Letter to FCC: Why are US carriers locking handsets to networks? A public interest group has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to look at whether the wireless industry's voluntary phone unlocking commitments are even effective, claiming the practice harms competition. The advocacy group, Public Knowledge, met with FCC staffers last week and filed the comment [PDF] shortly …
This goes to show, that companies see the consumers more like potential inmates than customers.
This also helps business: if a "customer" is chained to your brand like an involuntary oarsman on a galley of ancient times, you can move all the moneys that would have been wasted in marketing and customer service straight into the profits department.
-> I seem to have misplaced my get-out-of-jail card somewhere
(US) Bought an unlocked phone directly from Apple, used on Xfinity's network for a bit till the kid went over to Europe for a semester. $10/day was a little steep so ended up getting a local plan.
After 7 days of talking to Xfinity and Apple and escalating, Xfinity said that Apple has to unlock as we didn't buy the phone from them. Really burns my ass was the Xfinity guy saying to bring the phone back to the US for unlocking.
Ended up trading in the phone, thus bypassing the issue. Still cost over $1000.
This wouldn't have to do with eSIMs, for locking there is no difference between a physical SIM and an eSIM.
Device locking doesn't stop you from replacing e.g. one AT&T SIM with another AT&T SIM, it only prevents you from replacing the AT&T SIM with a Verizon SIM.
The one issue I have with eSIMs is that it sounds like a lot of companies aren't supporting the "quick transfer" spec, which makes it a pain to upgrade. I just got an iPhone 14 Pro Max on Friday, which required AT&T's help to transfer my eSIM from my 11 Pro Max - but at least I didn't have to visit the store like I did for the physical to eSIM switch on the 11 a few months ago (which I thought would make the upcoming upgrade to the 14 seamless, but not so much)
I suspect AT&T's CSRs all being overloaded having to manually do this for several million new iPhone owners in the next few weeks will cause the beancounters to see the light about supporting the iPhone's built in way of doing this using the eSIM quick transfer standard.
The other variable I should have added is that I'm using AT&T's prepaid plan, because it is cheaper than their 'traditional' postpaid plan. The price you pay is that they deliberately make the customer service for it suck compared to AT&T's postpaid plans (yes, AT&T's customer support can actually be worse than you get on their postpaid plans!)
So I'm not sure how much of this is true for AT&T's postpaid plans. They may want to make what I did as painful as possible because they want to discourage BYOD as much as possible, preferring people to buy phones through them. I wonder if instead of buying my phone unlocked from Apple I had upgraded through AT&T on its postpaid plans the whole process would have been as easy at it could have been if they supported Apple's built in (and GSMA standard) process.
As far as I can tell, the rest of the world is behind the US in eSIM support, which is why Apple went eSIM only on just the US iPhones. But I'm sure that will change with the iPhone 15 & 16, and Android phones will follow.
Apple says it's unlocked. Xfinity couldn't make up their mind. We check every 24 hours to see if it unlocked from Xfinity's perspective but the email saying it was never arrived. 7 days of "it takes 24 hours"
Not sure if it was esim or not, we were trying to put in another carrier's sim w/o changing the phone number.
Worked better for the kid, getting a "local" number for the country as the apps worked better according to them.
quote: we were trying to put in another carrier's sim w/o changing the phone number.
/quote
oh.. you were trying to port an US number... to another country. Another continent even. (Europe)
is porting a number to an overseas network, in another country (thus different telecoms regulation authority) even possible?
edit: call forwarding is one thing... but it appears you tried to port the number instead of forwarding it.
No, porting the number would not be allowed. Could it be done logically... of course. But it would not be done.
Attempting to port the number to another country would trample over standards, regulations, and sensible configuration. Better to just forward the number or tell people you care about your new local number.
Verizon did the same thing with an iPhone XR that was bought and paid in full from Best Buy. Not from Verizon through Best Buy, but Unlocked from Best Buy. This was in 2019. It also happens that Xfinity Mobile is using Verizon's network. Might just be a coincidence.
