7 ms·

The Verizon iPhone 11 Pro is Locked For 60 days. Buyers are told it is unlocked

103 points by downandout 7y ago

arcticbull 7y ago
Definitely an unfortunate regression [on Verizon's part], and quite a screwup [for Apple] not to document it. I’m sure [the communication and messaging] was some oversight to be fixed shortly. [EDIT] Edit for clarity.
- fortran77 7y ago
  What makes you think so?
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    Sorry, I was unclear, I'm confident the messaging and incorrect communication was an oversight on the part of Apple, and I'm sure the 60 day lock is a result of the recent FCC ruling [1] permitting Verizon to do so. Which, I imagine, has to do with political connections between Verizon and the FCC (Ajit Pai and his giant Reese's Pieces mug used to work there). [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-phone-lock-fcc-approves https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-p...
infinitone 7y ago
Lets not jump to conclusions... lets get more than 1 instance out of 1000s of sold iPhones.
40four 7y ago
Why is this on the front page? It's not interesting, or even a valid complaint if you ask me. The guys screscreen shot clearly says "nearly" all phones will be unlocked. Well in my world, that doesn't mean 'all', yet he insists on playing the victim & crying about Apple being liars. I'm a Verizon customer and the 60 day lock policy is clear on all the new iPhone marketing material from Verizon. I suspect he saw this and thought he could work around it by ordering from the Apple website instead. The excuse of getting the Verizon version "in case' she ever wants to switch doesn't make sense if he is expecting an unlocked phone. He was eligible for an upgrade she wasn't. He tried to game the system and lost. Boo hoo! Just use the new iPhone on your own verizon account for 60 days & be happy. His girlfriend's phone can't be THAT old if she not eligible for an upgrade. Maybe she can use his old one haha.
- yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
  > I suspect he saw this and thought he could work around it by ordering from the Apple website instead. That sounds like a completely reasonable expectation. > He tried to game the system and lost. Boo hoo! He paid for a phone and had it crippled without being told.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > He paid for a phone and had it crippled without being told. I think this is a particularly salient point. Today, all iPhones regardless of carrier cost exactly the same. However, the Verizon one carries additional undue burden on it in the form of this 60 day lock. The phone should be discounted to make up for its lack of functionality.
    - bardworx 7y ago
      I doubt Verizon is going to apply a discount and I don’t see why Apple should, considering this is a Verizon policy brought on by the FCC.
      - arcticbull 7y ago
        In fairness you have this backwards. "This is a Verizon policy brought on by the FCC" -- this is an FCC policy brought on by Verizon's lobbying. Until earlier this year it was not permissible for them to do this as a result of the terms of their purchase of licenses for the 700MHz LTE block in 2008.
        bardworx 7y ago
        Fair. I won't edit my comment since it will just confuse things but you are 100% correct, my wording was incorrect.
    - spsful 7y ago
      A discount for a 60-day carrier lock? I feel like that could only be worth a few cents at best.
metaphor 7y ago
I find it humorous that the comments on that post so ardently defend Apple's disclosure fail by citing disjoint Verizon policy and/or brushing off as obscure operator switchology.
- mackey 7y ago
  I am an Apple fanboy and a macrumors member since 2002 and that thread is infuriating. People bend over backwards to defend Apple by any means necessary. I just read the entire thread and it seems like Apple messed up here. I would be surprised if it was intentional, but they still clearly messed up. It's ok to admit that.
  - hanklazard 7y ago
    It’s really a bizarre read. It’s clearly an oversight by Apple (which I assume they will clarify as this type of situation repeats many times). Lots of people there seem to defend this ridiculous Verizon policy as well.
    - gargravarr 7y ago
      Indeed, just the first page was enough for me. The OP made a simple point - that clearly-stated facts didn't add up, and the entire first page was either suggested workarounds or unrelated advice. Completely useless and not addressing the original point in the slightest. I don't blame him for his final post on the thread before ragequitting.
nixgeek 7y ago
I suspect this person has spent more time at this point raging on the internet than it would take to exchange the phone, or otherwise solve their issue. Apple Support will mail you pre-paid packaging to return these if you don’t want to drive 120 miles (which they cite as a key problem). They have a great 14 day return policy which I used today for an iPhone 11 Pro Max. No hassles. Full refund with no questions.
- danShumway 7y ago
