Motorola Photon announced for Sprint, ships with unlocked boatloader?

[czerdrill]

One can't assume they play no part in the decision, though, right?

Well u ppl can play the blame game but verizon announced via twitter that WE CAN HAVE DEVICES WITH UNLOCKED BOOTLOADERS...

Sent from my DROID2

not trying to play a blame game, just think it's a little silly to think Verizon has zero say in it - especially with how they're clamping down on tetherers/rooters... and based on a twitter post alone. Of course they can have them, heck, they do currently. Bootloaders have nothing to do with the phone working on a network, generally speaking anyway. Anyway, not a big deal, didn't mean to start a debate, just wanted to throw my .02 in - whether it's wrong or not!

You're not wrong, you're right. The final decision is verizon and like you said it's silly if you think otherwise. So ppl are saying moto can tell verizon "we're releasing this phone on your network and there's nothing you can do about it!"

 

[bsweetness]

Well u ppl can play the blame game but verizon announced via twitter that WE CAN HAVE DEVICES WITH UNLOCKED BOOTLOADERS...

Sent from my DROID2

not trying to play a blame game, just think it's a little silly to think Verizon has zero say in it - especially with how they're clamping down on tetherers/rooters... and based on a twitter post alone. Of course they can have them, heck, they do currently. Bootloaders have nothing to do with the phone working on a network, generally speaking anyway. Anyway, not a big deal, didn't mean to start a debate, just wanted to throw my .02 in - whether it's wrong or not!

You're not wrong, you're right. The final decision is verizon and like you said it's silly if you think otherwise. So ppl are saying moto can tell verizon "we're releasing this phone on your network and there's nothing you can do about it!"

Exactly. Motorola said they'd be willing to leave the bootloaders unlocked if that's what the carrier wanted. Now whether or not they follow through on that is another matter entirely, but they're at least presenting the image that it's all up to the carrier.

 

[illmatic636]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

 

[JerseyFirefighter]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

 

[czerdrill]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

actually encrypted or signed bootloader = creating petitions on websites for the keys to be released thinking that that will actually work lol

 

[bsweetness]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

Actually, root access can be gained on an encrypted bootloader. Motorola has been encrypting their bootloaders with every phone after the original Droid, but we have root access on all of them. The real difference between the three is in being able to load custom kernals and custom roms. On an unlocked bootloader, it's ready to go. On a locked bootloader, custom kernals and roms and can be loaded after someone is able to unlock it. On an encrypted bootloader, yep, good luck.

 

[bsweetness]

actually encrypted or signed bootloader = creating petitions on websites for the keys to be released thinking that that will actually work lol

...and this too.

 

[Malvado]

Well u ppl can play the blame game but verizon announced via twitter that WE CAN HAVE DEVICES WITH UNLOCKED BOOTLOADERS...

Sent from my DROID2

not trying to play a blame game, just think it's a little silly to think Verizon has zero say in it - especially with how they're clamping down on tetherers/rooters... and based on a twitter post alone. Of course they can have them, heck, they do currently. Bootloaders have nothing to do with the phone working on a network, generally speaking anyway. Anyway, not a big deal, didn't mean to start a debate, just wanted to throw my .02 in - whether it's wrong or not!

You're not wrong, you're right. The final decision is verizon and like you said it's silly if you think otherwise. So ppl are saying moto can tell verizon "we're releasing this phone on your network and there's nothing you can do about it!"

If that's the case, then why would MOTOROLA publicly announce that they will be shipping devices with the same bootloader as the XOOM in late 2011? Shouldn't it be verizon saying that if THEY were the ones locking them?

Sent from my DROID2

 

[JerseyFirefighter]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

Actually, root access can be gained on an encrypted bootloader. Motorola has been encrypting their bootloaders with every phone after the original Droid, but we have root access on all of them. The real difference between the three is in being able to load custom kernals and custom roms. On an unlocked bootloader, it's ready to go. On a locked bootloader, custom kernals and roms and can be loaded after someone is able to unlock it. On an encrypted bootloader, yep, good luck.

Roms and kernals is pretty much all i need SU permissions for.. but yes you are correct sir.

