Related
Forgive me if this is already a known quantity around here, but I only just found out this evening that orders placed through Sprint for new devices can no longer be billed to your account. Apparently we now have to pay by credit or debit card up front when we want a new device.
dead78 said:
Forgive me if this is already a known quantity around here, but I only just found out this evening that orders placed through Sprint for new devices can no longer be billed to your account. Apparently we now have to pay by credit or debit card up front when we want a new device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup found out a couple of months ...........i believe there should b a couple of threads on it
lballer69 said:
yup found out a couple of months ...........i believe there should b a couple of threads on it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they're saying it changed it on October 5. yet another way we're taking it in the pants as a result of Sprint getting the iPhone and another reason to never bother ordering a phone from Sprint.
yep blame that on the iphone
apple started this a few years ago, so no cash at all, even in person at the apple stores for iphones, as people were buying them stateside, and selling them overseas for huge markups, since they were not available at the time
gotta love Apple lol
Amd4life said:
yep blame that on the iphone
apple started this a few years ago, so no cash at all, even in person at the apple stores for iphones, as people were buying them stateside, and selling them overseas for huge markups, since they were not available at the time
gotta love Apple lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep, you're 100% right.
man, I was on the fence before about upgrading my Epic...there's no way in hell I'll do it now. when you look at everything that's gone lately, Sprint's shown they're willing to screw over their entire customer base for the sake of luring in new customers with this gimmick Apple crap. now they've got their big sales figures and they can all pat each other on the backs for a job well done.
do the other carriers require up front payment for their devices?
Just so you guys know, sprint is actually the last of all the big 4 carriers to get rid of bill to account for new phones. Its a fight against fraud. Cutting costs is necessary to keep providing the unlimited data plans. Saving money by reducing fraudulent purchases is one of the best ways to do this. There is a reason behind every choice the company makes. It may not always sound like the best when you first hear it but the reasons why typically justify the changes. Sprint tries really hard to provide what other carriers no longer do but there at reasons that other carriers have cut things, and with sprints new high end world phone lineup we are running into the same things.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
lookout4theyeti said:
Just so you guys know, sprint is actually the last of all the big 4 carriers to get rid of bill to account for new phones. Its a fight against fraud. Cutting costs is necessary to keep providing the unlimited data plans. Saving money by reducing fraudulent purchases is one of the best ways to do this. There is a reason behind every choice the company makes. It may not always sound like the best when you first hear it but the reasons why typically justify the changes. Sprint tries really hard to provide what other carriers no longer do but there at reasons that other carriers have cut things, and with sprints new high end world phone lineup we are running into the same things.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
frankly, the "we need to do this to keep unlimited data" excuse has lost its appeal. all I'm seeing is a fledgling company pulling back on service in order to accommodate the iPhone and keep itself in business. as it stands now, I live in an area where my data service is horrendous. calls to Sprint are essentially pointless since I'm given an endless string of excuses as to why I can't download faster than .2 Mbps on 3G and why I can't stay connected to 4G for more than a couple of minutes. I've been with Sprint for over 10 years and I've seen all aspects of quality within the company deteriorate considerably in that time. The simple fact is that they're network couldn't accommodate the demand of all the Android devices on it; I can't even imagine what the surge of new iPhones is going to do to service.
meanwhile, we're told that every courtesy we received is being taken away in order to assure a high level of service. that would be fine except there is no longer a high level of service to maintain. I've actually had Sprint tell me that their changes aren't so bad because they're simply doing what all the other carriers do; therein lies the crux of why having 3.5 carriers dominate a nation of roughly 400 million people isn't good for anyone. a struggling company in that setting has no incentive to do anything but keep its doors open. they've lost the will to differentiate because they no longer have to; their sole concern is to avoid being subsumed by one of their competitors. most investors (myself included) doubt Sprint's ability to sustain itself beyond the next couple of years because they're a poorly managed company who've become notorious for making extremely poor decisions - this recent backpedaling from WiMax is one of the worst.
so yeah, great we get unlimited data. we'll see how well that unlimited data that Sprint's stripped away all incentives for holds up when an already super-saturated capacity is unable to withstand the demand from this gadget they've bet the farm on.
