AT&T responds to BBB complaint, Lumia 830 likely to never get Lumia Denim update

Nope, still waiting for my unbranded 830 to get the update. 000-22

How is that in any way relevant to what I said? If your unbranded 830 is on ATT, that is why it hasn't got the update, not because it's branded or unbranded.

Unbranded is unbranded.  The updates the device receives are not controlled by the carrier network it is on, only phones sold by the carrier specifically will get the updates they push.

And the unbranded and unlocked versions most likely would have even less of a chance of being updated.. am I right?

No, you are not right.  They would get updates direct from the manufacturer.

So you're saying that is one bought a phone that was unbranded and unlocked, Microsoft would directly update them (in this case, let's use the 830 as an example).  Wow, I thought Microsoft was only pushing those firmware updates via the Insiders Program as a work around, I didn't realize they might do this for their unlocked phones.  Besides, US law now requires that a carrier unlock a phone if a customer desires so (provided they have met their contractual obligations/ buy out).  How would you get updates in this scenario?  This seems more of a just an archaic quality control measure in a time when it was necessary to maintain such control AND as a way to force people to buy more new phones rather than let customers get maximum use out of their devices.  I hope Microsoft offers a variant of the Insiders program that offers firmware updates, etc, with whatever disclaimers are appropriate since it is clear that AT&T and others just aren't up the the task (is this really unique to Windows Phones? I'm seriously asking).  As for contract vs no-contract, pick your poison.  Some people want to pay cash, some (and I would venture to say MOST) don't.  You either are using subsidies (old style), credit cards, or no-contact-but-finance-phone-cost plans (i.e. NEXT, etc).  It isn't helpful to slam or criticize people who expect their devices be supported just for the method in which they chose to finance their purchase. In the end, the device will be paid off and in the end people want support.  *I* personally feel people shouldn't expect support because these vendors are already so $hitty at providing it.  It's easy for me to be so forgiving, though, as I'm one of those that buys devices for fun and doesn't actually *need* anything too fancy - check work email and some internet, done; but I'll use the hell out of the advanced features if I can get them.

Unlocked will allow any sim to be used in a phone Unbranded will allow updates from phone maker

Still waiting for Denim/8.1.2 on my unbranded Lumia 1320 though.

I think the world forgot about our 1320's. I moved on to a 640XL - miss the camera button though.

Same here I had a 1020 got the 640XL miss the camera button big time.

Nope, carrier branded phones are at the mercy of the carrier you bought it from. SIM free devices are at the mercy of the manufacturer which generally means that you get updates long before ANY carrier devices.

Of course not. Non-carrier phones often receive the updates as soon as they're available in the countries they're sold.

In a different universe maybe. In this one, unbranded phones get the most love from the manufacturer.

AT&T got Denim to the 1520 weeks before Microsoft delivered it direct to my unbranded CV 1520. The belief that unbranded phones get all updates, or updates sooner is a myth.

Sort of.  It depends on which country/region your phone is.  Differennt regions have different cell systems (CDMA/GSM etc).  My HK (hong kong) 1520 took longer for phones in several European countries to get denim, but still 6 months sooner than carrier locked ones in my country. If you bought your 1520 from a country whos regulators demand more testing then you're gonna get any updates later than from countriews that just let the manufacturers update blast through whenever they are ready.  You're still far more likely to get updates in a timely manner if your handset is unlocked, oh, and not an android.  If your android device is more than 6 months old you might as well pray for updates to happen because the handset makers make so little $ on the devices they aren't going to spend any time making sure updates don't screw with their universally awful skins and UI.  

But it's not cheap over the life of the contract.

Yes they are. I challenge you to find an unlocked non-carrier branded Windows Phone that works on Verizon. Verizon even lies and says their Windows Phones are unlocked, they aren't. They can use GSM bands, but Verizon severely cripples the device functionality, and Nokia and Microsoft and HTC will not supply users with a non branded ROM to rid us of Verizon's OS tampering.

There is no such thing as a unlocked CDMA device for which Verizon and Sprint's authorization networks are at this time.

