I was seriously considering purchasing a Nokia Lumia 920 off contract and then taking it over to T-Mobile. I figured this would be nice and easy as Nokia show all the specs for the phone and state that it handles the GSM bands and HSPA+ that TMO US uses (in fact the GDGT specs page shows the AWS bands that are critical). My understanding however is that the phone itself is locked to AT&T and that it also has had the other bands removed so that it can truly only be fully utilized on the AT&T network.
Can anyone provide confirmation that this is the case? And if so, why is it that Microsoft and Nokia who are struggling to get traction in the marketplace would deliberately cripple themselves by not allowing the flagship phone to be available on all carriers, or easily purchased subsidy free?
Discussion about
What is the deal with the carrier restrictions?
My understanding is the same as yours. I personally think it is a stupid move in a world where Windows Phone (and nokia) is trying to get some users under its belt.
That being said, up here in Canada our Lumia 920 is reportedly working with all bands enabled and is unlocked so if you got one from here, you could easily take it to T-Mobile
www.wpcentral.com/lumia-920-rogers-unlocked-works-...
That being said, up here in Canada our Lumia 920 is reportedly working with all bands enabled and is unlocked so if you got one from here, you could easily take it to T-Mobile
www.wpcentral.com/lumia-920-rogers-unlocked-works-...
Makes it seem like a trek north of the border needs to be made by somebody in the house then. I still wish they would just make it available here and skip this damn nonsense.
It is such a pervasive issue in the US market, really the entire system is just broken. I used to work for a telco and have seen how bad it is from the inside. I just wonder what it is going to take for this kind of thing to go away.
It is such a pervasive issue in the US market, really the entire system is just broken. I used to work for a telco and have seen how bad it is from the inside. I just wonder what it is going to take for this kind of thing to go away.
There is a good chance it is more expensive up here so I would wait until the official price is unveiled. (AT&T seels it for $450, but I am thinking Rogers will sell it for about $600)
Also you should double check to make sure what WPCentral was reporting is verified by someone else. They are usually pretty reputable, but regardless I would hate it if my advice was wrong. :)
Also you should double check to make sure what WPCentral was reporting is verified by someone else. They are usually pretty reputable, but regardless I would hate it if my advice was wrong. :)
att has removed bands it doesnt use... so your best choice is to get the international version... this was part of att exclusive deal...
i dont like it either but i wouldnt sell a phone for $450 just so that people could use it on another carrier...
international unlocked price is $726 minimum... so unless t-mobile gets the phone you either have to switch or fork up some cash
i dont like it either but i wouldnt sell a phone for $450 just so that people could use it on another carrier...
international unlocked price is $726 minimum... so unless t-mobile gets the phone you either have to switch or fork up some cash
It's business man. Nokia removed the bands so they don't have to pay royalty fee or whatever. It's locked to AT&T for exclusivity. Wake up, the notion that you can do whatever you want with any company's product is misguided. If you want to hot new shit, often you have to jump through hoops. Don't be naive.
It's hardly naivety, I think that it is a seriously broken business model that needs to be addressed and fixed. The US is one of the few markets where this kind of nonsense happens. In other countries phones are invariably purchased off-contract and don't have the nonsense kind of restrictions that we do here.
Mo' money = Mo' problems
There's so much more money in the US that the carriers can get away with the mindless games and making people jump through hoops. In other countries, maybe people will simply not pay the bill. In the US we would rather pay 19% interest on our credit card bill than risk missing a phone call. Culture plays a part, and we care less about debt than others.
Please tell me what percent of American's vs foreigners use a pay as you go plan? A much lower % from my experience.
Everyone I know who is not US born is on a pay as you go. Most Americans who can afford it go with the contracts. Getting our phones subsidized is how we justify the contract and thus the carriers can dictate which phones they want to offer. We also always prefer a new one so even if we can't get the phone we want, we think that a new one is still better than the previous phone we had, right?
There's so much more money in the US that the carriers can get away with the mindless games and making people jump through hoops. In other countries, maybe people will simply not pay the bill. In the US we would rather pay 19% interest on our credit card bill than risk missing a phone call. Culture plays a part, and we care less about debt than others.
Please tell me what percent of American's vs foreigners use a pay as you go plan? A much lower % from my experience.
Everyone I know who is not US born is on a pay as you go. Most Americans who can afford it go with the contracts. Getting our phones subsidized is how we justify the contract and thus the carriers can dictate which phones they want to offer. We also always prefer a new one so even if we can't get the phone we want, we think that a new one is still better than the previous phone we had, right?
follow this discussion
share:
Products mentioned
4 users following this discussion:
This discussion has been viewed 596 times.
Last activity .