Sadly enough, its a numbers game,. If moto will lose less money keeping them signed as opposed to losing hardcore android users... we all know what theyll go with

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

 

[czerdrill]

not trying to play a blame game, just think it's a little silly to think Verizon has zero say in it - especially with how they're clamping down on tetherers/rooters... and based on a twitter post alone. Of course they can have them, heck, they do currently. Bootloaders have nothing to do with the phone working on a network, generally speaking anyway. Anyway, not a big deal, didn't mean to start a debate, just wanted to throw my .02 in - whether it's wrong or not!

You're not wrong, you're right. The final decision is verizon and like you said it's silly if you think otherwise. So ppl are saying moto can tell verizon "we're releasing this phone on your network and there's nothing you can do about it!"

If that's the case, then why would MOTOROLA publicly announce that they will be shipping devices with the same bootloader as the XOOM in late 2011? Shouldn't it be verizon saying that if THEY were the ones locking them?

Sent from my DROID2

Again, do you think that Motorola can make an announcement like that without Verizon's approval? I don't get why you would think that could ever possibly be the case.

That's like me saying "The house on 123 Main St is on sale starting today and I haven't told the current homeowners" and then trying to argue that I don't need their permission to sell their house.

If Moto makes an announcement like that, it's with VZW's approval, not done behind their back...

 

[illmatic636]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

Thanks for the breakdown.
I'm sure we'll find a hack for it if it's just locked. Encrypted or signed, I'll have to mod what I can on the phone without root cause I'm still getting it! The thrill of having it stock and someday have the encryption broken on it should satisfy my needs.

 

[czerdrill]

But does unlockable/locked mean encrypted?

Unlocked bootloader = root access with a simple command
Locked bootloader = root access after someone hacks it and shares the process or creates a 1 click root app for the masses.
Encrypted or signed bootloader = good luck

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums

Thanks for the breakdown.
I'm sure we'll find a hack for it if it's just locked. Encrypted or signed, I'll have to mod what I can on the phone without root cause I'm still getting it! The thrill of having it stock and someday have the encryption broken on it should satisfy my needs.

Believe me you will be thrilled for many millions of years, because an encrypted bootloader will never be cracked lol.

But yeah, really, all phones will get root eventually, and you can do 99% of the things you need to do with root. Although I wouldn't mind an unencrypted bootloader, it might be overrated, especially given the fact that the OEMs are allegedly not going to drop the ball on updates anymore (although that remains to be seen). Regardless, Google's 18 month promise is kind of dumb...

 

[czerdrill]

not trying to play a blame game, just think it's a little silly to think Verizon has zero say in it - especially with how they're clamping down on tetherers/rooters... and based on a twitter post alone. Of course they can have them, heck, they do currently. Bootloaders have nothing to do with the phone working on a network, generally speaking anyway. Anyway, not a big deal, didn't mean to start a debate, just wanted to throw my .02 in - whether it's wrong or not!

You're not wrong, you're right. The final decision is verizon and like you said it's silly if you think otherwise. So ppl are saying moto can tell verizon "we're releasing this phone on your network and there's nothing you can do about it!"

If that's the case, then why would MOTOROLA publicly announce that they will be shipping devices with the same bootloader as the XOOM in late 2011? Shouldn't it be verizon saying that if THEY were the ones locking them?

Sent from my DROID2

Oh and btw I think there may be some confusion on your end on what ppl are saying. I don't think anyone here is saying that Verizon is the one locking bootloaders. Meaning VZW isn't sending techs to Moto HQ and locking bootloaders left and right. What I'm saying is that any device on the VZW network has to be approved by VZW. So if VZW tells Moto "we won't sell this XOOM unless you encrypt the bootloader" Moto can't say "Too bad we're selling it anyway!!!"...

the point is, VZW has to approve every device on their network.

 

[jntdroid]

Yeah that's all I was really trying to say - it's somewhere in the middle and the carriers (or at the very least Verizon) definitely have a say in it.

 

[bsweetness]

Yeah that's all I was really trying to say - it's somewhere in the middle and the carriers (or at the very least Verizon) definitely have a say in it.

And, at least according to Motorola's recent statements, starting later this year carriers will have the final say in it.