[HTC One X] BarryH_GEG:
I had one of the first 100 SGS2's sold. Here's a partial list from memory of what was reported on XDA when it launched:

- Phones that overheated so badly they shut down

- USB ports that got pushed up in to the body of the phone

- Dead headphone jacks

- Light showing through the sides where the display met the bezel

- Radio s/w so bad that Samsung was pushing out updates weekly

- Fingerprints on the inside of the display

- Plastic flashing covering the inside of the camera lens

- To this day there are swings in color temperature of the display (the subject of a 200+ page thread)

- To this day there are cameras that show a pink spot on subjects with a white background (the subject of a 100+ page thread).

In addition, the ICS update for the i9100 went terribly. First s/w releases were clearly unfinished and as of today there are still wireless issues. The GN launch was no picnic either.

I loved my SGS2 and was fortunate not to have the majority of issues that were experienced. But objectively, other than the One X's graphics issues, the number and severity of early issues aren't that different.

No. The rally you guys started made HTC review their position. The decision to launch HTCdev was driven by PR, the financials, or both. Meaning any negative financial impact of unlocking bootloaders would be made up by additional sales or the positive press they'd receive. Do you honestly think that even 10,000 names on a petition means squat when you're selling devices in the millions? Especially when those millions of buyers could care less about an unlocked bootloader? The expectations, opinions, and standards of XDA'rs in no way represent the general phone buying public and a device (or manufacturer) boycotted by all of XDA could still be incredibly successful.

Asus shipped the Prime with a locked bootloader, the first time they've done so. People were shocked and horrified and actually, even though smaller in number, were more effective rallying against Asus than you guys were against HTC. Asus reversed their policy and agreed to unlock the bootloader. To access the unlock tool you have to agree that you're giving up your warranty in its entirety. That means zero support of any kind from Asus. The unlock method they provided is crude and doesn’t even provide NVflash so the number of bricked devices is huge and they won’t reload the s/w on them even for a price. In the same time frame Motorola introduced a dev version of the Razr that is sold without any warranty. They've said going forward that's their approach to the dev community - dedicated versions of popular phones sold without a warranty.

When HTC introduced HTCdev they were out there alone. Now they're not. That most likely is what caused them to change their position on warranty repairs on unlocked phones. I know it's not what you want to hear but HTC by repairing unlocked phones that haven't had third party ROMs flashed on them is the most liberal of the three policies. If I were at HTC making the decision I probably wouldn’t have changed the policy. Samsung appears to be maintaining their open policy with the launch of SGS3 and with the market leader being liberal, taking a hard line as the weak number two isn’t that smart. I say “appears” in reference to Samsung because until the first unlocked and rooted SGS3 is successfully repaired under warranty we don’t know if their policy is still the same. All they’ve said is that the SGS3 isn’t locked.

What you’re seeing here is something similar that occurred in the U.S. with the airlines. To generate additional revenue they all desperately wanted to add fees. No one wanted to be first. When the first carrier announced they were charging for checked bags within 72 hours they all made similar announcements. It’s too early to say but that could be what’s going on with Android device unlocking. If that’s the case, you guys have a tough road to hoe.