Database Develop

Samsung gets Galaxy phone on all 4 carriers... WTF Google why not the N1?!

Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget

Because the entire point of the Nexus One was to prove that customers wanted a phone that was not bound by "carrier demands" thats why all the Droids have the pay for tethering, while the Nexus One supports it freely.

Why not just be flexible?
Let the T-Mobile and Att versions be completely free of carrier control and be flexible with the Verizon/Sprint versions. I'd much rather have a non-tethering N1 on Sprint and Verizon as options than nothing at all...
If Samsung could do it, why not Google?

Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.

Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.

Blueman101 said:
Because each version of the Galaxy is a totally different version, because this carrier didnt like this option on the phone, they took it out and renamed the phone. There are 4 versions of this phone each one less of a total package then the one before it. The Nexus One didn't want to be "flexible" it wanted to be allowed at the party as it designed to be. Plus the Nexus One was originally planned to be on Sprint and Version, it was the carriers who then dropped support for it. Also i was just throwing tehtering out there as an example there are many other things that the Nexus One can do that other phones have had stripped because of carrier control.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?

RogerPodacter said:
Verizon publicly came out and said they wanted the nexus but it was Google that did not come thru for unknown reasons. Who are we to believe, I agree I don't trust any of them. But its definitely weird that Verizon went on record saying that. Why would they lie? And the next question is if that was the truth, why would Google have backed out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats true, no one really knows who was at fault. Google isnt know for their Dev phones coming to CDMA. Its also possible that Google turned it down when the CDMA carriers refused to offer the Nexus One full freedom.

ap3604 said:
Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers
Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?
Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?
If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?
Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity
Samsung is not the first! The touch pro 2s for example existed on all 4 networks!
Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the normal customers will have no idea the phones are related directly. They are all a little different and have different names. Each carrier has say with software unlike the n1. That means no tethering etc. I dont see why US carries like to cripple phones and brand them... I get that they want their own image or to not look like just a network provider but customized phones blow... My htc pure has no front facing cam and all the td2s tp2s needed different skins/cases and that also means more expensive repairs and ****. Carriers around the world just stamp their logo and inject some crapware (sometimes) and leave everything else the same!

JCopernicus said:
Those phones are gonna be hindered by carrier approval for updates.
The main thing that will be gimped is the native tethering option of android.
Samsung is in the game for $$$ with a guaranteed business plan.
Google was attempting to change the typical business plan. It was always an gamble.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe someone will figure how to make a vanilla android rom for it.

I think the problem with the N1 is that the only carrier that subsidized it is T-Mobile. The two largest carriers are At&t and Verizon. Verizon doesn't carry it. For At&t, how many ppl are gonna shell out $529 for a phone, when you can get an iphone for like $199. All of us in this forum would, but for others it's too big of a difference.

well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.

When did "US Cellular" become one of "the 4" carriers??? They're #7 according to here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mobile_network_operators_of_the_Americas#United_States

Verizon got the HTC Desire
Sprint got the HTC EVO
If they got those phones, why would they want the N1 for? Those HTC phones are, in the carrier's eyes, better than the N1 and they aren't restricted to the plans that Google made T-Mobile customers switch over to in order to get the N1 for a lower price.
If those two phones came to Tmobile, I wouldn't have a N1 to be honest.

Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.

This is just the announcement right? In mid March 2010, Sprint and Verizon announced they were getting the N1, until they changed their mind. Like you guys said earlier something about the "Evo" and the "Moto shadow". Shadow is pretty sweet, 4.3 inch display plus QWERTY!
Wikipedia that **** "nexus one"

arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. Their are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent point. I much prefer that system to ours.
Sent from my Sexy Nexy, courtesy of the fine developers of Tapatalk

let me finance that sammich for you ...
Blueman101 said:
well especially these days with this economy, $530 is a lot to swallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?

