Slashdot Mirror


Droid X Self-Destructs If You Try To Mod

An anonymous reader writes with some discouraging news for hack-oriented purchasers of the new Droid X phone: "If the eFuse fails to verify [the firmware information (what we call ROMS), the kernel information, and the bootloader version], then the eFuse receives a command to 'blow the fuse' or 'trip the fuse.' This results in the booting process becoming corrupted, followed by a permanent bricking of the phone. This FailSafe is activated anytime the bootloader is tampered with or any of the above three parts of the phone has been tampered with."

164 of 757 comments (clear)

  1. Worst summary ever by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now people's heads will hurt. Great Job!

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    1. Re:Worst summary ever by maino82 · · Score: 3, Funny

      If something goes horribly, horribly wrong, circuit breakers do blow. In quite a spectacular fashion I might add, and certainly not by design.

    2. Re:Worst summary ever by clone53421 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That particular quotation was taken directly from here.

      While “trip” is not the correct word to use in correlation to a fuse, this isn’t really a fuse – it’s on-chip circuitry:

      If certain sub-systems fail, or are taking too long to respond, or are consuming too much power, the chip can instantly change its behavior by 'blowing' an eFUSE. This process does not physically destroy the eFUSE, so it is reversible and repeatable, using JTAG programming.

      As such (IMHO, at least), “trip” actually does seem to be a fairly acceptable word for this action.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    3. Re:Worst summary ever by mwvdlee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's all explained in the very last sentence of the summary. You should know to read Slashdot summaries backwards by now.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  2. Who cares by thren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Someone will find a way around this very quickly

    1. Re:Who cares by poetmatt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      this is actually damaging to the phone. that is a horrible idea for verizon and will very likely end up with a lawsuit again.

      good job verizon/motorola!

    2. Re:Who cares by kjart · · Score: 5, Informative

      Someone will find a way around this very quickly

      It's not even clear if this information is real. TFA links to a forum post which doesn't seem to actually contain a source of the information (the OP states it's a mix of "hard information" and "conjecture"). Said forum post then links to the eFUSE wikipedia article, which lists Droid X as having an implementation of eFUSE. However, if you look at the Droid X wikipedia page linked to from there, you'll see the original mobilecrunch.com is what is cited for the eFUSE inclusion bit.

      I'm not saying there is something fishy going on, but this could easily not be true.

    3. Re:Who cares by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've already found a way to get around this. I'll never buy one.

      Just add Motorola (and/or Verizon) to the list of companies that don't understand open platforms or respect end user rights. There are other pricey toys out there to choose from.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    4. Re:Who cares by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The way around it is simple -- don't buy one! It's not like there aren't any other Android phones out there.

    5. Re:Who cares by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Informative

      p3droid is a reasonably well known guy in the Droid world; he's the producer of a lot of popular overclocking kernels for the original Droid.

    6. Re:Who cares by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Informative

      In fact the "eFUSE" feature is present in a staggeringly common component in many different Android (and other...) devices, so the presence of an eFUSE is not in any way demonstrative of the functionality claimed.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    7. Re:Who cares by marcansoft · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've worked with security systems and I can definitely say that the guy who wrote that post doesn't know what he's talking about. I've hever heard of "resettable" eFUSEs. He keeps talking about eFUSEs as if they had some kind of power to control or supervise the boot procedure, which is bollocks - eFUSEs are storage elements, you need some kind of boot ROM to make use of the data and make decisions. And you don't "write programs in JTAG". Until someone writes something technically coherent about this issue, I'd take all of this with a huge grain of salt.

      eFUSEs can indeed be used for this kind of self-destruct-on-tamper behavior, but honestly I would be very surprised if it were actually implemented this way on a retail handset. Deliberately designing brickage into a unit is just a bad idea overall (except for security devices, e.g. HSMs and smartcards).

    8. Re:Who cares by marcansoft · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hacking the Linux source to change the CPU frequency registers is significantly easier than understanding a secure boot process.

    9. Re:Who cares by yurtinus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is the exact same conversation that takes place regarding the iPhone closed platform - Somebody lists some restrictions they don't approve of and somebody else says "So? Don't buy one if you don't like it!" This misses the point entirely. The proper response to seemingly arbitrary restrictions on my (hypothetical) device is to not buy one, and then tell other folks who might be interested *why* I chose not to buy one. A handful of lost sales probably won't be noticed on a popular device, but some lost sales coupled with as much bad press as we can make might force some change. We first have Apple placing arbitrary restrictions on their device, now the primary competitor is doing the same - How many times does this story need to repeat itself until we're out of options?

      --
      +1 Disagree
  3. So, are there reasons for this? by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not to defend a company which builds stuff which will brick your phone if you mod it, but ...

    Might there be legitimate reasons why Motorola would be required to do this? Patents they've licensed? Covering their asses against the RIAA et al? Perhaps Verizon wanted this?

    Or, is this truly a case of a company taking an open platform and buggering it up by locking it? It sounds shifty, but there might actually be strong reasons why they did it in the first place.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by characterZer0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      More likely covering their asses against the FCC.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    2. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by Suzuran · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is not the FCC's doing, this is Verizon's. The FCC has no laws against having an open phone. Please put the blame where it belongs!

    3. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by Microlith · · Score: 5, Informative

      If that were in true in any way, shape, and form, then every other vendor would be doing the same. Only Motorola is taking this stance.

      The code that actually connects to towers, does the signaling etc is well programmed, fairly well tested by the FCC for compliance and then locked up out of harms way with a simple API.

      Which is isolated from the Android environment via serial or USB connection. This lockdown has -nothing- to do with the 3G baseband, which runs on its own processor with its own memory and storage.

    4. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by Microlith · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is Motorola's doing, as HTC's phones have similar security features in the CPU (bootloader encryption is enforced by TrustZone) and yet they don't use it.

      Go back a couple years and you can find papers from Motorola discussing how to lock down the user environment against modification. They're all about locking users out of their property.

    5. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by Orange+Crush · · Score: 4, Informative

      Baseband firmware's separate from Android. Nobody else locks it down like that, and if Moto was so worried about fiddling with the baseband, then burn it into an non-writable ROM chip. The eFuse is watching for any modifications to the OS Kernel and Bootloader, the "computer bits."

    6. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 3, Informative

      In most Qualcomm processors (The MSM series used in most smartphones/PDA phones), there are dual ARM cores. This isn't a "dual core" system in the traditional sense, the cores are NOT identical and one is designed to handle radio functions and one is designed to handle application functions. On every phone I've seen, the radio is very well protected and the application side far less so. (Which is why, for example, WinMo phones tend to be "SuperCID" unlocked long before they get SIM-unlocked.) The dual-CPU nature makes this kind of protection approach (one side heavily protected, one far less so) much easier than trying to protect only certain code within a single CPU.

      However, the Droid X apparently uses a TI OMAP. I'm not sure if these have the same dual-core architecture that the Qualcomm MSMs do. For this reason it may be much harder to be confident about locking down the radio side to enforce SIMlocks and FCC rules without locking down the application side too.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    7. Re:So, are there reasons for this? by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Please put the blame where it belongs!

      Steve Jobs!

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
  4. Droid Does... by thittesd0375 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does your phone self destruct if you mod it? Where others don't... Droid does!

    1. Re:Droid Does... by Pollardito · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I dunno, supposedly there's an app for everything

  5. Goodbye Moto by Coopjust · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Seriously, I can understand your warranty being voided if you do unapproved modifications to a device, but designing the device so it blows up if you try to modify it is just wrong.

    Why do hardware companies think they should have the right to own the device forever? Why should I buy a device that has a time bomb built in that may trip if the official software gets corrupted due to a bug?

    The whole thing reeks. I'm done with Motorola. What is the point of this exactly? What does Motorola lose by you running a custom ROM? New phone sales when they decide after a year not to provide any Android updates?

    1. Re:Goodbye Moto by Devrdander · · Score: 3, Informative

      Its designed obsolescence. I learned this the hard way with my Samsung behold II, Samsung wants you to buy a new phone, and tries hard to lock you out of self updates so that the only option you have is to buy a new piece of hardware. The market has designed itself in such a way that its business model is dependent on people buying a new device every 2 years. If they let you openly hack your phone they cut into their bottom line. Hopefully the new players like HTC that are a bit more open will help change the marketplace.

