Develop Bugs

H2O MMS or others Ulock codes

If you are having an issue getting the Lumia 900 unlocked or trying to set it up on an AT&T MVNO. Please post something here. I started to think about it, when I bought the phone I thought.. ah I will just get it ulocked and bring it to T-Mobile. Then I was told about H2O in the process, even then I hit an AT&T wall. I did not unlock the phone, I am using it on AT&T through a friend so to speak H2O. The network settings app is on the marketplace if you are outside the US, it's not inside the US. I got off the phone with Nokia 2nd tier and he hinted toward AT&T blocking it. Then I started to think about what I was purchasing and how really nothing else we purchase is like this. You buy a car it's yours, you buy a computer it's yours.. why are phones different? I called my class action attorney client and had a discussion with him about it. Nothing may come of it, but if it does I need a list of those in the same boat, you bought the device out right no contract and can't use it outside of AT&T and that includes features like MMS not functional and a simple config utility would fix. Please do not post about how it won't work becuase blah, blah, blah. I just need a list of people so if anything comes of it I can say here is a list of others with the same issue.

Jumping on the bandwagon...
Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk 2

Right there with ya. I however went with Straight Talk which of course I cant use my MMS as well until the unlock comes available. I am curious if I can proxy my wifi to an international proxy so that I can access outside the USA market apps? Anyone have any ideas on this?

You can add me to the list of those that bought the phone at full price. I never called AT&T to ask for an unlock code. Do I need to do that first to prove that I'm at a disadvantage caused by AT&T?

awagner said:
I just need a list of people so if anything comes of it I can say here is a list of others with the same issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please count me in, I can send you my data in a private message, just let me know

21stNow said:
You can add me to the list of those that bought the phone at full price. I never called AT&T to ask for an unlock code. Do I need to do that first to prove that I'm at a disadvantage caused by AT&T?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's see what he says.. I contacted H2O today, as soon as they realized it was WP7, nope can't get MMS. I saw the pics of the network setup out of US and it has all those settings we need. If we need to contact AT&T I will try that tomorrow, but I think this is a bigger issue.

count me in too.

In.

I know people have been saying to give up calling ATT. But I just called for the first time tonight, and thought I'd share some of the interesting bits I got. Well interesting to me because they weren't what I was expecting in comparison to everyone else's. Anyways~,
~I asked about dates and a supervisor told me that on 5/7/2012, this past Monday, that their notes for the Lumia 900 were updated by corporate.
~What it essentially says is that they can't say anything. lol
~When I pushed a bit more she told me that it was updated to say that they have no expected date as of now for the release of unlock codes. That they won't release any now because it's an exclusive and otherwise ineligible (Which everyone has already heard.). And that customer service reps are urged to not even submit requests because they all will instantly be denied on the spot.
~Also they told me I was the first one they've heard of trying to unlock this phone.
EDIT: Also, I know this was just adding to the pile of. "Reps Don't Know Squat"
EDIT: Meant to post this on the other thread. Oh well~ Anyways~ I'm in too I guess.

sushirom said:
I know people have been saying to give up calling ATT. But I just called for the first time tonight, and thought I'd share some of the interesting bits I got. Well interesting to me because they weren't what I was expecting in comparison to everyone else's. Anyways~,
~I asked about dates and a supervisor told me that on 5/7/2012, this past Monday, that their notes for the Lumia 900 were updated by corporate.
~What it essentially says is that they can't say anything. lol
~When I pushed a bit more she told me that it was updated to say that they have no expected date as of now for the release of unlock codes. That they won't release any now because it's an exclusive and otherwise ineligible (Which everyone has already heard.). And that customer service reps are urged to not even submit requests because they all will instantly be denied on the spot.
~Also they told me I was the first one they've heard of trying to unlock this phone.
EDIT: Meant to post this on the other thread. Oh well~ Anyways~ I'm in too I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For this thread, I don't think it matters. The way I look at it, if they are gonna control where I can use a phone I paid full price for (Even if it was on CL) without a contract. Then they should support it to get my MMS working on their MVNO! Could you imagine if other things you buy where like this. You buy that nice new Nissan Fronteir, you can only drive on Nissan roads. Let's say you bought a GTE rotary phone 30 years ago and you could only use GTE as long distance company we would be like FU I am gonna do what I want!

awagner said:
For this thread, I don't think it matters. The way I look at it, if they are gonna control where I can use a phone I paid full price for (Even if it was on CL) without a contract. Then they should support it to get my MMS working on their MVNO! Could you imagine if other things you buy where like this. You buy that nice new Nissan Fronteir, you can only drive on Nissan roads. Let's say you bought a GTE rotary phone 30 years ago and you could only use GTE as long distance company we would be like FU I am gonna do what I want!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HHAAAAA~! I SAID THE SAME THING OVER THE PHONE. (Except I used Toyota). They also brought up that I didn't buy the phone directly from them, like that it was a point for them. And I go, "Yeah...that kind of just furthers my point. How does AT&T hold exclusive rights to block me from using something the way I want when I didn't even purchase it from them?) And they just repeated "AT&T has exclusivity and the phone is currently ineligible after that.

Too funny!! I love it.. well great minds think alike or it's just the damn truth. ha ha

awagner said:
If you are having an issue getting the Lumia 900 unlocked or trying to set it up on an AT&T MVNO. Please post something here. I started to think about it, when I bought the phone I thought.. ah I will just get it ulocked and bring it to T-Mobile. Then I was told about H2O in the process, even then I hit an AT&T wall. I did not unlock the phone, I am using it on AT&T and though the network settings app is on the marketplace if you are outside the US, it's not inside the US. I got off the phone with Nokia 2nd tier and he hinted toward AT&T blocking it. Then I started to think about what I was purchasing and how really nothing else we purchase is like this. You buy a car it's yours, you buy a computer it's yours.. why are phones different? I called my class action attorney client and had a discussion with him about it. Nothing may come of it, but if it does I need a list of those in the same boat, you bought the device out right no contract and can't use it outside of AT&T and that includes features like MMS not functional and a simple config utility would fix. Please do not post about how it won't work becuase blah, blah, blah. I just need a list of people so if anything comes of it I can say here is a list of others with the same issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Count me in

im in

i'm in.
i've called AT&T 6 times since logging my customer care case and they tell me nokia hasn't released the codes. LOL

OP - you're wasting everyone's time. When you buy a branded phone you know full well that it will be locked to a carrier. Buying the device at full retail does not entitle you to take your device elsewhere. AT&T (and all other carriers) spend months and millions in R&D to develop and test the phone before bringing it to the market, so it is completely logical that they wish to get a return on investment in form of service revenue. In case you're wondering, carriers do not make money off hardware, that's not the business they're in.
There is no rule or law that requires carriers to remove SIM lock. They do it as a courtesy when they see fit, but they are not required to do that by any means. How do you think AT&T was able to deny iPhone unlocks for so many years if it was illegal?
Anyone who bought the phone before checking with AT&T about their unlock policy have no one but themselves to blame, simple as that.

