Will an "unlocked" 950XL work on Verizon?

[Chelovek]

Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.

 

[Generalheed]

Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.

Umm, I'm not sure if that was an attempt to incite political debate here or if "Obama Wireless" was just a typo lol. I'll just assume you meant Verizon instead of Obama. But anyways, the Lumia 950 doesn't have nearly the same demand the iPhone did for Verizon to carry it.

 

[mjperry51]

Remember when the iPhone first came out...only AT&T carried it. Now even Obama Wireless carries it. If Windows will just stick with it for more than five quarters, Verizon will eventually get it.

While that may, the dynamics are not equal.

It's fair to say that Apple carries a lot more "gotta have" presence in the consumer market than Microsoft. It's trendy. I'm reminded of the Big Bang Theory episode where Sheldon tells Raj who has just gotten an IPod "You'll be sorry when Microsoft comes out with a music player".

Who carries a Zune player now? Even with the IPhone including a music player they still sell a ton of IPods.

I would love for Verizon to to "get it". I just don't see an environment where the planets align properly. What is the compelling business reason for Verizon to change course WRT Windows Phone??

 

[anywhereanytime]

I would love for Verizon to to "get it". I just don't see an environment where the planets align properly. What is the compelling business reason for Verizon to change course WRT Windows Phone??

Anyone who has used Windows Phone "knows" that it is far better for "business users" = ONLY large and small companies WILL IMPACT Verizon's decision.

Anyone see a good article on the benefits of Windows Phone in BUSINESS?

I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!

 

[miraidave]

The 950XL Dual Sim RM-1116 documents are up on the FCC website, along with user manual.

Can't post link until I have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / GenericSearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for PYARM-1116.

In the manual, it clearly states that "You can only use your device on the LTE TDD 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
(38); LTE FDD 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); WCDMA 850, 900,
1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz networks. You
need a subscription with a service provider."

So the 950XL Dual Sim will definitely not work with Verizon. The only hope now is for Microsoft either certify the single sim for CDMA and Band 13, or they release a Verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.

 

[TexasLabRat]

the 950xl dual sim rm-1116 documents are up on the fcc website, along with user manual.

Can't post link until i have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / genericsearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for pyarm-1116.

In the manual, it clearly states that "you can only use your device on the lte tdd 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
(38); lte fdd 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); wcdma 850, 900,
1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and gsm 850, 900, 1800, 1900 mhz networks. You
need a subscription with a service provider."

so the 950xl dual sim will definitely not work with verizon. The only hope now is for microsoft either certify the single sim for cdma and band 13, or they release a verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.

in addition, here are the bands tested for certification which create the legal framework in which the phone is allowed to operate in the U.S.


Head Configuration
Mode
Reported*
SAR value
(1g avg)
SAR limit
(1g avg)
Result
Plot #
LTE700 (Band 12)
0.14 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H1
LTE700 (Band 17)
0.15 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H2
4-slot GPRS850

0.39 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H3
WCDMA850 (Band 5)
0.32 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H4
LTE850 (Band 5)
0.24 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H5
WCDMA1700/2100 (Band 4)
0.45 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H6
LTE1700/2100 (Band 4)
0.39 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H7
4-slot GPRS1900
0.23 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H8
WCDMA1900 (Band 2)
0.38 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H9
LTE1900 (Band 2)
0.27 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H10
LTE2500 (Band 7)
0.47 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H11
WLAN2450
1.01 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H12
WLAN5000
1.05 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H13
Maximum of SPEAG combined multiband algorithm results
4-slot GPRS850 + WLAN2450
1.15 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H14
4-slot GPRS850 + WLAN5000
1.06 W/kg
1.6 W/kg
PASSED
H15

 

[mjperry51]

Anyone who has used Windows Phone "knows" that it is far better for "business users" = ONLY large and small companies WILL IMPACT Verizon's decision.

Anyone see a good article on the benefits of Windows Phone in BUSINESS?

I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!

Perhaps I should have phrased it "What is Verizon's compelling business reason to change course WRT Windows Phone?"

Or in other words,what's in it for Verizon??

 

[ksj1]

I am sad to say, that Microsoft's failure to get Windows Phone "delivered before mid-November" is HURTING this whole effort!

Is it mid-November already? I must have been asleep the last 3 weeks...

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Perhaps I should have phrased it "What is Verizon's compelling business reason to change course WRT Windows Phone?"

