yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Vibrant General] heatx:
OP is an idiot. Go troll somewhere else.
[Vibrant General] iBustCh3rries:
To all the people saying return the phone if your not happy with it what happens when the phone works fine for the trial period and then starts showing signs of shade after it... it has happened to me twice this year and t-mobile HTC and blackberry wouldn't do anything for me with out making an insurance claim... who is that fair too I bought a blackberry bold 9700 in January and it worked fine for 3 weeks but then started rebooting. Itself several times a day... sometimes while I was in the middle of a call. I call t-mobile and tell me tough $h!t in a nutshell make a claim so I have make a $120 claim on a phone I just coughed up $200 3 weeks before... how is that fair to me? Then 3 months later I buy the HD2 (biggest phone mistake I've made this year) and it worked great for about exactly 15 days before the locking and stalling began 3 4 even 5 times a day I would have to pull the battery... I call t-mobile and the rep tells me this is NORMAL for this phone............ REALLY!!!!!!! it is normal for me not to be able to use my phone the way I want too? That is normal? Am I some sort of idiot or does this sound wrong to anyone else???? Needless to say this phone was posted on Craigslist and I was lucky enough to find someone to trade me for a nexus. Moral of the story the manufacturer and the carrier will try to fraud your add every chance they get if they don't slip an extra charge on your bill that you don't catch (a la sprints 4g charge for areas that don't have 4g with the evo) or telling the phone will do something but fail to mention that it doesn't work that well (a la gps/twiz lag issues) so me sticking to them at some point (because I haven't... yet) seems more than fair. I feel owed to a free phone or a free month or two the way I've been shafted...
[Vibrant General] Anderdroid:
How? He makes a very valid point that the almost everyone here fails to recognize. Read his posts again.

It's not about morals. It's not about ethics. It's not about T-Mobile refurbishing the units. It's not about the plan that T-Mobile already has for returns.

And it's not that he's whining. It's called a message, and on forums you are permitted and encouraged to get a message across. That's what it's for.

It's about the future raise in costs of phones, degrading of warranty, and nazi-conversion of a beautiful company like T-Mobile.

Why does everyone here read something the wrong way, then flame as if they actually know exactly what the OP was talking about?

This is the most unfriendly forum I've ever been a part of.

200$ I get flamed ;)
[Vibrant General] acspin:
Lame.

I've bricked phones and returned them under warranty. Big deal, move on please :). Much bigger problems in the world right now.

kthxbai ;)
[Vibrant General] ags29:
The OP is correct and it is so sad to see how many people on here do not understand a bit of what he is saying (as evidenced by your posts)..

He's not at all saying warranties shouldnt exist. He's saying that warranties should only apply to phones that were actually ****ed up out of the box. The sad truth is that MANY idiots have a perfectly working phone when they buy it at first and then they THEMSELVES **** it up, but lie about it saying it came like that, to get a replacement.

It's like me selling u a perfectly working car, u crashing it, and then bringing it back to me saying that I sold it to u like that so that I end up paying for the repair costs.

However, I am not at all trying to defend the companies who take a hit from consumers who do this because I am certain they are aware of it and take it into account (with pricing, of course). And as the OP is pointing out -- where do u think the money to fix these "faulty" handsets comes from? From us the consumers, duh. Whether its a few dollars or a few cents added onto the cost of each new handset being sold, we end up paying more because of some idiot consumers. Example --> u buy a usb cable on ebay for $6 + Free Shipping.. U think the seller is really taking a loss on shipping costs? No! The shipping costs are included in the $6! That's what handsets manufacturers do.. They anticipate that consumers doing this will cost them, so they price their products a little higher to cover the costs beforehand.. And the more people keep doing this, the more it continues to cost them.. So the more we all pay.

Ok, I think I've said enough. Anyone who doesn't understand needs to go back to school, seriously.
[Vibrant General] darkknight49:
lol at the entitlement mentality so many people are showing.

