Verizon's open door policy all hype, no change?

[FL1134]

Exactly. The E816 was FCC approved but caused problems. The Kyocrea 7035 had major problems as well.

Best example though is the RAZR. When it was first released it had a software error that left EVDO sessions open for HOURS and since America's Choice billed for that, people had overage charges in the thousands. Since VZW certified that software, they took responsibility and gave people credit for the airtime charges.

If the phone was brought in through some other means, the customer is on the hook for all the charges.

I knew someone at AllTel that activated non AllTel phones for people but the disclaimer was that if you have any billing issues related to the hardware, tough.

And rightfully so. If my phone is subsidized, network locked, branded, required a 2 year contract, forced company services, and forced OEM's to design the software to their specs the service provider is responsible without a doubt in the example you mentioned.

When you design to one set of standards things like that shouldn't happen, not CDMA standards + VZW's.

[wnrussell]

Response (Federico G) 09/25/2008 08:19 PM
Dear William,

Thank you for contacting Motorola e-mail support, we appreciate your interest in our products.

Regarding your concern, there are some minor hardware differences between the two models. Please note that Motorola cannot provide assistance on unlocking cellular phones. The carrier that the phone was originally manufactured for is the only one that can authorize its unlocking.

We are sorry for the inconvenience and look forward to assisting you in the future.

For information about Motorola products and services, please visit us at http://www.hellomoto.com/

Thank you for contacting Motorola e-mail support.

Best Regards,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer 09/25/2008 07:57 PM
Thanks, Federico, but my question is basic. Let's say it again: Is there a difference in V9m hardware between Alltel and Verizon? Why can't I just have the software updated?

[Bandit390]

Response (Federico G) 09/25/2008 08:19 PM
Dear William,

Thank you for contacting Motorola e-mail support, we appreciate your interest in our products.

Regarding your concern, there are some minor hardware differences between the two models. Please note that Motorola cannot provide assistance on unlocking cellular phones. The carrier that the phone was originally manufactured for is the only one that can authorize its unlocking.

We are sorry for the inconvenience and look forward to assisting you in the future.

For information about Motorola products and services, please visit us at http://www.hellomoto.com/

Thank you for contacting Motorola e-mail support.

Best Regards,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer 09/25/2008 07:57 PM
Thanks, Federico, but my question is basic. Let's say it again: Is there a difference in V9m hardware between Alltel and Verizon? Why can't I just have the software updated?

What is there to unlock? Unlock code for Alltel phones are 000000. Program it yourself and give verizon the ESN. Getting verizon to add the esn to your number might be difficult and then voice and text should work. Its going to be up to you to update the software to get the rest of verizons stuff working.

[hwertz]

I wonder what the "minor hardware differences" were? Maybe the VZW tag or colors . I mean, certainly they aren't requesting like a particular brand of amp chip in the phones or something.

[wnrussell]

What is there to unlock? Unlock code for Alltel phones are 000000. Program it yourself and give verizon the ESN. Getting verizon to add the esn to your number might be difficult and then voice and text should work. Its going to be up to you to update the software to get the rest of verizons stuff working.

I've been trying these Motorola support threads for years. The point of doing it again is that there is no "Open door policy" or "Any device policy" for Verizon either then or now.

There is no difference between an Alltel and Verizon V9m hardware, except the battery cover. Until the CDMA OEMs begin selling unbranded handsets, the carriers will basically "own" the permissions.

It is also likely that Verizon is going to substantially own the CDMA market in the USA, looking at their history of acquisitions.

[CharlesH]

Unfortunately, that is not completely true. Beyond simply voice, there can be a lot of variation between the carriers. And when there is a variation that would cause a customer a problem, exactly who will be responsible, you?

Is this an issue for GSM providers, who are in general known for allowing any GSM phone on their network without being certified by them? I'm not questioning that there have been several FCC certified CDMA phones that really misbehaved (my bad for not recalling that), but why do the GSM providers allow this? Or is there something about the GSM certification process that makes it not a problem for them? Or does the SIM mechanism make it not practical to check the phone's IMEI?

[ilvla2]

I've been trying these Motorola support threads for years. The point of doing it again is that there is no "Open door policy" or "Any device policy" for Verizon either then or now.

There is no difference between an Alltel and Verizon V9m hardware, except the battery cover. Until the CDMA OEMs begin selling unbranded handsets, the carriers will basically "own" the permissions.

It is also likely that Verizon is going to substantially own the CDMA market in the USA, looking at their history of acquisitions.

They pretty much already own it here in California, in the past few years Verizon has gobbled up three local carriers, Cal-North Wireless, who served Humboldt, Del Norte and Trinity Counties, Mountain Cellular, who served El Dorado County, and Surewest PCS, who served the Sacramento Valley and Northern Sacramento Valley's. The only local CDMA carrier left in the state is Golden State Cellular, who serves the Jackson, Sonora, Martell and Yosemite National Park areas, and Verizon even has a small stake in them.

Even GSM has been consolidated, with Edge Wireless being merged into AT&T this April, Cell One of SLO is left as the only local GSM carrier in CA.