ohgood said:
$530 is too much? ok buy a g1 for 279. or a flip phone for 35 at a pawn shop. remember, this is something you OWN, not something that you lease with heavily financed contracts and etc s to mess with.
a potato chip is rediculously expensive if you compare it to the price of potatoes. cmon, find a logical argument folks or would you rather a company NOT profit, fail and leave you with no. support?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you missed his point a bit.
Google was attempting to do a few things with the N1. First, they wanted to offer a completely raw phone, free of all carrier branding and bloatware and crippling. To do so meant selling it themselves, or in stores like Best Buy or whatever. This would push the second item: showing those in the states how a lot of other countries operate, buying unlocked phones without a carrier subsidy and contract. I love this idea. Both ideas.
However, the timing was rather unfortunate. $530 in this economy is rough for a lot of people. Doesn't mean the idea is horrible, doesn't mean anyone is blaming Google. It simply means that there are a lot of people that won't buy the N1 (or any brand new completely unlocked phone) right now because of the economy. I personally have several friends that love my N1. They wish they could buy one but are either unemployed or under-employed (took jobs making much less than they're used to, simply to get a check coming in).
I love Google's approach on this. I think it's great that they (supposedly) told Verizon and Sprint go suck an egg, and that the N1 was not to be messed with. This is my first truly unlocked, unbranded phone and I don't think I'll ever go back to buying them from the carrier.

Plain and simple most carriers were not thrilled with the idea of a totally unbranded/un-carrier approved handset being activated on their network.
With the GSM variant, there is little that any carrier can do, but CDMA is a different animal and I am really not surprised that VZW/SPRINT said heck no.
Dan

arkavat said:
Quite ironically that's only true in western developed countries. And the major reason is that people are just too dependent on the whole contract and credit system. In India, we always pay for unlocked phone. There are no contracts. Therefore if we buy a smartphone we know what we are buying and how much that is worth. And in return we get cheap phone service (2 cents per minute). US carriers will give you "free" cheap phone and then charge you $45 for 450 minutes. That is $36 extra per month or $864 extra for the two year contract period.
$530 for a phone seems to be a reasonable price for us... even if we are still a developing country.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as in the UK, I have a cheap sim-only with unlimited data and just buy phones unlocked sim-free (no carrier restrictions) from the hundreds of stores (Play, Amazon etc). The money I save over the normal 18 months is enough to buy a Nexus One and have money left over.
But still some people in UK see the 'free phone' and sign up to a stupid long-term contract.

AT&T buys T-Mobile USA

THIS SUCKS!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/20/atandt-agrees-to-buy-t-mobile-from-deutsche-telekom/

Welcome to AT&T Wireless...

All I can say is F_*$
I hate AT&T! I used to have both At&t and T-mobile and I left the death star because of their terrible customer service! Now I have to go to Sprint or Verizon..most likely Verizon because of their coverage. However its going to cost me almost Double. Again all I can say is ****!

I just put a 32gb memory card in my HD7, this super sucks.

I was thinking to myself, sh!t! AT&T sucks! I then realized, well the monstrous GSM network would be pretty cool. I just hope they don't mess with the unlimited data plan, or the attractive prices. I use my phone a lot, and unfortunately some of us have to stay on 3G data at all times because we can't all afford home internet for WiFi (where I live it is NOT affordable). I also enjoy my 85 dollar phone bill, a considerable drop from the $120/mo. AT&T or Verizon charge.

sirandrew said:
Welcome to AT&T Wireless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe it's "AT&T Mobility" **** I have a bad feeling about this.

Luisraul924 said:
I believe it's "AT&T Mobility" **** I have a bad feeling about this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL - Indeed... there goes my rate plan out the window.

I have been here before.
I was with what was the Original At&t Wireless, they sold out to Cingular, and they sold out again and back to the At&t nameplate. So I was on a great plan and had been on a great plan for many years. At&t started turning off services on my plan. Every time I would call they would just say..."well you are on a legacy plan and we don't support that anymore. You need to sign up for a new plan at twice the cost if you want those features."And I am not talking about major stuff, call forwarding, paging, voice mail, etc. I see this coming again for all of us T-Mobile customers that have been with them for sometime. I was an originally a voicestream customer and now I will switch carriers, most likely to Verizon, if I am going to pay that much for service I will go where I get the best coverage. I know the drawbacks of both but I refuse to ever give At&t another penny after the way they treated me the last time I was a customer. It's sad to see a company that takes care of its customers like T-Mobile not be able to keep up in this Monopolistic world. Just another example of what deregulation has brought to the USA. We will be down to three major carriers with this merger and I will bet it will be two soon. So much for competition and lower prices.