Or in other words,what's in it for Verizon??

Who knows what demands Verizon made? In the past they have demanded exclusive models. Carriers want to add their own crapware. Carriers want to delay or deny firmware or OS updates if that saves them money OR encourages more people to upgrade their phone than to stop using the carrier. None of those things are in the best interest of the customers or of Microsoft. My best guess is that some decision maker at Verizon thinks Microsoft will eventually cave in because they have in the past. As a phone user, I hope MS doesn't give an inch because MS' best interests coincidentally are MUCH closer to phone users' interests than Verizon's interests are.

 

[to_be_announced]

The 950XL Dual Sim RM-1116 documents are up on the FCC website, along with user manual.

Can't post link until I have 10 posts, so got to [https: / / apps.fcc.gov / oetcf / eas /reports / GenericSearch.cfm] without the spaces and search for PYARM-1116.

In the manual, it clearly states that "You can only use your device on the LTE TDD 2300-2400 (40), 2570-2620
(38); LTE FDD 700 (12), 700 (17), 700 (28), 800 (20), 850 (5), 900 (8),
1700/2100 (4), 1800 (3), 1900 (2), 2100 (1), 2600 (7); WCDMA 850, 900,
1700/2100, 1900, 2100; and GSM 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz networks. You
need a subscription with a service provider."

So the 950XL Dual Sim will definitely not work with Verizon. The only hope now is for Microsoft either certify the single sim for CDMA and Band 13, or they release a Verizon variant, which doesn't seem likely.

Welp. That would seem to settle it then. No Verizon for these phones. While the writing was pretty much on the wall, we held out hope as long as we could.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Welp. That would seem to settle it then. No Verizon for these phones. While the writing was pretty much on the wall, we held out hope as long as we could.

I still haven't heard or seen anything that says the bands aren't just disabled in software. Until I do, I have to think all it would take is a software update (OS or firmware) and the phones being certified to use those bands.

 

[mjperry51]

Who knows what demands Verizon made? In the past they have demanded exclusive models. Carriers want to add their own crapware. Carriers want to delay or deny firmware or OS updates if that saves them money OR encourages more people to upgrade their phone than to stop using the carrier. None of those things are in the best interest of the customers or of Microsoft. My best guess is that some decision maker at Verizon thinks Microsoft will eventually cave in because they have in the past. As a phone user, I hope MS doesn't give an inch because MS' best interests coincidentally are MUCH closer to phone users' interests than Verizon's interests are.

I'm not choosing sides - I"m just asking the question, based on the fact Verizon will do what they believe to be in their best business interest, as will Microsoft. . . .

 

[HoosierDaddy]

I'm not choosing sides - I"m just asking the question, based on the fact Verizon will do what they believe to be in their best business interest, as will Microsoft. . . .

Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are. That's why I like what MS is doing even though I can't imagine ever using Verizon as a carrier. FWIW, I suspect Verizon customers will eventually be able to use 950s or 950 Xls on Verizon. All it will take is Verizon saying okay without a bunch of customer harming conditions. Between the way MS wants to do business and the way the un-carrier is shaking up all the other US carriers, better days are coming for all USA phone users. Old school US carrier behavior is terrible for phone users whether they realize it or not until they are out from under.

 

[psiu_glen]

Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are. That's why I like what MS is doing even though I can't imagine ever using Verizon as a carrier. FWIW, I suspect Verizon customers will eventually be able to use 950s or 950 Xls on Verizon. All it will take is Verizon saying okay without a bunch of customer harming conditions. Between the way MS wants to do business and the way the un-carrier is shaking up all the other US carriers, better days are coming for all USA phone users. Old school US carrier behavior is terrible for phone users whether they realize it or not until they are out from under.

Verizon has nothing to say about it. MS has the bands required for VZW usage disabled. End of story.

If MS enabled those, I could just get an unlocked 950/XL, take my already activated SIM, pop it in, and be off and running.

Keep an old Verizon phone around for any plan changes and free insurance, and case closed.

 

[tgp]

Nobody has to choose sides. But if they DO, MS's interests are coincidentally closer to end user's best interests than Verizon's are.

Since we're just guessing anyway, I'll throw my 2? in here. I suspect that AT&T is as much to blame as anyone. Verizon can't, or won't, do anything to block the phones on their network, even if they do not officially support them (as with the factory unlocked iPhones, last several Nexus devices, Moto X Pure Edition). Microsoft of course wants the phones to work on as many carriers as possible.

