Technology

59414 readers

2869 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

483

AT&T tries to defend why it shouldn't let you unlock your phone sooner (www.androidauthority.com)

submitted 1 month ago by neme@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world

102 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 18 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Out of curiosity, I would imagine that if someone goes the carrier-financing route, they'd still be on the hook for the cost of the phone even if they jumped to a different carrier? I don't want to sound like I'm in support of at&t, but it doesn't seem terribly unreasonable to keep a customer in place while they still have a balance on the hardware, or is there something else I'm missing?

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yeah. I always saw it as a trade-off. "Here's a cheaper or zero interest loan for a phone. You get this in exchange for paying us a cell phone bill for the next year or two."

What pusses me off is that none of the big three give any discount if you have your own phone. If the guy next to me gets $600 off his cell phone purchase and pays $80/month, how come I still pay $80/month with my own device?

[–] ODuffer@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Wow, I pay £10 a month for unlimited calls/text and 45GB data. Not even on contract, it's a monthly rolling bill, I can cancel at any time. The reason for this, there's pretty good competition between carriers/NVMOs in the UK at the moment, driving prices down.

[–] ECB@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah most of europe is waaaaay better when is comes to mobile plans compared to the US.

I don't use use that much data, but my 8gb plan is just under €6 per month.

In the US, I had a plan like this for over $30...

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not sure what carrier you're on, but I pay $35/mo per line with Verizon and have 2 SIM cards for my phone. Granted we have a family plan, and my wife pays $60/mo cause she wants her latest iPhone, but it usually works out cheaper to buy a phone online outright a year or two after release and then I'm not paying the recurring finance charges.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago

Thanks. I just threw out $80 as an example, but I get mine pretty cheap through t mobile. Got 3 lines and their gateway internet for like $110.

[–] darkmarx@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I agree with what you're saying. They got the phone from Carrier A with the expectation the phone plan went with it. Once the phone is paid off, they can take the phone to Carrier B. Since they phone is basically bought on an interest free loan, the interest is recouped by the plan, and the collateral for not paying is a loss of the phone plan and use of the phone. To leave the plan, payoff the phone.

That does require that, the moment the phone is paid off, it should be automatically unlocked. There shouldn't have to be a request or additional waiting. And the customer should be notified that it's unlocked along with an explanation that they can now use the phone with any other provider.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago

Automatic unlocking sounds like a pipe dream given the American business landscape, but there shouldn't be any barriers to unlocking, even if the customer has to request it. People are likely stuck in the mindset of yesteryear where phones weren't transferrable between carriers (especially with band compatibility of GSM vs CDMA), and I'd wager that many people don't even realize it's possible these days. I can't say I blame carriers for wanting to maintain the illusion, and I don't necessarily think they should be forced to advertise it, but the option should be plain and simple for those who want to exercise the right.

[–] mark3748@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

They automatically unlock it once it’s paid off. They have a disclaimer that it needs to stay on the network for 60 days after it’s paid off, but I think that’s a CYA because mine was unlocked within a day of the last payment.

I just checked and I have 6 unlocked phones on my account and never requested any of them.

[–] elvith@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago

I’m not from the US, but where I live it’s either (or a combination of):

Your contract runs for two years. You can cancel it before, but still have to pay for the first two years. Often prices depend on which category of phone you want (say 20€/month for the service, 25€ with a “smart” phone, 30€ with a “premium” phone, 35€ with a “power” phone,…)
You have two separate contracts, one for your phone, one for the mobile service. In this case you might pay for your phone 24 months, or 36, or whatever you agreed on and you can cancel the mobile service independently (assuming it’s not also locked to 2 years)
Some carriers even allow you to only get a phone without a contract for the mobile service.
If you finance a phone with your carrier, they’re legally bound to tell you what you pay for your phone monthly and how much for the service - there are many ways around that, unfortunately…

In any case, you get an unlocked phone.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

You're right. You still have to pay the remaining balance of the phone when you cancel early.