    2. Re:Goodbye Moto by tukang · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From AT&T's point of view, you would be correct. But we're talking about Motorola here. They do not lose a penny on phone sales because AT&T (and other companies) subsidize them.

    3. Re:Goodbye Moto by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      The point is that with all phones, money is lost on the hardware but made on the stringent phone contracts attached to them

      Uh, what? You can buy phones directly from the manufacturer without any kind of contract. If you buy one 'subsidised' by a network, it typically works out as if they'd given you a loan at 10+% APR.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  6. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In this case it's more a case of "Motorola Evil". Google provides the OS but the manufacturer still integrates it into the device.

    My next upgrades isn't until December, but I can already say that Droid X is off the table. Hopefully HTC will have out something new and shiny by then. If not, I'll still go for the Incredible over the X. I've had nothing but trouble from Motorola phones anyways.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  7. Re:How is this even legal? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the company which manufactured my washing machine included a termite charge

    Termite? Methinks maybe thermite?

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  8. How is this legal? by macemoneta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I purchase the phone outright, wouldn't this be willful destruction of property on Motorola's part? Does a company have the right to destroy a purchased product - after the sale - if the consumer doesn't use it in a prescribed manner?

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:How is this legal? by Xelios · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Everything of this nature is legal, until it's brought before a court of law. Are you willing to put in years of stress and potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars to file a suit against a Telecom giant that might reward you the cost of the phone? I don't think I would be, and companies like Motorola count on the fact that most people aren't.

      --
      Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
    2. Re:How is this legal? by ProppaT · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can legally buy a gun that only shoots in the direction of the person pulling the trigger, but it doesn't mean it's a good idea.

      I don't like this as much as the next /. reader, but if they put a visible tamper warning on the phone that the owner has to take off or, unfortunately, buries such text in a EULA then it's legally fine. It's unfortunate that there's so much that goes into being an informed consumer these days, but this is a slippery slope. As much as I'd like to say "there should be regulations against this!" there are an equal amount of items that Motorola et al think they should be able to get away with that I think are bad ideas.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    3. Re:How is this legal? by MrOctogon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is why class-action suits exist.

    4. Re:How is this legal? by Orange+Crush · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They're not destroying it after the fact, they're booby-trapping it up front. Now, if an official update accidentally tripped the fuse on unmodified phones . . . well that would make for quite a show, I'll make the popcorn. But yeah, I think they can put whatever countermeasures they want to in a phone. I think it ought to be illegal, but I don't believe it currently is. I'm glad I know about this eFuse and Motorola's asshattery. I'll gladly give my money to Motorola's competitors when I get my next phone(s).

    5. Re:How is this legal? by XorNand · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So you take them to small claims court, where in many jurisdictions lawyers are not permitted. Motorola will have to send a corporate officer to represent the company. A much more likely outcome is that they'll settle with you prior to the hearing. All it takes is a few people to do this, and then blog about it and/or post info on social networking sites. Suddenly, Motorola is facing hundreds of small claims suits. They're still likely to settle them all out of court for the cost of the phone, but perhaps the next time they make a phone someone in the initial design meeting says "Ya know, the fuse function really seemed to piss off a lot of people, people who are now likely buying phones from our competitors. Maybe we shouldn't take that route again."

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    6. Re:How is this legal? by powerlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      uddenly, Motorola is facing hundreds of small claims suits. They're still likely to settle them all out of court for the cost of the phone, but perhaps the next time they make a phone someone in the initial design meeting says "Ya know, the fuse function really seemed to piss off a lot of people, people who are now likely buying phones from our competitors. Maybe we shouldn't take that route again."

      No.

      They are likely to petition to have all these Small Claims rolled up into a Class Action suit (or some intrepid lawyer will, hoping to cash in on money they will make by battling Motorola).

      A judge is likely to grant the petition, and then Motorola can let their lawyers into the mix.

      Flash forward 5-10 years before the results actually matter (although it always possible Motorola MAY learn from this before then).

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    7. Re:How is this legal? by tunapez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So you take them to small claims court

      Best $38 you'll ever spend. Most times just faxing an unfiled, filled-out application to the other party gets you paid...fast.
      Make an honest effort to resolve your issue, when all else fails don't get frustrated, file. Having trouble getting a company officer to accept the certified mail? No problem, use a lottery logo embossed envelope, everybody accepts reg/cert'd letters from the lottery. Lastly, my experience w/ arbitration is if you only want half of the claim, go with arbitration. That's what arbiters do, split the contested amount in half after wasting 45 minutes acting like he/she is weighing both sides earnestly.

      --
      Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
    8. Re:How is this legal? by MorbidBBQ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Class action suits are so disappointing. The recent comcast case in point. I had to deal with comcast throttling for months, troubleshooting my connection, getting stonewalled by tech support. Its a slap in the face to be offered $16 for the months my service was limited.

      Back on topic, if that happens the victims can get a few dollars per phone while the lawyers get millions. I'd be interested to know if the small claims court theory holds any water. (never BT or DT) It just seems like its too simple, and the legal system is anything but simple.

      If its reversible with a JTAG, the phone will still get hacked, just more time and materials needed.
      Solution:Patience - Don't buy it until someone else does all the hard work.

  9. Re:How is this even legal? by bannable · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know I wouldn't be pleased with a termite charge. Imagine all the structural damage!

    --
    "If you see a man on a horse, he is likely an enemy. Kill the man and eat the horse."
  10. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, it's more of a Motorola issue than an Android issue. Just because an operating system is open doesn't mean the corporation that installed it isn't going to be a jackass.

    It's not as if there's no precedent for this. There's a certain operating system based upon open source components from Mach, FreeBSD, GNU, and KDE, which is somewhat infamous for being closed. At least you can load and run your own programs onto the Droid X, even if you can't update the operating system to your own version.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  11. Not a good idea, Moto and Verizon... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah... I guess I won't be buying a DroidX then. Sad, really... I was looking forward to getting one when the contract was up on my Droid.

    And I've been very happy with my Droid. Now, one wonders...was this done to suit Verizon or if it was on Moto's own thinking that it was done. I might not have modded my phone when I got it, but doing things like this are a real put-off. I bought the phone, it's mine to do with as I see fit- and putting in things like this take that away from me. It turns it into Motorola's device or Verizon's device and I'm just renting it. Sorry, you SOLD me a phone guys and if you're concerned about "user experience" or "risks to the network" design the damn phone to not need to be concerned about EITHER- and anything else is lying to the customer outright.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:Not a good idea, Moto and Verizon... by San-LC · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can thank Motorola for this gaff, not Verizon. Motorola Bootloader Lockdown Explained It seems that, since the Droid X is using part of Motorola's code along with the Android OS, they did not want that open. Part of protecting their IP I suppose.

    2. Re:Not a good idea, Moto and Verizon... by mlts · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That is an interesting article. It essentially means that Motorola is giving developers the middle finger and telling them to go elsewhere. Perhaps that is good advice. I'm sure HTC will be happy to sell phones.

      Since the Droid X does not have a hardware keyboard, there are really no reasons to bother with it over a N1, unless you want a Verizon phone, and there, HTC offers the Droid Incredible. Sprint has the EVO as well. If you like T-Mobile or AT&T, just get the N1 model that works on their 3G band.

      Since Motorola has expressly said it doesn't want the business of developers, that is just fine. It just means that Moto phones will end up being on the hind teat when it comes to being compatible with apps.

  12. Re:Sounds like by Enry · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, just an excuse to stay away from the Droid X. The Droid line has a number of phones from different manufacturers that make it. The original Droid and Droid X are made by Motorola while the Droid Incredible is made by HTC. Only the Droid X (so far) suffers from this problem that will likely have a way around it soon enough.

  13. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by Coopjust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    eFUSE is a chip technology developed by IBM is a special type of chip where the code isn't completely static- based on the operation of the device, an eFUSE can blow itself. This can reroute the logic in a variety of ways, or be used as a self destruct mechanism.

    It's reversible, but only by Motorola directly via JTAG. They have the custom code needed to flash the chip back to its original state.

  14. I do, actually... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sure they will... But I don't appreciate having them try to transform it more into a rental of the device than a sale- and then framing it in as a sale. I'm sure there's other people that'll view it the same way as I.