I am usually on the side of the consumer but, this time, I think if you don't have the money to pay for it, why are you upgrading? Wait a month and get it when you have the money. I don't see why it was ever an option to begin with.
The only reason I am still on Sprint is becaue they have the number one best plan for my situation. If I didn't want unlimited data, or the best cutomer service, or the coolest new phones, I would go with MetroPCS. They have the best plan for someone like that. Shop around. Get what is best for you. I'm not preaching. I just want every customer out there to be as happy as can be.
It is probably better this way. When you charge to credit card, they don't add the weird few dollars here and there taxes in the taxes and surcharges sections (this is in addition to the tax they charged on the phone purchase itself) I probably got another $5-$6 in random taxes I had to complain about to get back.
I agree that data speeds on Sprints unlimited plan sucks. I will contest to that. Sprint's network simply is being overwhelmed from all the traffic they get from all the smartphones out there. So Sprint came up with a plan. The plan is going to cost $10b over time I think it was. To come up with the money Sprint has to cut cost and create more revenue. To cut cost Sprint got rid of certain luxuries we were receiving as consumers. To create more revenue Sprint fought to get the Iphone on board (Sprint announce this was their biggest sales day ever). Simple economics. Remember Sprint is a far 3rd behind the top two cash cows we know as AT&T and Verizon. Sprint is not financially stable right now but, making these necessary moves will help us as consumer in the long run. I know you pay now, and, you want it now, but, all we can really do is wait till Sprint finish's with their $10B project in your area.
Seriously? You all look at this as "exploiting the customer"? What they got rid of was effectively an interest free credit card that people were abusing. No, doesn't make any business sense at all, certainly not.
True exploitation would be them deciding to charge interest on your balance.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
buggerritt said:
I am usually on the side of the consumer but, this time, I think if you don't have the money to pay for it, why are you upgrading? Wait a month and get it when you have the money. I don't see why it was ever an option to begin with.
The only reason I am still on Sprint is becaue they have the number one best plan for my situation. If I didn't want unlimited data, or the best cutomer service, or the coolest new phones, I would go with MetroPCS. They have the best plan for someone like that. Shop around. Get what is best for you. I'm not preaching. I just want every customer out there to be as happy as can be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive been doing bta for years without problems from sprint. The problem was me, with the subject the post is about. Im pretty impulsive at times. More that once ive had financial department calling me wanting money because im past due. I couldnt pay the price of the phone (usually full price because i was in mid contract) and my bill up to date in a month or less. I kept telling myself, after i would get my account completely paid up to date, that i wouldnt do this again and would only get another phone if i had the money in hand to pay for the phone. Sometimes financial emergencies happen that are unforseen and they can really put a person behind for awhile and its a struggle to get caught up. Thats one of my character defects, i admit it (for the first time). Its not sprint's fault for this, its mine for being impulsive and irresponsible when it comes to finances.
I dont know why i felt the need to say this, but it had something to do with the subject and i shared my experience (and foolishness) with you guys.
Shame on me, i know!
