3 ms·

The phone wasn't remotely locked; Best Buy's entire new iPhone stock uses "flex activation" which will automatically lock the phone to the first SIM card that's

by kbuck 5y ago

The phone wasn't remotely locked; Best Buy's entire new iPhone stock uses "flex activation" which will automatically lock the phone to the first SIM card that's inserted. Fi's primary network is T-Mobile, so for a Fi SIM, this means T-Mobile. The blame here lies on Best Buy (for not making it clear that this occurs) and Apple (for designing and supporting "flex activation" -- which will still carrier-lock the phone even if a MVNO SIM, such as a Fi SIM, is inserted).

mrjin 5y ago
Agree. Such practice was dumb and incessive. If it was made clear, why would someone buy it in the first place?
dataflow 5y ago
Ah I see, thanks for the explanation.
mushyhammer 5y ago
To simplify: Best Buy sells locked phones. The locking is already there, but the operator is chosen at the activation so that Best Buy can sell one model for any operator. So the blame is actually Apple’s for blindly allowing this behavior, Best Buy’s for not advertising it, T-Mobile’s for allowing this through MNVO’s, and Google’s for not knowing that this happens and not allowing unlocks. And they said my Node dependency tree was a mess!
giomasce 5y ago
But what is the point of this flex activation scheme?
- kbuck 5y ago
  Easier inventory management for stores like Best Buy. Instead of having to carry SKUs for the T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, etc. carrier-locked variant of each phone (which, I'll admit results in some combinatorial explosion), they can carry 1 SKU for each truly different hardware configuration. Then it magically "becomes" an AT&T locked phone when they insert the SIM in the store. If you buy it subsidized or through a carrier payment plan, this works as intended (and they'll refuse to let you have the phone before the SIM is inserted). If you meant to buy an unlocked phone, you've been given an annoying lesson to buy directly from the manufacturer.

by kbuck 5y ago

mrjin 5y ago

Agree. Such practice was dumb and incessive. If it was made clear, why would someone buy it in the first place?

dataflow 5y ago

Ah I see, thanks for the explanation.

mushyhammer 5y ago

To simplify: Best Buy sells locked phones. The locking is already there, but the operator is chosen at the activation so that Best Buy can sell one model for any operator. So the blame is actually Apple’s for blindly allowing this behavior, Best Buy’s for not advertising it, T-Mobile’s for allowing this through MNVO’s, and Google’s for not knowing that this happens and not allowing unlocks. And they said my Node dependency tree was a mess!

giomasce 5y ago

But what is the point of this flex activation scheme?

kbuck 5y ago
Easier inventory management for stores like Best Buy. Instead of having to carry SKUs for the T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, etc. carrier-locked variant of each phone (which, I'll admit results in some combinatorial explosion), they can carry 1 SKU for each truly different hardware configuration. Then it magically "becomes" an AT&T locked phone when they insert the SIM in the store. If you buy it subsidized or through a carrier payment plan, this works as intended (and they'll refuse to let you have the phone before the SIM is inserted). If you meant to buy an unlocked phone, you've been given an annoying lesson to buy directly from the manufacturer.