AnyMal said:
OP - you're wasting everyone's time. When you buy a branded phone you know full well that it will be locked to a carrier. Buying the device at full retail does not entitle you to take your device elsewhere. AT&T (and all other carriers) spend months and millions in R&D to develop and test the phone before bringing it to the market, so it is completely logical that they wish to get a return on investment in form of service revenue. In case you're wondering, carriers do not make money off hardware, that's not the business they're in.
There is no rule or law that requires carriers to remove SIM lock. They do it as a courtesy when they see fit, but they are not required to do that by any means. How do you think AT&T was able to deny iPhone unlocks for so many years if it was illegal?
Anyone who bought the phone before checking with AT&T about their unlock policy have no one but themselves to blame, simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Please do not post about how it won't work becuase blah, blah, blah" Hmm guess you didn't read that part. This is not just about unlock codes. "
H2O MMS or others Ulock codes" I don't even need an unlock code for H2O. Besides I already made my case to someone who does this stuff for a living, maybe nothing, maybe something... didn't I already say that somewhere?

awagner said:
"Please do not post about how it won't work becuase blah, blah, blah" Hmm guess you didn't read that part. This is not just about unlock codes. "
H2O MMS or others Ulock codes" I don't even need an unlock code for H2O. Besides I already made my case to someone who does this stuff for a living, maybe nothing, maybe something... didn't I already say that somewhere?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A laywer willing to sue for money? Color me surprised

AnyMal said:
A laywer willing to sue for money? Color me surprised
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, I know , we will see what he says.. never know might see something we don't. After all, I am a techy, not a lawyer. May be interesting.. maybe not. He did bring up what it says on the box. T-Mobile has a seal that says by opening this product you accept terms yadda yadda. AT&T does not. No terms and conditions on the box at all that I saw.

awagner said:
I know, I know , we will see what he says.. never know might see something we don't. After all, I am a techy, not a lawyer. May be interesting.. maybe not. He did bring up what it says on the box. T-Mobile has a seal that says by opening this product you accept terms yadda yadda. AT&T does not. No terms and conditions on the box at all that I saw.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't have to post terms on the box, they are usually on the back of the sales receipt. As long as the phone is fully functional in the environment it was designed for, there is just no basis for complaint. I wouldn't spend a dime on the lawyer if I were you. Just thinking logically here, not trying to start a war

No more unlocking phone

What is this crap. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105...king-of-smartphones-becomes-illegal-saturday/

Not a fan of this

Heres my thoughts. Everybody will ***** and complain about this, but nobody will do anything about it. They will not tell us what we can and cant do with OUR own property. Sure, its now illegal to unlock our phones. The solution is simple, stop buying phones from all the carriers! Everybody stop buying phones and watch them all crumble without us. If everybody is not willing to stick together and make a stand....then dont ***** about the problem.
Sent from my SGH-I747M

While this still does suck you guys do realize this just means carrier unlocking right? Like unlocking so you can use an att phone in tmobile and vice versa. Plus it doesn't sound like it applies if you buy an unlocked phone or get the code from your carrier.
Sent via carrier pigeon...

Already a thread on this.... http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2116859
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium

So much for America " the land of the free"

"Free," as in market and due rights. No one said anything about manufacturers property.
Am I the only person in America who never goes to the AT&T store besides when I initially buy my phone? If it breaks, I fix it. It there's cellular issues or internal problems I go online and send it in. People are too dependent on the actual carriers. This is why they enact such measures like this because they know a majority of Americans see no other choice but to be subjected to such laws. From home if I unlock my phone I guarantee AT&T can't detect it and since I never go in to the store, they can't deny insurance that I never buy or warranties I always break after flashing the my phones an hour after I receive them.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda app-developers app

Mr Patchy Patch said:
Heres my thoughts. Everybody will ***** and complain about this, but nobody will do anything about it. They will not tell us what we can and cant do with OUR own property. Sure, its now illegal to unlock our phones. The solution is simple, stop buying phones from all the carriers! Everybody stop buying phones and watch them all crumble without us. If everybody is not willing to stick together and make a stand....then dont ***** about the problem.
Sent from my SGH-I747M
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As soon as Google releases an LTE-compliant Nexus (or X Phone, or whatever else they may call it in the future), I will never purchase another carrier/OEM-branded phone again. In fact, I am seriously considering holding on to my S3 until such a phone comes out. LTE is becoming more and more ubiquitous, so it's only a matter of time until an unlocked, unbranded stock Android phone comes out that supports it. After all, the Nexus 4 has LTE capability (not an LTE antenna, though), and some crafty tinkerers managed to get it to connect to LTE.

There is a similar thread over on the TMo side (which is what I have), but I posted this in there.
It is NOT going to be illegal for you to unlock your phone. It WILL be if you do it without the permission of your carrier. That means that T-Mobile and AT&T will have to do it for you. For Verizon (and Maybe Sprint but not sure), there is an FCC requirement that any devices utilizing 700MHz for LTE cannot be locked.

