Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

androidauthority.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 286 posts

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#51

Post by grahamj »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #40
FireBeyond wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's the difference between giving away a $1200 phone in exchange for a 2-year contract which costs $50 extra per month That phone is generally not given away - the only phones "given away" are generally low end. $1200 flagship phones come at the cost of a contract on the line AND a monthly payment for the device that pays for it in full.

If the monthly payment pays for the device in full, what's the problem with a customer ending the service contract while continuing the monthly payments? If the monthly payment doesn't pay for it in full, why not just make the monthly device payments $n more, and the cellular service payments $n less? That way you don't need to worry if the service plan is cancelled, because the device payments would still be due (or…

Because they don't make much on the device payments, as opposed to the bloated plan fees.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#52

Post by miki123211 »

cogman10 wrote: post #14

I support this move as hopefully it will kill off the practice of carrier specific OSes. The last carrier phone I bought was a Samsung Galaxy 4 from T-Mobile. I got a total of 0 os updates out of it because T-Mobile never released a new version of the OS (even though Samsung did). They just abandoned the phone. At this point the most important quality of a phone to me is active security updates, so I'll never buy one…

No it won't, not unless it's specifically addressed in the law.

The EU (or at least most of it) has banned SIM locks a long time ago, but carrier-branded Android phones are still a thing.

In fact, the situation here is even more pernicious, there have been news reports[1] of carriers being able to remotely lock your phone down if you stop paying the bill, or if you buy it used and the first owner stops paying the bill.

[1] Polish https://niebezpiecznik.pl/post/plus-instaluje-cos-na-ksztalt...

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#53

Post by grahamj »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #35

Wow, I forgot SIM locks were still a thing. Here in the EU this has been dealt with like a decade ago or so.

Same in Canada, we got a rare regulator win some time ago, much to the chagrin of our draconian carriers. Number portability too.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#54

Post by monkeywork »

RHSeeger wrote: post #34
happymellon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a car, but then decided to not make the repayments. What's the recourse for the lender?

To be fair, car sellers have also started things like being able to brick your car if you're behind on payments. Or, for the up and coming ones, have the car just drive itself back to the dealer (Ford).

can you share a link to this for story happening?

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#55

Post by op7 »

mystified5016 wrote: post #26
op7 wrote: post #20

I worked in the prepaid phone industry for 4 years so I have some insight on this. This is bad. The whole purpose of phones being locked for 6(now 12 at Mpcs) mo. is so that we are able to offer very decent phones to poor people who would otherwise not be able to afford the up front cost. Were talking about $200-500 phones being given away for completely FREE to new customers sold at a LOSS and we only HOPE to recove…

So your argument is that a cell carrier can't be profitable without entrapping poor people into long contracts with debt. Therefore we must legally protect the rights of businesses to exploit people.

They arent locked into any contract whatsoever at prepaid companies like MetroPCS, Cricket, Tracfone, Boost etc. These companies provide the phones as interest free loans and the businesses incur all the risk.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#56

Post by smallnamespace »

toast0 wrote: post #29
486sx33 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but let’s just say you got a 1200 device and only made the first two payments… jump to another carrier and abandon the one with the finance plan. What’s the recourse for the carrier?

Credit reporting and collections. There's a reason carriers pull credit reports for post paid accounts and 'free' phone promos right? Although, personally, I prefer to be on the prepaid side of the carrier. I'm not getting a promotional phone, and I'm not paying for it in my monthly rate, so if my phone works for more than two years, I'm saving money. And I don't really need to use secret handshake financing... I'd r…

> Credit reporting and collections.

This has a loss rate of around 70-80% across the collections industry, which is an extremely strong disincentive to go this route since it's just highly inefficient. The high cost of the collections process is a deadweight loss upon all society.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#57

Post by siskiyou »

Just adding a little bit of context about AT&T: I collect used cell phones, erase them, unlock when possible, and distribute them to unhoused people through several local food shelves, which allows those people to access benefits, housing, health care, jobs, etc which would otherwise be out of reach. With AT&T I can go to their website and unlock an old phone in minutes, allowing them to use a no-cost carrier like QLink Wireless. With T-Mobile or Consumer Cellular (or many others) they just give you the finger. The phone could be e-waste for all they care.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#58

Post by MR4D »

jalk wrote: post #2

Can't the operators just sell unlocked phones with monthly installments instead? The installment plan will then include free service for some amount of data/minutes. If the user chooses to switch operator, they are still bound by the installment contract to pay off the phone.

There is a reason US cell rates are so high. That reason is because of lock-in.

If they did what you want, rates would fall, as would their profitability.

I expect them to fight this tooth and nail.

Re: FCC wants all phones unlocked in sixty days, AT&T and T-Mobile aren't so keen

#59

Post by kylehotchkiss »

AzzyHN wrote: post #42

It's not just carriers that enjoy locked phones. Currently, BestBuy (the 2nd largest electronics retailer in America, after Amazon) can only sell unlocked iPhones that are at least a year old. If you want a shiny new iPhone 16 Pro that's unlocked, you have to purchase it from Apple directly.

I don't see this as Best Buy's preferred situation, rather they really need to bring people into stores and this is an agreement with carriers to give them preferential treatment regarding access to their registration systems
Post reply on HN