12-02-2015 11:33 PM
1,084 ... 3738394041 ...
tools
  1. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    Can you point out where that is established? I have tried to find it and have not been successful in doing so. In fact, I have only found the direct opposite, explicitly stated:



    So as I read that they can block CDMA to their heart's content, which cripples any LTE only phone. Can you point to information that says otherwise?
    It's true that the open access provisions technically only apply to the open access network (700 MHz) but in practice Verizon does not seem to have applied the rule in that way. Devices that forced the issue, such as the Nexus 7, do not appear to have been restricted to 700 MHz.

    I concede that this may now have changed. It looks as though the compliance tests were updated earlier in the year to fully support CDMAless devices (an extra provision or two was added). I think the HTC One A9 was due to be the first CDMAless device that would be supported (by HTC) on VZW (using pure VoLTE/LTE with no cdma2000 fallback) but that has been delayed for some reason. HTC was/is apparently doing this without any explicit support from VZW, so I assume the plan was/is to use open access provisions.

    Of course, this doesn't really shift the burden from Microsoft. Worst case, they could have built a Band 13 device and got it certified and forced VZW to authenticate it on the network. In principle that should give +/- nationwide coverage on VZW. C-block has national coverage (contiguous states + Hawaii, not sure about Alaska) and VoLTE should be available across the network now so losing the fallback may not matter.

    Beyond that the question is only how unpleasant VZW wants to be to its paying customers--it could restrict the phone to 700 MHz or it could suck it down and allow it to access the full range of services.
    11-24-2015 03:33 AM
  2. RumoredNow's Avatar
    [NOTE]Thanks for all the Surface Charger debate. It really has no place in this thread though.

    Please stick to the topic of the thread: "Will an "unlocked" 950XL work on Verizon?"

    There is a whole forum devoted to Surface products: Microsoft / Nokia - Windows Central Forums

    Further comments along the Surface line will simply be expunged as an expediency. If you wish to debate Surface charging take it to the appropriate forum.[/NOTE]
    aximtreo and to_be_announced like this.
    11-24-2015 11:47 AM
  3. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    Of course, this doesn't really shift the burden from Microsoft.
    Yes, because it was never on them! LoL
    11-24-2015 11:50 AM
  4. sprtfan's Avatar
    Of course, this doesn't really shift the burden from Microsoft. Worst case, they could have built a Band 13 device and got it certified and forced VZW to authenticate it on the network. In principle that should give +/- nationwide coverage on VZW. C-block has national coverage (contiguous states + Hawaii, not sure about Alaska) and VoLTE should be available across the network now so losing the fallback may not matter.

    Beyond that the question is only how unpleasant VZW wants to be to its paying customers--it could restrict the phone to 700 MHz or it could suck it down and allow it to access the full range of services.
    I think it is still a case of we really don't know who to blame. Microsoft could force VZW to authenticate the device on the network but Verizon would still be able to basically cripple it and give the user a poor experience. The normal user at that point would think that this Microsoft phone sucks and I never had these problems with my Android/Apple phone. Since Verizon doesn't support the phone, I'd believe all customer service inquires regarding the problems would end up going to Microsoft also.

    Microsoft and Verizon could have had discussions about the phone being on Verizon and Verizon could have told Microsoft they would do this or could do this if certain demands were not met. VZW and MS have not always had the best relationship and don't see this being out of the realm of possibilities. MS also wouldn't have the power to force the issue as well as the Nexus phones would. MS might have been left in a position that it was best to leave out CDMA to save themselves from these possibilities.

    I'm far from an expert in this area though and please let me know if I'm interpreting the information wrong. But from what I have read, it at least looks like VZW would be with in their rights to do this.
    RumoredNow, aximtreo and libra89 like this.
    11-24-2015 11:53 AM
  5. gernerttl's Avatar
    Microsoft could force VZW to authenticate the device on the network

    No, Microsoft can't force Verizon or any other network to authenticate or allow any of its devices. The network is owned by the carriers and the SIMs are managed and activated by the carriers, not the OEMs.

