VERIZON - What's keeping the Bootloader from being unlocked.

[nix80908]

I speak for a growing mass of consumers concerned over the Bootloader still being locked for the RAZR

I purchased my RAZR under the impression that it'd be unlocked by the end of 2011..."where operator and channel partners will allow it." - as told by a sales rep and confirmed on various online sources, HTC, Samsung and even OTHER Motorola phones all have unlocked bootloaders. So, unlocking the bootloader for the RAZR doesn't really seem that far-fetched of a concept.

Like many others out there, I do base my buying decision based on the open-source and flexibility of the device. I left Apple for the very facts that A) their hardware is subpar and B) a combination of CARRIERS and MANUFACTURERS constricting device usage to that of a drone-like state.

I want to know WHEN and IF you're planning on unlocking the bootloader. And if not - what are you going to do to compensate myself and a huge community that was falsely led into thinking that we were getting a device that would have an unlocked bootloader. I would gladly have waited for the Galaxy Nexus for such privlidges. But I was mislead into buying a phone that's turning out to be a deadend for me.

"Wouldn't it be great if Motorola has the same committment to the open source nature of Android and the requests of their customers.  I am going to be trading in my Droid RAZR (3rd replacement) for the HTC so I can enjoy an unlocked bootloader (among other technical issues), and support a company that actually listens to its customers.  I am hoping with the acquisitions of Motorola by Google the devices release by Motorola will support open source, and the developer community.

The Droid RAZR is a great phone (aside from the data drops I have experienced), and with an unlocked bootloader this phone would surpass the Galaxy Nexus easily.  Motorola needs to realize that when they meant this phone is too powerful to fall into the wrong hands it shouldn't have meant the developer communtiy.  Those would be the right hands that would save this device.  "  -  Chris

I agree with the above quote - while aimed at Motorola, I think the same holds true to Verizon. I've always considered Verizon superior in customer service and quality. And I would like to think they'd work with their customers to provide the same service I've grown to love.

[mattlgroff]

Great write-up and nice quote find by that Chris guy. I believe Verizon should let customers with Motorola devices use their purchased products in the way Google meant Android devices to be used, openly and without boot-loader restrictions.

[Tidbits]

Matthew Groff wrote:

Great write-up and nice quote find by that Chris guy. I believe Verizon should let customers with Motorola devices use their purchased products in the way Google meant Android devices to be used, openly and without boot-loader restrictions.

IF Google honestly wanted it to be used a certain way they'd would have chosen GPLv2 or v3.  They chose ASL which isn't completely open source.  This is WHERE the problems lies with assumptions of people.

[mattlgroff]

So what does that have to do with the boot-loader?

[nix80908]

It's not an assumption of the people the Android platform is an open source project. Anyone can develop for it, Anyone can make things Android.,

The problem lies in IMPLEMENTING these things. That's where things fall short. And a locked bootloader stands in the way of that.

There's no assumption on anyone's part, but your own.

EDIT: Don't take this as a personal attack, but the only thing we're trying to do is bring awareness and light to the bootloader being unlocked. No ill has ever come from a Carrier allowing the bootloader to be unlocked. So, if you have something productive to add to the conversation, please do so. But this isn't going to be a post for flaming and trolling .

[frogman172]

This is a quote from "Droid Life" forums. It sums it up better than I ever can say it.

First let’s look at what the piece of this open access provision states that has everyone all heated:

“Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee’s C Block network, except…”

And that exception reads as follows:

Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the licensee’s network…

So this may just be my negativity, but I would put money on Verizon arguing and producing a document having to do with security and bootloader unlocking. You see, it states right there that they cannot limit the use of one’s phone unless they deem that service to be a liability to the protection of their network. Since we all know that “security” seems to be the reason for locking up a phone, then there is your exception to the rule. Remember that these things are vague and companies like Verizon use that to their advantage.

The second part of this story has to do with “locking” of phones and reads as follows:

Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are compliant with the licensee’s standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of such handsets on other providers’ networks.

I hate to break this to everyone, but “locking” in this scenario has nothing to do with bootloaders. We are talking network access here which means they are referencing a phone that can access multiple frequencies or another carrier’s network. “Locking” and “unlocked” mean two different things these days. For most people, an unlocked phone has to do with one that works on another carrier’s network (like my Euro Galaxy S2 that works on U.S. AT&T). To hackers and ROM developers, it means a bootloader. Everyone is just confused here.  An “unlocked” phone in this situation falls under that first category and means that Verizon cannot lock its phones from working on another network (this is not a bootloader situation). Since their are currently no other networks to my knowledge that have access to their LTE frequency, they shouldn’t have a problem doing that.

Everyone follow that? Now, as I stated above, these things are vague and I’m pretty sure my interpretation is about the 4th or 5th different take. What I would say, is that if you are angry with the whole situation, then feel free to submit a complaint to the FCC as has been suggested. Who knows, maybe they will end up siding with the bootloader crowd at some point.

[nix80908]

Another point to bring up is that there is already a possibility of a way to unlock the RAZR's bootloader.
Personally, I'd rather have a supported, way of unlocking rather than --- alternatives which may work or may end up crippling a phone - who knows?
I can guarantee you  I'm not the only one on the fence about that particular issue.

[Tidbits]

Android is not completely open source... Read what ASL licensing is. It ALLOWS people not to distribute their code if they choose not to, unlike GPL. If Android was all really about open... Then Google would have gone GPL...

[Tidbits]

It makes no difference... I would just buy a phone that has an unlocked bootloader if I wanted one. Which if every user did would affect the "bottom line" which will force changes quicker than complaining after you bought it.

[nix80908]

Again -  I'm failing to see the relevance of your post.

Several sources indicated that the bootloader would be unlocked by the end of 2011.
Just because you view it as an irrelevant sales point doesn't mean all users do
No one ever said Android is 100% Open Source, nor is that even part of the original debate (ie a mute point)
I'm not claiming to speak for anyone other than those who actually know what a bootloader is.
There really isn't a reason you (or anyone) should oppose an unlocked bootloader (unless it's to troll ) as it has no ill effect on users whatsoever.
Verizon (along with HTC, Morotola, Samsung, LG, ETC) have already allowed the bootloaders of many many phones to be unlocked (yes some after release - via software updates), but the RAZR is somehow excluded in this.
The complaint AFTER I bought it is brought about by A) Patiently waiting for them to do things myself and other consumers were promised would happen and B) having that pass the Return Polocy, thereby effectively sticking me with a phone. I would not have purchased a RAZR if I was under the impression the bootloader would never be unlocked.