"they didn't make the phone right, I'm entitled to a new, free phone. I don't know what i'm doing messing around with he phone, and now it won't work, i want a new one!"

Still, i can see both sides to this. You figure as long as TMO and Samsung allow the return of bricked phones, people will do it. You should take responsibility for the issues you cause to your phone, but modern american society has taught us to simply point the finger at someone else and demand a refund.
[Vibrant General] rhonal89:
So we all are saying if we comes to xda we are all good people. Who knows who is samsungvibrant. Problably is a rich guy who and I know if he keeps messing with his phone, I know he is why would he be in xda probably to bully its going to get bricked so is he going to go ahead and buy another I dont think so. He would call in so he can get another one send under garrenty. Why would I pay for something that am paying my garrenty my 5.99 a months it adds up. So I would take advantage that too. I had 4 phones for 2 year under me and I didnt even call for and exchange that adds up on all phone fir the garranted I paid so why would I give waist of that. Hell No!!!!!!.
[Vibrant General] rsfaze:
yes you are the only one and the couple other's that have backed you on your view. It's not a bad view but as another person said , we have much bigger issues in our world right now, heard of the unemployment rate lately ?

If you want to make a change in the world and see others follow in your good graces work on getting employment and manufacturing back into the United States if not it won' matter what these smart phones cost in a few years, none of us will have jobs to buy them. How much of our debt does China own now?

Just saying..
[Vibrant General] SamsungVibrant:
Have I heard of the unemployment rate lately, umm wow, so you think messing with your phone, then defrauding T-Mobile is going to help the unemployment problem, the opposite will happen.

Have you read the quarterly reports on T-Mobiles website. The entire report for past few quarters is up. The company is about to go under, they have virtually NO CASH ON HAND, ALMOST NONE for a company the size they are.

So why don't you continue to defraud T-Mobile, that way they can really go out of business, people will lose their jobs, that will really really help the unemployment rate. But in your little head this isn't possible right, in your way of thinking, there is no way your defrauding a company would have a large impact like that, well you are wrong.
[Vibrant General] SamsungVibrant:
First of all, I could barely understand the grammar and sentence structure in your statement. I never spoke about the 5.99 insurance or as you call it "garrenty." I don't know the specifics of how the insurance works, and if it covers something like this.
[Vibrant General] PathogenX:
This thread is stupid... There is a warranty for a reason. Why is it of any concern to you? Are you losing money? No. Phone prices won't increase that high.
[Vibrant General] SamsungVibrant:
Actually, the warranty is null and void when you tamper with your phone, such as rooting it. Hence the many panic driven threads on here, "HELP, how do I UNROOT, sending my phone in for warranty."

It is my concern because in the future, I will be negatively impacted as a consumer.

Retail stores never had 15percent restocking fees, until people abused the system.

Retail stores had 30, 60, 90 day return policies, until people abused the system, and now we see 14 day returns, sometimes even no returns on electronics.

Costco has a wonderful return policy, which should not be abused, instead what happens, people abuse it. I kid you not, I was at lunch, person at a table next to me was talking about how they purchased a Sonicare like 10 yrs ago from Costco, and every time a new model comes out, she pretends hers is broken, and gets the latest model for free. Really? Really? Since when did Costco's return policy became a free upgrade policy. I was in shock at what I was hearing.

It will be a shame when honest Costco customers have to pay the penalty, when Costco changes their Return policy, because of people who abuse the System. Gosh Costco and Price club was perfect years ago, when they didn't grant every scum off the street a membership. You actually had to be eligible to shop there, now anyone who can afford the membership fee is welcome to enter, and use Costco's return as a free upgrade.

They already did it with computers, computers had 6 month returns. People used that as an opportunity to upgrade every six months, so they changed the policy to 90 days. Trust me, if people continue to abuse the 90 days, you can expect a 14 day return with a restocking fee.

I am surprised how people don't see how this truly hurts each and every one of us as consumers. Do we really want every retailer to have best buys return policy?

