldn't be simpler mate...
You either take it, or you leave it.
But if you go into it with open eyes, as you surely should, then you have no right, or place, or reason, to later post in here that you think its unfair that the network won't give you an unlock code in the first twelve months.
If you don't like that idea, you DON'T take out the contract mate.
ITS THAT SIMPLE.
And if you want to, you can then buy a SIM FREE handset.
But please, don't complain about the cost being too high then. Of course it is - that is the REAL price.
The price you are used to, on contract, is a heavily subsidised one, available to you provided you AGREE to certain conditions etc.
Note that word "agree". Because it means that once you accept it, then there is little point or purpose to whingeing on later, about something that you, as a consumer, of your own volition and free will, AGREED to.
Now please, my Email address should be in my profile.
If you want to flame me or troll me anymore - by all means do so by Email, and keep your incesant ramblings OFF this board.
Like I said - both our comments are there for all to see.
More importantly, they are there for others to judge.
I'm more than happy to let the members judge me.
I trust you are the same.
Now leave it please. (Or rather, troll and flame me as much as you feel the need to, but use my email in future instead of boring everyone else in this forum).
Shadamehr said:
Mmm - I've spent seven years as a die hard internet user, from forums, to newsgroups, to chat rooms and all in between.
I learned a LONG time ago, that the rudest, most arrogant and obnoxious posters are never the brainless ones, but rather, just like you so emphatically prove, the ones that try and hide their attacks behind smooth words, and flowing language.
Consequently, I'll grant you one thing mate... You probably the rudest and most offensive to post to me, in a wee while.
Another thing I learned a long time ago, is not to bother arguing.
I will simply say, the post, the entire thread, is there for all to see, and more importantly, all to judge as they see fit.
Whilst I have no reservation in saying this thread is indeed one of my more flippant posts, compared to the help I try and chip in with round here, I have no suspicions whatsoever that I will be the one judged to be the perpertrator round here - after all, I merely pointed things out. Its not MY fault that you don't LIKE what I had to report. Hey, I never even said that I LIKED it either - I'm merely messenger, pointing out a few home truths.
And not letting you get away with it that easily, I would just remind you that once again, if people DO wish to prevail themselves of a handset that is NOT network locked, the facility already exists for them to do so, and its called BUYING SIM FREE.
Or did you miss that yet again.
Making it as clear as possible for you, in case you haven't worked out yet that I have NO reason to defend the networks per se, nevertheless mate, if a Network heavily subsidises a handset, provided you agree to stick with them 12 months, not tariff change until after 4 (or 6) months, and not get an unlock code until after the twelve months, then it couldn't be simpler mate...
You either take it, or you leave it.
But if you go into it with open eyes, as you surely should, then you have no right, or place, or reason, to later post in here that you think its unfair that the network won't give you an unlock code in the first twelve months.
If you don't like that idea, you DON'T take out the contract mate.
ITS THAT SIMPLE.
And if you want to, you can then buy a SIM FREE handset.
But please, don't complain about the cost being too high then. Of course it is - that is the REAL price.
The price you are used to, on contract, is a heavily subsidised one, available to you provided you AGREE to certain conditions etc.
Note that word "agree". Because it means that once you accept it, then there is little point or purpose to whingeing on later, about something that you, as a consumer, of your own volition and free will, AGREED to.
Now please, my Email address should be in my profile.
If you want to flame me or troll me anymore - by all means do so by Email, and keep your incesant ramblings OFF this board.
Like I said - both our comments are there for all to see.
More importantly, they are there for others to judge.
I'm more than happy to let the members judge me.
I trust you are the same.
Now leave it please. (Or rather, troll and flame me as much as you feel the need to, but use my email in future instead of boring everyone else in this forum).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mr. Shadamehr,
Please don't patronize me with your comments like, "If you want to flame me or troll me anymore - by all means do so by Email, and keep your incesant ramblings OFF this board." If you review your postings above, it is your posts that "ramble" (i.e. are the longest!)