Woody said:
There is a similar thread over on the TMo side (which is what I have), but I posted this in there.
It is NOT going to be illegal for you to unlock your phone. It WILL be if you do it without the permission of your carrier. That means that T-Mobile and AT&T will have to do it for you. For Verizon (and Maybe Sprint but not sure), there is an FCC requirement that any devices utilizing 700MHz for LTE cannot be locked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This fact alone doesn't make it any less BS. We, not the carriers, are the rightful owners of the phone. As such, the decision of what we want to do with our phone should be made by us, not the carriers. Why should we get permission from the carrier to unlock the phone? If, for instance, I buy a Chevrolet, should I be legally required to obtain permission from General Motors before using another manufacturer's parts?

Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from and it is BS. But from what I have read on this, it is for phone that are purchased under contract (subsidies). In that case, most people do not own the phone. It is more of a lease until you pay it off at the end. Once the phone is paid off, then you can unlock at will.
As for your Chevy example, let me play devil's advocate. You buy a Chevy and while you don't specifically have to ask them for permission to use a Ford gear shifter, your warranty probably states that only factory supplied or authorized materials can be used, otherwise you void the warranty upon installation. You intall the Ford gear shifter and somehow that destroys your transmission and shreds the gears. Is this covered by GM? They will probably say no because you installed an after-market device that caused the problem.

Woody said:
Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from and it is BS. But from what I have read on this, it is for phone that are purchased under contract (subsidies). In that case, most people do not own the phone. It is more of a lease until you pay it off at the end. Once the phone is paid off, then you can unlock at will.
As for your Chevy example, let me play devil's advocate. You buy a Chevy and while you don't specifically have to ask them for permission to use a Ford gear shifter, your warranty probably states that only factory supplied or authorized materials can be used, otherwise you void the warranty upon installation. You intall the Ford gear shifter and somehow that destroys your transmission and shreds the gears. Is this covered by GM? They will probably say no because you installed an after-market device that caused the problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just found the article linked below, which states that only phones purchased after January 26, 2013 will be affected by the new law. In other words, we are not affected by this law.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/25/tech/mobile/smartphone-unlocking-illegal/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
I'd be interested in looking into the logistics behind ownership of subsidized phones. I was always under the impression that a phone subsidy was an incentive to entice customers to sign a two year contract; after all, we are charged an early termination fee if we break the contract early, yet the device is ours to keep. Moreover, there's no formal lease agreement.
I completely agree with your analogy, but it's more applicable to rooting, rather than unlocking. From what I understand, rooting a phone automatically voids its warranty, regardless of manufacturer. Unlocking a phone, on the other hand, never voided the warranty. After all, no additional software is installed as part of the unlock process.

Woody said:
Don't get me wrong, I understand where you are coming from and it is BS. But from what I have read on this, it is for phone that are purchased under contract (subsidies). In that case, most people do not own the phone. It is more of a lease until you pay it off at the end. Once the phone is paid off, then you can unlock at will.
As for your Chevy example, let me play devil's advocate. You buy a Chevy and while you don't specifically have to ask them for permission to use a Ford gear shifter, your warranty probably states that only factory supplied or authorized materials can be used, otherwise you void the warranty upon installation. You intall the Ford gear shifter and somehow that destroys your transmission and shreds the gears. Is this covered by GM? They will probably say no because you installed an after-market device that caused the problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard even if you buy a phone outright from a provider the law is still upheld even though you bought it out of contract.
---------- Post added at 10:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 PM ----------
kgbkny said:
I just found the article linked below, which states that only phones purchased after January 26, 2013 will be affected by the new law. In other words, we are not affected by this law.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/25/tech/mobile/smartphone-unlocking-illegal/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
I'd be interested in looking into the logistics behind ownership of subsidized phones. I was always under the impression that a phone subsidy was an incentive to entice customers to sign a two year contract; after all, we are charged an early termination fee if we break the contract early, yet the device is ours to keep. Moreover, there's no formal lease agreement.
I completely agree with your analogy, but it's more applicable to rooting, rather than unlocking. From what I understand, rooting a phone automatically voids its warranty, regardless of manufacturer. Unlocking a phone, on the other hand, never voided the warranty. After all, no additional software is installed as part of the unlock process.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am also curious of they will void the warranty now if a phone is unlocked...
there is no way to relock it either so you'd be screwed

Well I feel like if you buy a phone out right and pay full retail or whatever not the 199.999 2yr contract price then you should be able to do what ever you want to it.
Its like nike saying ok you bought our air max's you can only wear nike socks with them don't let us catch you wear reebok or adidas socks.

dligon said:
Well I feel like if you buy a phone out right and pay full retail or whatever not the 199.999 2yr contract price then you should be able to do what ever you want to it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And you can. If you buy it outright from ATT then they can unlock it for you. You just can't take it down to Unlock City and have them do it.
Now if ATT refuses to unlock it, then there is just cause for you to file a non-compliance complaint against them.

Woody said:
And you can. If you buy it outright from ATT then they can unlock it for you. You just can't take it down to Unlock City and have them do it.
Now if ATT refuses to unlock it, then there is just cause for you to file a non-compliance complaint against them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do they actually have to by law if you buy it outright?

Probably not by law but it is your property (once paid off) and if you don't have a contract then there should be no ties that bind. Now if you are using THEIR service/bandwidth they can enforce certain criteria based on services rendered.
Anyone can file a complaint, it is just hard to determine where and to whom it would be most effective.
Edit: I think I might get a copy of this law in the morning and read it on the pooper. I have a legal background so I can decipher some legalese. Anyone got a link? Not to another news source, but the actual law.