  It is usually the case that broad solutions are harder and more time consuming than individual solutions. This is somewhat on purpose. Companies rely on the fact that when they mess up, the easiest solutions for consumers are ones that won't hold the company accountable or impact their ability to pull the same stunts in the future. If OP had just exchanged their phone, this thread wouldn't be on HN. But, assuming their claim is true, maybe the increased attention will force Apple or Verizon to clarify their advertising.
dwaite 7y ago
My understanding is that when you buy for a particular carrier/line, it does still have to be activated on that carrier/line before it will work. It could very well be that if he set up the phone with a Verizon SIM, it would immediately be unlocked. But this is a single data point based on what sounds like someone relaying information from Verizon tech support and a remote girlfriend having tech troubles.
gumby 7y ago
OP can return it no questions asked and get another unlocked phone. It's scummy this happened but I suspect in this case it would be Verizon not telling Apple the truth. Not giving Apple a pass, but if Verizon told the truth that would be newsworthy
- floatingatoll 7y ago
  The FCC approved Verizon’s request because they were requesting a very limited lock of 60 days in order to prevent “zero down” device theft and resale by people who manage to hijack or create a Verizon account using stolen credentials and identities, order a phone by mail from whomever, and then never activate it. Verizon provides a statistic of several thousand people last year having their identity stolen and abused to get iPhones, and they must continue to unlock phones (without user action required) at 60 days unless those phones are flagged as acquired through identity fraud (and thus essentially bricked for all carriers, terminating the get rich quick scheme). https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-phone-lock-fcc-approves https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-p... Hopedully the context helps provide some background for why this might not be as scummy as it seems without that.
  - RealStickman 7y ago
    Then the fault lies with Apple for marketing it wrongly. They should immediately correct it.
    - floatingatoll 7y ago
      That assumes OP is being completely truthful rather than misrepresenting a scenario that does not match the screenshot shown. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21039563 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21039563 I don’t assume that, since the above comment indicates they may have doing something fancy with multiple accounts. I would guess that the screenshot is from the process for one of the accounts - but their complaint is from something gone wrong with the other account.
  - rasz 7y ago
tzs 7y ago
> I got my girlfriend the Verizon version of the iPhone 11 Pro Max. [...] I'm with Verizon, she's with T-Mobile. I wanted to get the Verizon version in case she ever wanted to be able to switch Does this actually matter? The tech specs page for the iPhone 11 Pro at Apple just lists one model of the Max, and says it has both GSM and CDMA. It used to be that the models sold as AT&T or T-Mobile models only supported GSM, and the models sold as Verizon or Sprint models supported both CDMA and GSM, and so if you wanted maximum flexibility you had to get the later. Judging from current and past spec pages, it appears the iPhone X was the last iPhone that did that.
- delfinom 7y ago
  That used to be the difference...almost a decade ago. Verizon is killing it's remaining CDMA infrastructure by next year. The main difference now between carrier specific phones is their LTE bands as they all use different ones and for silly reasons phones sometimes will only support ones specific to the carrier.
GhettoMaestro 7y ago
Don't buy it on credit (finance) and you can have it unlocked immediately.
- downandout 7y ago
  The point of the thread is that Apple describes all of the circumstances under which phones they sell directly are supposed to be unlocked immediately. The poster’s situation met that criteria, and the phone was still locked.
imgvegas 7y ago
so the bad part about all this is for the ones that want to use the phone with multiple carriers for multiple lines. I have my main line as Verizon and my secondary line as T-Mobile. My Verizon line is tied to my digital sim, and as soon as you put the T-mobile physical sim into the phone it goes to the activation screen. Sucks for us that want to use the phone for multiple lines as they won't let you do so.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
edwardalbert 7y ago
Since we are here... are all iPhones financed through Apple come factory unlocked?
afab 7y ago
Yes, Verizon just told me to return my iPhone 11 pro Max and to buy it from Apple because their phone are unlocked. ️ I can’t use my e-sim from T-mobile for another 60 days. Very frustrating!!!!
afab 7y ago
Very frustrating!!! Verizon just told me to return my iPhone 11 pro Max and to buy it from Apple directly. I activated my e-sim not knowing the phones are locked and now every 10 minutes the phone locks, trying to push and activate the e-sim.