Last time I checked, freedom of speech is well within the bounds of this board. Your decisive statements, most of which are opinion-driven, are your position only. I'm not sure anyone complained of the cost of the PDA's--if you review the posts, no one actually did. I have plenty of income, so cost isn't an issue for me... so, why would you assume it does?
And, may I say, that this conversation will last as long as it needs to; again, isn't freedom awesome?
All I'm saying is: we agree law is the law. The debate lies in whether it is fair or not (personal opinions); as consumers, we have the ability to persuade the industry.
I'll refrain from the "are you STUPID mate?," "Or did you miss that yet again" statements as they are useless, condescending remarks that provide no value to the debate.
At what point do you believe you're more intelligent than the rest of us?
JS
Freedom of speech is indeed a truly wonderful thing.
But YOU were the one that said:
"In addition, I think your condescending, rude and utterly poor communication skills are of an entirely new thread."
Implying this should be kept well off the board, or at least, THIS thread!
But NOW you are saying:
"And, may I say, that this conversation will last as long as it needs to; again, isn't freedom awesome? "
I'm sorry, there's not a lot I or anyone else can do to help you, if you yourself are unsure as to what you want, and change your mind to suit, as and when you feel like it.
This whole thread was about Networks with-holding the Unlock code within the first twelve months.
I have just CHECKED again, and my first post on this topic, was an indication of the current position, based on my OWN issues I had, just like Cathy, and what OFTEL (as it was then), informed me was the law, and the issues around it.
I posted that information here, and as such, was only the messenger for what I am all too aware is unpopular knowledge. Nevertheless, I was nothing more than messenger.
Because that information was not popular reading however, you took it on board to somewhat hold me to blame, or at very least to turn the argument around onto me.
Suit yourself.
I end, after having demonstrated how you blow hot and cold in the same debate (a frightening quality indeed), simply by referring the Learned Gentleman to my last post, where I said:
"The members, ultimately will decide who they feel is right, and who is in the wrong..." (or similar)...
And in that respect nothing has changed.
Now, finally, you DID originally say you wanted this kept off the board, so I implore you to do so now.
But of course, you being you, you later contradicted yourself by then saying you will keep this going as long as you want, so I doubt you will leave it now.
Funny how you change your mind to suit yourself best.
But give the matter thought, because I really can't be bothered. You see:
"I learned a long time ago never to argue overly long with fools. All they ever do is bring you down to THEIR level, and of course once they manage that, they then go on to beat you with their vast experience over you they have in that role..."
And in an effort to reach closure, can I make something clear where your WHOLE debate is wrong...?
You say:
"All I'm saying is: we agree law is the law. The debate lies in whether it is fair or not (personal opinions); as consumers, we have the ability to persuade the industry."
Forgive me for completely correcting you...
This is Cathy's post.
And she called it:
"Are O2 acting legally in with-holding the unlock code"
Clear as day, a question on whether the issue was legallly correct or not. Nothing at all, as you seek to save grace by now implying, about the relative morals of it. I can't even see where that aspect creeps in other than your OWN posts.
And my response, pointing out the LEGAL position, was thus therefore a completely correct, and completely appropriate response to her thread.
You are therefore completely incorrect in saying this is a thread about the MORALS of it - it was a CLEAR question on the LEGALITIES of it.
If you wish to have a moral debate about the relative rights or wrongs of the netoworks doing this, then I would be HAPPY to join you in such a debate.
But as this would be a NEW aspect, then I would expect an apology from you (which there is no chance I will get), for you completely having wrongly judged me, by saying this debate was already one about morals.
It isn't - please read Cathy's title again.
My response to her, that you so deride and find worthy of argument, was thus totally appropriate - she asked if O2 were acting LEGALLY (it's in the title).
I replied explaining that they were - from my own experinces with OFTEL.
I trust, and I mean this fairly and not conflictory, that you now realise that I had done noting wrong. This was NOT a debate, as you so keep saying, about the MORALS of it.
That post would be entitled:
"Are O2 acting immorally or unreasonably by with-holding the unlock code"
And in that post, your comments would be far more correct then, and appropriate, and I couldn't fault them half as much.
But, er, this is NOT that thread though.
This is the "Are O2 acting LEGALLY..." one.
Sorry for keep repeating it.
Well, that gave me a laugh during lunch time....