Woody said:
Probably not by law but it is your property (once paid off) and if you don't have a contract then there should be no ties that bind. Now if you are using THEIR service/bandwidth they can enforce certain criteria based on services rendered.
Anyone can file a complaint, it is just hard to determine where and to whom it would be most effective.
Edit: I think I might get a copy of this law in the morning and read it on the pooper. I have a legal background so I can decipher some legalese. Anyone got a link? Not to another news source, but the actual law.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder if they could charge you a fee to unlock after you buying it outright

Woody said:
And you can. If you buy it outright from ATT then they can unlock it for you. You just can't take it down to Unlock City and have them do it.
Now if ATT refuses to unlock it, then there is just cause for you to file a non-compliance complaint against them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well att, tmo, probably would honor unlocking the phones. Verizon you may have trouble with as always

Ill never buy a carrier branded phone again

On returning the device and getting (at least some of) your restocking fee waived

As part of my pledge not to buy devices that aren't unlockable, I returned my phone today. Even though I was one of the lucky ones who managed to unlock it, on principle, I won't pay for devices that I can't take ownership of the software on. I did get half of my restocking fee waived; here's how I did it.
First off, before you even begin trying to convince someone else that you're right, you have to convince yourself. After all, if you don't think you're right, how do you expect anyone else to take your point of view? Luckily, if you choose to return this device because it isn't what was advertised, you are right. The reason why I expect to be able to return the phone is that it simply isn't the same device that I bought. When I bought the device, on day 1, it was an HTC One -- like every other HTC One, it was factory-unlockable. Any device that anybody calls an HTC One, until then, was an unlockable phone. And, indeed, on day 1, it was -- up until Verizon removed the feature that I purchased on, around 24 hours later.
So, just like it would be if you bought an HTC One, and instead it was made out of cheap polycarbonate (sorry, SGS4 fanboys!) instead of aluminum, you bought something that was different than you were expecting to buy. (When someone sells you something that's not what you got in a way that affects its value or utility, that means that it's "materially different"; that is to say, it's different in a way that caused you to do something different than you otherwise would have.) In that case, you're right to return the device, and obviously you shouldn't pay fees to someone who sold you something materially different than what you thought you were buying.
Now that you're convinced that you shouldn't pay a restocking fee, how do you do it?
I walked into a Verizon Wireless store (in my case, the one on San Tomas Expy., in Santa Clara, CA), and clearly told the man at the door -- the manager -- what my problem is, and what I'd like. I told him that I'd like to return the device, and why I felt that I should be refunded, without going into much detail. He agreed, and said that I'd have to call customer service to have the fee waived and applied as a credit, but that he'd be happy to help in any way he could. He suggested that I call *611 first to make sure that I'd get it waived, and then he'd process it; so, I did.
It got somewhat more hairy there. The person who initially answered my call to *611 said that she wouldn't be able to do anything, and under no circumstances would she be able to refund my restocking fee. I expected this, and you should too: the first-level drones can't do anything for you (but you should be polite to them anyway). She offered to transfer me to a "customer satisfaction representative", which I happily accepted.
We went back and forth a few times. One of the things that they will tell you is that once you return the phone, they can't sell it as new anymore; you can respond by saying that you understand that it doesn't have as much value to them, but that it simply doesn't work for your purposes, and that they have an obligation to refund you for something that's materially different from what they advertised. They may have to speak to the store manager; that's okay, let them. Be patient and polite, but firm.
They may begin offering compromises. At this point, it's up to you. For instance, I was offered a $10 credit; I decided that wasn't good enough. You can remind the person on the phone of how long you've been a customer, if you have that sort of status -- again, be polite, but firm. I was eventually offered a refund of half of the restocking fee, which I took (applied as a credit to my account).
But, if that's not good enough for you, you don't have to take it. Depending on how much you value your time, you have other opportunities. You can talk to your credit card issuer; again, be patient and polite. (If you're talking to an issuer, don't use the word "unlock", since they can very easily confuse it with a SIM unlock. Be perfectly clear -- refer to the feature as "the HTCDev feature", or "custom software support".) They may be willing to refund your money, and then they'll work it out with Verizon Wireless later.
If you have *way* too much free time, you could even use small claims court. Again, remember that phrase, "materially different" -- it is! You don't need a lawyer to go to small claims court (and, indeed, in many small claims courts, lawyers aren't allowed!).
tl;dr: Yes, it's possible to return your One with either no restocking fee or a reduced restocking fee. You shouldn't settle for a phone that you don't control -- as the EFF says, 'you own it, you pwn it'. If it bothers you, you should put your money where your mouth is, and return it -- then, but a phone that's unlockable.

joshua_ said:
As part of my pledge not to buy devices that aren't unlockable, I returned my phone today. Even though I was one of the lucky ones who managed to unlock it, on principle, I won't pay for devices that I can't take ownership of the software on. I did get half of my restocking fee waived; here's how I did it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, are you saying that you were able to return your bootloader unlocked/tampered phone? How did you get them to do that? I'm only asking because I am in the exact same situation as you and potentially thinking about getting the Moto X coming out this week. *flamesuit for that phone* lol

They let you unlock it via the HTC site, for a day at least. I feel that would still allow you to return it. The warranty is voided but there is nothing that stated you cannot return it. I'd think based on that you'd have a great argument too return it.
sent from my blue police box flying through time.....

Syn Ack said:
Wait, are you saying that you were able to return your bootloader unlocked/tampered phone? How did you get them to do that? I'm only asking because I am in the exact same situation as you and potentially thinking about getting the Moto X coming out this week. *flamesuit for that phone* lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They don't check.
I exchanged my unlocked One for another and then unlocked that one as well.

Well you weren't really "duped" per say. Its not like Verizon's like "Hey come check out the HTC One!!! Its boot loader unlocked!!!"
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

karn101 said:
They don't check.
I exchanged my unlocked One for another and then unlocked that one as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you managed to get and unlock two phones in less than the 24 hours we had to unlock the phone?
Sent from my locked Verizon HTC One

crazyg0od33 said:
So you managed to get and unlock two phones in less than the 24 hours we had to unlock the phone?
Sent from my locked Verizon HTC One
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. First one had a dead pixel. Jumped on the train and went through the rain to the store because I knew HTCDEV would be locked down. Exhanged it, double and triple checked the new one. Ran home and unlocked it again.

karn101 said:
Yes. First one had a dead pixel. Jumped on the train and went through the rain to the store because I knew HTCDEV would be locked down. Exhanged it, double and triple checked the new one. Ran home and unlocked it again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow thats fast AND lucky haha