[jalind]

I wonder what the "minor hardware differences" were? Maybe the VZW tag or colors . I mean, certainly they aren't requesting like a particular brand of amp chip in the phones or something.

In addition to the VZW "branding" on the front and battey door, and the color, there is a difference between a Sprint and VZW V9m in the labels on the three haptic controls on the outside of the flip. AFAIK, there's no other difference . . . oops . . . forgot . . . the label inside the battery box is different . . . has Sprint's name on it.

The Sprint V9m runs VZW fimware just fine . . . no problem whatsoever. IMVHO, there is no difference between a VZW with VZW firmware and Sprint V9m with VZW firmware that would affect VZW's network one iota. It's all about control, control, and yet more control over customers, and locking them in to contracts through subsidized phone sales. It's becoming apparent to me that VZW never had and likely will never have any intention of opening their network to anything they do not sell through one of their stores. IOW, if the ESN (or MEID) doesn't pass through VZW's hands in VZW's distribution channels, it won't be allowed onto VZW's network, period. Everything else publicly stated by VZW has been smoke, mirrors and "weasel words." There's no technical reason a Sprint V9m with VZW firmware couldn't (or shouldn't) be activated on VZW's network. It's pure business strategy and the perceived $$$$$ profit to be gained pursuing it. I don't believe VZW had any intention of living up to what the "common man" interpretation "any device, any apps" meant last November, now or in the future. As time runs out in 2008, it's being sliced, diced and parsed by VZW to mean something else entirely.

[inventor00]

I called my local store and they said before the end of the year I could convert a friend's PPC 6800 (Sprint) to VRZ... again send to Verizon for re-flashing - 3 weeks they said... waiting .. maybe in vain as this thread points out..

[FL1134]

...There's no technical reason a Sprint V9m with VZW firmware couldn't (or shouldn't) be activated on VZW's network. It's pure business strategy and the perceived $$$$$ profit to be gained pursuing it.

You mean having the customer send in their phone for "approval" and charging 1.5x over the normal rate plans isn't required for activating a compatible CDMA phone?

[drose8_07]

I was just wondering if anyone has attempted to use a different CDMA phone on Verizon's network? This was talk a while ago, but have not heard much of it since.

[Donkey]

I believe it when I see it happen. Now it just talks, nothing more.

[berzito]

They pretty much already own it here in California, in the past few years Verizon has gobbled up three local carriers, Cal-North Wireless, who served Humboldt, Del Norte and Trinity Counties, Mountain Cellular, who served El Dorado County, and Surewest PCS, who served the Sacramento Valley and Northern Sacramento Valley's. The only local CDMA carrier left in the state is Golden State Cellular, who serves the Jackson, Sonora, Martell and Yosemite National Park areas, and Verizon even has a small stake in them.

Even GSM has been consolidated, with Edge Wireless being merged into AT&T this April, Cell One of SLO is left as the only local GSM carrier in CA.

you forgot metro pcs they are cdma and local

[huntm856]

I believe it when I see it happen. Now it just talks, nothing more.

I actually wrote the VZW PR person quoted in the news release, and got an answer.

According to her response:

1. VZW can support a non-VZW phone if it supports 850/1900 and E911 and if it is *unlocked* by the other carrier (direct quote: "Verizon Wireless doesn't lock their phones but most other carriers do and we can't unlock another carrier's phone.").

2. VZW stores are authorized *right now* to look at a phone and evaluate whether it can be used on VZW's network.

I'd never heard the unlocked part before. Does anyone know more about this? Is she just talking about getting the MSL code from your carrier? I'd taken that as a given, but is she talking about something else that other carriers do to lock their phones that VZW doesn't do?

Anyway, if she's right and VZW has actually instructed its store reps to look at phones and evaluate them for suitability to VZW's network, then I'd have to give VZW major props.

Sprint only talks about doing this in the vaguest terms, and only rarely when the carrier-lock thing and how anti-consumer it is, etc., comes up in the media. They don't seem to be interested in really doing it at all.

[FL1134]

I actually wrote the VZW PR person quoted in the news release, and got an answer.

According to her response:

1. VZW can support a non-VZW phone if it supports 850/1900 and E911 and if it is *unlocked* by the other carrier (direct quote: "Verizon Wireless doesn't lock their phones but most other carriers do and we can't unlock another carrier's phone.").

2. VZW stores are authorized *right now* to look at a phone and evaluate whether it can be used on VZW's network.

I'd never heard the unlocked part before. Does anyone know more about this? Is she just talking about getting the MSL code from your carrier? I'd taken that as a given, but is she talking about something else that other carriers do to lock their phones that VZW doesn't do?

Anyway, if she's right and VZW has actually instructed its store reps to look at phones and evaluate them for suitability to VZW's network, then I'd have to give VZW major props...

Sprint is the only carrier that locks their phones and all you need is the MSL to unlock them. There is nothing else besides programming MMS, TXT, MW, etc for specific carrier.

Non-VZW, CDMA, dual-band, e911 have ALWAYS worked but it is due to their greed that they made it impossible to activate. Now VZW will charge you a premium for something they could have allowed since day one.