If the developer edition is bought directly from HTC's website, does that mean, despite the unlocked bootloader, it still has a valid warranty? I wouldn't have to anything except flash a custom recovery, right? Does AT&T's network place nicely with the developer edition?
That is a really good question. HTC technically reserves the right to void a warranty for any phone that has the bootloader unlocked, and yet this phone comes from the manufacturer BL unlocked. In practice it seems (from reports on XDA, at least) that HTC's enforcement of their policies is inconsistent at best. I've seen reports of unlocked bootloader is ok (warranty still honored) but custom ROM is not (even if returned to stock ROM, there apparently is some mechanism to tell if a custom ROM was ever installed); some reports of modding ok since the failure was hardware related, and other stories.
I suppose you can raise the question to HTC. But what they tell you, and what actually happens in practice may end up being two different things.
As far as compatibility with AT&T's network, from my understanding the hardware is exactly the same, just a non-AT&T branded ROM and bootloader unlocked. So it should work just fine on AT&T's network.
redpoint73 said:
That is a really good question. HTC technically reserves the right to void a warranty for any phone that has the bootloader unlocked, and yet this phone comes from the manufacturer BL unlocked. In practice it seems (from reports on XDA, at least) that HTC's enforcement of their policies is inconsistent at best. I've seen reports of unlocked bootloader is ok (warranty still honored) but custom ROM is not (even if returned to stock ROM, there apparently is some mechanism to tell if a custom ROM was ever installed); some reports of modding ok since the failure was hardware related, and other stories.
I suppose you can raise the question to HTC. But what they tell you, and what actually happens in practice may end up being two different things.
As far as compatibility with AT&T's network, from my understanding the hardware is exactly the same, just a non-AT&T branded ROM and bootloader unlocked. So it should work just fine on AT&T's network.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your response. Yeah, after using Samsung devices for years, I kind of got use to them haha. I wasn't sure if HTC had a knox like warranty. Hopefully it performs well on AT&T, some have stated the signal is about average. I know with the T-Mobile Galaxy S5, for example, the reception was not has good as AT&T's own S5. That's why I ask. Sometimes the carriers optimize their devices so that they work better than unlocked devices.
Hardware-wise, the AT&T and DevEd phones are identical. The radio firmware is different, but I haven't noticed any particular difference going between the original AT&T radio (original stock firmware without any OTA's) and either of the two DevEd radio firmware's (original radio firmware and the radio firmware on the DevEd OTA.)
In terms of the warranty, HTC reserves the right to not honor the warranty for either of the model if the phone is modified. Being that the bootloader is already unlocked on the DevEd, that's not considered a modification. (On the AT&T device, unlocking the bootloader IS a modification.)
In actual practice, I've never seen a phone manufacturer void a hardware warranty for software modifications -- unless the manufacturer had good reason to believe that the software modification caused hardware to fail. (For example, a processor burns up from overclocking, screens that developed defects from being over-driven, etc.)
garyd9 said:
Hardware-wise, the AT&T and DevEd phones are identical. The radio firmware is different, but I haven't noticed any particular difference going between the original AT&T radio (original stock firmware without any OTA's) and either of the two DevEd radio firmware's (original radio firmware and the radio firmware on the DevEd OTA.)
In terms of the warranty, HTC reserves the right to not honor the warranty for either of the model if the phone is modified. Being that the bootloader is already unlocked on the DevEd, that's not considered a modification. (On the AT&T device, unlocking the bootloader IS a modification.)
In actual practice, I've never seen a phone manufacturer void a hardware warranty for software modifications -- unless the manufacturer had good reason to believe that the software modification caused hardware to fail. (For example, a processor burns up from overclocking, screens that developed defects from being over-driven, etc.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. This is exactly what I wanted to hear. I re-ordered the Developer Edition in Gold. Should be here tomorrow. It's seem like very promising device. May not even root it.