    Here's how the conversation would go:

    Microsoft: "You will activate our devices or else."
    Verizon: "Or else what? Have a nice day."
    oldpueblo likes this.
    11-24-2015 02:16 PM
  6. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    No, Microsoft can't force Verizon or any other network to authenticate or allow any of its devices. The network is owned by the carriers and the SIMs are managed and activated by the carriers, not the OEMs.

    Here's how the conversation would go:

    Microsoft: "You will activate our devices or else."
    Verizon: "Or else what? Have a nice day."
    No, more like:

    Verizon: "I got your activation....right here!"
    oldpueblo likes this.
    11-24-2015 02:21 PM
  7. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    I think it is still a case of we really don't know who to blame. Microsoft could force VZW to authenticate the device on the network but Verizon would still be able to basically cripple it and give the user a poor experience. The normal user at that point would think that this Microsoft phone sucks and I never had these problems with my Android/Apple phone. Since Verizon doesn't support the phone, I'd believe all customer service inquires regarding the problems would end up going to Microsoft also.
    While I hate the way fanboys tend to try to put a positive spin on the low market share, bad reviews, etc., I do feel this is one area where the low usage could, if not exactly work in Microsoft's favour, at least protect them from the worst of the complaints here.

    I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that nobody would ever buy an unlocked 950 or 950XL from the Microsoft store with the intent of using it on Verizon by accident. The only people who'd be buying such a thing would be die-hard fans. As such, it feels to me like it'd be feasible to actually explain the limitations--"You'll get LTE and VoLTE, but if you're an area with no LTE service, you won't be able to fall back to 2G or 3G". Make sure that people are aware of the limitations up front. That puts the ball into VZW's court: how good a service do they want to offer their customers?

    And of course there's a good chance that the 700 MHz coverage is sufficiently fast and widespread that there isn't even a problem, and that the lack of 2G/3G fallback would never be noticed. That's a big part of why Verizon bought the spectrum in the first place; national coverage, high performance, good range and building penetration.

    I'm far from an expert in this area though and please let me know if I'm interpreting the information wrong. But from what I have read, it at least looks like VZW would be with in their rights to do this.
    Sure, but the question is, how much of a **** do Verizon want to be to their paying customers? I mean, sure, they're not using a Verizon-preferred handset, but they'd still be Verizon subscribers. Verizon customers that, incidentally, have a handset that'll work perfectly on AT&T and T-Mobile should Verizon treat them too badly. Now of course, this isn't possible; Verizon is a horrible company, and treating customers badly is the kind of thing we expect from them.
    11-24-2015 02:27 PM
  8. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    No, Microsoft can't force Verizon or any other network to authenticate or allow any of its devices. The network is owned by the carriers and the SIMs are managed and activated by the carriers, not the OEMs.
    The point of the 700 MHz C spectrum is that it has open access provisions. Microsoft can, in fact, force Verizon to authenticate its devices. The network is owned by the carriers, but the spectrum is owned by the people and licensed by the FCC, and the FCC can and does impose usage constraints.
    RumoredNow and aximtreo like this.
    11-24-2015 02:39 PM
  9. gernerttl's Avatar
    This document outlines the open access provisions that govern Verizon's network due to its successful bid for part of the 700 MHz spectrum.

    https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/at...-08-1108A1.pdf

    Essentially, VZW cannot prevent a device from using its network under the open access provisions, as long as the device passes network compatibility tests. These tests are defined by Verizon, but conducted by third parties, and while it would cost some money (sub-$1 million, but not free either), the decision on whether or not to submit to the tests lies entirely with the manufacturer, which is to say, Microsoft.
    That just means that Verizon has to provide roaming coverage for other networks and vice versa. What does that mean? That means if you are an AT&T customer and you go outside of AT&T's LTE footprint, then Verizon, T-Mobile, or Sprint, provides roaming coverage. The determining factor is whether or not the device supports the bands being used in that area. That does NOT mean Verizon HAS to activate an AT&T or T-Mobile device on its network.
    11-24-2015 02:57 PM
  10. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    That just means that Verizon has to provide roaming coverage for other networks and vice versa. What does that mean? That means if you are an AT&T customer and you go outside of AT&T's LTE footprint, then Verizon, T-Mobile, or Sprint, provides roaming coverage. The determining factor is whether or not the device supports the bands being used in that area. That does NOT mean Verizon HAS to activate an AT&T or T-Mobile device on its network.
    It does not mean that.