    Sadly, I'm fairly sure Verizon asked Moto to do this- they always seem to find a way to miss the point and try to assert "control" over everything.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:I do, actually... by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sadly, I'm fairly sure Verizon asked Moto to do this- they always seem to find a way to miss the point and try to assert "control" over everything.

      Remember Verizon's "open network" imitative that was announced in 2008? Two years ago -- so where's my market for open non-branded devices that I can use on the Verizon Network? Surely they didn't make that announcement just to forestall regulation and maintain their walled garden, right?

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:I do, actually... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then dont buy it. Hell spread it far and wide that you WONT buy it and why. How it has a self destruct built in.

      Give the Droid X a major PR black eye and suddenly companies wont try this crap again for a while...

      Honestly, non nerdy friends do listen to us when we say, "oh god no, dont buy that, it has this major problem with it"

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  15. Developers make the phone by necro351 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If developers don't want to use the phone, the platform's potential will be limited to the imagination and the business model of the original vendor, which is usually very limited. Android phones like this one will be selected against. Users will want to 'unlock' their phone's power by clicking the install button in the windows program they download from that .org site everyone they know goes to, and phones that brick when they do this will eventually not be bought. Really its a stupid move for Motorola.

    --
    --"You are your own God"--
  16. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Informative

    TFA doesn't explain what an "eFuse" is, but if it's anything like an actual fuse, then shorting it should be easy enough.

    If you follow the link in the story to here, it says:

    The eFuse is coded with information that it either looks for or is passed to it from the bootloader. The bootloader is loaded with information it looks for when it begins the boot-up process. (I have seen the sbf file look for a certain bootloader when it begins so its safe to assume that this is the process).

    Once the the eFuse verifies that the information it is looking for or that has been passed through to it by the bootloader is correct then the boot process continues. What type of information is written to the bootloader? So far i've been able to verify that the firmware information (what we call ROMS), the kernel information, and the bootloader version.

    If the eFuse failes to verify this information then the eFuse receives a command to "blow the fuse" or "trip the fuse". This results in the booting process becoming corrupted and resulting in a permanent bricking of the Phone. This FailSafe is activated anytime the bootloader is tampered with or any of the above three parts of the phone has been tampered with.

    Basically, they've added trusted computing to a phone.

    The eFuse is the gatekeeper -- if it detects that you've done something they haven't approved, it causes the phone to self destruct.

    So far, it doesn't seem like this is an easy thing to work around.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  17. Invitation to brick? by swanky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because of this setup--isn't it entirely possible that some sort of malware can be created to actually attempt to brick the phone by triggering efuse?

    1. Re:Invitation to brick? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unlocking bootloaders usually has to be done with physical access to the phone via adb/console. So no, shouldn't be possible.

      Still, this whole thing reeks. So glad I have a Nexus One instead.

    2. Re:Invitation to brick? by Svartalf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yep. And you can rest assured, since it's a smartphone, someone, somewhere will find a social engineering exploit to trick people into zapping their phones this way.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    3. Re:Invitation to brick? by Coopjust · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You'd have to figure out an exploit that would allow you to modify the firmware (ROM), bootloader, or kernel without root access on the device.

      However, every piece of software has bugs and many OSes have had escalation exploits, so it certainly is within the realm of possibility.

    4. Re:Invitation to brick? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that will be an awesome time. When people who never understood why they should care about this kind of thing suddenly have it shoved in their face.

    5. Re:Invitation to brick? by Gazzonyx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd be more worried about VZ pushing a bad update that bricks the fleet. They already hold all the keys (as I'm reminded when they push crap to my BlackBerry). In any case, I'm more afraid of incompetence than malice.

      --

      If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  18. Re:Yes, and... by Superken7 · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EFUSE "By utilizing an eFUSE (or more realistically, a number of individual eFUSEs), a chip manufacturer can allow for the circuits on a chip to change while it is in operation."

    I understand how someone can decide not to officially support modding since that could translate into more costs, but actually investing time and money to prevent modding?
    Seriously, whats wrong with them? They are supposedly part of the Open Handset Alliance.

    Hey moto, most people actually want to run other andriod "mods" (such as cyanogenmod) in order to have the latest and greatest android version, since you guys are obviously too uninterested in keeping your own phones updated. Most of them don't actually care about platform development.

    I hope you realize you should actually support - at least not make it difficult to - flash alternate operating systems. Providing an unlocked bootloader is a big first step which should be almost cost-free to do and can IMHO only bring you benefits. (Ever heard of the Nexus One's "oem unlock" command?)

  19. Re:Yes, and... by Spad · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's Slashdot's new plan to make people RTFA by picking a random paragraph to quote out of context in the summary, thus forcing them to visit TFA in order to work out what it's about.

    Not that it's worked in the past, of course...

  20. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by rwven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You gotta wonder what they perceived the benefit was of putting this "functionality" in place. I can't think of a single thing they gain by doing this...

  21. It's the principle of the thing and more. by wonkavader · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A hardware company actually put a self-destruct mechanism in the phone when you change the software.

    A. This will get tripped accidentally, even for naive users, and will cost owners money to fix.
    B. This violates the idea of ownership of the device. Motorola figures that they're licensing you parts, not selling. For an "open" OS, this is insane.
    C. Once you get around it, unless you can destroy the code, you still have that thing hanging around. A mistake or bad combination later on could trip it -- there's no reason to have to put up with walking through a minefield.

    All this translates to "Spread the news, blacklist the phone, send a message to Motorola." Because if this goes on as a "who cares" thing, all Motorola Android phones will have it in future and other companies will follow suit.

    This needs to be a black eye for Motorola, they need to notice that, and they need to quickly backpedal.

    1. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by dintech · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, the great unwashed masses are probably never going to know or care that this is in there sadly.

      The type of "geniuses" that work in mobile phone shops aren't going to be able to explain what it does or why either.

    2. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by mdm-adph · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Open Software != Open Hardware. Just throwin' that out there.

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    3. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by zwede · · Score: 5, Funny

      Eh? It’s just another safety feature.

      Mandatory car analogy? Try pulling out an airbag system or modding it.

      (For those not already aware, an airbag unit is basically a bomb. Don’t fuck with it.)

      A better car analogy would be:

      You don't like the rims your new car came with so you decide to swap over to some other ones. As soon as you remove the first wheel the entire car explodes.

    4. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The more correct phone analogy for your car analogy would be try removing the innards of the phone battery, using tools made of highly reactive materials.

      The correct car analogy would be to replace the ECU unit with an aftermarket unit. It's done all the time in certain circles, much like those that wish to mod phones. To further go down and tie the 2 analogies together, now imagine car manufacturers put air bag explosives on the ECU socket. Would you buy such a car?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    5. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If one were of the risk-taking sort, the best way to oppose this sort of crap would probably be to disseminate a trojan app that trips this "efuse" system...

      A few hacker nerds whining probably just makes Verizon smile. 10s of thousands of angry customers demanding replacement of their bricked phones, along with massive bad publicity would not.

      I wonder how possible that would be.

    6. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by TheSpoom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A. This will get tripped accidentally, even for naive users, and will cost owners money to fix.
      B. This violates the idea of ownership of the device. Motorola figures that they're licensing you parts, not selling. For an "open" OS, this is insane.
      C. Once you get around it, unless you can destroy the code, you still have that thing hanging around. A mistake or bad combination later on could trip it -- there's no reason to have to put up with walking through a minefield.

      And absolutely none of that creates a negative for Motorola or the carrier. To them, this is the greatest anti-hacker technology ever, and that is how they will advertise it to users, if necessary.

      Increases safety! Prevents hacking! Prevents viruses! Safest phone in ages!

      Users will flock to it, and us hackers will be a very small joke group consisting of less than one percent of sales. We will make absolutely no difference.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    7. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by twistedsymphony · · Score: 2, Interesting

      have you ever tried to pull or modify an airbag system? it's actually quite easy to do.

      Do to the "explosive" nature of the device itself everything is clearly marked (the entirety of the harness is wrapped in bright yellow tape with black lettering stating "AIR BAG") and simply designed (no fancy serial signals, each data bit gets it's own wire) so as to ensure no accidental detonation.

      I've removed the airbag system on 3 cars that I've owned, and one one I swapped steering wheels (meaning swapped air-bags) and had to modify the system for the new bag... very simple. indeed.

      if you remove the airbag passenger's of the car are none the wiser since everything looks as it did before... Also they're pretty fun to explode after removial with a car battery and some 20ft of speaker wire.