Syn Ack said:
Wait, are you saying that you were able to return your bootloader unlocked/tampered phone? How did you get them to do that? I'm only asking because I am in the exact same situation as you and potentially thinking about getting the Moto X coming out this week. *flamesuit for that phone* lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All I did was put a stock recovery on it, put it in the box, and bring it back to the store. (I sure didn't relock it first, since it would still say tampered, and then if they rejected it, I'd have a phone that both said "tampered" *and* was locked. ****ty situation!)
Usually I would feel bad about bringing a phone back to the store that said "tampered", or otherwise that I had modified in such a way that they couldn't do their normal reconditioning process on it. In this case, they screwed me; it's on them.
antp121 said:
Well you weren't really "duped" per say. Its not like Verizon's like "Hey come check out the HTC One!!! Its boot loader unlocked!!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, but they did say "Come check out the HTC One" -- not, "the HTC One Minus", or "the HTC One, Almost", or "the HTC One-like". Different people look for different features; again, think about what it would be if the Verizon HTC One was made out of polycarb, instead of aluminum. I don't care, as long as the fit and finish is still as good, but I can imagine that someone out there would -- and it wouldn't be an HTC One.
You make a good point that I should clarify, though. They don't have to explicitly advertise something -- the important bit is what a reasonable person would be lead to believe.

joshua_ said:
All I did was put a stock recovery on it, put it in the box, and bring it back to the store. (I sure didn't relock it first, since it would still say tampered, and then if they rejected it, I'd have a phone that both said "tampered" *and* was locked. ****ty situation!)
Usually I would feel bad about bringing a phone back to the store that said "tampered", or otherwise that I had modified in such a way that they couldn't do their normal reconditioning process on it. In this case, they screwed me; it's on them.
No, but they did say "Come check out the HTC One" -- not, "the HTC One Minus", or "the HTC One, Almost", or "the HTC One-like". Different people look for different features; again, think about what it would be if the Verizon HTC One was made out of polycarb, instead of aluminum. I don't care, as long as the fit and finish is still as good, but I can imagine that someone out there would -- and it wouldn't be an HTC One.
You make a good point that I should clarify, though. They don't have to explicitly advertise something -- the important bit is what a reasonable person would be lead to believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but an unlocked bootloader is not a feature and is definitely not promised. Its like someone saying that vzw One is not the same because of the logos on the back. Tbh I don't think you should've gotten a discounted restocking fee because of the bootloader. I think the fee is bs to begin with but this does not count as legitimate reason. You say a reasonable person would be lead to believe but that's basically assuming and making inferences with data going against your claims. Have any Verizon devices been unlockable in the past? Very few with less and less with the passing time. Not trying to flame you I just don't like people complaining about buying a locked device with expectations higher than they should be lol
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

antp121 said:
Yes but an unlocked bootloader is not a feature and is definitely not promised. Its like someone saying that vzw One is not the same because of the logos on the back. Tbh I don't think you should've gotten a discounted restocking fee because of the bootloader. I think the fee is bs to begin with but this does not count as legitimate reason. You say a reasonable person would be lead to believe but that's basically assuming and making inferences with data going against your claims. Have any Verizon devices been unlockable in the past? Very few with less and less with the passing time. Not trying to flame you I just don't like people complaining about buying a locked device with expectations higher than they should be lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good points.
I'd argue that it *is* a real feature -- it's something that you care about, and that I care about, and that most of us care about, to be sure! Being able to control and verify the software running on my device is very valuable to me.
This is not just a hypothetical -- I *did* buy the device because when I bought it, it was unlockable. I checked XDA, and it was unlockable on HTCDev; there exist other Verizon devices (like my Thunderbolt!) that are unlockable on HTCDev, and my current phone -- the Galaxy Nexus -- is also an unlockable device. So it's not unheardof to have an unlockable Verizon phone, though I will grant you that it is getting more rare with time.
I don't think I would have complained if it were not unlockable on day 1. Everybody checks before they buy; I think your argument was that "if you don't check, you're not a reasonable person" -- and that sure is true. What idiot *doesn't* go on XDA first before they buy a phone? The thing that got me is that I bought it with the ultimately reasonable expectation that it'd stay an unlockable device. Even though my device was unlocked, an unlocked device without a community is basically as good as a locked device.
So you're totally right. If I had bought a locked device, and expected it to be unlockable, then I'd be an idiot. But for those of you who got screwed on day 1 -- or bought the device with the reasonable expectation that it'd be unlockable, and then it wasn't -- you probably have a real case.

Whistle whistle whistle...

joshua_ said:
Good points.
I'd argue that it *is* a real feature -- it's something that you care about, and that I care about, and that most of us care about, to be sure! Being able to control and verify the software running on my device is very valuable to me.
This is not just a hypothetical -- I *did* buy the device because when I bought it, it was unlockable. I checked XDA, and it was unlockable on HTCDev; there exist other Verizon devices (like my Thunderbolt!) that are unlockable on HTCDev, and my current phone -- the Galaxy Nexus -- is also an unlockable device. So it's not unheardof to have an unlockable Verizon phone, though I will grant you that it is getting more rare with time.
I don't think I would have complained if it were not unlockable on day 1. Everybody checks before they buy; I think your argument was that "if you don't check, you're not a reasonable person" -- and that sure is true. What idiot *doesn't* go on XDA first before they buy a phone? The thing that got me is that I bought it with the ultimately reasonable expectation that it'd stay an unlockable device. Even though my device was unlocked, an unlocked device without a community is basically as good as a locked device.
So you're totally right. If I had bought a locked device, and expected it to be unlockable, then I'd be an idiot. But for those of you who got screwed on day 1 -- or bought the device with the reasonable expectation that it'd be unlockable, and then it wasn't -- you probably have a real case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree almost 100% however, I still wouldn't consider an unlockable bootloader as a "feature". It was pretty dumb vzw locking it up day 1, but once again, that happened with the Rezound, inc 4g lte and the Droid DNA iirc. They all were unlockable for a short amount of time before Verizon pulled the plug. Its just a matter of time before either:
A) HTC finds it in their hearts to reopen htcdev for vzw skus (highly unlikey)
B) some genius finds an exploit.
The unlocking of the bootloader is very important to me but I've learned to have VERY low expectations with anything verizon gets their hands on haha
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

antp121 said:
I agree almost 100% however, I still wouldn't consider an unlockable bootloader as a "feature". It was pretty dumb vzw locking it up day 1, but once again, that happened with the Rezound, inc 4g lte and the Droid DNA iirc. They all were unlockable for a short amount of time before Verizon pulled the plug. Its just a matter of time before either:
A) HTC finds it in their hearts to reopen htcdev for vzw skus (highly unlikey)
B) some genius finds an exploit.
The unlocking of the bootloader is very important to me but I've learned to have VERY low expectations with anything verizon gets their hands on haha
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
#blameant