hard to find accessories- requests welcome

I have just made a contact through my company where i will be able to get accessories for the xda2s and other HTC devices at a good price.
Im that fed up of searching for things for the xda2s and only getting a couple results off ebay so i decided to do something about it.
i haven't got prices but i should be able to get some deals on:
GPS car kits
Car kits
Batteries
Cases
or anything else which you might want
the only thing is that i will have to buy some of these items in bulk so i just want to get a feel for what peeps want.
PM if you want a specific item i can get a price for you
please don't delete this post because im technically selling. Thinking about it im not selling anything I haven't got anything to sell at the moment maybe think of it as a service for those hard to find accessories.
your comments welcome
Rob
I don't even know if what I want exists yet. But you can see what I want in the following thread:
Link
If you have anything like that (or can get it) let me know...

Theft of Donations ???

Hi,
I've come across individuals who are selling the xda-unlock software on eBay, for personal profit I assume.
I think this is ethically wrong.
Is anyone on the xda-developers forum aware of this?
I am posting this message in the hope that those who agree that this activity of stealing from those developing the software, will e-mail the person (see below) to tell him that what he is doing is wrong and should stop immediately.
Noteyou may have to copy and paste the following hyper-links into your browser's address field for them to work)
See;
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=69929&item=5206235467
I tracked the perpetuator down and confronted him with this breach. His response was pretty much "Go away! I can do what I want" The sad thing is, the person has no idea about the software he's selling and is misleading people by telling them that one version (which he has) is suitable for all PDA's.
Here's his e-mail address.
[email protected] , with which he accpets Paypal payments on-line.
And this is his profile on eBay:
http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=mrtrader888&iid=5206235467&frm=284
The odd, brave, eBay traders are complaining about this in the Feedback facility but the feedback system isn't perfect.
See:-
http://feedback.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayI...val=&page=2&frompage=-1&iid=5206235467&de=off
I hope everyone who appreciates xda-developers.com 's efforts will help stop this person from making money out of their efforts by telling them by e-mail how they feel about it.
technologyfusion.
The only way to deal with this kind of issue is to post an ad every day offering the software for free and directing the people to this site, that way nobody buys from the seller and there is a chance that those directed to the site may donate once they unlock and or upgrade their phone.
The other option is to email every bidder with the details.
I am not a vindictive person, generally, but that email is just begging for about 10,000 newsletters per day. I always believed that educating people is far more effective than punishing them. I think Daily Dumb Question will be a good start for him to explore.
I don't mind people reselling free tools. at the moment they take advantage of poor advertising of our tool.
I now created a wiki page for it, so it will become easier to find for people.
when it rises in google's index, it should become easier to find.
willem
If you're an eBay user, you can send private email to the bidders, warning them that what they are bidding on is available for free. They might not like finding it out after they've already bid, but they will probably appreciate knowing that they shouldn't pay any more for it, and that they can get it right away off the internet. (And if they don't mind a stain on their eBay record for 6 months, they can cancel their bid if it's not too late.)
But surely before bidding on eBay, they should have done their homework. A simple Google search would have found it.
Technically eBay could get you for "bid interference" or some such thing if you emailed users like that, but that won't happen unless they turn around and report you. Be careful, though: in several cases before, when I've given advice to bidders about a bad or misleading piece of merchandise, they've mistaken me for the seller and chewed me out!!! So I don't generally do this unless I'm prepared for an angry response. And I won't go out of my way to do it -- I'll just do it if, say, I was searching for something similar on eBay, and I stumbled across someone's unfortunate bid. ("Think I should warn them? Nah. No good deed goes unpunished.")
Speaking of theft of donations.... Has anyone noticed [deleted]