Related
Has anyone done a warranty exchange with an unlocked bootloader? For example:
Your headphone jack develops issues and you're pretty sure it's a hardware problem with the connector as noted in this thread. You have an unlocked bootloader so the text "UNLOCKED" is shown every time you boot, but otherwise stock 4.5.91. You are beyond your 30 day exchange period.
You send the phone in for a warranty exchange, and since it's a hardware issue Motorola does one of the following:
1. Says, "Everything is cool, we know you unlocked the bootloader but can see this is an obvious hardware issue and will give you an exchange."
2. Says, "You unlocked the bootloader and voided your warranty. You owe us $500."
3. Replaces the phone without noticing.
Would flashing the stock 4.5.91 SBF to remove the "UNLOCKED" notice change anything?
This is all purely hypothetical, of course.
I have no idea what checks Motorola goes through when they receive a device under warranty but, for me personally, I just accept that I forfeited my warranty when I unlocked my BL. I know it doesn't seem fair for the consumer to have this mentality but until they decide to offer us the unlocks officially we have to play by their rules.
stewartsoda said:
Has anyone done a warranty exchange with an unlocked bootloader? For example:
Your headphone jack develops issues and you're pretty sure it's a hardware problem with the connector as noted in this thread. You have an unlocked bootloader so the text "UNLOCKED" is shown every time you boot, but otherwise stock 4.5.91. You are beyond your 30 day exchange period.
You send the phone in for a warranty exchange, and since it's a hardware issue Motorola does one of the following:
1. Says, "Everything is cool, we know you unlocked the bootloader but can see this is an obvious hardware issue and will give you an exchange."
2. Says, "You unlocked the bootloader and voided your warranty. You owe us $500."
3. Replaces the phone without noticing.
Would flashing the stock 4.5.91 SBF to remove the "UNLOCKED" notice change anything?
This is all purely hypothetical, of course.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let us know when you find out.
I voided my warranty and your mum.
stewartsoda said:
Has anyone done a warranty exchange with an unlocked bootloader? For example:
Your headphone jack develops issues and you're pretty sure it's a hardware problem with the connector as noted in this thread. You have an unlocked bootloader so the text "UNLOCKED" is shown every time you boot, but otherwise stock 4.5.91. You are beyond your 30 day exchange period.
You send the phone in for a warranty exchange, and since it's a hardware issue Motorola does one of the following:
1. Says, "Everything is cool, we know you unlocked the bootloader but can see this is an obvious hardware issue and will give you an exchange."
2. Says, "You unlocked the bootloader and voided your warranty. You owe us $500."
3. Replaces the phone without noticing.
Would flashing the stock 4.5.91 SBF to remove the "UNLOCKED" notice change anything?
This is all purely hypothetical, of course.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, here in canada with Bell, if you have a software problem you're in deep sh*t...
If it's a hardware problem, they fix it or they give you another atrix ^^
Your welcome
In Singapore, sent in an Atrix with a hardware problem, (Atrix will not start up)
They fixed it and returned it back to me with the bootloader still unlocked.
(They returned it to stock, but OEM fuse shows it is unlocked)
Really though, pray or go on your lucky day!
stewartsoda said:
Would flashing the stock 4.5.91 SBF to remove the "UNLOCKED" notice change anything?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flashing to a FroYo SBF can either remove the text or brick your phone.
If you updated to Gingerbread officially (OTA) than it would brick your phone
Well I actually just got off the phone with AT&T and I'm getting a replacement phone because the vibrate motor (don't want to call it a vibrator ) in this one is broken or something. She said they only charge the big fee if there's water damage or severe cracks, etc. I mentioned that I had modified the phone in various Android-ish ways and she said it doesn't matter because they flash it to stock before they do anything with it...But AFAIK there's no way to relock the bootloader for us Atrix owners. Hopefully they can do something we don't know about, or I'm screwed. I imagine they have plenty of ways to get it back to stock. No where on AT&T's terms for warranty exchanges does it say anything about getting the fee for something other than water damage/extreme physical damage/etc.