This post has been deleted by its author
They are sold unlocked but when you put a SIM in they get locked to that network
I didn't even know that was possible. Is there any indication of this when you insert the SIM, does it pop up a dialog asking to lock your phone?
Can this happen with an eSIM activation? Like if I travel with my new eSIM only iPhone and get an eSIM for service where am I and scan a QR code to load it and activate the profile can it really lock my phone to that network without my knowledge so that when I come home I'm totally screwed with my phone locked to a carrier that doesn't even operate in the US? Surely that can't be the case!
Are you sure of this? I have a work phone and personal one. iPhones, the same model. ATT. The work one is sim locked, the personal one I've got off ebay, brand new, unlocked and it's remained so despite "sim-swapping" the card from work one into it. No harm done (and I'd be unhappy if your statement was true as I may eventually place the prepaid tmobile card into it, when I cut it down in size to fit once tmobile for real cuts off my emergency flip phone from their 3g net, surprisingly this thing still works).
Because some see the shiny and the headline £(not very much) cost per month and think "why not?" Then they factor in the "free" replacement in two or three years and, because they can't or won't do the sums, nor think about the real effect of the lock-in, they sign up. Sometimes I fear for humanity.
Years ago my daughter was going to university (history, I console myself that it is at least a literate, traditional subject) and wanted a mobile telephone. The only explanation that got through was pointing out that about every fourth shop was a 'phone shop and who else was paying the rent if not her?
Why would anyone buy a phone from a carrier?
AFAICT they do it because it's fast and a lot less work. You can walk into the <carrier> store, pull out your credit card, point at a phone, and 5 minutes later you're back on the street.
Not everybody enjoys comparing phone specs and trying to determine which phones will work on which carriers.. Here in the US the latter was a real issue, and it wasn't all that easy to figure out.
I've never bought a smart phone from a carrier, but long ago I dd get one or two flip phones from Verizon. The last few flip phones I bought were all unlocked (either used carrier-phones or non-carrier retail phones).
In the US there were two different mobile technologies CDMA (&TDMA years ago) and the more familiar GSM. If you were on a network using CDMA a GSM phone wouldn’t work and vice versa. That’s before you had to consider the different frequencies used by different networks across the continent. To get a phone that was guaranteed to work on your network it was often easier just to buy from the carrier.
Plus the carrier often had phones that were exclusives to them. You want that phone you buy from us thank you.
That's like asking why someone would take out a car loan instead of just paying cash. Not everyone has $50,000 just lying around, and not everyone has $1000 just lying around. Or even if they do they would rather pay for the phone over time and have an extra $1000 in the bank in the meantime in case some major unexpected expense comes along, which is the same reason many people who could write a check for a brand new car choose to make payments instead.
Sure, you can argue that someone who can't easily buy a phone outright shouldn't buy a $1000 phone, but then I could argue someone who can't easily buy a car outright shouldn't buy a $50,000 car. If everyone thought that way, the number of new cars sold every year would be a whole lot smaller!
you can argue that someone who can't easily buy a phone outright shouldn't buy a $1000 phone
Thanks, yes, I will make that argument.
Frankly, I've never seen a cogent argument for why anyone should buy a $1000 phone. I could certainly afford to; I certainly would never do so.