Yeah, this is pretty bad. Hopefully when the deal goes through next year they will let me out of my contract without penalty.

they will if they change your plan. t-mobile has a 3000 minute, unlimtied text and data family plan (limited time only) that's $10 cheaper than their 1500 family plan with the same features....mine kicks in 3/29 for 2 years...if it changes, i leave ETF free.
linky http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/...re-for-Families-3000-Talk-Text-Unlimited-Data

What does this ultimately mean for T-Mobile customers?
Will T-Mobile still keep their branding name?

there will still be t-mobile, but only in the u.k., no more t-mobile usa.

mr8820 said:
there will still be t-mobile, but only in the u.k., no more t-mobile usa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct. It'll just be AT&T. I wonder, given Sprint's situation, if Verizon will pick them up as they are using the same cell technology as each other. It would be a massive duopoly. I'm not sure how that would affect the prices, it might drive prices lower faster given that they'll only mainly be looking at each other in terms of "scopin the comp out".

****ing sucks...

LMAO I still dont see what the big deal is aside from prices going up however
i dont see what the big issue is with At&t
aside from capping data and the 4g debacle.
I had them and they were pretty decent to me

Nothing will happen for a year. ATT primarily wants TMO's AWS spectrum and other assorted IP. THEN they'll assimilate everyone

carmeng4evr said:
LMAO I still dont see what the big deal is aside from prices going up however
i dont see what the big issue is with At&t
aside from capping data and the 4g debacle.
I had them and they were pretty decent to me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Prices going up: If I bought the same services (but still less than what I'm getting from TMo) from AT&T it would cost me an extra $35 a month (from $119 to $154). That's $420 a year. That is a pretty significant difference.
The closest package I could get with both Verizon and Sprint is $188 a month. That's $828 more a year. With less competition, it's significantly more likely that AT&T will raise their prices to Verizon and Sprint's level as opposed to the other way around.

If this deal falls through, how are we supposed to feel about tmobile?
Sent from my 32GB HD7 using Board Express

when I　hear the news feel sad........so...there isn't any cheap price anymore guys.

My friend works for T-Mobile as an engineer, he said expect T-Mobile to implement all the changes MUCH sooner than we expect. He said his division is already being broken up & relocated. Some are getting their walking papers. The T-Mobile employees aren't too happy about this either. Also confirmed that older phones like the HD2 will not be supported with 3G capabilities on at&t's network. But even though the deal won't be complete for a few months, they will start making most changes sooner, so the transition will move along smoother. Basically us that love T-Mobile & hate at&t are screwed.

Google should get ATT on board

I know the Nexus 4 works on ATT obviously. My point is for marketing and sales Google should have the Nexus 4 in ATT stores as well, showing off their new pride and joy. Just being officially on T-Mobile in the U.S. won't spread the Nexus word around enough to the average Joe and Jane.
Looks like the European market will get the bigger marketing push ?
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

They would certainly sell more, but AT&T would want a cut. I guess AT&T could do what T-Mobile is doing and selling it subsidized on a plan like any other smartphone, but something tells me AT&T would want to load their crapware on it. AT&T doesn't seem like they give two ****s about the Nexus program. AT&T would never carry the phone in-store, off contract, at Google's prices, even if Google was giving them a small cut of it.

I agree, but not.
IF AT&T got the N4 it would:
A.) be more expensive (like the Tmob variant, yes cheaper on 2 year, but stupid expensive off contract)
B.) Likely contain at least some bloat, Maybe this would be negotiated out, but I somehow doubt it
C.) be carrier locked (like the Tmob variant)
D.) Be the exact same phone with no benefit to us for purchasing it from AT&T except signing a 2 year contract
If Google wants more AT&T users to buy it they just have to advertise it more in the US, letting everyone know it works with AT&T and can be had directly from google, plug in your sim and go. No need to involve AT&T, they will just ruin it.

Z/ZL US Release date?

Does anyone know yet which of these models(Z/ZL) are coming to the US? And maybe a release date?
:fingers-crossed:

Both will probably be coming to the US, but only unlocked through Sony's own retail channels. If I'm right both sets will work with HSPA+ on AT&T and T-Mobile (so no LTE).
Spectre should have more info on this though.

Ambroos said:
Both will probably be coming to the US, but only unlocked through Sony's own retail channels. If I'm right both sets will work with HSPA+ on AT&T and T-Mobile (so no LTE).
Spectre should have more info on this though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No LTE on AT&T is a bit a waste, isn't it?