      I guess I don't see how your analogy works...

    8. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by imakemusic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is that a problem? The great unwashed masses aren't going to be modding their phones.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    9. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by crakbone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Think a better analogy would be "you replace the ECU and a couple of chunks of thermite set off and cut through your engine, transmission, weld your differential and compromise the temper of the frame. Completely disabling the car and costing your more than the price of the vehicle to repair it.

    10. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      More importantly, after an airbag blows, if you want to, you could just shove the airbag out of the way and continue driving the car indefinitely. You can also replace that part (and only that part) without gutting and replacing the entire inside of the car.

      By contrast, if an eFuse destroys itself, your whole phone is bricked, and can only be repaired by replacing the entire phone, or at least its main board.

      An airbag is solely for safety, whereas a phone is a phone, and that single component is supposedly solely for "safety". If the phone were perfectly functional without it (albeit less "safe", then that would be fine. It's not. Therefore, an airbag and an eFuse are not comparable. Simple as that.

      Designing self-destructing hardware should be illegal. Fundamentally, designing a device to deliberately damage itself is no different than deliberately designing a laptop to fail a few months after the warranty expires. It is selling a customer a product that you know to be fundamentally defective because you deliberately made it so, and doing this without remorse. Unless clearly labeled with "This hardware may destroy itself at any time", that's false advertising and fraud for starters.

      The worst thing is that if they are building this in to detect firmware hacking now, what's to stop them from using it for something else in the future? Oh, you installed a ringtone that isn't approved. Say goodbye to your phone. Oh, you visited a website that is used by movie pirates (despite not being able to do anything significant there with your phone). We don't like that, either. Pop. Living in China? You received a phone call from a suspected dissident or went to a website that the government considers dodgy. We're killing your phone. And so on.

      And what's to stop a virus from attacking the phone and simultaneously killing millions of these things worldwide on the same day? This is a glorified land mine, and we all have heard the statistics about how many tens of thousands of people are killed or maimed every year by those. Adding a feature like this into a product borders on suicidally stupid, and I really hope it blows up in their faces as soon as possible just so I can say, "I told you so."

      Boycott MOT. This ends now.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    11. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by mcvos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you – the customer – from an accident.

      How is it protecting the manufacturer from me? How is me modding my device damaging the manufacturer in any way? It's not protecting anything, it's just vengeful destruction.

    12. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, it would definitely be a "nuclear option" sort of thing; but I suspect that it is the only strategy that would have any chance of causing them to reverse their stance.

      Companies don't drop their DRM systems because they love freedom and fuzzy puppies, they drop them because the engineering costs and customer support issues are more expensive than the perceived benefits. Thus, if you oppose DRM systems, you can either lower the perceived benefits(by cracking the systems and distributing tools for doing so) or raise the costs. Boycotts are the legal and ethically unproblematic; but generally not that effective, way of doing this. More, er, direct methods of raising customer support costs are less legal and ethical; but probably a lot more effective...

    13. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by silverpig · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apparently this is blown out of proportion: http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/07/15/reality-check-modding-the-droid-x-may-not-lead-to-a-bricked-phone/ "This breaking news may not be as dire as many are claiming, as a google search of OMAP3 and e-fuse reveals that current OMPA handset already have e-fuse in place as part of the M-Shield hardware security technology built into TI’s OMAP system on a chip. It is on the very hackable DROID and the not-so-hacking-friendly Milestone, but it is not being used by Motorola to lock the bootloader of the handset. " etc...

    14. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by thijsh · · Score: 4, Funny

      The latest in car theft prevention! Guarantees to never ever have your car stolen again, and with a little luck you too can kill the motherfuckers touching your car!!!
      * May lead to loss of automotive transportation, groceries, pets, children and any other items still in the car.

    15. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by zlexiss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      A rims analogy would be more like putting on a new slip-case. Mostly cosmetic.

      Changing base boot and operating software would be like swapping the engine (or ECU) from a BMW into a Toyota and expecting the manufacturer to honor the warranty.

    16. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by YouWantFriesWithThat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      no one is asking for Motorola to honor the warranty, they are pissed that Motorola is going to intentionally sabotage the product after it is sold to their customers.

      to reiterate: void warranty, fine; brick phone, bad

    17. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by geckipede · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having the phone effectively destroy itself such that it can only be repaired by the manufacturer is not comparable to voiding the warranty.

    18. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's about the principle of it. You've long since stopped buying a merely a cellular phone and moved on to buying something akin to a hand held computer. Yeah, your on their network, but you own the phone. Your not leasing it, your not renting it. You slapped down several hundred dollars of your money for something that you can't modify to your liking.

      If tomorrow Dell came out with a new line of computers that prevented you from putting your Linux distribution of choice on it by zeroing out the bios and the bootloader so it was rendered unbootable the fury would be cataclysmic. Even though 99 percent of the people who buy computers don't change the operating system.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    19. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "If tomorrow Dell came out with a new line of computers that prevented you from putting your Linux distribution of choice on it by zeroing out the bios and the bootloader so it was rendered unbootable the fury would be cataclysmic. Even though 99 percent of the people who buy computers don't change the operating system."

      Ssssshhhhhhh!!!

      Don't give them any new ideas!! I'm sure there's lots of organizations out there that would lobby for support for this...backed up by legislation!!

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    20. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2, Informative

      Changing base boot and operating software would be like swapping the engine (or ECU) from a BMW into a Toyota and expecting the manufacturer to honor the warranty.

      Actually, they do. Or they have to be able to prove that the modification is what caused the problem.

      For example, I have a third-party ECU in my Audi. If I have a problem with, say, the suspension, Audi would have to prove that the ECU modifications were the cause of my suspension problems. It's not up to me to prove that they weren't.

    21. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by Lehk228 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Socialism!!!!!!!1111eleventy

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    22. Re:It's the principle of the thing and more. by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And yet, unless they can prove your change broke it they have too. We have regulation that says this for cars, we need it for everything else.

  22. +1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by brunes69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is just another nail in the coffin for Motorola, who becomes more and more irrelevant every year, being pushed out of the market on both sides by Apple and HTC.

    HTC makes the most robust and moddable phones on the planet, and do not try to stop the modding in any way - in fact one may say they passively encourage it.

    This post is coming from someone who owns a 4 year old HTC Vogue that came shipped with Windows mobile 6.0, but thanks to the modders, has been upgraded to 6.1 and 6.5, and more recently ove rthe past 3 months, has been running a fully working version of Android that is lightning fast. All on 4 year old hardware.

    This is what can be done when you don't shut out your customers - I am an HTC purchaser for life now.

    1. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by mdm-adph · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're still using a 4-year-old phone? You're not doing HTC any good. :P

      --
      It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    2. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not true. Ask anyone on Rogers who has a HTC Dream phone just how modable it is.

      Thanks to HTC and Rogers, it's locked down tighter than a duck's you-know-what. Why? So Rogers can claim the Dream is unable to run the latest Android, forcing you to buy a new phone (and probably another multi-year contract).

      HTC did this at Rogers' request.

    3. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As if this will make any difference to the masses?
      Please nobody will care about this. If it mattered Verizon wouldn't have any customers at all since it has a long history of locking down phones are removing functionality.
      This just isn't on most users radar.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by Name+Anonymous · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...

      This is what can be done when you don't shut out your customers - I am an HTC purchaser for life now.

      Or until HTC does something really stupid and doesn't back down. There are many companies who used to be great, then they changed. I'm not saying HTC will change in a bad way, but you just never know.

    5. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by powerlord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is what can be done when you don't shut out your customers - I am an HTC purchaser for life now.

      Except you did not purchase a single phone from them for the last 4 years.

      Not that I am supporting what Motorola did.

      I've seen this comment from a few people so I have to ask:

      Since when should the manufacturer decide how often I need to replace their product?
      How often to you buy a new computer or TV? I'm sure Dell/Sony/Samsung/Toshiba would be happy if you bought a new one each year, but for most people that is way overkill.

      When you DO chose/need to buy a new "X", do you give any consideration to "brand loyalty" when making your purchase?

      Personally my Desktop is coming up on 5 years old. My television is about 4 years old.
      When I look to replace them I'm probably going to look at ASUS and Samsung because they made a quality product that worked well.