EDIT: I got online with another ATT rep, because I was freaking out. I told him about the unlocked bootloader and he said "Yes, that will be a problem". When I read that, pants had been pooped. I was glad that I found out so I could perhaps cancel the exchange, but mad that I was basically stuck with this broken phone now...Then he said he talked to a supervisor, and he told him that google recently required manufacturer's to take any phone regardless of any modifications that had been made to it in spirit of open source. So I confirmed numerous times that the unlock won't be a problem. And as long as there's no water damage (circle on back is still white) or extreme physical damage, you should get the replacement without any fee.
At the very least, if anything were to arise, I feel I have reason to argue now that I've confirmed this in so many ways... Hope this helps you all!
guys, just use the SBF to flash to stock. it *should* remove the "unlocked" text on boot. I HIGHLY doubt they will go into that much trouble to try to see if your bootloader is unlocked or not.
andy2na said:
guys, just use the SBF to flash to stock. it *should* remove the "unlocked" text on boot. I HIGHLY doubt they will go into that much trouble to try to see if your bootloader is unlocked or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also highly doubt that they would check but I'm not willing to risk $500 on that doubt.
I might have hypothetically fixed the headphone jack on my own anyway. But I still think that inquiring minds would want to know the answer to this: Can a software modification release Motorola from honoring warranty claims based on hardware issues?
stewartsoda said:
I also highly doubt that they would check but I'm not willing to risk $500 on that doubt.
I might have hypothetically fixed the headphone jack on my own anyway. But I still think that inquiring minds would want to know the answer to this: Can a software modification release Motorola from honoring warranty claims based on hardware issues?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fastboot oem unlock.
Iphone > galaxy s 2.
@thebeardedchild - So did you actually replace the phone through ATT warranty and they didnt charge you any money.
I replaced mine through at&t not a single charge was given to me. Bootloader was unlocked and had stock gingerbread.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
defnow said:
I replaced mine through at&t not a single charge was given to me. Bootloader was unlocked and had stock gingerbread.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And it said "unlocked" at the top left during boot and everything? Just trying to clarify whether you tried to hide it or not or left it as obvious as it normally would...
If you did hide it, what did you do? I've been confused as to whether you SBF flash or what. I'm scared of bricking this phone before I send it back haha.
@hjd17, I haven't sent it in yet, the replacement hasn't arrived. The poster I quoted has had success though, so that should answer your question!
Hi all,
But why don't you all put stock rom with rsd? If you do this the label "unlocked" Goes
away. Just download the stock rom from xda in the thread under the Android development and push it with rsd, no worries i've done it lot of times....
stewartsoda said:
...
I might have hypothetically fixed the headphone jack on my own anyway. But I still think that inquiring minds would want to know the answer to this: Can a software modification release Motorola from honoring warranty claims based on hardware issues?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IF Moto was going to hold you to this, then I would expect them to win unless you could show the product was broken day one.
In reality, it is not worth it for companies to play this game. Easier just to fix and get on with life.
They could make it easy for all (and collect some cash) by adding a "un hard-bricking" fee.
Unlocked boot-loader and running a non-OEM ROM.
My device's LCD appeared to have burn-in, went to AT&T and he gave me grief because he noticed the launcher was not stock and the background was different (Really?) So I kindly returned the launcher to Blur and changed the background to something else.
They replaced my device on-site.
I have unlocked bootloader, and am trying to return it to stock. RSD lite won't show my device...
here is more info on my drama: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=17571581#post17571581
any idea how to proceed with flashing the OEM .sbf when RSD lite will not recognize the device? thanks...
I'm reading through the threads and forums and maybe I'm just missing it... Is there a way to get S-Off/Unocked on the Tmobile One besides htcdev.com? My One is a warranty replacement, and also I just now received it back from having the camera repaired, so I really don't want to officially unlock it via htcdev for warranty purposes. On Verizon we had Rumrunner just before I switch to T-Mobile. Is there something similar? I see rumrunner for the int'l variant, but can't find if it'll work on T-Mobile. Again I apologize if it's right in front of my face or if I'm looking in the wrong places, but I've been looking for about an hour with no luck.
