Related
Buying a phone without contract is unlocked?
Or is it still under the current plan? Or new plan with that carrier?
No. It will still be carrier locked if you buy it from them. It will be carrier locked unless its explicitly stated otherwise.
bazhip said:
No. It will still be carrier locked if you buy it from them. It will be carrier locked unless its explicitly stated otherwise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, this is generally the case. Unless buying an unlocked European phone. Aka buy the phone put any carrier SIM in it that works on those GSM bands.
OP, if you buy the phone on a contract you can always take it to a new line/account on the same carrier by switching SIM cards, but the obligation lies in paying the old contract out, that's where the ETF is. The bonus of buying a phone unlocked, or at least unsubsidized is not having the carrier contract.
Oh okay, the main reason I asked is because I seen a thread and someone was talking about trading in there phone for the Incredible S and someone said to buy it for like 599 or something unlocked and it just gave me the idea that buying a phone at the retail price meant your not tied down to a contract hence price, which seems to make sense.. But also makes sense that you are in fact tied down to that specific carrier hence buying from them.
The contract price is to lock you in basically, and the retail price is because you ALREADY have a contract and simply want to switch your device without messing up your contract. OR... maybe your credit isn't the greatest so just paying out of pocket is your best bet!
melodicjunkie said:
Oh okay, the main reason I asked is because I seen a thread and someone was talking about trading in there phone for the Incredible S and someone said to buy it for like 599 or something unlocked and it just gave me the idea that buying a phone at the retail price meant your not tied down to a contract hence price, which seems to make sense.. But also makes sense that you are in fact tied down to that specific carrier hence buying from them.
The contract price is to lock you in basically, and the retail price is because you ALREADY have a contract and simply want to switch your device without messing up your contract. OR... maybe your credit isn't the greatest so just paying out of pocket is your best bet!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've got it. If you've got a contract already and don't want to extend it or aren't eligible for an upgrade, you can pay full price for the phone and just insert your SIM card.
Should also be said that GSM phones can be unlocked with unlock codes to be used on different carriers in different countries etc.. This isn't much of an issue in the US because T-mobile and AT&T are the only 2 big national's that offer GSM service (aside from Simple Mobile, etc. but those are on AT&T/T-mo towers anyways), and they operate on different 3G frequencies so unlocking your T-mo phone will only get you EDGE on AT&T and vice-versa. So really the only reason to unlock is for international travel.
martonikaj said:
You've got it. If you've got a contract already and don't want to extend it or aren't eligible for an upgrade, you can pay full price for the phone and just insert your SIM card.
Should also be said that GSM phones can be unlocked with unlock codes to be used on different carriers in different countries etc.. This isn't much of an issue in the US because T-mobile and AT&T are the only 2 big national's that offer GSM service (aside from Simple Mobile, etc. but those are on AT&T/T-mo towers anyways), and they operate on different 3G frequencies so unlocking your T-mo phone will only get you EDGE on AT&T and vice-versa. So really the only reason to unlock is for international travel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! What do you think is faster at&t or tmobile? I'm really liking my service, tmobile doesn't have the best coverage but when 4g kicks in, its fast. Tmobile will be switching to hpsa++ so I can't wait for that.
At&t seems obsolete because of veriPhone.
melodicjunkie said:
Oh okay, the main reason I asked is because I seen a thread and someone was talking about trading in there phone for the Incredible S and someone said to buy it for like 599 or something unlocked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They probably meant for a retailer not associated with your carrier. There are various cellphone vendors online, etc. that sell phones unlocked. Carriers don't sell unlocked phones typically. Its against their self interest. The only reason cell companies sell phones at all is to lure new customer and retain existing ones. They make little or no profit from selling phones.
If you buy a phone full retail price from your carrier, you can use it on your current plan. But its not really linked to a plan. Some carrier will let you walk into a store and buy a phone for full price without a contract or service with them even, I believe. Although some apparently won't. With a GSM phone, it doesn't really matter, you can swap your SIM in and out of whatever device (as long as its SIM locked to your carrier, or unlocked, and uses the same frequency bands). Its the SIM that is linked to your account, not the device.
melodicjunkie said:
Thanks! What do you think is faster at&t or tmobile? I'm really liking my service, tmobile doesn't have the best coverage but when 4g kicks in, its fast. Tmobile will be switching to hpsa++ so I can't wait for that.