I'm right there with you man! I sold a Dell Venue Pro so I could get my Epic Touch and I still have an Atrix on At&t and am looking at over $500 if I leave At&t. All that so I could get a 1/2 inch bigger screen and a slightly faster phone. Oh well at least I got a good one, no Los or any other issues thus far.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I just paid my Sprint bill the other day. With activation, the phone, and my normal bill, it was $578.06. No more bta? Who cares. If you don't have the money, you probably shouldn't buy the phone anyway.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
Verizon still allows billing to your account. This last carrier nonsense isn't true
heygrl said:
Verizon still allows billing to your account. This last carrier nonsense isn't true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's what I thought. quite frankly, this argument that deadbeats have ruined the bta is a bunch of b.s. because that would be a punitive major and not something supposedly introduced to insure a high level of future service. the reason why bta is a solid option is that it means not having to rely on Sprint to refund your money in the event you decide to return a recently purchased phone. what this new move does is allow Sprint access to the customer's money immediately, which is actually a better move from an accounting standpoint since funds collected can be immediately invested. however, my biggest beef with this change of policy is that like all the other changes we've endured in recent weeks, they're all being done to accommodate the iPhone. like many others, I'm not remotely convinced of Sprint's able to even stay in business long enough to see all these supposed service improvements take place, so right now (and for the immediate future) all that's happening is Sprint is pulling back on customer services to pander to the iPhone.
Like another poster said this is to accommodate fraud. I work for another big name phone company and this is a way to keep people from calling in and ordering multiple phones on an account and having them shipped and once you see that these phones were ordered and you did not order them you call sprint and they have to foot that bill. If there is a credit card used it is tied to the person who used it and fraud is dealt with easier through the CC companies because they have more info. The FCC are coming up with all these rules to help us as consumers. It kinda makes it harder but safer. Anyone who knows your information can order on your account and that is scary. We see people on this forum who call in and tell lies all the time. Fruad is no joke. If it makes it safer why not?
Sent from my hand crippling Epic 4g Touch
Thanks for sharing this. I think you hit the nail on the head and I wish more people were willing to look at their own situation objectively and take some personal responsibility.
Sprint is a business, making business decisions. If they need to make changes to stay viable, then they should make them. If I decide at some point I don't like them, I can go somewhere else. It's the beauty of free enterprise and consumer choice.
oscarthegrouch said:
Ive been doing bta for years without problems from sprint. The problem was me, with the subject the post is about. Im pretty impulsive at times. More that once ive had financial department calling me wanting money because im past due. I couldnt pay the price of the phone (usually full price because i was in mid contract) and my bill up to date in a month or less. I kept telling myself, after i would get my account completely paid up to date, that i wouldnt do this again and would only get another phone if i had the money in hand to pay for the phone. Sometimes financial emergencies happen that are unforseen and they can really put a person behind for awhile and its a struggle to get caught up. Thats one of my character defects, i admit it (for the first time). Its not sprint's fault for this, its mine for being impulsive and irresponsible when it comes to finances.
I dont know why i felt the need to say this, but it had something to do with the subject and i shared my experience (and foolishness) with you guys.
Shame on me, i know!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who orders from Sprint anyway? There's always some place cheaper to get the phone of you're eligible for an upgrade. Ordering from places like Amazon or Wirefly at the very least saves you tax.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
My local Best Buy is great about returns and will price match any other vendor that has a unit in stock. I've never ordered from Sprint.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
As of tommorow (1/26/2013) the unlocking of subsidized cell phones becomes illegal in the united states of america. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!
i politely ask all of my fellow xda members to please sign this petition at the white house.gov website to try and stop this.
here is the link http://wh.gov/yA9n
Yes I noticed this earlier today
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105...king-of-smartphones-becomes-illegal-saturday/
Signing the petition now. All US XDAers should sign it. 100k people sign on to it, and the White House says they will respond.
Much of this is actually being done by the Library of Congress, and its chief....yes, the "Librarian of Congress", no joke. Turns out he's been there since 1987. Could be time for a change.
Signed! Everyone needs to sign this. :victory:
Signed as well.
If it was for me, all phones would be unlocked. After all, isn't signing a 2-yr contract with a hefty ETF enough of a tie to the carrier anyway? Why is there a need for a technical one as well? The iPhone 5 proves this can be done.
The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired.
Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
I believe this only applies to new phones.. and you have 90 days from the date of the law to unlock your phone without any penalties.
page 16 of the docket: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-26308.pdf
so most of us are okay. but it sucks for people buying new phones. Might be okay on used phones, but I haven't gotten to that part yet.
chances are they'll revise the law in 2 years.
Seeing as T-Mobile is doing away with subsidized phones and the other carriers will probably follow suit much the same as international markets then one would no longer have a need to lock into a2 year contract unless of course there are to be plan discounts. That said there should be no reason for a carrier to refuse to unlock a phone that a consumer is now paying full price for, which is pushing $600 to $700 for the newest high end models.
I certainly don't agree that we should be paying upwards of $700 for something that has a realistic life span of 2 years, i would expect a laptop of the same price to last 5+. However i do agree that if you purchased a phone at a lower subsidized price and signed a two year contract then no you should not be able to Sim unlock it. Now if you pay your early term fees and are clear of your contact them there should be no reason for a carrier to deny unlocking said device.
If you are a person that travels abroad and need an unlocked phone them you should take that into consideration at time of purchase or contact the carrier to deal with it then.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
blakdrew said:
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see why not...but whats the point? Everyone should know about this by now, its been mentioned on various websites all over the internet.
Also, no offense to the OP but this petition is pretty useless, I mean, we all know how good petitions (ones pertaining to mobile phones) have worked before. Companies don't pay attention to it, so I doubt Congress will. The whole issue is redundant seeing as whoever wants to unlock their phone, will end up unlocking it, whatever the law may be. Its not like the government will set up random checkpoints to take your phone and make sure its not unlocked. People are just over reacting like they usually do. Its been illegal to download music and movies for a few years now and that doesn't seem to stop the people doing it. The only thing I see the this law harming are the various websites and ebay auctions that make money from unlocking phones. The truth is compared to the old Nokia days, smart phones(some, not all) are pretty easy to unlock.
One of the provisions is if you buy a phone from a 3rd party youre exempt.
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Today its phones, tomorrow its......?
blackangst said:
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know. Even the cell phone industry (CTIA) basically admitted in its arguments to the Library of Congress that the reason they want this is purely in order to protect their business model (based on subsidies) and has nothing to do with copyright. It's bizarre to claim that it can possibly be a violation of copyright to use a physical device that you fully own the way you want. And it's pathetic that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world in terms of having a rational competitive wireless market.
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
mike-y said:
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
explodingboy70 said:
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, sir, I believe YOU are missing the point if you honestly believe this is about carriers trying to recoup their $$$ from subsidized phones. Seriously? NOTHING in the bill states carriers can unlock phones after a contract is fulfilled, or that they have to. Therefore, after said contract is fulfilled, you STILL own a device you dont have control over.
Do you own a house? Do you have a mortgage? If so, you know that just by paying off the mortgage it doesnt give you any more property ownership rights that you didnt have when you signed the mortgage. Once you've signed it, you legally own it, even though you still owe money on it. Until this overreaching law took effect, it was that way for phones (for the most part).
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You forgot an important point in your comment. YOU HAVE TO PAY 20-30USD PER MONTH FOR DATA! Therefore, your cost of adding a line is 120$+20x12=360$. So the profit is not as great as you mentioned.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda app-developers app
What's next? Putting restrictions on oxygen?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Signed and reposted on Hackforums.
http://www.hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3226550
Hope you don't mind.
I linked this thread, and quoted the contents of the OP.
Figure it'd be good to get it out to a broader audience.
45,000 more signatures needed.
Go ahead and put my name on it. I'm too lazy to register, and I don't want a bunch of new e-mails trying to get me sign a bunch of other petitions.
And to the debate: Use an Obama phone, Save your money, and BUY a phone outright. The faster they see that this hurts the big TWO (AT&T, Verizon), it will change.
If you're impatient and want a phone NOW, understand the consequences. You are licensing that phone, and may never own it. And you'll also be advertising for whatever company you go with.