      That's the sort of reward a good company should get. When you choose to replace their product, you WANT to give them more business, instead of just jumping ship with a thankful sigh.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    6. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by yurtinus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He did just tell a bunch of people that if they buy an HTC phone, they might not need to buy another one for four years... That sounds pretty good to me!

      --
      +1 Disagree
    7. Re:+1000. Goodbye Moto, Hello HTC by honkycat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No. In 2007 it was 0 years old. In 2008 it was 1 year old. In 2009 it was 2 years old. In 2010 it was 3 years old. That's how we count ages in the Western world. IIRC some East Asian cultures consider you 1 when you're born, so maybe there you'd say it's 4.

  23. Citation needed by rumith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I did follow the TFA to the origin of the story (MyDroidWorld forum), and I still don't see any code, captured data or even a photo of the said eFuse chip inside the DroidX. I understand that the original poster appears to be a reputable hacker, but come on, what kind of real reporting is this? Can anyone else verify these claims? More information needed, thank you very much whoever posts it, because if true, this is an outrage.

    1. Re:Citation needed by Coopjust · · Score: 4, Informative
      Motorola acknowledged this back in February:

      We understand there is a community of developers interested in going beyond Android application development and experimenting with Android system development and re-flashing phones. For these developers, we highly recommend obtaining either a Google ADP1 developer phone or a Nexus One, both of which are intended for these purposes. At this time, Motorola Android-based handsets are intended for use by consumers and Android application developers, and we have currently chosen not to go into the business of providing fully unlocked developer phones.

      The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets. We post appropriate notices as part of the legal information on the handset and post source code, where required, at http://opensource.motorola.com./ Securing the software on our handsets, thereby preventing a non-Motorola ROM image from being loaded, has been our common practice for many years. This practice is driven by a number of different business factors. When we do deviate from our normal practice, such as we did with the DROID, there is a specific business reason for doing so. We understand this can result in some confusion, and apologize for any frustration.

    2. Re:Citation needed by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A locked-down bootloader is not uncommon on Android devices these days. That the Droid X bootloader is locked by no means demonstrates the ridiculous measures that the article claims Motorola have implimented.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    3. Re:Citation needed by assantisz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I am sorry but I do not see that Motorola acknowledged the use of eFuse technology. Yes, they locked the bootloader down just like they did with the Milestone (using encryption). Other than that it is pure speculation. Show me the pictures or show me a bricked phone and then we talk.

    4. Re:Citation needed by jimicus · · Score: 4, Informative

      The use of open source software, such as the Linux kernel or the Android platform, in a consumer device does not require the handset running such software to be open for re-flashing. We comply with the licenses, including GPLv2, for each of the open source packages in our handsets.

      (my emphasis)

      This is exactly the sort of thing GPLv3 was intended to circumvent. Whether that's because the FSF foresaw a future where there were so many locked down devices that most people simply wouldn't buy a general purpose PC any more or because they simply thought it was a bit disingenuous to provide source but no way of running the compiled code is another matter altogether.

  24. Glad I have an Apple phone. by lxs · · Score: 5, Funny

    Compared to the eFuse, their new iFuse just works, which makes for an infinitely superior bricking experience.

  25. Corporate Security by Manhigh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm under the impression that the Droid X is intended for the business market, to try to take a bite out of RIM's market share. This sounds like an attempt to make the phone more "secure" by preventing people from getting at the data by rooting the phone. Not that it's necessarily the best way, but thats just my 2 cents.

    --
    "Open the pod by doors, Hal" > "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave" sudo "Open the pod bay doors, Hal" > alright
  26. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by aesiamun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's also another OS that is based upon open source components from Mach, FreeBSD, GNU and KDE which allows me to install whatever I want without having to jailbreak, root, break bootloaders, etc...Clicky

  27. These aren't the droids we're looking for. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Move along.

  28. Re:Ouch by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In reality, the main appeal of Android operating systems is that they give phone manufacturers a serious competitor to Apple and they don't have to pay Microsoft. Not to mention, they probably don't care for Windows Mobile.

    The problem is that what made the Android OS a serious competitor to Apple was that it wasn't locked. If a phone running Android is locked as tight as an Iphone, I may as well get the Iphone and the "coolness" of owning an Apple product.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  29. Re:How is this even legal? by HungryHobo · · Score: 2, Funny

    twice as deadly!
    Metal termites filled with thermite!

  30. "Written in JTAG" by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Written in JTAG" implies a program written in a language called JTAG.

    The problem is that JTAG is a standardized electrical communications protocol used to support debugging of ICs, and often also used to program them.

    Nothing can be "written in JTAG" because it isn't a programming language. I question whether the poster on that forum has any clue what's really going on. So far the only evidence of this is one forum post that has very little detail and has some glaring technical/grammatical errors (see above). I'll believe it when I see a more in-depth analysis.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    1. Re:"Written in JTAG" by Gravitron+5000 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you wanted to be pedantic, it should be "written in BSDL" as that is the language in which you directly control JTAG. Many people that have used JTAG wouldn't care about the distinction. And yes you can write code in BSDL to control JTAG. It sucks (I know from experience), but it can be done.

  31. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    To be fair, OS X doesn't implode if you recompile the bootloader, which is open source under Darwin. You can either download apps for OS X (many free), make your own using Apple-supplied tools (XCode), third-party paid tools (why?), or use free-as-in-speech-and-beer OSS tools.

    This can be done in any combination of interfaces, from CLI and X11 to Cocoa and Carbon.

    None of this, or even (to make an accurate analogy) installing Windows or Linux on your Mac, is going to make the Mac go boom. In fact, if you buy the system and install the exact same Linux distro as you did on your IBM or Compaq... it'd work.

  32. A nice class-action suit by markus_baertschi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope Motorola get's a nice class-action suit out of this.

    Imagine a nice little virus, designed to trigger the 'self-destruct' and some innocent users getting infected.

    Markus

  33. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by aliquis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple evil, Google good.

    And it still holds.

    Google can't be responsible for everyone else though.

    (But they for sure could restrict usage for more open phones by pushing whatever demands they wanted. The risk for them of course would be that phone companies may decide to pick another product and hence Google would lose the data of their consumers. In a perfect world I would had preferred a "open" phone as far as the OS goes directly from Google, which is sure to run future versions. Stock everything would be fine. I trust them much more than any third-party provider.)

  34. Re:Sounds like by dangitman · · Score: 3, Informative

    A great excuse to stay away from Motorola. It's not the OS, it's the hardware, and only Motorola (that we know of) is doing this crap.

    Right. Droid is the Motorola trademark (licensed from Lucasfilm) for their hardware that runs the Android software.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  35. Apparently... by Crippere · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apparently, this is not the Droid you're looking for.

  36. Re:Sounds like by AndrewNeo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except for the Droid Eris and Droid Incredible, which are HTC.

  37. Re:Yes, and... by mlts · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Certain handset makers want their phones to have a short lifetime. I'm sure the handset maker views it if the phone is not rootable, nor flashable to a newer version of Android, it eventually gets thrown out, as opposed to being used a longer time. Plus, blown phone == more new phone sales.

    This appears to be a very short term profit attitude here, and if this is true, this will ensure I never buy a Motorola device again and will actively tell people to go HTC or another vendor who does not put self destruct mechanisms in their devices.

  38. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh, so we just have to wait a couple of weeks for some teenager to crack it. Awesome.

  39. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by Svartalf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unlikely...

    If they've put eFuse stuff on the phone, you might be able tapdance around the issue a bit- but the odds are good that if you're modding the phone you'll brick it. And it's liable to brick a few un-modded phones as well. There was a reason they quit using it a while back (this stuff is from the early part the last decade...)- and I'm kind of surprised they brought it back on this phone.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  40. Re:Ouch by mlts · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't forget that Motorola phones only have a few die-hards working on ROMS. Compare the forum for the CLIQ on modmymoto.com to the ones for HTC devices on xda-developers. The iPhone also has a big jailbreaking/modding scene, and I'm sure there will be a bunch of cool apps on Cydia once iOS 4.1 comes out and is jailbroken.

    If I were to buy an Android phone, I'd go with an N1, or the "official" Google stuff. Second choice will be almost any HTC device because they actually put out source and tools to help with modding.