Frankly, I've never seen a cogent argument for why anyone should buy a $1000 phone
I just bought a $1099 iPhone 14 Pro Max and received it last Friday, replacing a three year old 11 Pro Max that I got $370 back on a trade in so the net cost with tax was about $800. I use my phone 2-3 hours a day, so let's call that 800 hours a year. If I paid $800 every year to upgrade that would be $1/hour for the time I'm using my phone. But since I replace it every 2-3 years now it is more like 30-50 cents per hour. That's pretty cheap entertainment. That compares pretty favorably to the cost of most entertainment. Just try to be a "gamer" for less, or calculate how many hours a day you have to watch Netflix before it is cheaper than that (let alone if you also subscribe to Disney+ and others)
You have to spend your money on something, otherwise what is the point of making more than you need to eat ramen and have a roof to keep the rain off your head. You don't think it is worth it to spend $1099 on a phone, you undoubtedly spend money on things I would find just as frivolous as you find that. Maybe you like fancy restaurants, collect rare vinyl albums, buy a new car every few years, or have a wife who every year chooses a room to be remodeled or refurnished. If any of those are true you'd be damn happy to get away with spending only $1099 in any given year!
The low cost per hour is irrelevant if you can get the same utility & entertainment for half the price. No one is arguing that buying a smart phone isn't useful. The argument is that out of 30-50 cents/hour, you're paying 15-25 cents per hour for a logo (and the "design", and the notch, and the 56 cameras, and the "battery life", and the... bla bla bla, I've had both).
That's no different than buying a new car vs a used car, or luxury car vs an economy car - except that the price per hour difference is measured in dollars rather than cents.
So I take it you are also arguing that no one should buy a luxury car, or even a new car, or a high end PC, or a large screen 4K TV, or anything else that fits your "get the same utility/entertainment for half the price" scenario.
Like I said, you have to spend your money on something. If all I required was my most basic needs satisfied I could have retired at age 30, and drive a 20 year old car, live in the same 'starter' home I first bought, never eat out, etc. etc.
If you buy "on payments", you're taking out a loan and paying interest, often at quite high rates. You have to ask yourself, "should I pay up front, should I take a bank loan, should I use a credit card, should I pay the retailers outsourced loan-shark rate?". Then work out which is cheapest or most affordable,
I have purchased my last three smartphones via the carrier for these reasons:
1. I can buy on credit without interest as part of my bill
2. My bill is reimbursed by my employer up to $AMOUNT which can include my phone payment only if it is part of the provider's bill. That amount tends to be higher than my service, so my phone fee fits nicely.
3. I've never had an issue from that provider when asking to unlock the phone early.
If any of those changes, but especially the second, I might change my process.
"If you buy "on payments", you're taking out a loan and paying interest, often at quite high rates.'
Not necessarily true.
I bought a new iPhone SE in the Watford Apple Store earlier this year.
I used Apple's interest free credit.
Curiously it was about 4 pence cheaper in total; than buying it outright.
I tried to buy my wife a new iPhone at the T-Mobile store. Pay in full, in cash. Been a customer with them for nearly 20 years (via their Sprint acquisition), so this is not like some unknown customer trying to get a phone with a bad credit card. They refused to sell me an unlocked phone, and insisted I endure a waiting period.
They lost the sale. I went over to the Apple store and got the same phone for the same price. Unlocked.
Sprint has gone in the crapper since the T-Mobile acquisition. We will probably switch to a different carrier at some time. The problem is they are all just different fleas on the same dog. If just one of them actually gave a shit about their customers they would dominate the market. A human on the phone within 30 seconds, and not a robo call tree. Then that human is authorized to use their brain to solve the problem. Crazy talk, I know. It is like they are all in a race to see who can be the worst.
As a telecom peon, I can enlighten you to a few things you knew was true.
Churn is considered the biggest threat to profit. They will do anything to avoid it. To us, they say you avoid churn by providing stellar customer service. Rose colored glasses and that. I too can make a difference! In practice, they try to prevent churn by making it hard to report trouble, change service, or anything else. Absolutely the only thing that matters to a telecom is your check clearing every month. You getting what you're paying for is a happy acident.
They outsource customer service to script readers who will say nothing other than your problem is being worked on, and they can never reach the technician. As a fellow provider, I have the advantage of having the numbers they give out when reporting their own troubles to my company, but you lesser scum otherwise known as "customer" have no such access. You get the script reader.