103 points by downandout 7y ago

Definitely an unfortunate regression [on Verizon's part], and quite a screwup [for Apple] not to document it. I’m sure [the communication and messaging] was some oversight to be fixed shortly. [EDIT] Edit for clarity.

fortran77 7y ago
What makes you think so?
- arcticbull 7y ago
  Sorry, I was unclear, I'm confident the messaging and incorrect communication was an oversight on the part of Apple, and I'm sure the 60 day lock is a result of the recent FCC ruling [1] permitting Verizon to do so. Which, I imagine, has to do with political connections between Verizon and the FCC (Ajit Pai and his giant Reese's Pieces mug used to work there). [1] https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-phone-lock-fcc-approves https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-p...

infinitone 7y ago

Lets not jump to conclusions... lets get more than 1 instance out of 1000s of sold iPhones.

40four 7y ago

Why is this on the front page? It's not interesting, or even a valid complaint if you ask me. The guys screscreen shot clearly says "nearly" all phones will be unlocked. Well in my world, that doesn't mean 'all', yet he insists on playing the victim & crying about Apple being liars. I'm a Verizon customer and the 60 day lock policy is clear on all the new iPhone marketing material from Verizon. I suspect he saw this and thought he could work around it by ordering from the Apple website instead. The excuse of getting the Verizon version "in case' she ever wants to switch doesn't make sense if he is expecting an unlocked phone. He was eligible for an upgrade she wasn't. He tried to game the system and lost. Boo hoo! Just use the new iPhone on your own verizon account for 60 days & be happy. His girlfriend's phone can't be THAT old if she not eligible for an upgrade. Maybe she can use his old one haha.

yjftsjthsd-h 7y ago
> I suspect he saw this and thought he could work around it by ordering from the Apple website instead. That sounds like a completely reasonable expectation. > He tried to game the system and lost. Boo hoo! He paid for a phone and had it crippled without being told.
- arcticbull 7y ago
  > He paid for a phone and had it crippled without being told. I think this is a particularly salient point. Today, all iPhones regardless of carrier cost exactly the same. However, the Verizon one carries additional undue burden on it in the form of this 60 day lock. The phone should be discounted to make up for its lack of functionality.
  - bardworx 7y ago
    I doubt Verizon is going to apply a discount and I don’t see why Apple should, considering this is a Verizon policy brought on by the FCC.
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      In fairness you have this backwards. "This is a Verizon policy brought on by the FCC" -- this is an FCC policy brought on by Verizon's lobbying. Until earlier this year it was not permissible for them to do this as a result of the terms of their purchase of licenses for the 700MHz LTE block in 2008.
      - bardworx 7y ago
        Fair. I won't edit my comment since it will just confuse things but you are 100% correct, my wording was incorrect.
  - spsful 7y ago
    A discount for a 60-day carrier lock? I feel like that could only be worth a few cents at best.

metaphor 7y ago

I find it humorous that the comments on that post so ardently defend Apple's disclosure fail by citing disjoint Verizon policy and/or brushing off as obscure operator switchology.

mackey 7y ago
I am an Apple fanboy and a macrumors member since 2002 and that thread is infuriating. People bend over backwards to defend Apple by any means necessary. I just read the entire thread and it seems like Apple messed up here. I would be surprised if it was intentional, but they still clearly messed up. It's ok to admit that.
- hanklazard 7y ago
  It’s really a bizarre read. It’s clearly an oversight by Apple (which I assume they will clarify as this type of situation repeats many times). Lots of people there seem to defend this ridiculous Verizon policy as well.
  - gargravarr 7y ago
    Indeed, just the first page was enough for me. The OP made a simple point - that clearly-stated facts didn't add up, and the entire first page was either suggested workarounds or unrelated advice. Completely useless and not addressing the original point in the slightest. I don't blame him for his final post on the thread before ragequitting.

nixgeek 7y ago

I suspect this person has spent more time at this point raging on the internet than it would take to exchange the phone, or otherwise solve their issue. Apple Support will mail you pre-paid packaging to return these if you don’t want to drive 120 miles (which they cite as a key problem). They have a great 14 day return policy which I used today for an iPhone 11 Pro Max. No hassles. Full refund with no questions.

