←back to thread

T-Mobile, AT&T oppose unlocking rule, claim locked phones are good for users

(arstechnica.com)
197 points LorenDB | 1 comments | 21 Oct 24 20:31 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
tptacek ◴[21 Oct 24 21:11 UTC] No.41908565[source]▶
This is a good way for Ars to generate clicks and a more honest headline probably wouldn't move the needle much, but it's worth being clear for HN that the objection here is not that locked phones are good for consumers, but that the subsidization deals locked phones enable are.
replies(11): >>41908581 #>>41908673 #>>41908679 #>>41908875 #>>41908906 #>>41909375 #>>41909380 #>>41909447 #>>41909558 #>>41911205 #>>41911215 #
IshKebab ◴[21 Oct 24 21:26 UTC] No.41908673[source]▶
Locked phones don't enable subsidized deals though. We still have subsidized deals in the UK but locking is a thing of the past. In fact they have started explicitly calling it like it is and breaking the price down into payments for the plan and payments for the phone, which stop once you've paid it off.
replies(3): >>41908694 #>>41908956 #>>41909705 #
1. extraduder_ire ◴[21 Oct 24 23:40 UTC] No.41909705[source]▶
IIRC, years ago there was an EU directive forcing phone companies to separate service contracts and device payment plans. Network locking still exists, but unlock codes need to be free after you've paid off the phone. This leads to a situation here (Ireland) where some people are billed monthly for their phone itself, but the have a pre-pay plan on the sim card inside.

I thought the US had made a similar change banning that kind of co-mingling of charges.