TIA!
Forgot to mention I'm also on stock 4.3, 3.24.531.3
Ok correct me if I'm wrong - I've read (haven't tried yet) the int'l rumrunner will get S-Off, but you have to be rooted first - i.e. have to unlock via htcdev anyway.
You are correct the current T-Mobile build IS supported by rumrunner, and yes, you must be HTC dev unlocked first. Contrary to popular belief, however, this does not completely void your warranty with HTC.
Hardware issues (like your camera for example) will usually still be covered by HTC, but you can go directly through T-Mobile. Going through warranty with T-Mobile is very easy. When you go through them and the only downside is the replacement will be a refurbished phone, but sometimes they'll even send you the refurb before you send back the defective one. T-Mobile is really great with warranty replacement.
They honor a one-year device warranty, all you would need to do is set your bootloader back to "locked" (which you can do once you've gained soff) and place a warranty request with T-mobile directly.
Thank you - that's exactly what I needed to know. And I forgot you can set it back to locked with S-Off - good to know!
I am wondering if there is any bootstrap that works for this model of the S4? I have seen AT&T and Verizon threads with bootstrap and none about this device. I am interested in bootstrap because it doesnt trigger the knox counter when installing custom roms.
If anyone knows whether it would work on this device or not i would like to hear.
Thanks!
We have an unlocked bootloader, and can flash roms and kernels (including AOSP) with custom recovery. Bootstrap is a waste of time unless your bootloader is locked. Who cares if Knox is tripped ;] carriers don't even care in my experience lol
Monkz said:
I am wondering if there is any bootstrap that works for this model of the S4? I have seen AT&T and Verizon threads with bootstrap and none about this device. I am interested in bootstrap because it doesnt trigger the knox counter when installing custom roms.
If anyone knows whether it would work on this device or not i would like to hear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all clear what you are asking. Did you really mean S4 or is that a typo? And by bootstrap.. you mean Safestrap? Much of the interest in Safestrap is because the ATT and Verizon bootloaders are locked. So that was the only way to work with them for some time.
The S5 TMobile bootloader is not locked so Safestrap isn't so compelling an approach, although you might want to look at it for the ability to "multiboot" multiple ROM configurations. Or perhaps because it will preserve Knox in certain, specific configurations. But even then, as the poster above mentioned, less and less people care about Knox since warranty claims are usually done through the carrier, rather than directly with Samsung. And most carriers don't care about Knox. As well, Samsung ostensibly can't invalidate a warranty over Knox in the EU due to stronger consumer protection legislation.
.
fffft said:
Not at all clear what you are asking. Did you really mean S4 or is that a typo? And by bootstrap.. you mean Safestrap? Much of the interest in Safestrap is because the ATT and Verizon bootloaders are locked. So that was the only way to work with them for some time.
The S5 TMobile bootloader is not locked so Safestrap isn't so compelling an approach, although you might want to look at it for the ability to "multiboot" multiple ROM configurations. Or perhaps because it will preserve Knox in certain, specific configurations. But even then, as the poster above mentioned, less and less people care about Knox since warranty claims are usually done through the carrier, rather than directly with Samsung. And most carriers don't care about Knox. As well, Samsung ostensibly can't invalidate a warranty over Knox in the EU due to stronger consumer protection legislation.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I meant S5 yeah. But my buddy had an issue with his speaker failing and the first thing the carrier did was check the status and saw knox was tripped and refused to help him even though at the time he was running a non rooted stock ROM.
I havent had any issues in the past where I needed to use warranty but trying to prevent tripping it if I can. At the moment ive installed safestrap and it seems to work but I havent attempted flashing anything yet as im waiting for my ext SD and for safestrap to support multi boot, but im guessing since it goes into the safestrap recovery it probably works too.