  41. A lot of discussion based on a single forum post by jmichaelg · · Score: 4, Informative

    So a guy [p3droid] few know posts a speculative comment

    So this post is a mix of hard information and a bit of conjecture on my part (guesses).

    and /. takes it as fact? At least p3droid has the courtesy to warn his readers what a conjecture is and that's all his post is.

     

  42. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by nyctopterus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Where's you god now, Googlebots? WHERE'S YOUR GOD NOW?

    Come over to the iSide, it's shiny!

  43. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by Coopjust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've heard that Cyanogen and other groups that do this sort of technical work on Android phones have sworn off the Droid X because options that are equally good as phones and won't make getting a custom ROM on a process that will destroy several phones and be risky every time someone flashes it themselves exist.

  44. The shining irony of this event by jra · · Score: 4, Informative

    is that Verizon will be the first one out of the gate with Block C 700MHz LTE service -- which will put them on the spot: they are *required by the terms of the license* -- thanks, Google -- to allow any device that meets their published tech specs to connect to that network.

    So if the do this to their handsets for LTE700, then they'll just lose sales *directly*.

    Fun to watch massive corporations try to turn on a dime.

    Microsoft couldn't do it.

    Betcha Verizon can't either.

  45. As do other products... by PalmKiller · · Score: 2, Insightful

    eFuse is an IBM brain child, and they have it in several of their RISC products. The XBox 360 has one in its xenon (ibm power pc) processor. The Texas Instruments OMAP processors that motorola chose for their droid x are using the eFuse technology. The statement that it is not reversible via software is bull, once you figure it out, you can set up a JTag interface (as any serious modder will do anyway) and then you can reverse the eFuse bits and try your mod again.

    1. Re:As do other products... by Coopjust · · Score: 3, Informative

      eFUSE can be used to change chip logic on the fly based on the operation,, or, as Motorola is using, can be used to modify the programming of the chip itself to render the device nonfunctional without a reflash.

      If you could figure out the necessary code to flash to the chip - which wouldn't be easy - yeah, you could reflash the chip via the JTAG port.

      Given that HTC and others aren't locking the phones down in a method where the phone deliberately tries to use a device to brick if the phone's firmware/kernel/bootloader is not official, crackers are more likely to ignore the phone. And given the publicity ("Motorola phones have chip that self destructs"), ordinary consumers could be scared off too.

  46. Re:I do! by aliquis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about the Nexus One?

    I don't know if it's open for future OS versions (or even whatever normal people can get access to and build the code, but I guess we can?)

    Also I live in Sweden, Europe and I don't know if we can order it or if it was US only?

    I won't go through too many loops to get one. If they don't want to sell me a phone: Fine! Don't ...

  47. Re:It's a wonderful New World by bickerdyke · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wasn't the android phones meant to be the openish alternative to the wall^H^H^H^Hputrid compost offered by Apple?

    No.

    The Android operating system was meant to be an openish alternative for the phone manufacturers. It's up to them to repeat apples ways by walling up their phones too.

    Butthey shouldn't forget that people who trade in a stable system with a hand-picked selection of possibel apps for a locked down system tend to buy an iPhone in the first place.

    --
    bickerdyke
  48. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Return the devices for refund. Tell Verizon why.

  49. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    That term is not compatible with the GPLv2, which is what the Linux kernel (an integral part of Android) is licensed under.

    You fuckers all laughed at GLPv3, but look where it got you.

  50. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That opinion... You're holding it wrong.

  51. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by tgeller · · Score: 5, Funny

    eFUSE can blow itself.

    Lucky eFUSE!

    --
    Tom Geller
  52. Tivoization by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's like Tivoization: the software is open, but the hardware blocks any changes.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:Tivoization by sleeping143 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Somehow blaming Google for this (or making a snark about an "open OS") isn't appropriate at all.

      That's why we're blaming Motorola, the ones making the locked-down hardware. The OS is absolutely not the problem here.

    2. Re:Tivoization by idontgno · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Tivoization"

      Tivo

      GPL v3, which, if it had been the license of Android instead of the Apache License, might have prevented this travesty.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  53. Re:After enduring all that vitrolic by Coopjust · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The laughs will come if consumers decide that they don't care and buy the phone anyway despite headlines saying how Motorola has put a self destruct chip in the phone. The carriers will probably play hardball with every device manufacturer and get this technology in every Android phone so they can brag about an open platform but lock down the updates and stop providing Android updates a year after the phone is released.

    If consumers ignore the Droid and other phones that implement such anti-consumer chips, then it'll be a victory for Android users, resiting attempts to take away from the openness of the platform.

  54. Re:I do! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's actually pretty much even with other smartphones in its class. The trouble is, most carriers(at least in the US); subsidize handsets but don't offer less expensive plans to those who BYO hardware...

    If there were a "zOMG Free Phone* *(with $$$$/month contract)" option and a "Pay full retail phone price, or bring your own, $$/month for voice/data" option, the American preference for crippled carrier phones would be an example of the "stupid consumers, only looking at upfront costs" phenomenon. As it is, though, you pretty much choose between getting a subsidized phone, then having the subsidy(and some extra) gouged out month by month, or you pay full price, and then face exactly the same monthly costs. This adds up to paying a fairly major premium to purchase your own device.

  55. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by xtracto · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Haha, that reminds me. I recently bricked my Wii, *real* brick by erasing IOS60 (the main "function" that makes the system boot), not even the "preventive" homebrew apps were helpful.

    However, it was revived by a simple re-flash of the NAND chip using an specialized programmer.

    I doubt this "fuse" brick will be unbreakable

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  56. Re:Ouch by slriv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In reality, the main appeal of Android operating systems is that they give phone manufacturers a serious competitor to Apple and they don't have to pay Microsoft. Not to mention, they probably don't care for Windows Mobile.

    The problem is that what made the Android OS a serious competitor to Apple was that it wasn't locked. If a phone running Android is locked as tight as an Iphone, I may as well get the Iphone and the "coolness" of owning an Apple product.

    Nah, openness had nothing to do with android being a serious competitor.

    Gah, not you necessarily, but so many people latch on to a company/product just like they would a sports team. This isn't sport, this is business, and most people buy what's convenient (standing around at a phone store...walmart, radio shack etc...) and what is seemingly cool (shiny graphics... yay), and more and more, what is cheaper than their current stuff.

    The coolness factor is probably a bigger factor than anything else. Apple has sexy commercials for their products. The lesson to be learned here is that sexy sells, technobabble mostly sucks by itself, but throw in cute people and wow, I gots to have that 10g phone with xyz widgets now!

    --
    All the worlds a stage, and I'm the guy running the lights...
  57. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by thoromyr · · Score: 2, Funny

    They saw all the press Apple has been getting lately, first for "not really having a retina display" then for displaying the wrong number of bars to indicate signal reception strength. They wanted in on this, so they... wait a minute, they had to have started all of this before the iPhone4 was released. Dunno, maybe they're just plain evil.

  58. GPL violation? by Urkki · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is all the GPL code in Android under such a version of GPL, that this is legal? I mean, it prevents the user from changing certain parts of the GPL software, something which at least some versions of GPL require, as far as I understand.

    1. Re:GPL violation? by ejasons · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is all the GPL code in Android under such a version of GPL, that this is legal? I mean, it prevents the user from changing certain parts of the GPL software, something which at least some versions of GPL require, as far as I understand.

      GPLv2 only requires that you give out source to the GPLed components that you use (as well as any modifications); it doesn't require that the source actually be usable.

      This process has become known as TiVoization, after TiVo, who locks things down in a similar way.

      This endaround the GPL is one of the main reasons that GPLv3 was created; what Motorola is doing here is not legal with GPLv3 code (note that the Linux kernel is, and probably always will be, GPLv2...).

  59. Re:I do! by bberens · · Score: 5, Informative

    I would like to take this moment to give a shout out to T-Mobile, which actually offers a bring your own phone plan for less than the subsidize your phone plan.

    --
    Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
  60. Re:After enduring all that vitrolic by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Android users can buy a different, more open Android device. You've not even got that option on iOS.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  61. GPL v3 by Excelsior · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Isn't this exactly what the GPL v3 is designed to prevent (Tivo-ization)? Seems like FSF's concerns are once again coming true. Too bad Linux won't ever adopt v3, it seems.

  62. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by PRMan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Return them and tell Verizon that you're returning them because of the eFuse.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  63. people who want to mod their hardware by zogger · · Score: 2, Informative

    You keep getting handed options, then just purchase the stuff that is designed on purpose to frustrate you. Why not more love for projects like openmoko?