Ambroos said:
Both will probably be coming to the US, but only unlocked through Sony's own retail channels. If I'm right both sets will work with HSPA+ on AT&T and T-Mobile (so no LTE).
Spectre should have more info on this though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
roninr1c said:
No LTE on AT&T is a bit a waste, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The ZL will have LTE but not the Z which will only be HSPA+ (still very fast, I get upto 6.5 Mbps on my Xperia T on at&t on their HSPA+ network).

roninr1c said:
No LTE on AT&T is a bit a waste, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really, considering AT&T's transfer caps.
Even if I had LTE available in my area, I'd take an unlocked HSPA+ device over a carrier-mangled locked-down LTE device without any hesitation.
LTE isn't all it is cracked up to be, once you take into account monthly transfer limitations (Since AT&T now throttles "unlimited" users, there is no such thing as "unlimited" any more.), especially if you have access to HSPA+.
LTE was more critical for Verizon users, since CDMA2000 hit a wall without an upgrade path far earlier than UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+ did.
I'm really hoping the rumors that the Z will be sold directly in a timely fashion are going to be true.
The ZL will be available from AT&T as far as I can tell, but that version will suffer from complete lockdown in addition to traditional AT&T firmware mutilation.

Entropy512 said:
I'm really hoping the rumors that the Z will be sold directly in a timely fashion are going to be true.
The ZL will be available from AT&T as far as I can tell, but that version will suffer from complete lockdown in addition to traditional AT&T firmware mutilation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its still up in the air about the Z availability in the US. Hoping its sold directly too.
AT&T isn't picking up the Z or ZL. but both should work on its network.

So till now, AT&T was the only carrier that sold the sony smartphones, with the only exception I think was the playstation phone on verizon.
So the most logical thing for me is Sony to push again through AT&T, because:
1) They already have done business in the past, and have worked out the business side, so it's a safe bet, they might try to work deals with other carriers later through the year to have bigger exposure to the market.
2) It's a flagship phone, Sony will try to get it in the hands of as many people, the comment that it'll be available only full price in retail channels made me laugh The situation is so heated, that they'll have to loose ton of money, just to try to snatch some market, to have a chance to stay a player in this market. They surely want to be in this market, why would they make the Z and show it at CES when no other big name was revealing top models - so they grab the spotlight at CES, and the phone doesn't get lost in all the announcements coming in Feb from the mobile congress.
3) AT&T would love to have another strong horse in the race so they are not dependent only on Apple or Samsung for the best devices they offer. For AT&T the bigger portfolio of manufacturers that want to move devices on their network gives them edge on pricing and other deal terms.
So yeah, I can bet money that in couple of weeks, there will be announcement/leak that AT&T will carry a Z/ZL phone, with LTE of course.

Spectre51 has said it before, AT&T won't be carrying the ZL or Z. The ZL will be sold unlocked through Sony's own retail channels, the Z may be sold unlocked too.

Spectre51 said:
Its still up in the air about the Z availability in the US. Hoping its sold directly too.
AT&T isn't picking up the Z or ZL. but both should work on its network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's your source?

Inspiredwire said:
What's your source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is the source. As far as I know he works at AT&T but I'm not sure.

I'm starting to like this phone. I'm currently on T-Mobile so I probably will only see 3G speeds correct? If so maybe StraightTalk could be an option as my contract expires in June of this year.

peaceburn said:
So yeah, I can bet money that in couple of weeks, there will be announcement/leak that AT&T will carry a Z/ZL phone, with LTE of course.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll take your money if you want. Its not happening.
Sent from my Sony Xperia™ TL

I wonder why AT&T would skip out on such a great device. Especially considering what appears to be a long term relationship with Sony. It doesn't make much sense...
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium

They were supposed to pick up the ZL but backed out a month or so ago. They will be picking up the Fall device from Sony and it's supposed to be a flagship phone.

I asked one of the AT&T associates and they confirmed they will be getting zl but not sure about the z

darksora145 said:
I asked one of the AT&T associates and they confirmed they will be getting zl but not sure about the z
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm I would consider buying a factory unlocked ZL then and using it on ATT's network - less bloat.

encouraged eatehii
i really want thi sphone!!