AT&T seems obsolete because of veriPhone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AT&T is the second largest cell carrier in the country, and that was true long before the iPhone. And they only barely trail Verizon in the number of customers. Why would VZN getting the iPhoney make AT&T obsolete? If anything, I personally feel that things are looking BETTER on AT&T for Android users. Now that iPhone exclusivity is gone, AT&T has the freedom to release some REAL Android devices (which they are now doing).
It seems that AT&T's network size has also been a hindrance in its move to 3G, and now 4G. T-Mob seems to be well ahead of AT&T in deploying 4G/HSPA+. Just based on comments on these forums, it seems that people are getting up to 7 Mbps on T-Mob in some areas, with number often being in the 4-5 Mbps range. Best I've seen on AT&T is just under 4 Mbps, with the typical case being more like 2-3 Mbps. And I haven't seen any comments by AT&T users on here and the AT&T forums about getting any faster than that (and often slower). Plus AT&T has only stated theoretical download speeds of "up to" 6 Mbps on HSPA+ (and thats probably optimistic), so we likely won't see any faster than that until they deploy LTE. But as you said, T-Mob coverage tends to not be the greatest in some areas.
I'd ask around with friends, co-workers, etc. in your local market to try to determine which carrier has the best coverage and data speeds in your area. Also compare plan prices and phone selection, and from there determine which carrier is best for you.
I am with Sprint under my dads account. It is a family plan with my sister, my dad and I. Heres my question, I just want to know if I can order safely from Wirefly without any fuse, in other words, they will send me my phone without attempting to change our plan, rise our bill or anything like that. I just want to upgrade my phone to the Galaxy Nexus with the same plan intact, nothing change. The reason I am asking this is because I once tried to order a phone from Amazon (at the same price of a normal upgrade), and they wanted me to get a brand new number and plan.
Thanks for your help.
P.S. I cant believe they are selling this phone for 50 bucks. I am awed ._.
Anyone?
it is only that price with a contract. they will make you sign up for 2yr sprint contract before selling you the phone.
yup confirmed
$49.99
with a new Sprint account
look right under the price tag in small writing
Darunion said:
it is only that price with a contract. they will make you sign up for 2yr sprint contract before selling you the phone.
yup confirmed
$49.99
with a new Sprint account
look right under the price tag in small writing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, I dont know how I missed that. lol
Thank you.
DO NOT buy from wirefly. There are too many problems with that company to list them all here.
latindor17 said:
I am with Sprint under my dads account. It is a family plan with my sister, my dad and I. Heres my question, I just want to know if I can order safely from Wirefly without any fuse, in other words, they will send me my phone without attempting to change our plan, rise our bill or anything like that. I just want to upgrade my phone to the Galaxy Nexus with the same plan intact, nothing change. The reason I am asking this is because I once tried to order a phone from Amazon (at the same price of a normal upgrade), and they wanted me to get a brand new number and plan.
Thanks for your help.
P.S. I cant believe they are selling this phone for 50 bucks. I am awed ._.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello latindor17: Wirefly can certainly upgrade your phone without changing your plan or the amount you pay every month (provided you’re not on an old grandfathered rate plan the carrier no longer offers, in which case you may be asked to choose a current rate plan – but if that were the case, Wirefly would always contact you for approval before proceeding with your order). Darunion is correct that you will need you renew your contract for 2 years in order to be eligible for the price on the website, but you do not need to get a new number, you may keep your existing number without a problem. There are no other hidden fees or charges, as long as you maintain your account in good standing (and don’t downgrade your plan) within 6 months of your activation date. For more information on this, please see http://www.wirefly.com/about/low-phone-prices/?referringdomain=wirefly&oflag=specialoffer.
obsanity said:
DO NOT buy from wirefly. There are too many problems with that company to list them all here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? I used Wirefly to get a Galaxy SIII as an upgrade on my T-Mobile account with absolutely no issues. They simply checked to see if I was eligible for an upgrade and once they verified that I was I purchased a Galaxy SIII as an upgrade for $200. They did not screw with my plan at all.
It was much cheaper than going through T-Mobile directly ($379 for the phone at the time) and they shipped the phone extremely fast. I'd use them again in a heartbeat.