    1. Re:people who want to mod their hardware by Svartalf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Options he says...

      There's a reason AT&T lost their little lawsuit over the "There's a Map For That" ad campaign that Verizon ran.
      There's a reason I don't use AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile- I use the "slower" 3G in more places than the others offer.

      Since that's the case, I can't very well use an OpenMoko phone until someone makes a CDMA one and then Verizon decides to honor their publicly stated commitment for an "Open Network" that allows me to bring that phone over to their network. I can't as readily take the access hit for the things I do with the phone and go to another network that I could use an OpenMoko phone on.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    2. Re:people who want to mod their hardware by Miamicanes · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Why not more love for projects like openmoko?

      Because in America, an Openmoko is a nearly-useless GPRS paperweight. Ditto for Trolltech GreenPhone, and every other "open" phone. They couldn't do EDGE (in the US, lack of EDGE is a nearly automatic deal-breaker, because even today, few AT&T or T-Mobile customers can truly depend on UMTS working everywhere they go), let alone 1700/2100 or 850/1900 UMTS. IMHO, it's a major reason those phones have all largely failed.

      Their argument that they were "development" phones not intended for real use was stupid. Very, very few businesses are going to buy a relatively expensive phone for pure abstract "development", and no slightly geeky elite user is going to spend that much money on a phone that's borderline useless as a phone ready to be tweaked, extended, and made MORE cool.

      The US isn't the entire world market, but it's a big, important chunk of it, and any project that effectively writes it off completely is probably doomed from birth. The same is probably true of any American project that completely ignores Europe. Just look at Palm -- they released the Pre for Sprint while the rest of the world was literally begging for it. At the VERY least, they should have released a 1900/2100 UMTS Pre simultaneously with the CDMA Pre. Someday, companies in the US and Europe will realize that it's worth making at least a half-assed effort to ensure that anything that works in one place will at least have a chance of working in the other, because it's cheaper to spend a little more and end up with one device that works in both places than two devices that can independently flop and leave the vendor with useless, expensive inventory.

      Google was smart -- they made sure the Nexus one would work fully in both Europe AND the US. Admittedly, T-Mobile wasn't the greatest choice of American networks, but their only real alternative would have been to have released it with 850MHz support from the start (frankly, I'm shocked they didn't), or go with a (still slightly experimental, apparently) tri-mode chipset capable of GSM800/900/1800/1900, UMTS850/1700/1900/2100, and CDMA2000@800/1800/1900 so it would work on Verizon & CDMA carriers in Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, and China.

  64. While I love a good ragefest by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While I love a good ragefest, wouldn't it be prudent to check the facts?

    Droid, DroidX, Droid2 and others -- they all have this efuse, it's nothing new. Perhaps rather than making assumptions based on the presence of a device, someone could do some actual research to find out if this is really a concern? Just because the chip is present does not mean it's configured to brick the phone - it certainly hasn't done so in other Android devices using it.

  65. Re:iPhone Evil, Android Good by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From where I sit, Motorola / Verizon are more evil than Apple / AT&T. Well, OK, AT&T is pretty fucking evil, but the reality is that Apple has never been about open devices and so has never violated any trust with any communities, because iPhone has always been a walled garden. On the other hand Android is wide open, yet they are coupled with Verizon, notorious for locking down phones and removing features, and Motorola who knows fuck all about good software. Android + (Verizon and Motorola) seems like oil and water to me. Plus the Droid-X software seems to not be getting good reviews today: http://gizmodo.com/5587225/motorola-droid-x-review meaning that hacking it is even more desirable.

    --
    I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
  66. It's all about Tethering by SoulMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would guess that if Verizon is the one that is requiring this of Motorola, then they are doing it to restrict people's ability to tether 2.2 without having to pay Verizon.

    The Android 2.2 platform has built-in wifi tethering that you have to pay your carrier for in order to use, an extra $20/month or some such. Rather than do that, a quick root and install of a free wifi tether app allows the owner to bypass the carrier Tether requirements and build their own little wifi network to access the 'net from any wifi capable device without paying... The data becomes just another set of packets.

    If you're looking for a business reason, that's it.

    -SM

  67. Re:After enduring all that vitrolic by nilbog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even a locked down self destructing Android phone is 10x more open then an iPhone. You know you can still install your own applications, right? You know you can use your locked up tight Android phone for streaming podcasts (over 3G no less!), tethering, instant messaging, multi-tasking, wifi metering/sniffing, file management, accessing FTP servers, playing non hardware-supported media types, google latitude, free theft protection, customizable home screens, widgets, porn(!), universal file system, change the default launcher, use skype, flash, use non-webkit browsers, use a full bluetooth stack, VOIP, tight google voice integration, expandable memory, remote or local torrent control, reading around the world in 80 days by Jules Verne, offensive apps, installing apps outside the app store, listen to nine inch nails, use alternative music players/music stores, dope wars, watch south park, use alternative keyboards, voice texting/typing, plenty of navigation apps, replace the battery, alternative SMS/alerts/quick reply apps, search emails, apply custom themes, console emulation (nintendo, sega, super nintendo, ps, etc.), sample apps and return them if they suck. The iPhone does none of those things (or does them in some sort of crippled way) so who is laughing at who?

    --
    or else!
  68. Re:Easy for hackers to fix? by asvravi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Wrong. There are lots and lots of different eFuses. An example - http://www.toshiba-components.com/ASIC/eFUSE.html

    The story most probably refers to an actual fuse inside a chip that is made by a layer of polysilicon - it can be made to melt and blow just like the common electrical fuse. In this case, there is no return.

  69. Phone bricking malware by DaveSlash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can't wait for it.

    --
    Burn FAT not OIL
  70. Re:A lot of discussion based on a single forum pos by assantisz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Reading comprehension is not your strength is it? 1) p3droid admitted right from the start that it was all guess work but somehow everybody ran with it and concluded that there should be "shame on Motorola" etc, 2) Motorola admitted to locking down the bootloader but not to bricking the phone in case an attempt to replace the bootloader was made. Btw, reports came in that the Droid X does not get bricked when trying to fiddle with the bootloader.

  71. In past days... by pclminion · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In past days this would be properly seen as a hardware quirk to be worked around. Like a buggy SCSI controller which trashes your disks when you hit it with an obscure command sequence. You don't throw up your hands, foam at the mouth, and threaten the manufacturer! You figure out what you need to do to avoid the undesirable behavior.

    My God, you modder people are turning into a bunch of pussies and whiners. THE WHOLE POINT OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING is to have fun and push the hardware into areas it was not meant to go. In this case, the manufacturers have laid a few things in your path to make life interesting. Take it as a challenge, as we've always done in the past, rather than acting like a whiny bitch. My God, the hacker spirit is well and truly dead.

    1. Re:In past days... by Microlith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In past days this would be properly seen as a hardware quirk to be worked around.

      A quirk is one thing, a landmine where one misstep craters the thing intentionally is something else entirely.

      Like a buggy SCSI controller which trashes your disks when you hit it with an obscure command sequence.

      Such an error could be recovered, since presumably it doesn't render the disks inoperable.

      You figure out what you need to do to avoid the undesirable behavior.

      There's no way of knowing if avoiding this is possible. Certainly, it is designed not to be.

      THE WHOLE POINT OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING is to have fun and push the hardware into areas it was not meant to go.

      Which -is- fun, when the device isn't designed to self destruct when you try and do so. Fighting against what are essentially self destruct mechanisms that have no good reason for being there is simply pushing to get back where you used to be, not forging new territory.

      My God, the hacker spirit is well and truly dead.

      Which is exactly what misfeatures like eFuse are designed to accomplish.

  72. Re:I do! by s73v3r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Fuck you. They pointed out that there is exactly that at T-Mobile, and then you turn around and bitch some more? What more do you want?

  73. Re:I do! by powerlord · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would like to take this moment to give a shout out to T-Mobile, which actually offers a bring your own phone plan for less than the subsidize your phone plan.

    True. Also my experience has been that they are one of the FEW U.S. carriers NOT to cripple their phones from the get-go (Bluetooth File Transfers to/from the phone, no extra software needed to offload your pictures/audio/video).