Fingers crossed on att with lte!
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app

:sigh: I give up.
Sent from my Sony Xperia™ TL

Guys I've gotta say that spectre is usually right on about stuff like this. I've seen him in the ion forums and he seems to have insider information.
Sent from my SGH-I747 using xda premium

[Q] Easiest way to carrier unlock

Picked up a Rogers Moto X on the weekend, unlocked the boot loader, now what is the easiest way to carrier unlock as well?
No way i'm ever going to actually use Rogers as a provider.
Thank yah.

Use a third party company who'll sell you an unlock code.

I have unlocked 2x Rogers Moto X via cellunlocker [.net] for use on Bell
It's like $8 and turnaround was 3 hours for the first and like 6 hours for the second (albeit I did both on the weekend)

Correct me if I am wrong but if you buy a phone outright isn't the carrier suppose to unlock the phone for you too?

jonnyg1097 said:
Correct me if I am wrong but if you buy a phone outright isn't the carrier suppose to unlock the phone for you too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a fee, different depending on which carrier you're talking about.

scorpion667 said:
I have unlocked 2x Rogers Moto X via cellunlocker [.net] for use on Bell
It's like $8 and turnaround was 3 hours for the first and like 6 hours for the second (albeit I did both on the weekend)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This! I used cellunlocker[.net] over the weekend to unlock my X. Cost $8 and took 15 minutes.

Are Rodgers selling them sim free?
Sent from my XT1058 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

jonnyg1097 said:
Correct me if I am wrong but if you buy a phone outright isn't the carrier suppose to unlock the phone for you too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nop. For Rogers you have two options:
1. Buy just the phone for $599+tax and unlock it yourself (you lose your warranty as per Rogers). Not all stores will allow you to purchase it like this though. If they let you buy just the phone they only make $50, where as if they get you on a plan they make $200. I bought mine at Shops at Don Mills (Don Mills and Lawrence) in Toronto. They should still have stock.
2. Buy the phone for $549.99 and go on a month to month plan for 90 days (3 months). ONLY after that you can PAY Rogers $50 to unlock it. The first option was cheaper for me as I'm with Bell Mobility. You still lose warranty if Rogers unlocks it, as per Rogers.
3. Sign a contract. I don't do contracts. I like being off the leash nom sayin'?
I know this doesn't coincide with the new CRTC rules but Rogers hires lawyers to find basically everything they can get away with. The CRTC rules technically don't start till December 2nd.
Source: multiple Rogers stores, Rogers phone support
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk 2

scorpion667 said:
Nop. For Rogers you have two options:
1. Buy just the phone for $599+tax and unlock it yourself (you lose your warranty as per Rogers). Not all stores will allow you to purchase it like this though. If they let you buy just the phone they only make $50, where as if they get you on a plan they make $200. I bought mine at Shops at Don Mills (Don Mills and Lawrence) in Toronto. They should still have stock.
2. Buy the phone for $549.99 and go on a month to month plan for 90 days (3 months). ONLY after that you can PAY Rogers $50 to unlock it. The first option was cheaper for me as I'm with Bell Mobility
I know this doesn't coincide with the new CRTC rules but Rogers hires lawyers to find basically everything they can get away with. The CRTC rules technically don't start till December 2nd.
Source: multiple Rogers stores, Rogers phone support
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^+1. You know your ****.
Option #1 listed is probably the best option if you're not with Robbers, or do not want to sign a 2-yr contract with Robbers.

hidea said:
^+1. You know your ****.
Option #1 listed is probably the best option if you're not with Robbers, or do not want to sign a 2-yr contract with Robbers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL Robbers, sounds about right. I wasn't impressed by their plans at all. I was gonna switch to Rogers cause their support and LTE speeds are slightly better, but their plans just flat out SUCK right now. I'm paying $74 after tax on Bell for a fat plan (6GB data, unlimited this and that, caller ID etc) and an equivalent plan on Rogers would cost me $105 + tax
I was like naw I'm good just sell me the phone lol
I'm hoping Verizon is determined to dominate Rogers by offering much better deals. Trust me, the coming competition between Verizon and Canadian carriers is great news for the consumer. Everyone's gonna price cut each other and we will laugh all the way to the bank =P

scorpion667 said:
LOL Robbers, sounds about right. I wasn't impressed by their plans at all. I was gonna switch to Rogers cause their support and LTE speeds are slightly better, but their plans just flat out SUCK right now. I'm paying $74 after tax on Bell for a fat plan (6GB data, unlimited this and that, caller ID etc) and an equivalent plan on Rogers would cost me $105 + tax
I was like naw I'm good just sell me the phone lol
I'm hoping Verizon is determined to dominate Rogers by offering much better deals. Trust me, the coming competition between Verizon and Canadian carriers is great news for the consumer. Everyone's gonna price cut each other and we will laugh all the way to the bank =P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That'd be great in theory. But corporations exist to make money. While I do sincerely hope Verizon will bring competition; I also doubt they'll shake down the market. Why make less if you can rob people in broad day light?

