yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
He made an uneducated statement. Anyhow, all the mfr's are locking bl's now and relying on the carriers for approval to shipped unlocked devices. What brand will you go to?
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] NJGSII:
One word: Nexus.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] JohnArauz:
No wifi issues, No dropped calls here...

sure HTC falls behind a little on the update department but the HOX+ is not a mistake, the new flagship comes with JB which will be available a couple of weeks after the official release on the HOX and HOS, and every phone manufacturer releases an updated/better/newer version every 6 months or so.

About Samsung... 4 diferent types of S2 or something... maybe more on other carriers (who knows), Skyrocket couple of months after the release of the S2, then the Galaxy Note... Samsung made the same thing and considering the crazy amount of phones HTC released last year... this is an improvement... sort of xD

Hopefully JB will come out soon (if is not out alredy...havent look into it), and all your bugs will go away :)

BTW sorry about my English, doing my best! :D
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
Really? All the nexus devices shipped with unlocked BL??
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] NJGSII:
You're right they're not. Process of unlocking them isnt an issue though.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] jordanishere:
By HTC releasing a new, upgraded version of their flagship device during the same year, customers really feel like they have made a bad decision...

But....you could argue the one x plus is necessary, because the one x, one s, each sgs3 variant and countless others all are essentially the same device, with an s4 soc and at least a gig of ram.

the only variance is screen size, storage, and the materials used to build each device.

Nice to see a unique device on the market. Its not the same thing as every other phone out there.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] CheesyNutz:
Yep nailed it sounds like the op is just butt hurt that HTC released a new phone...

Btw op I've had non Wi-Fi or calling issues phones been rock stable
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] 18th.abn:
If you must have the latest and greatest phones as they release quit buying carrier subsidized phones. I could care less if the price drops $0.99 subsidized, I guarantee I'm still going to get $400 for mine and will have upgrade for a couple hundred dollars. In 5-6 months, I will do it again.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] jove39:
That's how it is

In Android world if your phone stays on top for 6 months...consider yourself lucky...new phones launch every week...and samsung is no different...Galaxy S (Vibrant) was awful...no updates except from 2.1 to 2.2 and it had very bad firmware...thanks to CM...I am running 4.1 on it now :)
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Silellak:
Wait, is my One X going to explode when the One X+ comes out?
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] 18th.abn:
Maybe not, but it will be REALLY embarrassing to be seen holding one;)
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] freshbakd:
While i understand what your saying.The whole one x + deal was a technology speedbump the lte incompatability with the tegra chip....so yeah they had an option of waiting to release a new line while sammy kicks there butt in sales or release some sort of new device. How pissed would you be if you had an s3 right now and they are gettin ready to release quad core devices....guess what thats happening now. As for updates ha you have no idea my last 2 devices were moto and you would think since google acquired them they would get there act together hell no i think the og atrix just moved from gb as well as the a2(my previous devices). so unless your willing to spend 600 bucks every six months or so you will not be satisfied.Please do buy an i phone and please update us in a month or two on your satisfaction.Last note i bought this phone for a penny and i love it.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] JohnArauz:
I agree on this, I have a Motorola RAZR XT910 which i bought in a local carrier here (south america) and is not even our region, every region have issues asking for updates, not getting them, the supremely locked bootloaders, Moto support is maybe the worst of all android phones,

btw they take forever, and I MEAN LIKE FOREVER! to release an update... xD
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] NJGSII:
Henchman sent straight from HTC are going to break into your house in the middle of the night and take it.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] redpoint73:
That really sucks. I can see why people are so pissed now about the X+.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] dustinhayes93:
Aww man. =/ What are they going to replace them with? Iphones? Ewww
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Silellak:
Damn! I knew it! :mad:
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Dannar:
Or blackberries, if they really hate you.

Duely blundered from my thunderdolt.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] bdjam2:
iPhone should never be an option. Other than that, I feel same way.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] jatipton:
I really LOL'd here... good one!
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] WookieFan:
I am an HTC fan, so we can get that out of the way up front. I have no problem with the way they do business and have always been pleased with their phones.

I am surprised by the misdirected anger with bootloader locking. AT&T required that as part of their deal to get Evitas out to market. After a new flagship phone arrives, AT&T will probably be okay with unlocking our bootloader.

But that's not HTC's fault - they are just getting their phones in your hands.

If you want to be mad, be mad at AT&T, but you'll get the same treatment at Verizon.

I look forward to a new HTC Nexus device (one day!). But until then, this is an awesome device still at the top of its game.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] freshbakd:
Taiwanese htc ninjas i tell ya. Officer i swear it was damn ninjas. roflmao
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] redpoint73:
It takes two to tango. Yes, its AT&T's request to lock the bootloader, but its HTC that agrees to do it. Samsung, LG, and other brands on AT&T are not bootloader loacked. I'll bet those manufacturers were also asked to lockdown their devices, but they decided not to bend over. The Vivid was locked (later unlocked), One X is locked, I have no doubt that future HTC phones on AT&T will be locked down as well.