Trust me, Same will happen with T-Mobile.
[Vibrant General] kmao2004:
I would prefer more honesty being a Tmo employee myself. I know the other side of the story and it does suck for the company and end users.

I have seen so many policies change due to abuse. Remember when you could cancel and fax in "proof" of moving out of the area?

For the people trying to do the right thing it makes it harder or more expensive. I cannot count the number of escalations I have had because an honest customer felt they were being given the run around, but really it was just a policy change due to dishonest people.
[Vibrant General] disturkis4u:
hmm messing up your software and getting a refurb unit in exchange for suiting a refurb unit. Seems like an even exchange. But just because you root your phone or mod it doesn't mean you cause it to die. What if the phone stops charging? Earpiece dies? Mic dies? Etc.

Again, do you really think t-mo is losing much money if any at all for this? They lose money on their stupid free add a line and bogo deal with all the people buying and canceling. There really aren't that many doing development on the phone much less bricking the damn thing.
[Vibrant General] Sapient Prophet:
I don't feel that people should swindle their way into a free phone just cause they bricked their phone. However, I am very pissed at Samsung for not adequately testing the product before it was released and at T-Mobile for rushing the release just to be the first on the scene. Kinda in the same way I was pissed at Microsoft for Windows ME, but that's another story. I do love my Vibrant, but it has problems. Anyway, does it give people the right to steal, no. I don't think Samsung is getting hurt because they're getting paid for each unit. Those that have been bricked can just be flashed properly and sent back out, many probably as new units. If T-Mobile really gave a crap about it they would test the phones, but they don't... if I were to assume, it is because the cost isn't getting them down. I was told (so I don't know how true this is) that if T-Mobile gave the phone for free, three months of service would pay for their cost. Now, I haven't researched this, but if it's anywhere close to the truth... I don't think T-Mo is hurting any.
[Vibrant General] DrStinkbomb:
Go into a Tmo retail outlet tomorrow morning and pretend to be a new customer interested in a Samsung Behold II or a Samsung Vibrant or even an HTC HD2 device - and see how many Tmo, Samsung or HTC representatives are going to volunteer information about the well documented flaws of these devices prior to making a sale and signing you to a two year contract. After this little experiment we can talk more about who is really defrauding who.

These devices simply do not reliably perform the functions that they are advertised to perform. There should be mass recalls - they are defective out of the box. But they keep selling them and we keep buying them, so if anything we are doing them huge favors.
[Vibrant General] outllaw:
I think your dead on.

Problem here is I fully consider a locked out boot loader a defective product.

I have no harsh feelings about my warranty exchange as had the phone had a working boot loader i would not have needed it when odin crapped out.

I have a i5700 in addition to my Vibrant, that thing is a horse there aint a goddamn thing i can do to that phone to kill it short of physical damage. Why? Because i can easily enter either recovery or download mode on boot with absolutely 0 ****ing hassle. That is the way an open source device should be.

Its bad enough some of the companies use proprietary drivers and dont release the source. That isnt what googles vision for Android was I am quite sure of that.

I dont ask alot, Just give me a no hassle DL mode and Recovery and the company will never here from me again unless the phone explodes at random setting my cat ablaze.
[Vibrant General] disturkis4u:
The representatives are there to make money. I believe it's the consumers job to research an investment instead of relying on a person who gets paid on commission to sell you something you already are interested in. besides, if that were the case nobody would be able to sell anything because every phone has flaws.
[Vibrant General] kmao2004:
Has anyone found a phone without flaws yet? I have heard every possible issue arrise with every phone. There is no singular perfect device. As consumers we demand phones be more sophisticated, cheaper, and out RIGHT NOW. At this point can we really expect the phone to be perfect?

