• progandy@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Meanwhile Australia is going to fore carriers to disconnect customers with devices that are not guaranteed to support emergency calling over volte. As there are still unsolved problems with detecting that, the providers fall back to only allowing devices they provided themselves.

    • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      60 minutes ago

      god I hate how the government acts like smartphones need to call. smartphones are able to be used as computers and should be treated as such.

  • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Just make carrier locking illegal and have customers pay the actual price, now it’s just hidden costs to the consumer.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      You’re going off of phone contracts that haven’t been around for a decade. The cost of the phone up front, and has been for a long time.

    • HobbitFoot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 hours ago

      It isn’t been a hidden cost for a while. Phone companies sell the phones at full price, but consumers want the 2 year 0% APR financing.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 hours ago

        If consumers bought the phones from a third party, there’d be absolutely no reason to lock the phone to a carrier. But when carriers also provide the financing, there’s an incentive to keep them on the service until the bill is paid. Screw that.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Then don’t buy a $1k device, and instead buy something you can afford?

            Otherwise, there are tons of buy now, pay later services, so you could just use any of those.

        • HobbitFoot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 hours ago

          But who is going to provide the financing otherwise?

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            There are tons of buy now, pay later services, and they make money through revenue sharing w/ the retailer, as well as when people fail to pay back the loan on time.

            But ideally, this would just put downward pressure on phone prices as people look to buy phones w/ cash instead of going into debt.

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

                Honestly any moderately expensive item can be purchased through installments. Go to any electronics store and they’ll have offers like that, and they use different services to provide that financing.

                It’s a non-issue, carriers don’t need to be a party to that at all. I can literally go to BestBuy or Apple and get 0% financing on a new phone and take it to any carrier I want.

  • Rin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I accidentally broke my Sony after drowning it a little too hard. I remember going into a AT&T store at a mall in the us and having this literal conversation.

    “Do you have the Pixel 7 Pro?”

    “Yes! We do.”

    “Does it come carrier unlocked?”

    “No…”

    “Thanks for your time”

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

        Same, and phones are good enough now that I feel perfectly comfortable buying a device that is two generations behind. I recently saved nearly $1300 by doing this ($1800 when it was new; I paid $550), and the phone feels just as fast and responsive as a brand new flagship.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I get all mine on eBay. There are some big-time sellers who are pros at reselling old phones and give an honest A-D rating. Same goes for PCs. Buy from the pros if you’re wary of the average Joe.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Exactly. I bought my Pixel 8 refurbished on eBay, and everything came as expected, and honestly in better shape than I was expecting. Find someone with good reviews, check for recent bad reviews, and then go for it. I paid <$400 and feel like I got a really good deal (I also stacked w/ an eBay discount, which rocked).

          I bought my last phone new from Google Fi (fantastic deal) then transferred to a cheaper service after the required time, and the two phones I got before that (my SO’s and mine) were also from eBay. It’s a great way to go, just be careful and don’t buy something at the absolute lowest price since there’s probably a reason they’re advertised cheaper than the pack.

      • Rin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I ended up just ordering one from a friend’s amazon account.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I don’t play this game. I buy my own unlocked phone and find prepaid cell service at a fraction of the cost.

    • M600@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Why is prepaid service cheaper? I never understood why plans cost more. You would thing it would be the opposite.

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

        Some reasons:

        • prioritized traffic - if towers are congested, carrier customers get priority over prepaid customers
        • name brand recognition - most have heard of Verizon, T-Mobile, or AT&T, few have heard of Tell, Ting, or RedPocket
        • financing - you can get “free” upgrades from bigger carriers, whereas I pay cash w/ my prepaid service
        • features - most big carriers support roaming (sometimes international roaming), whereas those tend to be ala carte w/ prepaid

        In short, you get a bit more hassle w/ prepaid, but you get a lot of savings. I pay <$10/month for my service (1GB data, unlimited text, 300 minutes call), and I could get unlimited everything for $25-30 (depending on prepaid carrier). I bought my phone for <$400, whereas cost is less of a concern for big carriers since they often offer financing issues. I hate monthly payments, so I prefer to buy devices in cash and keep my monthly service payments low.

      • gray@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Money up front vs people just not paying the bill at the end of the month.

      • Psythik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Because prepaid customers get lower priority on the tower. If I’m in even a moderately crowded area, my connection speeds go to shit and nothing loads.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It won’t last, oligopolies are buying out mvnos to consolidate further. Maybe anti trust fear will halt them but doubtful.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          There are still a ton of MVNOs though, and from what I can tell, MVNOs are generally not getting bought out by other telecoms, but by companies looking to diversify/transition their business. For example, Dish bought Ting and Boost, probably because they see their core offering (satellite TV) dying out w/ streaming taking over, and they want to diversify a bit. I’ve been seeing a lot of internet companies trying to offer mobile service, and it honestly doesn’t bother me if that’s the kind of consolidation we’re seeing.

          Verizon buying Tracfone is a lot more troubling, but that seems to be more of the exception rather than the rule. I don’t necessarily like it because any acquisition tends to change the business model, but I don’t think it’s dangerous in any way, it just means customers may end up needing to shift around who they get service through to find what they’re looking for.

          • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Mint and Tmo?

            I shot off the hil based on tmo and vz deal.

            Point being if they want to, they can cut us off.

            Mint was taking too much biz from tmo is why it was bought out is my understanding

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              Yeah, that one is painful too. But again, those deals are fairly rare, and for every Mint, there’s another MVNO.

              The only real change we should make here is to require network operators to offer their service to MVNOs at reasonable rates. Ideally, the network would operate as a separate business from the carrier. But we only really need to enforce that if MVNOs disappear, and there are still a ton of options.

        • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          The planet won’t last. I just have to make sure my cell coverage is cheap until society collapses.

          Ten-twenty years?

    • ObstreperousCanadian@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      14 hours ago

      One of the three carriers in Canada is about to do away with prepaid entirely in December. That said, I have a pretty affordable monthly plan and I buy my phones outright.

  • underwire212@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Basically, AT&T argues against it saying it’ll force them to innovate and be competitive with other services.

    Won’t anyone think of the poor telecom shareholders??

  • Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/contact/phone/q19.htm

    Canada:

    First, locked phones are a thing of the past. Effective December 1, 2017, service providers will have to offer unlocked devices to their customers.

    What are the benefits of having an unlocked device?

    An unlocked device can be used on other networks, which means that you will be able to switch providers and keep the same phone. That means more flexibility for you, the consumer.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I want to reiterate this. Even second hand phones. Find the carrier and call them. They legally have to oblige.

  • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    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?

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      58 minutes ago

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

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      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?

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours 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.

      • ODuffer @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour 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…

    • elvith@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

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

      1. 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,…)
      2. 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)
      3. Some carriers even allow you to only get a phone without a contract for the mobile service.
      4. 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.

    • darkmarx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours 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.

  • Fogle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It’ll lead to higher prices meaning they’ll charge more lol