We should have a Buy/Sell/Trade forum

Hey why don't we have one???
I recently found someone on this site that got a Jam from me. I would rather give the great XDA-Developers.com members a chance before trying to sell it on eBay.
I totally agree!
Me too. I've had a lot of help from this site, and have recommended it to friends who also have found it very useful. I posted this a couple of days ago:
"I know that this is not a selling forum, but I've had a lot of help over quite a long time from this site so would like to help out fellow members if I can. If this is not acceptable to the moderators I'm sorry, but here goes:
I've got an XDA2 that has been dropped. The screen is fine, but it's permanently locked into "Calendar" mode and cycles through all the calendar views and options. In all other ways it is in very good condition. It receives and makes calls, and all the functions are available, but I can't always turn it off. It's boxed and complete with cradle, charger, earphones, case, software, manuals, etc., and I'm sure that someone with a bit more time than me could make use of it. It's not stolen, or from any other dubious source - I've upgraded and just don't have the time at the moment - I wish I did, but that's the way it goes".
I think that the whole XDA-developers community could benefit if, for instance, the seller donated, let's say, 10% of the agreed selling price to the site. I think that's fair and gives XDA-developer members the chance to benefit rather than the auction sites. I looked at eBay in order to sell the item I've mentioned above, and I'm new to Ebay, but it looks over-complicated for what I want to do with an item that I know is faulty.
There may be other issues that might make things difficult, but if people are honest in their descriptions I don't see a big problem. Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware - if you're not happy about something, don't do it.
I think there's room for discussion on this matter.

A new kid on the block? Opinion, anybody?

Being a pda freak, I'm always looking for a better device. Having just sold my JAM, I am inclined to switch to the HTC Universal-based model. However, being unlucky to be based in Kazakhstan (the notorius "Stan"!), I have found it very difficult to talk to the online stores such as eXpansys or MobilePlanet. They simply do not make deliveries to this region.
However, I found this website, www.qtekuk.com which, after I wrote to them, responded that they would be able to deliver to Kazakhstan.
My quesiton is, has anyone dealt/heard of these guys? I need a second opinion before I make a money transfer.
Replies at soonest are much appreciated as I need to make up my mind (there is one guy in town waiting to sell me the item but his price is not as attractive).
Thanks and regards
Try some other sellers too.
Hi I noticed you didn't get answer yet to your question. I can't tell much about that,but my advice would be ,that if you're planning to buy a gadget like that,you could also spend a few extra dollars and actualy call them to make an idea about the company. Also,read throughout the forum and you'll find a lot of sellers especialy in uk from whitch people bought already.
Good luck.
qtekuk.com = SDD
"qtekuk.com" are none other than SmartDevicesDirect. I don't know if they have become the official distributor in the UK, or if the domain and site are just designed to look that way. (qtek.co.uk still redirects to agbglobal, Qtek's parent company).
Search the forum if you want other people's experiences of them (good and bad). Personally I prefer not to put my trust in companies that use mulitple identities, or that charge credit cards up front for stock they haven't got. Plus I hate web sites that play cheesy music as soon as you land on their home page. YM, of course, MV.
Hey striker_69, sorry I missed your post before. I would say don't bother with this firm. £610 is outrageously expensive. You could buy one from someone trustworthy on eBay for around £150-200 LESS than that. Since you are in Kazakhstan you would need to pay via bank transfer probably (a lot of PayPal fraud occurs in Eastern Europe and also in India, Thailand, nigeria, etc as I am sure you are aware).
Hmm, can't really comment, but after seeing that guy on the intro to their site, well, 'I wouldn't buy a used car from him!'
Hope it works out for you
Gareth

Categories

Resources