    From the document I linked previously:

    [the FCC] Determined that for the commercial Upper 700 MHz Band C Block, licensees will be required to
    allow customers, device manufacturers, third-party application developers, and others to use
    devices and applications of their choice, subject to certain conditions.
    "devices of their choice" such as C Block-compatible smartphones.

    The Commission determined that for one commercial spectrum block in the 700 MHz Band – the Upper
    700 MHz Band C Block – it will require licensees to allow customers, device manufacturers, third-party
    application developers, and others to use or develop the devices and applications of their choice
    , subject
    to certain conditions. It was concluded that it would not serve the public interest to mandate, at this time,
    requirements for open platforms for devices and applications for all unauctioned commercial 700 MHz
    spectrum, or to impose broader requirements, such as wholesale or interconnection requirements, for the
    C Block.
    The Commission will require only C Block licensees to allow customers, device manufacturers, thirdparty
    application developers, and others to use or develop the devices and applications of their choosing
    in C Block networks, so long as they meet all applicable regulatory requirements and comply with
    reasonable conditions related to management of the wireless network (i.e., do not cause harm to the
    network). Specifically, a C Block licensee may not block, degrade, or interfere with the ability of end
    users to download and utilize applications of their choosing on the licensee’s C Block network, subject to
    reasonable network management. The Commission anticipates that wireless service providers will
    address this requirement by developing reasonable standards, including through participation in standards
    setting organizations. Finally, the Commission did not impose additional requirements on the C Block,
    including wholesale and interconnection requirements.
    The requirement is that licensees (i.e. Verizon) allow customers (i.e. Verizon customers) to use the devices (i.e. smartphones) of their choice. This is plainly not just roaming (because people roaming aren't Verizon customers).
    11-24-2015 03:52 PM
  11. maevinj's Avatar
    It does not mean that.

    From the document I linked previously:



    "devices of their choice" such as C Block-compatible smartphones.



    The requirement is that licensees (i.e. Verizon) allow customers (i.e. Verizon customers) to use the devices (i.e. smartphones) of their choice. This is plainly not just roaming (because people roaming aren't Verizon customers).
    You left out the most important part though..
    subject to certain conditions
    11-24-2015 04:08 PM
  12. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    You left out the most important part though..
    The conditions can all be found at Verizon's Open Access site: https://opennetwork.verizonwireless....ment/home.html though some of them are behind logins. The conditions aren't arbitrary; they're network compatibility/management stuff to affirm that C Block devices won't break anything. Verizon can't arbitrarily construct conditions to block a device.
    maevinj likes this.
    11-24-2015 04:13 PM
  13. maevinj's Avatar
    The conditions can all be found at Verizon's Open Access site: https://opennetwork.verizonwireless....ment/home.html though some of them are behind logins. The conditions aren't arbitrary; they're network compatibility/management stuff to affirm that C Block devices won't break anything. Verizon can't arbitrarily construct conditions to block a device.
    10-4. I'm just always skeptical, especially when it relates to Verizon when there are the words "certain conditions". Usually means the consumers are getting screwed.
    RumoredNow and DavidinCT like this.
    11-24-2015 04:50 PM
  14. DoctorPizza's Avatar
    10-4. I'm just always skeptical, especially when it relates to Verizon when there are the words "certain conditions". Usually means the consumers are getting screwed.
    I understand the skepticism, but this is an area where Verizon doesn't really have a ton of choice. The only part that's up to Verizon is: How good a service would it like to offer its customers? It can either stick to the letter of the rules and force them to use 700 MHz only (which may still be decent enough, if VZW's claims about its 700 MHz network are true), or it can be more generous and let them use the full network.