    I'd imagine that the T-mobile Android phones should be nice and "open", but I recently got an iPhone through work, so for now all my T-mobile number is doing is forwarding calls. :D

    --
    This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  74. Re:Mod? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 4, Informative

    Welcome to Slashdot, you must be new here!

    In case you hadn't noticed, this is a technology site where a large number of people are dedicated to "fucking with stupid shit" on a regular basis. So talking about modding your phone is kind of right up the proverbial alley here...

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  75. Amazing. And stupid. by rickb928 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously, Motorola fuses the Droid X to prevent tampering with the bootloader, etc, etc. So if you attempt a mod, it bricks the phone?

    Ok. Let's roll with this for a moment.

    So I buy a Droid X, fulfill my 2-year contract, and I've fulfilled my obligations, paid my bills, and I'm off contract.

    Does Motorola or VZW disclose that even after this, the phone is limited to official software rleases, and despite being both out of warranty and fully paid for, it's still 'locked' to official software?

    Bogus. If I have paid for it and Moto and VZW have no further obligtation to support it or even repair it at any expense, why would they care? what does it matter to them if I mess with the software?

    Well, it's not at all about what happenbs to the phone after contract. It's about the 2-year contract, and that's all.

    Since most users ditch their phones after the contract and upgrade at the first opportunity, Moto/VZW have little incentive to accomodate users that keep the phone past the contract. The most obvious reason is to sell a new phone, AND and a new contract. Alternatively, though, why expend any effort to support a phone that is, by marketing, considered obsolete? Let it die, and the users will re-up with a new phone and all. Moto/VZW win, you just keep on paying for a phone no matter what.

    And during the contract, Moto/VZW have learned from the Android community that those hacking root and installing custom ROMs is a non-trivial portion of their users. It brings with it support problems (l0sers bricking their fonz), possible network impacts (users bringing up WiFi hotspots and cranking data), and discontent from other users (asking "why don't you give me Android 3.0, the modders have it, I hate you", causing angst and loathing amongs the user community and possibly impacting future sales). Samsung is getting a dose of this for a couple of phones that aren't going to get Android 2.x OTA updates, and T-Mobile risked it with the G1 (my phone) not getting Android 2.x at all. So a big impact here is the fragementation of the user experience, all the reputaitonal damage, and just the complications.

    But there is something EVEN MORE SINISTER at play here, and both Motorols and VZW are players well-experienced at this. It's ALL about revenue. That's right, this is about profits. Directly impacting the bottom line.

    This is not the first time Moto/VZW have 'conspired' to lock users into their desired experience. Remember the RAZR? Many users could download ringtones and have some fun. But not VZW users. Not only were ringone downloads via USB blocked, but also on Bluetooth. Intentionally. Of course, you could BUY ringtones from VZW. Nice chunk of change, too. This happened with GPS services also, and wasn't limited to VZW.

    I do not doubt that 'fusing' the Droid X is in part intended to keep the users on the VZW farm, and prevent them from installing non-Market apps, ROMs, and probably even getting services that VZW would rather you pay for. We'll find out about that very soon.

    One more reason for me to avoid Verizon. As if I needed another. And Moto also. Just an in-your-face slapdown, reminding you they have an ownership stake in YOUR phone.

    If you can't root it, it's not yours.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  76. Re:After enduring all that vitrolic by nilbog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't tell if you're trying to be sarcastic, but I'll bite. You really think that paying $99 a year is a good way to have a 3rd party application environment? How does that enable a community of any kind? Seems like you're probably only able to install apps that you write at that point and that is nothing compared to being able to access a development community. What if your business model doesn't match Apple's rigid App store?

    What good is tethering if you're not allowed to do it? It's effectively the same problem. What good is multitasking if you STILL can't do instant messaging? What good is even having instant messaging if you still don't have anything even close to a reasonable notifications system?

    You cherry picked a few things out of a long list and even those are pretty piss poor substitutes.

    Look, I love the iPhone and I love iOS, but if you're trying to defend it as being open then you're delusional. I own an iPad. It's a toy. I would never accept an OS like that on my phone.

    --
    or else!
  77. Re:Mod? by Baseclass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I paid for the hardware then it's mine, I own it, in spite of what big telcom wants you to think.
    I was actually considering getting this phone, I guess they just lost a customer.

    --
    ^^vv<><>BA
  78. accent by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I guess that is the euro-peon way to spell boogers..how quaint and continental and all...

    anyway, I said "like" Openmoko. And here's the deal. No huge corporation is going to sell you an open anything any more, it conflicts with their skewed notion of "shareholder value" and "leveraging their intellectual properties" and other buzz speak. So..ya'all phone modders can either start supporting projects like openmoko, so it can be developed beyond the "boogers" stage, or just keep whining that your new iGS turboprofitphone is "locked down" and you can't do what you want to do with it.

    Also on telco "plans".. I see kvetching galore about stupid two year "plans".. geez loweez this *ain't* rocket surgery, stop using plans, stop rewarding those lame ass "plans", go prepaid. Vote with your wallet, or don't be surprised when eventually your options for cellphones plus connectivity have been narrowed down to very sucky versus extremely sucky. You get what you pay for, keep paying for closed off/locked down two year suck plans on closed off/locked down suck phones, they'll keep selling that to you.

  79. Re:Amazing. And stupid. by JustNiz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    >> Not only were ringone downloads via USB blocked, but also on Bluetooth.
    >> One more reason for me to avoid Verizon.

    Dude its not only Verizon. my Cingular (now AT&T) Sony-Ericsson W810i did exactly that too. Even though a stock W810i supports the user putting their own tones on, with the Cingular-supplied one, if you wanted to use anything other than a small selection of (probably purposely) very crappy built-in ringtones, you had to buy/download them via the phone. Furthermore once bought, they only lasted about a month!! the intent was to force you to re-buy eve the same ringtone at least once a month.

    I refuse to buy phones from a network providers since that experience. I prefer to pay the overhead and get a fully functional phone by going directly to the manufacturers or unaffiliated dealers. Besides, all the phones that network providers carry (AT&T at least) are a very limited choice entirely comprising of outdated or undesireable models.

  80. Meanwhile... by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    HP/Palm continue to support their homebrew community, and provide a virtually un-brickable device that you can modify without even compiling any code.

    WebOS FTW!

  81. Re:Stated up front by bbsux · · Score: 2

    If Motorola clearly states up front that you are not allowed to modify the phone and doing so may cause your phone to stop functioning properly then I don't really see what the issue is. If you want to mod your phone there are several models out there that allow it and to some degree even support it.

    The point is that they "can't" say that. Once you buy the hardware it is yours to do with as you please. They can't force you to only be able to use in a certain way. It'd be like saying they would only let you dial phone numbers in your own area code or only numbers with a "4" in them.

  82. Re:Mod? by Miamicanes · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not true. When you buy the phone, liquidated damages (something called an "Early Termination Fee") gets tacked on if you don't complete the contract. It's your property the moment the credit card gets swiped through the reader or the cash goes in the register.

    By law, if you request that your phone's SIM-lock (if GSM) be removed, or that you be given its MSL code (if it's CDMA), the phone company MUST give it to you as long as 30 days have elapsed since purchase. I'm not 100% sure, but I think even the 30-day waiting period can be eliminated if you waive your right to cancel the plan or return the phone.

    American phone companies (at least Verizon and AT&T by virtue of being AT&T's offspring) aren't allowed to keep the phones as secured assets or lease them due to the consent decree that broke up AT&T's monopoly 25 years ago that prohibited them from forcing customers to lease phones instead of purchase them from independent sources on their own. I'm not sure, but I think the FCC incorporated its terms directly into its own regulations, so they probably apply to Sprint & T-Mobile as well. On the other hand, that might be the reason why Verizon was grudgingly forced to open its network to any phone you can physically figure out how to make work, while Sprint can get away with refusing to let anyone use any phone not purchased from Sprint.

    I believe the first cell phone companies tried to lease phones to customers, but were prohibited from doing so by the FCC out of concern that if carriers were allowed to lease phones, the price of purchased phones would be wildly inflated and customers would be forced into leasing anyway. As a practical matter, subsidies turned out the same way (in the US, at least, though Google's fought the hard fight to at least try and change it a little).

  83. Re:Mod? by Miamicanes · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, a mortgage is a loan secured by the property. When you buy a phone, even a subsidized phone, you legally own it outright the moment you sign the credit card slip or hand the cashier the money.