Yes, I know I'm advertising for T-Mobile in my signature. That's because I think they are honest, and very beneficial to the XDA community.
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidized price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WELL SAID! BRAVO! This I would support as well as many others!
I have been on this side of things for a long time! I used to live in Seattle, had Sprint and Verizon because ATT and T-Mobile are both very sketchy up there, Verizon is top dawg and since Sprint uses Verizon's towers and is cheaper than anyone else, you get the best phones (imo) and best value, not to mention unlimited data.
That being said, I recently moved to Dallas, and Sprint/Verizon down here are really terrible! I mean Seattle, West Seattle I was pulling upwards of 70mb down and 50-60's up, ridiculous speeds, but made it a lot better when you paid your bill because you felt like you were getting something! Down in Dallas I never saw it go past 10-15mb. Not to mention my signal bars never reached full unless I was under a tower.
Tmobile, my current provider (only for another week or so) is just terrible everywhere. Best I have seen them anywhere is 6-10mb, and I'm sorry but they claim to have better call quality than ATT now, which is horse$hit! Dropped calls, taking over a minute just to start dialing, and when you do talk, lets just say its not good.
I just think that payment plans should be based on where you are at in their coverage area. (If you leave state/town for a trip that's on you). That's like car companies making you pay retail price for a used car same as a new one! Would you do it?
I hope you guys know they unlocking your device is legal. What's illegal is buying an unlock code from online sources. You can no longer just go online and pay a small fee (like $10) for the unlock code. You can call your service provider (T-Mobile as an example) and ask them for the code. (They shouldn't have a problem giving it to you.) Another way of legally unlocking your device is by doing a method like the one in this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2024514
Or you could have someone that knows coding and have then do it for you. (As long as it is not through an online coding site you are good.)
Source: T-Mobile employee and target mobile employee.
----------------------------------------------
I'm full of great idea's, but don't have the time to create them or learn the coding to create them. If you want to make one of my ideas a reality just message me and I will give you my idea as specific as possible.
ideas:
Spoiler
-launcher/lock screen
-line rider type game where you control the character
-2d fighting game like art of fighting for the SNES
-multiplayer fps where you create your own map with a creative mode (minecraft style)
-roller coaster tycoon style game
-many more!
Just message me which idea you want info on and I'll tell you!
----------------------------------------------
Well said Ariana....
Service provider must ... unlock the device at any time and at no charge.
At least that's what the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is recommending.
It's warm day in February when I have something good to say about the CRTC but they do finally appear to cracking down on service provider fees, lengthy contracts, and cell phone locking.
I mention this because the title of this thread sounds like the opposite of ongoing discussions in Canada about how North American consumers are paying more than cell phone customers the world over.
More information by search for "Buyer's remorse" and CBC or go to the Canadian governments CRTC website to download a full pdf of current proposal.
(I'd give you the links, but I'm newly registered here
I just have a quick question. I want to switch to prepaid straight talk. I'm currently on at&t and want to leave them... If I unlock my phones myself and switch to straight talk and slowly pay off at&ts etf, will our phones get locked out? I want to make sure of I make this switch that at&t won't lock us out. Also keep in mind that the 2 phones I have with AT&T wasn't purchased from at&t, I sold those phones to buy the phones we have now. Any information would be greatly appreciated
The phones are yours. AT&T can't do anything to them. Even the ETF is related to the contract, not the devices. Meaning, its your contractual obligation to pay the ETF to terminate the contract. But nowhere in the contract will you see the devices are in any way compromised if your terminate (much less devices you bought from a 3rd party). They can no more "lock you out" of your phones, anymore than they can lock you out of your car or home.