I have to say if the rep in the store tells me the GPS on the Vibrant is screwed up that I will probably still get the phone. Tell the same thing to someone else and they might decide otherwise. Every phone, and I mean all of them, have a list of "known issues" from day 1. Worrying about what problem your next phone will have is about as helpful as worrying about the next time you will have to **** while stuck in traffic.
[Vibrant General] DrStinkbomb:
I guess my point being: what is the difference if they misrepresent the truth while trying to sell the device and lock a customer into a contract, or if the customer misrepresents the truth while trying to get the device replaced?

Both sides are misrepresenting the truth in order to achieve their own desired outcome.

So why are we even debating the issue?
[Vibrant General] stolen_pillow:
Full agreement. My first Vibrant crapped out because of the hardware lock. I exchanged it within the 14 day period and made damn sure that I could boot the replacement into recovery before I left the store. As far as I'm concerned the hardware in the first phone was faulty. These things are damn near impossible to brick provided that A) Samsung does not lock the hardware, or B) you're not a complete moron.
[Vibrant General] dmolition:
I am going to replace my perfectly working phone tomorrow just to be an azz :]
[Vibrant General] wacky.banana:
Mod Warning

Guys,

A couple of posts in this thread are on the wrong side of acceptable and have been deleted. We don't expect this to happen again.

Keep your comments clean, on topic and in line with the rules here...http://xdaforums.com/announcement.php?a=81

Your cooperation is required, anticipated and appreciated.

WB (XDA Moderating Team)
[Vibrant General] ags29:
It's nice to see how someone is able to agree and disagree with another persons argument without responding like a 12 year old. Thank u for that.

I also think ur dead on with ur point, but I think that from ur argument arises a completely different one. And u clearly mentioned it - basically, an open source device shouldn't be sold with a locked down bootloader because that sort of defeats the purpose of open source I think. However, I wouldn't go as far as calling it a "defective product". Instead, I would see it as a "falsely advertised product". Samsung definitely deserves the blame on that one for 1) locking it down & 2) being inconsistent with their products by selling some locked and some unlocked. Consequently, I do believe that a phone with a locked down bootloader deserves a replacement for one without it locked, as it should've been in the first place.
[Vibrant General] Col.Kernel:
Lovely sentiment.

Except MY $250 VIBRANT DOESN'T WORK RIGHT BEFORE ANY OF THIS.

Perhaps if Samsung/TMobile were to get off their collective backsides and GET THE FIX PUSHED OUT fewer people would be impatiently trying to fix it themselves.

Note: I have not rooted, done any of the lag fixes, or attempted any GPS fix other than to change a few settings.

My phone will spontaneously soft boot, and it can't find itself even if I hold it up to a mirror.

Don't you come in here with your huge brass cajones ranting about defrauding Samsung/TMobile, I'M THE INJURED PARTY HERE.

And yes, I've swapped out my phone once, and I'm about to do it again once there's less than an hour wait on TMo's support lines (thanks to the chowder heads who started the Sep 20 OTA rumor).

If Samsung/TMo had issued a working product for $250 people wouldn't be trying to fix it themselves. People requesting a replacement for a phone they bricked are IN THIS INSTANCE fully justified.
[Vibrant General] smutek:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the OS that's open source, not the device running it, right?

I don't know much about all of this but I'm guessing manufacturers are free to lock the device down as they choose? Not taking sides here, just looking for clarity on the quoted statement.
[Vibrant General] strictlyrude27:
You're correct - Android itself is free and open source, but this does not necessarily mean that the hardware is. Further, derivative works or works that use Android don't necessarily need to be released as free and open source, since the Apache license that Android uses is not a "copyleft" license.
[Vibrant General] MacGuy2006:
Google can put a stop to this if they change their licensing agreement to allow only vanilla OS to access Market and push manufacturers to open-source their drivers - which they should do.

As it is, the whole great idea of an open-source OS is subverted by the manufacturers, who slap some crappy UI customization on the the OS, lock their drivers and prevent us from installing OS upgrades.

The manufacturers use this to block OS upgrades as soon as new hardware comes out, preventing you from getting new features or fixes, and hoping that you would just fork out the cash for the new hardware.