** I should mention that I have since sold the Galaxy SIII and reverted back to the GNex because it just wasn't the same. But that's neither here nor there. :highfive:
Wirefly_Kim said:
Hello latindor17: Wirefly can certainly upgrade your phone without changing your plan or the amount you pay every month (provided you’re not on an old grandfathered rate plan the carrier no longer offers, in which case you may be asked to choose a current rate plan – but if that were the case, Wirefly would always contact you for approval before proceeding with your order). Darunion is correct that you will need you renew your contract for 2 years in order to be eligible for the price on the website, but you do not need to get a new number, you may keep your existing number without a problem. There are no other hidden fees or charges, as long as you maintain your account in good standing (and don’t downgrade your plan) within 6 months of your activation date. For more information on this, please see http://www.wirefly.com/about/low-phone-prices/?referringdomain=wirefly&oflag=specialoffer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What Ms. Kim said here is exactly why you SHOULDN'T go with wirefly or any other similar service. They make you sign an additional contract, apparently in this case for 6 months, that has NOTHING to do with Sprint. Well, technically it does since it stipulates you must stay with Sprint for 6 months, but this contract isn't with Sprint.
So, if you move, find a better deal, find a reason to terminate without an ETF, etc., you're still on the hook with this company for 6 months. If you like buying through a 3rd party, I think Best Buy and Radioshak both still don't require this anti-consumer tactic.
Wow. I didn't realize that when I did it. Luckily if you plan on sticking with your current contract for more than 6 months this won't effect you (like most people). But it would be quite annoying if you did need to switch carriers quicker than expected.
Good to know.
Morphling27 said:
What Ms. Kim said here is exactly why you SHOULDN'T go with wirefly or any other similar service. They make you sign an additional contract, apparently in this case for 6 months, that has NOTHING to do with Sprint. Well, technically it does since it stipulates you must stay with Sprint for 6 months, but this contract isn't with Sprint.
So, if you move, find a better deal, find a reason to terminate without an ETF, etc., you're still on the hook with this company for 6 months. If you like buying through a 3rd party, I think Best Buy and Radioshak both still don't require this anti-consumer tactic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what reason could you find to terminate without an ETF though? as far as i know death is the only exception..and sometimes that doesnt even work
the stipulation (as i understand it) is that you just have to hold your end of the bargain for 6 months (something you already agreed to with your carrier by signing a 2 year anyway)...the reason for the 6 months is because thats the contract they have with the carriers..they recruit or keep customers for carriers and pass on the commission to us (which is why they can sell the phones cheaper)
its not like they are going to kill you if you break the wirefly contract..you just end up paying retail for the phone...as long as you are certain about the phone and plan that you are purchasing i dont see a problem...if you have buyers remorse or you don't do your homework and want to cut the cord..then yeah...you're gonna pay for it..thats kinda what happens when you break any contract (cell phone or otherwise)
i have been researching this company as well...reading customer comments and their fine print..im thinking about upgrading to the Note 2 through them...$300 as opposed to $420 with tmobile ($370 AFTER mail in rebate)
if kim from wirefly is still reading this...the phone is listed as $300 (for upgrades)...do you know what the end cost is gonna be? is it $300? or is there gonna be upgrade fees and tax and my first born?
jdiddy_ub said:
if kim from wirefly is still reading this...the phone is listed as $300 (for upgrades)...do you know what the end cost is gonna be? is it $300? or is there gonna be upgrade fees and tax and my first born?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure no additional tax is charged on top of the listed price. I think T-Mobile charged me an upgrade fee but instantly credited it back to me on my next bill.
Morphling27 said:
What Ms. Kim said here is exactly why you SHOULDN'T go with wirefly or any other similar service. They make you sign an additional contract, apparently in this case for 6 months, that has NOTHING to do with Sprint. Well, technically it does since it stipulates you must stay with Sprint for 6 months, but this contract isn't with Sprint.
So, if you move, find a better deal, find a reason to terminate without an ETF, etc., you're still on the hook with this company for 6 months. If you like buying through a 3rd party, I think Best Buy and Radioshak both still don't require this anti-consumer tactic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello Morphling,
Our 181 day rule is based on a contractual agreement that we have with the carriers. We don't get compensated for a sale from the carrier until after this time frame has been met. All 3rd party dealers have a stipulation period that customers must abide by even though the terms and conditions can vary from company to company, this is an industry standard. Let me know if I can answer any questions for you.