    But step one was, is, and always shall be, build a phone that's compatible with VZW's network and that has passed the certification. That's the stumbling block right now, and it's not VZW's doing.
    11-24-2015 05:28 PM
  15. anywhereanytime's Avatar
    Allright everyone = back on the topic = news that US 950XL IS "dual SIM" version!

    But, what about "NAM and Ban 13 and CDMA" = doe we know anything further?
    11-25-2015 03:29 PM
  16. Generalheed's Avatar
    Allright everyone = back on the topic = news that US 950XL IS "dual SIM" version!

    But, what about "NAM and Ban 13 and CDMA" = doe we know anything further?
    Well in a spec sheet it was discovered that the NAM version of the 950 would support Band 13, but still no CDMA. However, beyond that one spec sheet, there hasn't been much else about the Band 13 support. Regardless of all this, now that 950's are available to everyone, the only way to solve this mystery is to try putting an activated SIM in a 950 or seeing if Verizon will activate the unlocked phone.
    11-25-2015 04:16 PM
  17. maevinj's Avatar
    Well in a spec sheet it was discovered that the NAM version of the 950 would support Band 13, but still no CDMA. However, beyond that one spec sheet, there hasn't been much else about the Band 13 support. Regardless of all this, now that 950's are available to everyone, the only way to solve this mystery is to try putting an activated SIM in a 950 or seeing if Verizon will activate the unlocked phone.
    There is another thread started where a user put their sim into a 950XL and guess what... It didn't work.
    Requesting the Mods close this thread as it has been confirmed the 950XL will not work on Verizon.

    http://forums.windowscentral.com/mic...tm#post3310327
    Last edited by maevinj; 11-25-2015 at 04:34 PM. Reason: link
    RumoredNow likes this.
    11-25-2015 04:33 PM
  18. gernerttl's Avatar
    There is another thread started where a user put their sim into a 950XL and guess what... It didn't work.
    Requesting the Mods close this thread as it has been confirmed the 950XL will not work on Verizon.

    http://forums.windowscentral.com/mic...tm#post3310327
    Since the AT&T version is the only one out there right now, that is not necessarily a good test. AT&T's LTE bands are different than Verizon's, so trying to get an AT&T branded device to work on another carrier's network is probably not going to work. The only way we are going to find out is to wait for the unlocked AND unbranded version to roll out.

    A good example is the Icon. The Icon can connect to AT&T's and T-Mobile's respective GSM networks, but not to their respective LTE networks. There have been some rare cases of people being able to connect to AT&T's LTE network with the Icon, but those were special cases where both AT&T and Verizon had LTE bands the Icon could connect to.
    11-25-2015 05:32 PM
  19. TexasLabRat's Avatar
    Since the AT&T version is the only one out there right now, that is not necessarily a good test. AT&T's LTE bands are different than Verizon's, so trying to get an AT&T branded device to work on another carrier's network is probably not going to work. The only way we are going to find out is to wait for the unlocked AND unbranded version to roll out.
    I think you're confused. What you suggested is exactly what was tested: An unlocked/unbranded 950XL with a verizon sim.
    DavidinCT and RumoredNow like this.
    11-25-2015 05:37 PM
  20. doublestack1's Avatar
    I put my Verizon nano sim (from my iPhone 6s Plus) in the 950 XL and sadly the device would not recognize the carrier. No signal. Sorry. Was slightly hopeful MS failed to list the vzw cdma bands on their data sheet.
    RumoredNow likes this.
    11-25-2015 06:09 PM
  21. bulls96's Avatar
    I put my Verizon nano sim (from my iPhone 6s Plus) in the 950 XL and sadly the device would not recognize the carrier. No signal. Sorry. Was slightly hopeful MS failed to list the vzw cdma bands on their data sheet.
    Bummer. Hmmm. Would it make a difference if you called Verizon to try to activate it?
    11-25-2015 06:37 PM
  22. libra89's Avatar
    11-25-2015 06:55 PM
  23. DavidinCT's Avatar
    But step one was, is, and always shall be, build a phone that's compatible with VZW's network and that has passed the certification. That's the stumbling block right now, and it's not VZW's doing.
    We'll sort of kind of is. Verizon screwed over Microsoft a few times with Windows Phone, A good clunk of their employees just bashed Windows Phone and on a Corporate level, they could care less. And screw over by Verizon goes deeper back to the KIN, a Social Media based phone from Microsoft geared towarded the younger croud and Verizon forces a $30 a month data plan for it and killed it off..