danShumway 7y ago
It is usually the case that broad solutions are harder and more time consuming than individual solutions. This is somewhat on purpose. Companies rely on the fact that when they mess up, the easiest solutions for consumers are ones that won't hold the company accountable or impact their ability to pull the same stunts in the future. If OP had just exchanged their phone, this thread wouldn't be on HN. But, assuming their claim is true, maybe the increased attention will force Apple or Verizon to clarify their advertising.

dwaite 7y ago

My understanding is that when you buy for a particular carrier/line, it does still have to be activated on that carrier/line before it will work. It could very well be that if he set up the phone with a Verizon SIM, it would immediately be unlocked. But this is a single data point based on what sounds like someone relaying information from Verizon tech support and a remote girlfriend having tech troubles.

gumby 7y ago

OP can return it no questions asked and get another unlocked phone. It's scummy this happened but I suspect in this case it would be Verizon not telling Apple the truth. Not giving Apple a pass, but if Verizon told the truth that would be newsworthy

floatingatoll 7y ago
The FCC approved Verizon’s request because they were requesting a very limited lock of 60 days in order to prevent “zero down” device theft and resale by people who manage to hijack or create a Verizon account using stolen credentials and identities, order a phone by mail from whomever, and then never activate it. Verizon provides a statistic of several thousand people last year having their identity stolen and abused to get iPhones, and they must continue to unlock phones (without user action required) at 60 days unless those phones are flagged as acquired through identity fraud (and thus essentially bricked for all carriers, terminating the get rich quick scheme). https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-phone-lock-fcc-approves https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/26/18759602/verizon-60-day-p... Hopedully the context helps provide some background for why this might not be as scummy as it seems without that.
- RealStickman 7y ago
  Then the fault lies with Apple for marketing it wrongly. They should immediately correct it.
  - floatingatoll 7y ago
    That assumes OP is being completely truthful rather than misrepresenting a scenario that does not match the screenshot shown. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21039563 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21039563 I don’t assume that, since the above comment indicates they may have doing something fancy with multiple accounts. I would guess that the screenshot is from the process for one of the accounts - but their complaint is from something gone wrong with the other account.
- rasz 7y ago

tzs 7y ago

> I got my girlfriend the Verizon version of the iPhone 11 Pro Max. [...] I'm with Verizon, she's with T-Mobile. I wanted to get the Verizon version in case she ever wanted to be able to switch Does this actually matter? The tech specs page for the iPhone 11 Pro at Apple just lists one model of the Max, and says it has both GSM and CDMA. It used to be that the models sold as AT&T or T-Mobile models only supported GSM, and the models sold as Verizon or Sprint models supported both CDMA and GSM, and so if you wanted maximum flexibility you had to get the later. Judging from current and past spec pages, it appears the iPhone X was the last iPhone that did that.

delfinom 7y ago
That used to be the difference...almost a decade ago. Verizon is killing it's remaining CDMA infrastructure by next year. The main difference now between carrier specific phones is their LTE bands as they all use different ones and for silly reasons phones sometimes will only support ones specific to the carrier.

GhettoMaestro 7y ago

Don't buy it on credit (finance) and you can have it unlocked immediately.

downandout 7y ago
The point of the thread is that Apple describes all of the circumstances under which phones they sell directly are supposed to be unlocked immediately. The poster’s situation met that criteria, and the phone was still locked.

imgvegas 7y ago

so the bad part about all this is for the ones that want to use the phone with multiple carriers for multiple lines. I have my main line as Verizon and my secondary line as T-Mobile. My Verizon line is tied to my digital sim, and as soon as you put the T-mobile physical sim into the phone it goes to the activation screen. Sucks for us that want to use the phone for multiple lines as they won't let you do so.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

edwardalbert 7y ago

Since we are here... are all iPhones financed through Apple come factory unlocked?

afab 7y ago

Yes, Verizon just told me to return my iPhone 11 pro Max and to buy it from Apple because their phone are unlocked. ️ I can’t use my e-sim from T-mobile for another 60 days. Very frustrating!!!!

afab 7y ago

Very frustrating!!! Verizon just told me to return my iPhone 11 pro Max and to buy it from Apple directly. I activated my e-sim not knowing the phones are locked and now every 10 minutes the phone locks, trying to push and activate the e-sim.