I love HTC products too. But likely I won't buy a device in the future that cannot be bootloader unlocked. I took a gamble when I bought the One X just after launch that the folks here would find a way to crack the security, and they did. But HTC is just locking the device down more and more.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] daneren2005:
Between the OG Atrix and this One X I just have horrible luck. Both of them have had problems getting any decent market traction beyond early adopters and both have had trouble getting/keeping a dev community because of bootloaders. But really I think there is a bigger reason to avoid HTC in the US: They seem to be the only company Apple successfully sued into breaking Android's clickable links. And instead of merely disabling it they seem to be actively trying to make sure the mod community has no way to re-enable it. I have no intention to ever again buy a phone where I can't even click on links properly, and if that means I have to avoid HTC then so be it.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] foxbat121:
I think the neotiation goes like this:

AT&T: We pay you $100 per phone if you lock the bootloader. $70 without.

HTC: Since we have no confidence that our phone will sell millions, we will take $100 and lock the bootloader.

End of the story.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] redpoint73:
Simply proves my point. Regardless of whether money was involved, HTC agreed to do it. So I'll think twice about buying an HTC device from AT&T next time.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] michaelnel:
I got really used to a rooted phone when I was using my HTC Inspire 4G. I really screwed up just assuming that someone had rooted these phones. I really like the phone, especially the display, but if I can't get it rooted, I am not sure I want to keep it. And I would also never buy another HTC phone.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Blkdmd16:
Same goes for me. Guess I'll go back to

I phone. At least I can jailbreak it.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Luisit0:
This isn't apple (1 phone a year that changes just a few details and specs) this is android... Constant ideas and new features, u just can't contain them for long or you'll be left behind when the competition decides to throw em out on their products before u!! It's a game to stay on top, and lately htc has been falling back. Honestly I was expecting an upgraded One X around December back on august when I got the one x, I was just so desperate to get a new phone I decided not to wait... Besides ill be selling my hox and upgrading to the x+ just for the battery n storage (:

Sent from the One u wish u had ;)
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] ksnax:
This thread is riduculous. If it was your intent to unlock, root, mod or whatever, you KNEW when you bought the phone that it was locked down, or you were simply too ignorant to be considering a successful flash anyway. It's niether HTC's nor AT&T's fault if you feel screwed because that actually turned out to be the case! I'm certain that nobody involved in the transaction promised you otherwise.

This is exactly like buying a CPU marked at a maximum bin speed only to expect that it will run faster because others do. Likewise, you should review Moore's law. The delusioned notion that phones should be any different is simply laughable.

Grow up. Quit whining.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
I think HTC is one that wants the BL locked. Samsung knows how to lock BLs, but hasn't on AT&T. Verizon says jump, Samsung says how high. If AT&T asked I would bet they would. I would imagine HTC asked to ship with locked BL, and AT&T doesn't really care. Because HTC is the one refurbishing them. If HTC thinks a locked BL will reduce the number of returns then more power to them. Whats AT&T's motivation for asking for a locked BL? Now that the unlimited plans are throttled, why would they care if you tether? They don't even ask when you call warranty. They already ask all sports of stupid questions. They ask about water and physical damage. If AT&T was the one who cared why not ask about custom software? During my month long ordeal trying to get a replacent GS II one supervisor and one regular rep told me they had custom firmware on their Samsung device.

Sure, Samsung released a lot of phones. But, AT&T didn't sell the i777 GS II in LTE markets, so they could sell the Slowrocket. Plus, that phone and the i777 are not the same. Samsung is down to two flag ships a year (that do not directly compete with each other), with low and mid range phones spattered throughout (again, not directly competing). HTC hasn't learned that lesson. I think that will be their demise, as evidenced by their recent performance. HTC one upping themself every few months makes it look like they don't know what makes the best phone, so how are consumers supposed to know? Couple that with a complete lack of marketing of their devices, and you have a picture of RIMM or Nokia not that long ago...

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] WookieFan:
Pretty sure that's just speculation. If you read any industry publication, you'll see that the carriers are the ones requiring locked bootloaders.

Carriers have to field the calls, collection the phones and ship them back to the manufacturer (if necessary). It's a huge logistics nightmare and expense. If they can significantly reduce that expense by requiring locked bootloaders, that makes good business sense.