At what point did they promise "you'd own the software" or an unlocked bootloader... I know I'm going to get a lot of **** for this but seriously get off your high-horse and stop trying to manipulate the system. When you get screwed over that's one thing. Nowhere does it say that you can root, rom, or unlock a device. It's assumed risk...
---------- Post added at 05:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:43 AM ----------
joshua_ said:
Good points.
I'd argue that it *is* a real feature -- it's something that you care about, and that I care about, and that most of us care about, to be sure! Being able to control and verify the software running on my device is very valuable to me.
This is not just a hypothetical -- I *did* buy the device because when I bought it, it was unlockable. I checked XDA, and it was unlockable on HTCDev; there exist other Verizon devices (like my Thunderbolt!) that are unlockable on HTCDev, and my current phone -- the Galaxy Nexus -- is also an unlockable device. So it's not unheardof to have an unlockable Verizon phone, though I will grant you that it is getting more rare with time.
I don't think I would have complained if it were not unlockable on day 1. Everybody checks before they buy; I think your argument was that "if you don't check, you're not a reasonable person" -- and that sure is true. What idiot *doesn't* go on XDA first before they buy a phone? The thing that got me is that I bought it with the ultimately reasonable expectation that it'd stay an unlockable device. Even though my device was unlocked, an unlocked device without a community is basically as good as a locked device.
So you're totally right. If I had bought a locked device, and expected it to be unlockable, then I'd be an idiot. But for those of you who got screwed on day 1 -- or bought the device with the reasonable expectation that it'd be unlockable, and then it wasn't -- you probably have a real case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so based on you "PERSONAL' preferences you are mad cause they didn't meet them. You knew there was a risk of this... If not you seriously need to rethink what to expect. Saying that I could argue that fact that I wish my phone could kill people cause it's important to me...
---------- Post added at 05:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 AM ----------
antp121 said:
I agree almost 100% however, I still wouldn't consider an unlockable bootloader as a "feature". It was pretty dumb vzw locking it up day 1, but once again, that happened with the Rezound, inc 4g lte and the Droid DNA iirc. They all were unlockable for a short amount of time before Verizon pulled the plug. Its just a matter of time before either:
A) HTC finds it in their hearts to reopen htcdev for vzw skus (highly unlikey)
B) some genius finds an exploit.
The unlocking of the bootloader is very important to me but I've learned to have VERY low expectations with anything verizon gets their hands on haha
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This post right here is 100% accurate. And obviously someone who understands the truth behind this.

A "reasonable" person knows that Verizon loves to lock their boot loaders up tight.
You got lucky to get the fee waived or partially waived. Nobody should expect to get theirs waived for this reason.
I'm keeping my One. I have faith in our devs and know that I'll soon be able to unlock.
Sent from my HTC One.

Bottom line is that in retail you can get what you want if you are willing to be their fly in the ointment (or PITA). As illustrated by the OP, you can be a nuisance, even without being rude, and get your way.
I personally would pay the restocking fee instead of dealing with the hastle of haggling over it. Not worth my time and stress. But hats off to those that can stick to their guns and get a refund. I just hope I'm not behind you in line cause we'll be here forever
Sent using xda app-developers app

Wow, you got duped. I've never paid restocking. And they've never had to get permission from corporate to do it. The manager on site can waive your restocking fee and if they feel they will lose business if they don't waive it, they will.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4

SGH-T999L Bad ESN

I bought an almost new S3 LTE SGH-T999L for my son off CL. It checked OK on swappa and it worked for a week, then unable to connect to network. Swappa now says blacklisted. DOH!
It sucks to have a $350 paper weight! I tried to contact the seller with no luck.
Couple questions...
Any way to fix it?
Can this model be downgraded to 4.1.1 to use free unlock method and even then will it possibly work on anther carrier is the US. I know it will work outside the US if unlocked.
I contacted T-Mobile and they said nothing I can do, only the original owner can have the blacklist lifted.
Any help or advice much appreciated!
Also let this be a lesson to all...just because it works when you buy it, don't mean it wont go belly-up in a week. :crying:

Sorry I didn't answer your PM before. Wasn't ignoring you. Unfortunately your options are extremely limited.
You will have to pay for an unlock code online (see the last couple pages of the unlock thread), and then sell overseas. Just please be honest about it to whoever you sell it to in case they plan on bringing it to the states.
Personally, I'd also file a police report. May not come to anything, but if the guy gets arrested for anything else, or enough people file a report against him for similar stuff, you may then have some recourse against him. But he has twice committed fraud, or theft by deception (or something like that). First against T-Mobile, then against you.
Once unlocked, it might work on other carriers here, but not for long. I'm told all US carriers will be sharing the same blacklist by year's end. I've also heard it may also be shared with Canadian carriers as well.
Sorry to hear that happened to you. You're definitely not alone! This happens all the time, unfortunately.
Never buy used unless you make the transaction in person at a T-Mobile store where the seller can prove they have paid for the device in full and are allowed to sell it. Also, have a note made on both accounts (preferably by a manager) that the sale is made so they can't report it stolen a few weeks later.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4

I hear you, but it never goes down like that. I've bought and sold 30 or 40 smartphones. First time I've ever got burnt. I make small profit along, but this one is a stinger. I've had people want to meet me at Verizon, ATT and T-Mobile and every time I met them there all the store employees would say is if the sim card works it's ok.
Of course you could ask for a receipt...but what if it's a reseller like myself? I've had one receipt the whole time. Most of the time you can spot a fraud and steer clear. I check esn on swappa and/or Verizon site. I guess it's just a risky thing and I've been very lucky so far.
I did get a guy on ebay to unlock the phone for $10 last night. It works with a Lycamobile sim(T-Mobile reseller) and also works with a new LTE ATT Straight Talk sim...recieves LTE even. Maybe not for long...but it works fine now and it's been blacklisted about a month.
Guy on ebay unlocks clean phones for $5 & blacklisted for $10, he does remote into your pc to do it, but it only takes 2-3 minutes. He gave me the code, but it was never needed.
I'm a PagePlus dealer and I do alot of carrier flashing, not to beat blacklist, but to get more use from older 3G devices. Anytime I sell a phone I always give a 2 days return policy if they change their mind.