My device is really the Canadian model but from my knowledge and history with the S3 and S4, if it works on TMO it works on mine too
Monkz said:
My device is really the Canadian model but from my knowledge and history with the S3 and S4, if it works on TMO it works on mine too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung will try to disavow a warranty over Knox. Most people do not deal directly with Samsung though, so what really matters in warranty claim is whether the carrier cares about Knox. Many people including at least one TMobile employee have posted that TMobile doesn't care.. making Knox almost an non-issue on TMobile.
It turns out that you're with one of the Canadian carriers, so you could search the forums or perhaps already know how your carrier handles Knox warranty claims.
Safestrap is an interesting approach, well supported by Hashcode. It has some advantages and some limitations as well. Given that a lot of us don't care about Knox and that TMobile's bootloader is unlocked, a lot of people are going to prefer a conventional custom ROM.
I'd like safestrap just because I don't have T-Mobile as my carrier I use it on at&t. Thus I cannot do a warranty claim through my carrier
Hello Pixel-ers! Just wanted to throw this out there to see where we end up (forgive me, mods, if I have sinned).
I just received my Pixel 3 from Sprint, and, unsurprisingly, the option to OEM Unlock is greyed out. I mostly expected this so I'm not super worried about it, but I was reading other forums and some users suggested that unlocking the SIM through Sprint might allow the bootloader to unlock as well. (I'm admittedly confused by this as I don't understand fully the relationship between the SIM and bootloader, but I digress...)
I contacted Sprint advanced tech support to see if they had any insight. They seemed to end up where I did, presuming that the bootloader can be unlocked if the SIM is unlocked. But I'm left with a couple of questions.
1) Has anyone already purchased the phone outright from Sprint and able to confirm if SIM unlocking allows bootloader unlocking?
2) Anyone tried the previous for unlocking the bootloader, like those for the OG Pixels (deleting the android phone apk?) or similar?
Thanks in advance!
natenins said:
Hello Pixel-ers! Just wanted to throw this out there to see where we end up (forgive me, mods, if I have sinned).
I just received my Pixel 3 from Sprint, and, unsurprisingly, the option to OEM Unlock is greyed out. I mostly expected this so I'm not super worried about it, but I was reading other forums and some users suggested that unlocking the SIM through Sprint might allow the bootloader to unlock as well. (I'm admittedly confused by this as I don't understand fully the relationship between the SIM and bootloader, but I digress...)
I contacted Sprint advanced tech support to see if they had any insight. They seemed to end up where I did, presuming that the bootloader can be unlocked if the SIM is unlocked. But I'm left with a couple of questions.
1) Has anyone already purchased the phone outright from Sprint and able to confirm if SIM unlocking allows bootloader unlocking?
2) Anyone tried the previous for unlocking the bootloader, like those for the OG Pixels (deleting the android phone apk?) or similar?
Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn that sucks, guess that's the price of going carrier. I fell victim of unlockable bootloader when I sent in my pixel 2 and got back a refurbished one. I tried the old tricks and nothing worked. I sent it in as rma. The 2nd rma still could not be unlocked. Only options are to return it, deal with it, or sell it and buy one directly from Google or other route.
Sure there maybe a way down the line but it's not likely going to be soon.
Pretty certain it just requires a unlock from Sprint first. Knowing the Verizon variant has a locked bootloader and looking on Google's own factory flashable image site we can see there are only 2 different images to download, the stock unlockable image and a separate Verizon labeled image which is obviously separate since it has a locked bootloader in the image. So the Sprint model has to be using the same os as the straight from Google model but the unlock option is still greyed out, leaving the only other possible lock being the sim/carrier lock put in place u til the device is paid for.