Can't really comment on HTC business philosophy, but I doubt they're going down. They respond well to change and plenty of people are buying their phones. Just take a look at how many people at xda can't wait for the next great (HTC) phone. As long as we keep insisting on the latest tech, HTC will do fine. Locked bootloaders or no.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] tehdef:
No. You're wrong. Case and point: Apple. They laid things out to Verizon and V said no. They didn't want to conform. They went to ATT, after and said we will give you exclusives if you do this. BAM. Verizon is known as one of the big issues. Another good point is the new nokia Wp coming that was pulled because Microsoft didn't want to put Verizon crap on the phone. Verizon is a very very controlling provider.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
Actually that supports my point. My point was that AT&T was not asking for bootloader lock. I said Verizon is a control freak (on my next post), but specifically said no other carriers have made the same request or statement. Which is why I said I believe its HTC that wants the phone to remain BL locked, and AT&T just went along with HTC's choice.

Everyone here is quick to blame AT&T, but there is NO evidence it was AT&T's choice, but several patterns to indicate OEM choice. They went along with it, but it doesn't appear to be at their request. Verizon has made a statement about locked BLs, ALL other statements have come from OEMs.

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] foxbat121:
Actually you are completely wrong. HTC made public statement last year that it is committed to provide tools to unlock boot loaders of its phone. When HOX was released, it was found the HTC's own unlocking process won't unlock the boot loader for AT&T HOX. With all the negative press, HTC basically told everyone, not explicitly, they are not the one to be blamed for. IIRC, all versions of HOX can be BL unlocked with the EXCEPTION of AT&T version.

People seem to forget that AT&T is HTC's direct customer. We, the end users, are not the direct customers of HTC. We are the customers of AT&T. That's how branded and subsidized phone works. HTC make the phone which ever way AT&T wanted.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Luisit0:
Hence the ugly at&t logo on the top too >:/

Sent from the One u wish u had ;)
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
Where to begin ...

1- I think I am beginning to understand how this forum works. When a deficiency in the phone is discussed, two types of speculations are made. A- HTC is responsible for the defect in their device -> speculation = wild, unfounded, pure speculation. B- HTC is not responsible for the defect in their device -> speculation = fact.

2- Your speculation (that's what you supplied - more speculation) does not disprove my speculation.

3- This statement only makes HTC look worse. We have a saying at work: Don't write a check you can't cash, and don't let others write a check you can't cash. HTC made the promise to unlock. AT&T has NEVER made a statement about bootloaders either way. If HTC is going to promise to unlock BL, then they need to A- unlock the bootloader, or B- explain the reason for not doing A. They have done neither. AT&T made NO promise to unlock, or statement that they want it locked, like the BS Verizon did.

4- Yes, AT&T is HTC's customer. Probably their biggest customer. Globally. So when AT&T says "here is 1,000 defective devices" HTC says "here is 1,000 to replace them". AT&T is not refurbishing them, HTC is. AT&T doesn't care about the return rate nearly as much as HTC, they just get replacements.

5- Samsung knows how to lock BL's yet never does on an AT&T device. LG also does not lock BL's, but I don't know that they have the technological prowess to do it.

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
Its pretty obvious that att is behind the locked boot loader. Every single hox on the planet can be unlocked except for atts. If fact, it is easily unlocked once the cid is changed.

And there have been countless email exchanges posted where ATT states they need secure devices on their network and also emails from HTC saying ATT is requiring the boooader stay locked.

Its quite obvious, really.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] foxbat121:
We all speculate. Some speculate better than others:)

Your speculation has two flaws:

1. You can't explain why only AT&T version of HOX can't be BL unlocked.

2. You failed to understand that if there is 1,000 refurbished devices, AT&T need to spend a lot of money on shipping, stocking and handling the device exchanges They need staff ppl to handle this work. Phones don't exchange by themselves. You, the end user, don't send the warranty device to HTC, you send to AT&T who honors 1-year warranty, not HTC. Sine AT&T is a publically traded company, they are required to estimate a specific phone's failure rate for warranty exchange and need to set that amount of money aside to honor those exchanges. This increases AT&T's capital expediture.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
Can you explain why Samsung and LG devices aren't locked?

Are you saying AT&T refurbishes them? HTC has the same costs. And AT&T's cost for supporting a higher volume of Samsung devices should be the same per device. HTC also needs to pay for people, and shipping. AT&T is making a quick visual check for LDI and physical damage. HTC needs to identify the issue and fix it. Are you speculating that AT&T does more work than HTC to refurb the device? Do you think AT&T eats the cost of a defective device, or HTC honors the warranty based on AT&T's evaluation of the device?

If every AT&T device was BL locked I would agree, but that is not the case, and there is no ecplination other than OEM choice.

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
^None of us can "explain", only speculate.

How about this?

Only 2 manufacturers (that I'm aware of) have very secure devices and a sanctioned bootloader unlock program.

Motorola and HTC

Both of those 2 manufacturer's products cannot be unlocked on ATT but can on many, if not all, other carriers.