It makes the whole platform terrible for end-users.
[Vibrant General] SteveSlimer:
Which will give carriers like Verizon more power to push their v-cast app store.
[Vibrant General] strictlyrude27:
This isn't true - while Android is released under the Apache license and thus open source, the bootloader isn't part of Android itself - it just boots the OS. So while the bootloader CAN be released free and open source - note that this does NOT mean that it must be provided unlocked! but the code must be released, and at some point someone will unlock the bootloader and re-release that derivative - the Apache license, unlike the GNU GPL, does not require that all works derived be listed under the same license. So Android's license explicitly allows for proprietary software to be in play on the phone, as we've seen. Think of all the apps you've seen that must be paid for - many if not most or all of these are not open source, and it's piracy to install this software without paying for it.
[Vibrant General] strictlyrude27:
I somewhat agree - on the other hand, if the GPL was in play instead of Apache or BSD, every single app that was written by any lowly developer must be released under the GPL - meaning all the source code to all apps must also be released. So developers that want to make money on their apps don't get that chance, and furthermore companies that produce, say, standalone GPS apps, won't have any incentive to put the man-hours in to work on an app just to release it freely.

The licensing issue cuts both ways. Licensing in a free-but-not-copyleft gives you the best (and worst) of both worlds.
[Vibrant General] MacGuy2006:
Google may be trying to figure it out, since they talked about how the new UI of OS3 will make the custom crap that manufacturers slap on unnecessary.

Unfortunately, the likes of Motorola immediately came out with statements saying that they will continue to integrate their crap into the OS.

I hope Google has the muscle to enforce the openness of the ecosystem, or the platform will continue to get more and more fragmented and no amount of volunteer hacking will be able to alleviate the frustration of end-users.
[Vibrant General] strictlyrude27:
You're missing the point. Releasing Android under a pure copyleft license will end up harming app developers, too. They chose to release under the Apache license for a reason - to let developers do whatever they want. You can always flash an AOSP ROM if you really can't stand TouchWiz. (Personally, I've been using ADWlauncher and various stock apks from my old G1.)

There are two audiences that Google needs to keep in mind - consumers AND developers. I'm not just talking Samsung or HTC or Motorola, either - any app developer from top-of-the-line standalone GPS companies, SlingBox, or other actually companies that produce for Android, as well as small developers for stuff like Angry Birds. I wonder how many top-quality paid apps like Tasker would not be developed if authors were forced to publish their source code freely.

Google might be developing their own UI, but just as Android is under the Apache license, there is nothing to stop phone developers from producing their own UIs.

So again - licensing issues cut both ways. If you give more freedom to the consumer, you will take from the developer, and vice versa. The model Google is following is the best of both worlds. Free and open source means anyone - including phone manufacturers - can modify the base source code however they choose.
[Vibrant General] ags29:
But isn't that like being sold a car that functions well, but has the hood permanently locked down? Idk but I just think that if u are sold an open source device, u shouldn't have to worry about any part of it being locked down.. And sure Samsung has the right to do it, but it doesn't mean they should do it.
[Vibrant General] MacGuy2006:
Neither ADWlauncher, nor Launcher Pro can prevent you from updating your OS, when such update is available by Google and your hardware is compliant.

Samsung and TouchWiz CAN prevent you from getting OS updates.

If TouchWiz was available as an add on in the Market, for a fee, or just for specific Samsung devices, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

What's wrong with Google experience?
[Vibrant General] bchalk:
This man speaks the truth. This Forum really needs to quit this whole entitlement thing and work together. I can see why Devs go other places.

Try working in the industry and reading some of these posts.

If you have a valid hardware or software reason to warranty, then great, I encourage you to go and exchange your phone in for something new. If you are a dumbass and screw things up by voluntarily breaking the software on your phone and doing things expressly outlined as forbidden in your warranty/contract then go pound sand. Period.