It's also the same situation for my Nexus 6 I financed from Sprint on release, running Crdroid and the system images on Google's site list a stock release and a separate Verizon release as well as a T-Mobile release but the only difference being the T-Mobile image contains a different radio img. I cannot think of any cross carrier device that is unlockable on one model while the Sprint model being locked, Sprint being the smallest of the major carriers they tend not to go out of their way to restrict customers, been a customer for over 10 years, they may have incompetent, poorly speaking, slow phone reps but they still allow 1000x more compared to Verizon lol. I use around 800gb - 1tb a month for years and they just laugh when I talk to them, try that with Verizon lol.
LaGgY_42o said:
Pretty certain it just requires a unlock from Sprint first. Knowing the Verizon variant has a locked bootloader and looking on Google's own factory flashable image site we can see there are only 2 different images to download, the stock unlockable image and a separate Verizon labeled image which is obviously separate since it has a locked bootloader in the image. So the Sprint model has to be using the same os as the straight from Google model but the unlock option is still greyed out, leaving the only other possible lock being the sim/carrier lock put in place u til the device is paid for.
It's also the same situation for my Nexus 6 I financed from Sprint on release, running Crdroid and the system images on Google's site list a stock release and a separate Verizon release as well as a T-Mobile release but the only difference being the T-Mobile image contains a different radio img. I cannot think of any cross carrier device that is unlockable on one model while the Sprint model being locked, Sprint being the smallest of the major carriers they tend not to go out of their way to restrict customers, been a customer for over 10 years, they may have incompetent, poorly speaking, slow phone reps but they still allow 1000x more compared to Verizon lol. I use around 800gb - 1tb a month for years and they just laugh when I talk to them, try that with Verizon lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right?! I've been with sprint for like 10 years too and they are absolutely incompetent when it comes to pretty much anything and have been since day 1. I usually have to walk them through most things I've asked them to do, but they have been pretty chill about lots of stuff. Anyway, I guess my biggest worry was that I'd pay off the device and it still wouldn't be OEM unlockable, but this at least gives me hope that my pain and suffering with them won't be for nothing. Thanks for the insight!
LaGgY_42o said:
Pretty certain it just requires a unlock from Sprint first. Knowing the Verizon variant has a locked bootloader and looking on Google's own factory flashable image site we can see there are only 2 different images to download, the stock unlockable image and a separate Verizon labeled image which is obviously separate since it has a locked bootloader in the image.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The two images will merge into one in the next month or so and the only difference is radio and network. That has been what has happened with all of the Pixels on release. There is no difference in the image that locks it, they all run exactly the same software. The Google ones ship locked and only unlock when they are connected and phone home for permission to unlock.
That said, I agree that Sprint will be able to unlock them. That is exactly what EE in Europe does. They come SIM and bootloader locked. As soon as you fulfill your contract they flip the switch and you are SIM and bootloader unlocked.
So we know Google has a system set up for this, and that it works. The only question is will Sprint participate in it. My gut says yes they will.
yep...got my Pixel 3xl today from Sprint, and low and behold its locked up...i was honestly shocked, whats worse is my current phone is a Essential....from sprint...thats been unlocked since first boot....FML
I think what is happening is that Google has now declared the Pixel 3 line and above (the a series) enterprise ready. Meaning security and thus being able to keep the bootloader locked thus no root. That will allow businesses to purchase a Sprint, Verizon or TM device plan and make sure the bootloader remains locked no matter who pays off what. They tested it with Verizon the past 2 years and they now have it down. At some point in the near future, IMO, all bootloaders will be locked except the Google (or Fi) bought device.
I also believe the refurbishment channel on Google store replacement devices will be as Pixel 2. I had a unlocked Google store Project Fi that when device was exchanged through store four times were not unlockable. Finally gave up and received credit. From a restocking point of view lock, unlock is important to us, but the previous statement on business needs makes sense.
Can someone with a non Sprint version check this in Mobile network>advanced. I think this is how it knows to be greyed out for oem unlock.
Double post
So, I've got a couple of Note 3s set up for my kids to use. I need to keep Knox to get the advantages it gives to Boomerang parental controls. I need root for running Xposed modules. Since 3g is going away, I'm scrambling to find newer devices.