The seller of the phone should be able to get some sort of confirmation off of his own account showing he is not currently making payments on it. If the employees are only saying to see if the SIM works, they are just being lazy or ignorant! With the owners permission they can look it up, or call support from the phone and have him ask them to verify on speaker so you can hear. I'm just trying to say there's other ways to get the info before buying.
I'd say that if you've bought that many you are pretty lucky. But for the blacklisted one that worked on other carriers...expect it not to on AT&T very soon and all other US carriers around the end of the year. Right now T-Mobile and AT&T share their lists, but don't use the same one, so it'll often take a few weeks to catch up. As I understand it, once the national list is in place, all carriers will be using the same one so it'll be more instant.
I have spoken to a few people who bought their phone used and all seemed good, but then nearly 2 months later it got blacklisted! Some people are apparently selling it, but then waiting a month or two to report it stolen!
I just hope that if one of your customers gets blacklisted a few weeks after buying from you, you will be willing to at least exchange it.
But before you try and sell this one, please consider that it's practically a given that it's not gonna work for very long.
Also, (and I'm not sure of the ramifications here) keep in mind that you are knowingly in possession of stolen property. That by itself is probably not a big deal for you, legally speaking, since it happens to so many people and hardly no one knows what they are buying when this happens to them. But if you sell it, you will be knowingly selling stolen goods. If one of your customers gets blacklisted, you could be the one held liable.
Don't take it wrong, I'm just trying to help!
And I'm just curious, what do you mean by "carrier flashing"?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4

I understand where you're coming from and I will not sell this phone except to one particular customer who takes them outside the country. My son is using it now on LycaMobile which is a UK based reseller using T-Molile towers. We will see how long it lasts...strange circumstance there since the provider is not from the US, will they also adhere to universal blacklist? I dunno...time will tell. At $30 per month they are cheapest unlimited I know of(Only 50MB 4G data, then 2G/3G).
I run a legitimate part time business and have rarely had phones returned, but always made the customer happy. Happy customers come back and most of my profit is selling refills and flashing/rooting/unlocking...not the actual phone sales.
Carrier flashing: Mainly I've flashed older Metro phones to work on PagePlus and GS3's from Sprint or Verizon must be flashed for pageplus because they don't yet allow 4G phones. I never do any ESN changes. I'm an old techie and I go way back to Nextel mods in mid 90's. lol
BTW I installed CM 10.1.2 RC2 right from the phone yesterday after originally flashing the CM10 linked in Doc's T999L thread. It flashed perfect right through CM update utility automatically and seems to run perfectly.

Why are so many of you buying from Verizon & BestBuy instead of Google?

Just wondering. Why are so many of you buying from Verizon & BestBuy instead of Google?
You do realize the phones not purchased from Google will have a locked bootloader. So why would you buy from Verizon or BestBuy instead of Google, who has the same price and you can use either phones on Verizon if you so choose to do so.
I don't want to say ya'll are dumb, but I kind of feel this way.
I'm sure there is something I'm missing though, so help me understand please.

Are the payment plan options the same? If so that might be one reason. I have Verizon because that's what my employer (who pays for the phone and the bill) uses.
Sent from my SM-N930V using Tapatalk

Believe it or not, not everyone needs a bootloader unlocked these days. My days of tinkering with Android are over as I feel Android is better than ever. It is unfortunate the OP feels that I am dumb because everyone doesn't agree with his way of thinking...

It was also cheaper to purchase from Verizon for a new 2 year cobtract
Sent from my Pixel using XDA-Developers mobile app

I personally ordered mine from Verizon due to my work account, and also don't care about root or unlocked boot loaders since I haven't needed either in several years. That being said I also believe many people have not been buying directly from Google because Google hasn't been able to keep them in stock. Which of course also implies that many people are buying them from Google, lol.

Best Buy is cheaper with a 2 year agreement ($299.99) as well as a 24 month installment ($31 a month), for 32GB version.
Also, best buy is giving a $100 gift card, which you can do whatever you want with. (resell it, use it, etc).
If you are only keeping the phone for two years, and don't care about updates after that, then its probably a better route. After two years, you are SOL for getting an up to date OS.

I had the note 7....the last return I just upgraded to the pixel xl. In exchange So....through Verizon it was.

Its an economic decision for me. In Germany I'll get the Device from T-Mobile Germany for 179€ (around 197 US$) for the renewal of my contract - I think this ist much better than the 1097€ direct from Google. The only downside is that it will have a locked bootloader...I'm still hoping someone finds a way to unlock the bootloaders of the Devices wich doesnt come directly from Google.

I ordered mine from Verizon. I haven't rooted a phone in a long time so locked or unlocked bootloader doesn't really matter for me.
Sent from my SM-N930V using Tapatalk

CZ Eddie said:
You do realize the phones not purchased from Google will have a locked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have my phone rooted for Tasker and Xposed, but the Verizon phone can effectively be considerably cheaper right now.
So why would you buy from Verizon or BestBuy instead of Google, who has the same price and you can use either phones on Verizon if you so choose to do so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best Buy will currently give a $100 gift card if you don't want a new line, a $200 gift card for a new line, another $25 for a sign-up will be available after the pre-order is over, and it can be done with monthly payments to allow porting out or cancelling the line. Verizon has phone trades that total $200-$300, which is done through reduced monthly payments, and my Razr M qualified for $200. Some people have other options on Verizon. Google does not offer similar sort of ways to essentially reduce the phone's cost at this time.
I don't want to say ya'll are dumb, but I kind of feel this way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally I question the idea of paying iPhone 7 prices, and since I'm not interested in the VR headset, that's basically what initial Google store customers are doing. As much as I like what Tasker can do with root, I'm not sure it's worth giving up automatic updates and effectively spending another $175 that I could have with $225 in Best Buy gift cards. If it turns out that there are limitations on the Verizon phones for anything other than the bootloader unlock, I'll probably change my opinion, but at this time it looks like Google's bottom-line price is considerably higher than what is possible at Verizon.