This leaves AT&T as the only remaining suspect. They probably put some sort of demands on Microsoft. I bet Microsoft fell on their knees and worshipped AT&T, begging and pleading, to get them to carry the 950.

I've read here that AT&T pays a lot of money to Microsoft for the privilege of carrying their phones. I don't know for sure, but I highly doubt that this is the case. If AT&T were to invest that much into Microsoft's phones, they would certainly do everything they could to push them. They do not, and never have. I'm guessing it is the other way around, that Microsoft pays AT&T a boatload of money to carry their phones. And AT&T still writes the terms.

I know, I know, there are all kinds of holes in this theory. But there are holes in every other theory I've read here too.

 

[sprtfan]

I still haven't heard or seen anything that says the bands aren't just disabled in software. Until I do, I have to think all it would take is a software update (OS or firmware) and the phones being certified to use those bands.

I think the problem here is even if it is just disabled in software, Microsoft would have to resubmit the phone for testing. This is not normally done from what people have said earlier in this thread and would be more likely for Microsoft to release a different but similar phone if the decided to go this route. I'm just using info I've gathered from this thread for this so hopefully someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[badshar]

So was Mr. MacPhisto wrong this time?

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Verizon has nothing to say about it. MS has the bands required for VZW usage disabled. End of story.

Sure they did. Both benefit from Verizon selling these phones.

So its a sure thing that MS told Verizon they could sell these phones as long as they understood it could be sold by others and that Verizon agreed to let MS update the handset firmware and OS as needed.

And its a sure thing that Verizon told them we will sell them if you back off on one or both of those.

So both parties had a say. It's a case of both sides believing they would get their way or would be better off than accepting the other's terms. Negotiations are not foolproof. That's why some people don't get the car they want for $x when the same salesman just sold the same car to another customer for less than $x. The car salesman incorrectly believed the 2nd customer would pay more for whatever reasons his instincts and training told him.

In this case I suspect Microsoft was not bluffing about their requirements while Verizon might have been bluffing or incorrectly calculating the values of their terms. Not having Verizon hurts Microsoft but Verizon's demands (if they match previous ones) could hurt MS more.

So both parties lose as things stand. And I am willing to bet that if either side backs down it will be Verizon because they are the only ones with something to gain.

MS loses without Verizon, but loses maybe even more with Verizon and and no ability to push critical updates in a timely manner or no ability to sell the phones elsewhere in the US.

Verizon on the other hand would be better off with MS terms than not being to offer these phones. Now Verizon may find another source for Windows Phones which is also a win for MS since they are as interested in having more Windows users as they are in selling phones.

What I would like to know is what incentives MS is giving 3rd party WP10 makers to ensure or make it more likely those phones can get Windows updates without carrier roadblocks.

 

[psiu_glen]

Sure they did. Both benefit from Verizon selling these phones.

So its a sure thing that MS told Verizon they could sell these phones as long as they understood it could be sold by others and that Verizon agreed to let MS update the handset firmware and OS as needed.

Again, so what? Right now, if Verizon wanted those phones on their network, they could do NOTHING.

MS could have simply sold unlocked phones, from their store, and they would work on Verizon with an already activated line. That's the only hiccup. If Verizon didn't want to have a new WP in their stores, with Continuum accessories to sell, microSD cards at rip off prices for, that is their loss. Yes, they probably wanted all sorts of junk, giant logos, and who knows what else on a "Verizon branded" version.

But pure and simple, if the unlocked phones come out with those bands disabled? That's all on MS.

VZW are a merry load of butt weasels, but the MS apologists really need to understand this. MS is locking the phones to prevent them from going on Verizon's network.

 

[sprtfan]

What I would like to know is what incentives MS is giving 3rd party WP10 makers to ensure or make it more likely those phones can get Windows updates without carrier roadblocks.

I still wonder if one of those incentives to 3rd party WP10 makers is not having to compete against the 950/950xl on Verizon. MS would benefit if Samsung or LG released a flagship WP10 on Verizon. The 3rd parties maybe willing to try if the potential for a larger market share is there. I'm on Verizon and would get a 950 if I could and wouldn't really even consider anything else. If I can't, I'll wait and see what other options I may have before thinking about switching carriers.