---------- Post added at 02:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:16 AM ----------
jdiddy_ub said:
what reason could you find to terminate without an ETF though? as far as i know death is the only exception..and sometimes that doesnt even work
the stipulation (as i understand it) is that you just have to hold your end of the bargain for 6 months (something you already agreed to with your carrier by signing a 2 year anyway)...the reason for the 6 months is because thats the contract they have with the carriers..they recruit or keep customers for carriers and pass on the commission to us (which is why they can sell the phones cheaper)
its not like they are going to kill you if you break the wirefly contract..you just end up paying retail for the phone...as long as you are certain about the phone and plan that you are purchasing i dont see a problem...if you have buyers remorse or you don't do your homework and want to cut the cord..then yeah...you're gonna pay for it..thats kinda what happens when you break any contract (cell phone or otherwise)
i have been researching this company as well...reading customer comments and their fine print..im thinking about upgrading to the Note 2 through them...$300 as opposed to $420 with tmobile ($370 AFTER mail in rebate)
if kim from wirefly is still reading this...the phone is listed as $300 (for upgrades)...do you know what the end cost is gonna be? is it $300? or is there gonna be upgrade fees and tax and my first born?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hello jdiddy_ub,
The carrier will charge you an upgrade fee but this is only paid once on the first billing cycle following the upgrade. The taxes for the service is assessed by the carrier and varies depending on where you live. If you are keeping the same rate plan then your taxes should not be any different then what you are currently paying now. Let me know if I can answer any further questions.
Wirefly_Kim said:
Hello Morphling,
Our 181 day rule is based on a contractual agreement that we have with the carriers. We don't get compensated for a sale from the carrier until after this time frame has been met. All 3rd party dealers have a stipulation period that customers must abide by even though the terms and conditions can vary from company to company, this is an industry standard. Let me know if I can answer any questions for you.
---------- Post added at 02:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:16 AM ----------
Hello jdiddy_ub,
The carrier will charge you an upgrade fee but this is only paid once on the first billing cycle following the upgrade. The taxes for the service is assessed by the carrier and varies depending on where you live. If you are keeping the same rate plan then your taxes should not be any different then what you are currently paying now. Let me know if I can answer any further questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not asking about the tax for service.. i am asking about tax from the cost of the phone
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Buy it from costco wireless. $39.99 upgrade. No extra etf and they refund the $36 upgrafe fee. 90 day exchange. Dont even think you have to be a member.
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 have a T-Mobile s4, which is turned off due to non payment and I want to hook it up with another carrier. I tried the info given to unlock it but after I enter the number, it doesn't go to the screen shown on the video. Is there anything I can do besides pay T-Mobile?
Nope. I'm pretty sure that you have to have an active line to unlock.
purplekity415 said:
I have a T-Mobile s4, which is turned off due to non payment and I want to hook it up with another carrier. I tried the info given to unlock it but after I enter the number, it doesn't go to the screen shown on the video. Is there anything I can do besides pay T-Mobile?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda
carrier unlock s4
ShinySide said:
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda[/QUOTE
Hi, thank you for getting back to me so soon. It is off due to non payment of the bill and i put down half on the phone, so i guess its for both. I lost my job and could not afford to pay anything to anyone until i got my unemployment, anyway i wonder if i will have a problem restoring the service when i get paid? Thanks again.
denise
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ShinySide said:
None payment of service or non payment on device?
Either which way your device is black listed. But if for non payment on device, technically device is stolen.
And either each way, this is probably a grey area to discuss on xda
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope what you mean is that carrier locking of phones is borderline criminal. There is nothing morally wrong with unlocking your own phone. If you don't pay your electric bill, they don't confiscate your lights.
Sent from my One using Tapatalk
mhannigan said:
I hope what you mean is that carrier locking of phones is borderline criminal. There is nothing morally wrong with unlocking your own phone. If you don't pay your electric bill, they don't confiscate your lights.
Sent from my One using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess you dont understand what I meant by non payment on the phone. i.e. Tmos payment plan to pay off the phone. Which you are in a contract to pay off the device. And if you dont fulfill the contract....guess who legally owns it? Cant buy a car not pay the bank and say hey i dont bank with you anymore so now I own the car legally....
ShinySide said:
Guess you dont understand what I meant by non payment on the phone. i.e. Tmos payment plan to pay off the phone. Which you are in a contract to pay off the device. And if you dont fulfill the contract....guess who legally owns it? Cant buy a car not pay the bank and say hey i dont bank with you anymore so now I own the car legally....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, it would be a little bit more like not paying your OnStar subscription fee and then having someone in a forum talk down to you like you stole the car because of it.