I've been looking at the S8 and S9 and their variations. I found some S9+s in good condition for a reasonable price. They are the G965U1 running Android 10 on bootloader v9. My understanding is that they should work with T-Mobile or AT&T for voLTE and also for wifi calling on T-Mobile.
I've been reading a lot, but can't find definite answers to some questions.
Do these factory unlocked phones support voLTE and wifi calling or do they have to be branded by the correct carrier?
Can they be rooted on v9 bootloader without tripping Knox (Extreme Syndicate)?
Does anyone want to test Boomerang parental controls' Knox features on a device with Knox already tripped for me? If The Knox features still work, this would be the very best solution, but the app developer said they can't answer as to whether it will or not. The developer said to just try it. I'm not ready to lay out hundreds for a test that might leave me with a device I have to replace again.
It looks like originally you needed to downgrade to Android 8, but then some also update to Android 9. I prefer to have Android 9 or 10, but have read some saying that the system can't be downgraded from 10, which would leave unlocking the bootloader (and tripping Knox) as the only option for root. So what's the real deal?
I've also looked into the s5 and a few others, but like the idea of something with a newer Android for all comparability. Willing to look at anything that will work, though.
I appreciate any help.
If you trip the Knox e-fuse, Knox is gone forever unless you replace the mobo.
Both 9 and 10 are reasonably secure, 8 and below less so.
The Note 10+ 12gb ram, 4G Snapdragon variant is a gorgeous workhorse of a phone. The display is still one of the very best for color rendering and viewing. New ones can be had for $800 still, used for much less. New ones are loaded with 10, but used ones are likely updated to 11 unless you can confirm otherwise. Exercise caution as there's a lot of misinformation and outright scamming going on with used phones.
As for voLTE support it depends on the carrier and the model. My new unlock N10+ works on AT&T but some models especially older ones may not. Check with your carrier to see what models they support.
Whatever Samsung you choose I would recommend that you keep it stock. You can use a package disabler to easily tone down a stock Samsung... rooting isn't necessary.
blackhawk said:
If you trip the Knox e-fuse, Knox is gone forever unless you replace the mobo.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand that tripping the counter cannot be undone. Are you saying that third-party software that uses Knox cannot run after it is tripped, even if the Knox software remains? There seems to be evidence to the contrary.
Both 9 and 10 are reasonably secure, 8 and below less so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is part of why I prefer to use 9 or 10, but other concerns are more important.
As for voLTE support it depends on the carrier and the model. My new unlock N10+ works on AT&T but some models especially older ones may not. Check with your carrier to see what models they support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both carriers list these generic models (S8,S9,etc.) but don't specifically list branded or factory unlocked model numbers. Some people have had problems in the past trying to use an AT&T branded phone, carrier unlocked, on T-Mobile, specifically wifi calling not allowed. My bigger concern is now that 3g is being phased out; will voLTE work on each carrier with a factory-unlocked phone? Is there a way to use wifi calling on a factory-unlocked phone?
Whatever Samsung you choose I would recommend that you keep it stock. You can use a package disabler to easily tone down a stock Samsung... rooting isn't necessary
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you propose that I run X posed modules without rooting?
I just know that members here have issues with bank apps on rooted phones. Haven't paid that much attention to that problem but Knox's status is easily available if the banking app wants check it.
My unlocked Note 10+ was added to the AT&T network by simply swapping out the sim from my other AT&T 10+. Boom, that's all I had to do to set it up. Obviously AT&T will need to punch you out a sim card for the new phones. Talk to Advanced Tech support at AT&T to get a firm answer about voLTE support. If it's just the unlocked model of the variant they sell it will likely work.
The only way you can run some apps is to be rooted. So if you're hell bent on a specific app that requires root... can't have your cake and eat it too.
My kids don't need banking apps. They do need to be able to place and receive phone calls after 3g goes away next month.