Clearly it's an opting program for the carriers, and ATT is opting "out".

Samsung is just learning how to lock BL's and has no sanctioned unlock program. And you see how well that's working for them.

Nobody gives a **** about LG, there's no development anyhow.

Who am I missing?
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
I think Sony locks on all carriers. I don't know they have an unlock program.

Clearly, you are speculating too, and we know how speculations are handled in this forum. I have as much evidence as you have provided.

I don't want be in violation of the unwritten rule that HTC can do no wrong, and AT&T can do no right, so I'll stop trying to discus possible alternative explinations.

I have a brick wall to discuss this with ... I think I will be more effective there.

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] Kindatired:
This is one of the reasons I will be sticking with Nexus phones from now on. I went from nexus one, nexus s, galaxy nexus and then to the HTC One X. It's not that htc makes bad phones. The one x is far better than my galaxy nexus, it's just that I prefer the way Google handles things.

Having Google tell carriers, this phone comes carrier unlocked, and the bootloader can be unlocked by anyone at any time. If you don't like it, don't carry our phone.

That's the attitude I want to see manufactures take with carriers. If you don't want your customers to do what they want with their phones, then don't carry our phones. If they all did it, then the carriers would have no choice but to give customers their freedom.

I have a Rogers one x. It can have its bootloader unlocked through HTC Dev, but I don't want to support a company that let AT&T lock the crap out of the phone hence stopping many people from using the freedom that android is based on.

From now on, only nexus phones until other manufacturers step up and tell the carriers to stop dictating how their phones are used.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
You are ignoring the facts.

1.) HTC blames att for this, several emails have been posted.

2.) Att blames themselves for this, several emails have been posted.

So, really, none of us are speculating. You are just struggling to accept the facts. Hitting your head against a brick wall is unlikely to help that.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] quarlow:
Care to provide links for your "facts"?

An email from a first level tech support rep in either HTC or AT&T is not a "fact". Those reps probably know less about bootloaders than most XDA members.

The ONLY 'fact' I can find is this:

Perhaps you can point out the part that mentions the One X or AT&T. Its vague on purpose. Yes, AT&T has not officially blamed HTC, but HTC has also never specifically stated which devices are not unlockable, or why.

And I wasn't beating my head on the wall. I was having a conversation, and I'm getting a more receptive response there.

Sent from my HOCKS
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] beaups:
Just search.

Messages have been posted by att stating they won't allow unlocked boot loaders due to it being a security risk. I'm all for playing devil's advocate and challenging assumptions being believed as facts, but this one is pretty obvious. You are aware that changing the CID to ANY other carrier allows the boot loader to be unlocked, right?

Since that's your (ridiculous) position, please share a business case or some hint of logic explaining why HTC would choose to prevent an unlock on ONLY att's version of the hox.

Ask your wall, since its so talkative.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] WookieFan:
And this was what drove my original response in this thread. So, I spent some requisite time researching. Here are some article from sources I trust:

http://gizmodo.com/5889553/we-have-carriers-not-oems-to-thank-for-locked-bootloaders

http://androidandme.com/2012/05/smartphones-2/htc-says-restrictions-prevent-att-one-x-from-joining-in-their-bootloader-unlocking-program/

http://http://www.droid-life.com/2012/05/05/atts-htc-one-x-the-latest-to-star-in-a-bootloader-gate-htc-blames-restrictions-aka-the-carrier/

Sorry if my links don't come out right - still learning my way around xda posting. This was after a very short time with a basic search.

AT&T has every financial reason to lock bootloaders. While some call center experience may indicate that knowledge is not there, the reason for the call is tracked, as well as the phone model. If you think that AT&T isn't aware of a statistical uptick in resources spent on phones with unlocked bootloaders, as well as returns of "bricked" devices due to ROM flashing, you're wrong. They just make sure they track the cost and then require the Evita bootloader to be locked until it is no longer a premier device, so they don't get a flood of "I can't turn on my phone" calls.

As I stated above, AT&T returns the phones to HTC, sure. But AT&T has to manage that process, and even a 1000 returns equates to significant man-hours and shipping costs.

It's not reasonable to think that HTC would feel the need to lock bootloaders, since their track record has been to unlock bootloaders, even with aged devices (the incredible bootloader was added to the HTCDev list WELL after s-OFF had been achieved). If it were about material costs to HTC, why unlock bootloaders for aged devices?
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] foxbat121:
Maybe those aged devices no longer under warranty and hence there will be no more increased cost to HTC.
[AT&T, Rogers HTC One X, Telstra One XL] WookieFan:
The same logic applies to AT&T and their decreased cost in managing the warranty return process. Since it is now (out of warranty) a decreased cost issue, they release the manufacturer to allow bootloader unlocking.