Purely inventory for me. Google shipments are a month or more out. They won't even take my money to pre-order it. VZW device I can have in 3 days.
Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

Buying it as a contract renewal over Deutsche Telekom is way cheaper for me, especially because I work there and get a monthly discount on the main contract.
I have to 29,95€ monthly instead of 64,95€ and get the Pixel XL 128 GB for 279,95€ on time fee.
But even the phone for my wife is way cheaper. I paid 19,95€ for here family card without a phone before, now we upgraded it to a contract with phone to 29,95€ a month and also 279,95€ for the small Pixel 32 GB.
Yes, I would also love to have a unlockable bootloader and instant updates from Google but after not rooting phones for a couple of years I will get along with it.

I wanted the one from the google store but didn't feel like waiting for it. I would like to have the bootloader unlocked just for the option but i haven't had time or need to mess with rooting and custom roms, so just having pure android is perfect for me. So for me it made sense to just order from Verizon, everyone has different needs or reasons and i would say for 90% of the people buying this phone has no need to ever unlock the bootloader or even know much about that world of roms and rooting. I thinks its a stretch to insinuate people are dumb for having a choice and choosing one over the other

dbrohrer said:
Troll. Glad you like your OP3. I'm sure there are plenty people on the OP3 threads that agree with you and would love to hear your comments.
I ordered from Verizon because I was able to trade in an old phone for monthly device credit. It should save me $100-200 depending on how long I stay on Verizon DPP. I preordered one from the Google Play Store as well. I don't plan on opening the box from the play store unless the Verizon model upsets me and needs to be returned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whats the point of buying two then? Everything about the Verizon version is the same except for boot loader.....

Buying it directly from Verizon because
1) My job will be paying for it
2) I feel once I have stock Android I don't really need to have root or an unlocked bootloader.
3) Don't have to wait until it comes back in stock via the playstore.

Major discount through employee. 419 vs 869 for xl 128gb and plus availability. Still waiting though as I want to see if anyone cracks that Verizon bootloader within the first month.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

IkeBiker said:
Whats the point of buying two then? Everything about the Verizon version is the same except for boot loader.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am planning on keeping the Verizon Pixel because it is cheaper for me. As more reviews and info come out that is ACTUALLY reputable, I want to be able to return it to Verizon within the first 2 weeks if I decide there are significant differences between the Verizon version and the Google Play version. If I do that, I want to have the Google Play store Pixel in a box ready for me to switch over. This way I also get to take advantage of the Daydream VR, no matter which device I return.
Since the announcement on October 4th, there has not been any real credible information about the Pixel. Everything has been "so and so said this... Don't buy the Verizon version... etc." Then every Android blog site just blindly regurgitates what was said as if it was real news. NO ONE fact checks. Some CSR at Verizon who doesn't know what a freaking bootloader even is said something, then everyone freaks out and android headlines and forums go crazy. Then someone at Google says something else and everyone takes that as the truth. Does anyone even look at where the info came from? The only group I believe at all at this time is Google Pixel team. If they didn't say it or someone cannot show me in a video with their phone in their hand, I'm not going to believe it.
As long as I am confident that the Verizon pixel will get updates straight from Google when Google promises (just like what I'm used to with Nexus), I don't see a convincing reason not to go with Verizon. I would like the ability to unlock the bootloader so that I can flash the factory images if that promise is not kept. With every new version of Android, I find less need to try custom roms. With what I have seen from 7.1, I don't think I will even have the urge.

destes37 said:
It is unfortunate the OP feels that I am dumb because everyone doesn't agree with his way of thinking...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I regret saying it the way I did.
I don't think you're dumb at all.
XDA is all about development, I guess I'm still surprised when there are people here who don't care about flashing ROM's or backing up in TWRP and even some who apparently don't care about root any longer.
If I didn't care about flashing ROM's (or root), I'd be on a S7 Edge right now.

dbrohrer said:
I am planning on keeping the Verizon Pixel because it is cheaper for me. As more reviews and info come out that is ACTUALLY reputable, I want to be able to return it to Verizon within the first 2 weeks if I decide there are significant differences between the Verizon version and the Google Play version. If I do that, I want to have the Google Play store Pixel in a box ready for me to switch over. This way I also get to take advantage of the Daydream VR, no matter which device I return.
Since the announcement on October 4th, there has not been any real credible information about the Pixel. Everything has been "so and so said this... Don't buy the Verizon version... etc." Then every Android blog site just blindly regurgitates what was said as if it was real news. NO ONE fact checks. Some CSR at Verizon who doesn't know what a freaking bootloader even is said something, then everyone freaks out and android headlines and forums go crazy. Then someone at Google says something else and everyone takes that as the truth. Does anyone even look at where the info came from? The only group I believe at all at this time is Google Pixel team. If they didn't say it or someone cannot show me in a video with their phone in their hand, I'm not going to believe it.
As long as I am confident that the Verizon pixel will get updates straight from Google when Google promises (just like what I'm used to with Nexus), I don't see a convincing reason not to go with Verizon. I would like the ability to unlock the bootloader so that I can flash the factory images if that promise is not kept. With every new version of Android, I find less need to try custom roms. With what I have seen from 7.1, I don't think I will even have the urge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So much this right here. They said this about the Verizon N6 also. That everything would be locked down and look what happened. Nothing was locked down at all. I ordered the Verizon Pixel XL because of this also and i dont really need root anymore. If i am able to root its a plus but not a deal breaker for me.

arcanexvi said:
Purely inventory for me. Google shipments are a month or more out. They won't even take my money to pre-order it. VZW device I can have in 3 days.
Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
.
Yes, I also am grumpy and pissed at google for messing up the "orders / pre-orders". Year after year, they keep screwing up on the first step. They "could" have manufactured an extra 50, 000 and it would not have hurt their economics and it would have greatly helped their public image. Did the 'Note 7' burn put a snag in things ?
.
What if the "big and detailed" reviews start coming in and it shows a narley wart about the phone ? ? ? My biggest, desired attribute is the big leap in the camera ( camcorder ? ) area . . .