There is a huge difference here. The phone and the "contract" being intermingled with control over using the phone is nothing more than a tool to blackmail the customer into staying with the provider. T-Mobile's primary business is providing service for a monthly fee. I paid cash for my T-Mobile branded phone ($700+). But when I traveled abroad about a month later, they refused to unlock it because I had not had it with T-Mobile service yet for 40 days (although I have been with T-Mobile for at least a decade).
Like I said, when you don't pay your electric, they don't disable your lamps and your TV. They don't even come take your CFL bulbs that they subsidized. I get to use those bulbs with a windmill if I want to. When you don't pay your landline bill, they don't remotely disable your Panasonic cordless phone. If they COULD, they WOULD, but we wouldn't tolerate it. Unfortunately, there are people (like you) who have been lulled into thinking that this is OK when it comes to cell phones. Being a Senior Member, I think you should set a better example and use your critical thinking - and not simply imply that someone who didn't pay their cell bill shouldn't even be discussing it in public.
That was my point - indicating that you're not even sure if it should be discussed here is a bit dramatic - the guy isn't trying to screw anyone - just exploring his options. He paid for half of the phone up front, and paid for service for somewhere between 0 and 2 years. If anyone has been screwed, it's him by being held hostage.
A cell phone and a financed automobile are in different ballparks, my friend. I think you know that.
Mike
mhannigan said:
Actually, it would be a little bit more like not paying your OnStar subscription fee and then having someone in a forum talk down to you like you stole the car because of it.
There is a huge difference here. The phone and the "contract" being intermingled with control over using the phone is nothing more than a tool to blackmail the customer into staying with the provider. T-Mobile's primary business is providing service for a monthly fee. I paid cash for my T-Mobile branded phone ($700+). But when I traveled abroad about a month later, they refused to unlock it because I had not had it with T-Mobile service yet for 40 days (although I have been with T-Mobile for at least a decade).
Like I said, when you don't pay your electric, they don't disable your lamps and your TV. They don't even come take your CFL bulbs that they subsidized. I get to use those bulbs with a windmill if I want to. When you don't pay your landline bill, they don't remotely disable your Panasonic cordless phone. If they COULD, they WOULD, but we wouldn't tolerate it. Unfortunately, there are people (like you) who have been lulled into thinking that this is OK when it comes to cell phones. Being a Senior Member, I think you should set a better example and use your critical thinking - and not simply imply that someone who didn't pay their cell bill shouldn't even be discussing it in public.
That was my point - indicating that you're not even sure if it should be discussed here is a bit dramatic - the guy isn't trying to screw anyone - just exploring his options. He paid for half of the phone up front, and paid for service for somewhere between 0 and 2 years. If anyone has been screwed, it's him by being held hostage.
A cell phone and a financed automobile are in different ballparks, my friend. I think you know that.
Mike
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahaha Okay so according to your logic, Everyone go to Tmobile Only put a down payment down then run off with the phone and you legally own it. Sounds so legit and logical. Their not going to unlock a phone they legally own because some one didnt pay it off. Or unlock your phone for you when you owe them money. Nor let you use it on their service under a different account. Why? Because everyone will just rack their bill up then just open a new account so they dont have to pay that racked up bill off. Obviously you dont understand how a business and contracts work. Hes not being "held hostage" he/she just isnt going to receive a service (ie unlock code) when he/she owes money.
Is but same logic. Dont pay your phone, no unlock code. Dont pay your note, No title. As far as your 40 day problem? (And its actually 90) No where lets you buy phones out right, unlock them right away and walk away free without service. They'd lose money and wouldnt be a service but just a cell phone dealer. If you want to do that go buy a factory unlocked which costs even more then one locked to a carrier then you dont have to worry about whinning and crying you cant unlock your phone when you dont pay your bill, fulfill a contract, or fulfill the terms of service you signed when you purchased the device.
Anyways you think its cool to unlock and "run off" with a phone that isnt paid in full and money is owed on, and I dont. We can just leave it at that.
OT but actually its 7 or 14 days service needed to get it unlocked once its paid in full, I don't remember exactly but its one of those. I called T-Mobile a few months ago and that's what they told me.. It might be a recent change
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...