When you want to add service you get a salesman, when you want to cancel you get an email address. And, even when you add, the service will suck. One company I used to work for would start billing you for service on the agreed start date, even if they hadn't even run fiber to your new facility yet. And once billing starts, your install becomes a maintenance problem. Guess who won't be completing your install? If your install date is missed you may not get what you're paying for for months.
Fun fun fun. Telecom companies think you owe them your everlasting devotion for deigning to allow you access to their network. I'm glad I retire soon, but my current customers will hate it. I'm one of the few left in the industry who remembers the source of revenue that pays my paycheck and when I go, one less person actually making an effort on my customer's behalf. I'll be replaced by 10 script reading Filipinos from Cebu, telecom outsourcing capital of the world.
Anon, because I don't want to be "retired" early.
And half the time you have to absolutely prove to them that Yes, the line really is bad- they will swear up and down that it's fine when in reality the neighborhood access box is on fire due to the car that landed on top of it upside down from the accident in the road next to it. Or that the local drug addicts decided that the stuff inside the fiber distribution box was all high grade copper, removed it with a fire axe, then realized that it's just plastic and glass, smashed it into bits and left it behind (along with said fire axe and the remains of the 8 ball they took beforehand)...
The cable companies are not much better, but at least their damned support call tree has hooks into the head end to run automated diagnostics and resets.
And do not expect the "support" to have even a basic understanding.
Telekom "support" insisted everything was fine and only my router (fritzbox) had issues. They always tell you that they do something they call "line check" (Leitungsprüfung) and then its "diagnose" is mostly "all fine at our end,must be your fault".
Too bad the fritzbox has rudimentary diagnostics and even worse that something like traceroute exists....
Bonus facepalm points when they do not accept your hint that their subcontractor left the DSL box down the road open to the elements and that one of the usual hefty autumn rains just started....
I actually think that this is a direct result of the size of the company and therefore the height of the management chain. Once a director gets *so* removed from the customer that they are just numbers, then it is pretty much guaranteed to see this kind of behaviour.
Might has well have the company run by computers programmed to maximise profit in the most arithmetically efficient way possible, everything else be damned. Honestly, that's probably how Amazon get such a bad rap: they have eliminated the human element from so many aspects of their operation.
"No, government is in a class of its own in that category."
I would normally agree but in recent times there are not many discernible differences between government and corporations, apart from the name and letterhead when it comes to respect for customers/citizens (rights) or whatever the human livestock is called from the respective organisation.
Concerning inefficiencies, despite (or because of ?)my age i cannot remember wether any relevant differences ever existed.
I've found the MVNOs to have much better customer service than the physical network operators. I'm currently with Consumer Cellular ("phones for old people!") and their service by voice call or email has been quite satisfactory.
The disadvantage is limited or no off-network roaming, which is certainly a potential problem for many. In my case it hasn't been an issue, since my only significant off-network periods in the past decade or so have been in Europe, where I just swap in a local PAYG SIM for the duration.
I don't see the allure of a $1,000 phone so an iPhone is definitely not on my list. I buy second hand, unlocked and try to keep a spare on hand as well. I also don't want an eSIM. If one phone goes for a swim, I want to pull out the SIM, dry it off and stick it the backup phone. The phone co's seem to have some idiotic script that wants to require doing something with the damaged phone and the CSR is stumped when it can't happen. They'll ask to get some reading from the old phone and keep asking no matter how many times you tell them it's not pining for the fjords, it's stone cold dead. Sheesh.
Mobs are too small and too fragile to not be thinking about and having a backup plan if you rely on one. Even with planning, I just had several days of no phone service and Ryan Reynolds can go and fornicate himself. Cheap? Yes, Good service? no. The CSR's spend too much time begging for a thumbs up even before they've solved the issue without wasting an hour of my time.
I stopped buying 'Premium Phones' in early 2017.
I bought a Galaxy S8 at full price and damaged it the first week I bought it. Seeing that it was not repairable I switched back to my old Galaxy S3. I used the S3 for and additional 36 months without a problem. It provided all the features I needed from a phone.
When I needed to update the S3 because I was going overseas and it would not roam on the network in the country I was visiting I bought a $170ish Motorola G Power. I chose it because I like the long battery life. I can use it for three days relatively heavy use on a single charge. I switched my whole family to that model or its newer cousins ever since then. They typically retail for just over $200
Like you I will never again buy a Premium Phone.
Absolutely, 6s was peak iPhone (functionality-wise). The idea of paying 800$ for base model is ridiculous (not to mention missing features like more convenient fingerprint reader, audio jack and proper home button instead haptic fakery). Apple has great PR with regard to respecting privacy but some of this is plain bs (why else personalized ads are opt out) and being locked into walled garden gets old over time. Esim seems like another lock-in vector (judging by the ease of switch from physical to esim but not the other way).
"convenient fingerprint reader"
I don't find a fingerprint reader as valuable in any way, not withstanding its convenience.
I secure my phone by not putting anything on it that needs to be secured. Since so many other people do, a thief might be placated by my handing them my unlocked phone and completely forgo taking my wallet or other things that actually have value.
Australia still has locked phones. They do not have the UK's sensible scheme of just SMS. The thing about locked phones is that they are branded, and rarely have security updates - say like Google's phones that do. All phones under $200 should be automatically unlocked - without drama, and without contrived excuses.
Australia has a 2nd bigger problem. Many take out locked phones overseas, get them unlocked for about 5quid, and they come back with a cloned duplicate IMEI and S/N. All the professional criminals are proud, and able to send the police off on goose chases and decoys. Locking should be banned. Customer can always 'Opt in' to locking, should they choose. But not allowing opt out on purchase - well that is criminal.
>> Locking should be banned.
I totally agree. I travel internationally extensively and my phone has two SIM card slots. I get a local SIM card for every country I visit. I wouldn't be able to do this if my phone was locked.
Network locking is a shocking practice. All it does is inconvenience the consumer... there is absolutely no benefit to the consumer. Weasels!
" All it does is inconvenience the consumer... there is absolutely no benefit to the consumer."
Which is absolutely normal for each and every kind of "copy protection", "(digital)rights management" and such.
As for the ninja lock-in of customers own devices via network provider, i would consider such a practice in the range of theft and blackmail.
I also do not fall for "premium" whateverstuff. The samsung galaxy S mini, the motorola Razr and the legendary nokia 3310 are the only phones i still own with manufacturer names that are known worldwide.
After the Blackview BV5900 (price tag around 100-120 euro) that currently experiences a well deserved rest as emergency phone after more than 2 years on site, building site (with metal dust and welding fumes "on air"), harsh weather and environment, several gravity induced contacts with metal surfaces and concrete, i switched to its bigger "brother" BV6600pro with its 8000+mAh battery, a 40x80 FLIR and a considerable higher price around 300 euros. As FLIR camera addons with pretty much the same resolution range around 270 euros, i decided to give myself a nerdy treat. ;)
Added convenience bonus: the fingerprint sensor is now located within the power button instead of near it.
BV phones dont care wether you "hold them wrong" or "unpacked them wrong" and although you trade in a slower (mediatek) chipset those things - if equipped with a good screen protector - are even sturdier than the CAT smartphone from my colleague that lasted about a year under the very same conditions the low/mid budget BV series survived without issues. Added bonus: screws instead of glue, threaded brass inlets in the plastic parts.
Another colleague has taken a liking to the low budget ""Armor" series from Ulefone after trashing several Iphones despite of providing them with expensive "sturdy" and "armoured" cases.
While "mainstream" customers seem to favour shiny and new, i tend to look for sturdy and reliable... Imagine the face of a samsung or iphone devotee who sneered at your brick, then gets a little electrical help via reverse charge..
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