hidea said:
That'd be great in theory. But corporations exist to make money. While I do sincerely hope Verizon will bring competition; I also doubt they'll shake down the market. Why make less if you can rob people in broad day light?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because with Verizon being a new player, they will have to undercut Rogers(Fido) and Bell(Virgin) to make sales. They have to offer a better value proposition to get people who are loyal to existing Canadian Carriers to switch over.
I know I wouldn't switch my carrier unless I got a better deal or better speeds/service.
But you could be right because Verizon can outbid all Canadian Carriers combined in the upcoming frequency band auction so they could just have same prices as everyone else and just brag about having the fastest speeds. Kind of like what Rogers is doing right now. Just to give you a number, Verizon has 100 million customers, Rogers has 10 million. They have deep pockets mang.

scorpion667 said:
LOL Robbers, sounds about right. I wasn't impressed by their plans at all. I was gonna switch to Rogers cause their support and LTE speeds are slightly better, but their plans just flat out SUCK right now. I'm paying $74 after tax on Bell for a fat plan (6GB data, unlimited this and that, caller ID etc) and an equivalent plan on Rogers would cost me $105 + tax
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because they've moved to 2-year plans and jacked up the monthly cost to ensure they make up the subsidy within the contract term. Take a look at Bell's current plans and you'll see something similar. In comparsion, your current plan is probably based on a 3-year contract.
You can thank the CRTC for how this turned out.

+1 on cellunlocker[.net]
Cost $8 and turnaround was all of about 15 minutes...

scorpion667 said:
Nop. For Rogers you have two options:
1. Buy just the phone for $599+tax and unlock it yourself (you lose your warranty as per Rogers). Not all stores will allow you to purchase it like this though. If they let you buy just the phone they only make $50, where as if they get you on a plan they make $200. I bought mine at Shops at Don Mills (Don Mills and Lawrence) in Toronto. They should still have stock.
2. Buy the phone for $549.99 and go on a month to month plan for 90 days (3 months). ONLY after that you can PAY Rogers $50 to unlock it. The first option was cheaper for me as I'm with Bell Mobility. You still lose warranty if Rogers unlocks it, as per Rogers.
3. Sign a contract. I don't do contracts. I like being off the leash nom sayin'?
I know this doesn't coincide with the new CRTC rules but Rogers hires lawyers to find basically everything they can get away with. The CRTC rules technically don't start till December 2nd.
Source: multiple Rogers stores, Rogers phone support
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah I see. I was thinking about Option 2 but only knew bits of the pieces. Thanks for the clarification.

+1 to cellularunlock.net
Ordered an unlock code for the Moto X around 6:39pm EST and received an email with the unlock code 2 hours after.
Oh and Hello everyone! First post here in XDA after years of lurking
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk 4

Another +1 for CellUnlocker. They came through for me overnight. They're the cheapest I've seen of any other unlock service (Unlockcode247, UnlockUnit).

Rogers unlock
Rogers says if you buy outright they will unlock for free as per CRTC rules starting in Dec. Rogers say they will honor the rules now on outright phone purchases. That being said the 8 bucks I paid to cellunlocker.net was well worth it, got the code in less then an hour and didn't have to deal with anyone from Rogers. The Moto x will work on fido out of the box as thats my carrier I just unlocked mine to use in the USA.

scorpion667 said:
I'm hoping Verizon is determined to dominate Rogers by offering much better deals. Trust me, the coming competition between Verizon and Canadian carriers is great news for the consumer. Everyone's gonna price cut each other and we will laugh all the way to the bank =P
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I read VZW pulled out for the time being of trying to buy a Canadian carrier.

Does anyone know of a reliable place to unlock the AT&T version?