NEXT program excluded, under the traditional "discount" or subsidized phone pricing model, even the phones you buy from AT&T don't belong to them once you've bought them. Folks keep thinking the phones somehow belong to AT&T until you fulfill your 2-year contract. But if you read the contract terms, it doesn't say any such thing. The device belongs to you solely, the moment you pay for it.
redpoint73 said:
The phones are yours. AT&T can't do anything to them. Even the ETF is related to the contract, not the devices. Meaning, its your contractual obligation to pay the ETF to terminate the contract. But nowhere in the contract will you see the devices are in any way compromised if your terminate (much less devices you bought from a 3rd party). They can no more "lock you out" of your phones, anymore than they can lock you out of your car or home.
NEXT program excluded, under the traditional "discount" or subsidized phone pricing model, even the phones you buy from AT&T don't belong to them once you've bought them. Folks keep thinking the phones somehow belong to AT&T until you fulfill your 2-year contract. But if you read the contract terms, it doesn't say any such thing. The device belongs to you solely, the moment you pay for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright thank you. My next concern is insurance.. What if we break our phones? I'm not worried about upgrading new phones, I use swappa for that
I understand that that's normal, last year there was a workaround so I just figured I'd ask to see if there was currently any similar options, as I'd love to check out some custom roms, Thanks for any info!
Just pay them off. The actual amount may be far less than you think especially if in the last year or two of the contract.
I know from stories I heard from friends that AT&T can be very persistent and aggressive about a customer reneging on a contract... for years.
They may blacklist the imei.
If you're having trouble with your plan, and need to lower costs try talking to their Customer Loyalty Group ie Retainment Dept. They can offer you service deals and packages not normally available. The squeaky wheel gets the grease...
blackhawk said:
Just pay them off. The actual amount may be far less than you think especially if in the last year or two of the contract.
I know from stories I heard from friends that AT&T can be very persistent and aggressive about a customer reneging on a contract... for years.
They may blacklist the imei.
If you're having trouble with your plan, and need to lower costs try talking to their Customer Loyalty Group ie Retainment Dept. They can offer you service deals and packages not normally available. The squeaky wheel gets the grease...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Paying the device off outright isn't possible. Every other phone I've ever had from them I was always able to get them to let me unlock it. I don't think I've ever seen a carrier that DOESN'T blacklist a stolen phone lmfao. Thx for the info, if finances end up tough that'll be good to know. The pixel 6 pro came out this past October. It'll be awhile before I've had it a year or two lol.
Doesn't always matter if you pay them off or not. I'm not sure if this policy is new, but when I went to purchase my 6Pro I wanted to pay it off then and have it unlocked for development. I was told that even if I paid it off, they wouldn't issue an unlock for 6 months after my purchase. Heard that from 2 different sources at different locations. Kindof stupid if you ask me... if it's my device, and I pay you for it in full, I should get to develop on it how I want... not how you want me to.
Rescue9 said:
Doesn't always matter if you pay them off or not. I'm not sure if this policy is new, but when I went to purchase my 6Pro I wanted to pay it off then and have it unlocked for development. I was told that even if I paid it off, they wouldn't issue an unlock for 6 months after my purchase. Heard that from 2 different sources at different locations. Kindof stupid if you ask me... if it's my device, and I pay you for it in full, I should get to develop on it how I want... not how you want me to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, this is why I always buy unlocked and never from any carrier! I would put it on a credit card and pay it off as fast as I could with interest before I'd succumb to their BS!
Rescue9 said:
Doesn't always matter if you pay them off or not. I'm not sure if this policy is new, but when I went to purchase my 6Pro I wanted to pay it off then and have it unlocked for development. I was told that even if I paid it off, they wouldn't issue an unlock for 6 months after my purchase. Heard that from 2 different sources at different locations. Kindof stupid if you ask me... if it's my device, and I pay you for it in full, I should get to develop on it how I want... not how you want me to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's in the contract and usually not a problem. I have a AT&T N975U (now unlocked) and an unlocked N975U1, not much difference between them. That surprised me however the optimization for both is nearly identical which pleased me
Go with whatever version suites your needs/price range best...