    It's Verizon's fault why Microsoft is upset with them and this could be a VERY good reason WHY this phone does not work on Verizon's network (they are not screwing Verizon, they are screwing the consumer but anyway)

    These issues have been very well documented on this site and a quote by Microsoft confirmed it on the press release on the 950/950XL.

    Sad to say, the dream or fantasy is over now. The Microsoft 950XL WILL NOT WORK ON VERIZON. Dan was not the ONLY one to confirm this.

    It's been quoted that "Verizon wont activate it because it's not an approved device"(trying on their web site) and Putting a Verizon SIM in a 950XL does nothing (same with a 950 BTW).

    Now it's Verizon's turn to see what they offer after the holidays. A quote by a well known Verizon employee here stated that Verizon is planning something for Windows 10 phone... Now WHAT they are going to offer is a different story. Are we going to get a 949 and 949XL ? Only time will tell. Be warned like everything besides the iPhone, Verizon is 6 months behind on new phones...

    As it's been confirmed, I also vote to lock this thread or change the title to "the 950 and 950XL WILL NOT WORK ON VERIZON" and change the first post to link to the tests that were done for proof (sticky ?).

    Verizon, it's your turn now... give us something good...
    Last edited by DavidinCT; 11-25-2015 at 08:18 PM.
    libra89 and RumoredNow like this.
    11-25-2015 08:05 PM
  24. HoosierDaddy's Avatar
    Now it's Verizon's turn to see what they offer after the holidays. A quote by a well known Verizon employee here stated that Verizon is planning something for Windows 10 phone... Now WHAT they are going to offer is a different story. Are we going to get a 949 and 949XL
    I'd say there is zero chance of a Verizon variation of the 950s. I think MS is serious about limiting the number of models. I wouldn't rule out a software and certification change to 950s to make it possible for them to be used on Verizon. Or for whatever replaces the 950s down the road being Verizon ready. Am anxious to see what happens. I HOPE Verizon doesn't talk some other phone maker into making a Windows Phone that Verizon has full control of updates for. I wonder if part of the deal with phone makers to get WM10 for free includes NOT letting that happen. I feel for Verizon customers but would hate to see Verizon create another bad WM experience that paints the rest with the same brush.

    Verizon, it's your turn now... give us something good...
    Yes, please give your customers what they want.
    jmajid likes this.
    11-25-2015 08:34 PM
  25. Generalheed's Avatar
    I put my Verizon nano sim (from my iPhone 6s Plus) in the 950 XL and sadly the device would not recognize the carrier. No signal. Sorry. Was slightly hopeful MS failed to list the vzw cdma bands on their data sheet.
    Hmm well I guess that settles it then. It's confirmed now that the Lumia 950's don't work on Verizon's network despite the proper LTE band support.
    RumoredNow likes this.
    11-25-2015 09:53 PM
1,084 ... 3738394041 ...

Similar Threads

  1. 950/950XL - QI charging...1.0 or 1.2 ?
    By DavidinCT in forum Microsoft Lumia 950 XL
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-26-2016, 07:43 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-05-2015, 05:19 AM
  3. Day time while running/exercising on Band 2
    By smatofu in forum Microsoft Band & Band 2
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-09-2015, 10:07 AM
  4. Will we be able to preorder online at MS Store?
    By jlangner in forum Microsoft Lumia 950
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-08-2015, 10:41 PM
  5. Why won't my computer wake from sleep mode after installing Windows 10?
    By Windows Central Question in forum Windows 10
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-06-2015, 09:16 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD