• mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    42 minutes ago

    They aggressively buy spin off services to ensure a locked market as well.

    Cricket wireless was a on AT&T network provider that outshined AT&T because it allowed any device + better prices.

    So naturally they bought them out and shutdown the any allowed devices to force you into buying a carrier phone to ensure your device will be locked.

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    “Narcissistic domestic abuser claims the exit doors that are locked from both sides are just for the protection of their spouse and its in their best interest to be secure”

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Locked phones are what led me into the rabbit hole of purchasing phones from manufacturer, since the carriers not only lock phones but hobble the OS.

    It did mean understanding what was necessary for a phone to qualify for given carriers, but I can tech when I need to, and I tech for my friends when they need it.

    In 2024, T Mobile and AT&T (and Verizon) have all demonstrated they do not engage in good faith commerce, and so right now they’re being sniveling little shits (quote me please) because the FCC and DoC are escaping regulatory capture.

    That is to say, the end users are tired of their shit. Apple and Google, too.

    • return2ozma@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      My T-Mobile phone that’s been unlocked and moved over to Google Fi has the T-Mobile image whenever you start up the phone. I’ll only buy phones directly from the manufacturer now.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 minutes ago

        You’d have to flash new firmware for that to change. In the old days each phone was carrier specific and had to have the exact right firmware but now they’re fairly generic and are cross compatible (do your own research). You could check XDA Developers for the process.

  • DaddleDew@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Is there a technical term for when a company or corporation makes a statement that is a blatant bad faith argument like that?

    If none exists, I’d call it “Corporate massturbation”. Because they’re trying to jerk everyone off.

    Edit Here’s another one: “Corporate Anal Ostriching.” Because they’re shoving their heads up their own asses

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      25 minutes ago

      It’s always the same argument. “This objectively bad thing for consumers is actually good for consumers because it allows us to offer a lower price!”

      No, dipshits, you are choosing to make your product shittier than necessary and charging customers to undo your shittery. That’s not some external thing, it’s something that you chose.

  • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    6 hours ago

    So the story is ‘if they have to be unlocked, we can’t offer discounts on the phones’.

    Okay fine but uh, the last time I used a post-paid subsidized phone, I signed a contract. That stipulated how much I’d pay for however many months, and what the early cancellation fee was, as well as what the required buy-out for the phone was if I left early.

    In what way is that insufficient to ensure that a customer spends the money to justify the subsidy?

    • Hegar@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s just a lie. I don’t think it’s meant to hold up to scrutiny, it’s just meant to be repeated.

    • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 hours ago

      That’s exactly right. Users will have to purchase phones on credit like we do for every other major (and sometimes minor) purchase. This doesn’t change the relationship between carriers and their customers at all. It only changes their accounting.

    • TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Nono that wasn’t a service contract, it was a payment plan on the phone. And you can’t cancel the service until you pay off the phone.

      It’s different…. Really….

    • pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      This is not me defending any telecom, but locking subsidized phones during the contract period, is one of the only reasonably legitimate use cases for carrier locking.

      And the reason is simple, fraud. Carrier locked phones that have been reported for fraud/nonpayment, can’t be used off network. It doesn’t help recover the cost for the carrier, but it does deter that type of fraud.

      Whereas unlocked phones can just be taken to another network, which means they’re resale value is worth the effort to steal in the first place.

      Now, all that is true, but that doesn’t mean I’m in favor of it, or that telecoms have ever made unlocking fully paid phones easy, they haven’t, so fuck them.

      And before anyone points it out, yes, I’m aware locked phones still have have value for fraud, but that fraud typically has a higher threshold for entry, as it involves having the contacts who can leverage overseas black markets.

      • basmati@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Not even unlocked phones can be used on another (us) carrier if reported stolen, all IMEIs associated with the device are blacklisted across all legal carriers in the country.

        • pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          No, they are not. Blacklists are per carrier, at least when dealing with American primary carriers, and not MVNOs.

          • basmati@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            No, it’s nationwide, all carriers and mvnos are signed on to the US Block Status since IMEI became standard. It’s a separate list from the global GSMA and not all carriers in the US report to the GSMA like they should,but if a device is reported lost or stolen in the US it cannot be activated by a US carrier until resolved.

            • pandapoo@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              55 minutes ago

              Except I have used unlocked IMEI blacklisted devices on different carriers, so if one exists in theory, it doesn’t appear to be there in practice.

  • lnxtx@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 hours ago

    If they are good, why then the Europe ended that practice nearly 2 decades ago?

  • Scott@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Never buy a phone from your carrier, they will do some evil shit to try and force you to stay

    • five82@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      It was probably incompetence more than malice but T-Mobile customer service incorrectly told me multiple times that I was not allowed to pay off my phone balance early to unlock it. I’m on US Mobile now and I’ll never go back to postpaid.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        With Deutsche Telekom, never attribute to incompetence that which can be attributed to greed.

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Ohh look a corpo has opinions about your property 🤡

    Remember that nextime you pay for a subscription

  • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s weird to see T-mobile taking this stance. I switched to them years ago because they were one of the few that supported unlocked phones, and even offered them for sale. Their policies might have changed on this, but I just bought an unlocked phone off Ebay this Summer and all I needed to do was pop my sim card into the new device. Hell I had to specifically install the visual voicemail app because there wasn’t any bloatware on the phone when I got it. So I guess I’m not following what their complaint is about?

    • ozymandias117@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Every carrier lets you use an unlocked phone on their network

      T-Mobile no longer lets you buy unlocked phones from them

      • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        That’s a shame to hear, but yeah they’ve certainly changed since I signed on. Not that I expect any other to be better at this point.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The US peasant is not tech savy enough to do what you do, they end up in some lop sided contract with a corpo parasite that attempts to make their lives uncomfortable.

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I remember their “Uncarrier” slogan and how they were doing things very differently from the big providers and even led to them doing away with contracts and such.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Newsflash: T-Mobile is a big provider. They took some standard European practices, also technology, and then pretended to be a small scrappy startup in the US until they had enough of a customer base to return to their usual monopolistic ways.

        The only thing that keeps them half-way in check over here is forced unbundling: If you have network infrastructure you need to let other providers use it, at regulated prices. Which is really necessary as they inherited every single landline in the country from the old state monopoly.

        Be glad that the postal service got broken up into telecoms, postal/parcel and banking before getting privatised if it hadn’t it would be an absolute scourge on the world. Imagine them cross-financing such market takeovers with the additional resources from the largest logistics company in the world (DHL). Banking sector is less impressive right now Deutsche Bank doesn’t know what to do with it. I have no idea why they even bother, they don’t care about end-consumer banking there’s no money in that.

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    They shouldn’t be locked at all. If the phone is included with the contract, it probably requires you to pay it off if you cancel early anyways.

  • Venicon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Fuck the lot of them. Shop around for the best deal that doesn’t try to screw you over.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      the term is MVNO, thats where you want to shop, folks. bring your own device too.

      deny the parasite them profits.