The Nexus 5 D820 is indeed an unlocked CDMA and GSM device that can work on Sprint, AT&T and TMobile with LTE on all three networks. It does not work on Verizon.

It has both CDMA and GSM radios?  I wasn't aware there was a chipset that could handle the crappy old CDMA alongside the GSM stuff.  Why ANY network would stick to CDMA baffles the mind.  And getting an unlocked CDMA phone is a very different proposition than unlocked GSM. Especially as the carriers have muich greater control over the handsets unlike GSM where you just switch sims.

Take a look at the US west of the Mississippi River. Bunches of nothing except on the west coast, with pockets and bands of population scattered throughout. CDMA using low frequency bands travels further and needs less towers per square mile. That's why.

Just stop. The stupid here just hurts to look at.  Almost every phone Verizon sells supports CDMA and GSM.  They have for years now.  Verizon doesn't really even use CDMA anymore except around their outdated towers.  They carry voice and data both over LTE now.  You can go into the settings and turn CDMA completely off and as long as you have an LTE signal, you'll still get both voice and data.  And yes, their phones are unlocked.  However, Verizon orders their phones with chips particular to their LTE band so, no, you're not going to get LTE on another network with a Verizon phone or vice versa.  iPhone might be an exception.  Verizon doesn't hardly use GSM either.  It's only on their phones so their customers can take their devices out of the country.  Please STFU with the CDMA crap already.  You're talking out of your ass from almost ten years ago.  It's time to update your bullshit.        

You mean other than the iPhone, Nexus 6, Moto X, etc.

And that is just one of the big reasons my money no longer goes to Verizon, nor am I beholden to their strong-arm tactics.

The reality is that Verizon never tampered with the OS.  All the Carrier options are provided by Microsoft, and are paid for by Verizon.  This is why a variant ROM does not exist.

Not that easy to go buy an unlocked phone.... I understand what you are saying, and it makes sense, I buy unlocked/unbranded phones only. It is easy for you and I to go buy an unlocked/unbranded phone.... and possibly many others who follow tech news sites like this one.... But for the big majority (the lay person if you will!), it is not easy. A cell phone company's store is on every other block. Their sales people are the most aggressive and trained to sell phones, with contract. The majority do not even know they can buy a phone anywhere other  than a carrier store. I have my own family, co-workers, friends, etc who I try to help out when ever I can, but it is a same situation every 2 years.... BIG Majority dont have even the slightest of clues about the whole game of carrier locked phones, manufacturer gimmicks, OEM back door contracts with carriers, etc This is where the problem is my friend. In the grand scheme of things, us tech savvy people are a very tiny number. And that is a fact.

I just find this to be a bit of defeatest attitude. I mean, I understand what your saying. But exactly how hard is it for someone to research buying their phone much like they would research buying a gaming console or a stove or refrigerator? Again, I get the strong arm marketing tactics of the carriers. 

Its EASY to buy an unlocked phone (unless its a CDMA variety).  You see, there is this thing called ebay, and this 'ebay' can show and facilitate sales of non-locked and logo'd very easily. I'm always amazed that most people continue to buy locked phones and sometimes even defend the locked'ness because the carriers must somehow have better phones than if you bought the same handset elsewhere. Like the AT&T Lumia 1520.  It has 1/2 the storage (16 instead of 32Gb) and no Qi wireless charging than the non-AT&T version, but people/idiots still bought the AT&T locked and branded one. I buy unlocked:  #1 for the availability of updates.  #2 because I HATE having carrier logos branding my phone's startup, front and back of the casing.  #3 to stick it to the effing carriers because they are all mongrels.

Or better yet, buy a locked AT&T Lumia 1520.  Add Qi charging for $8, unlock for $1, unlock band 4, and pop in an SD card.  Just saved at least $75

Adding Qi charging to an AT&T 1520 is impossible without the skills, tools, and parts that 99.999999% of prospective owners lack. I have no idea why you think that process is $8. You're overpaying for your unlock which is free. Unlocking band 4 requires you look up procedure. Just as with Android, MANY apps cannot be installed on microsdxc. Show another phone model with a variant that has the aforementioned features for $75 additional. You cannot.

That's a really stupid argument. Just because someone buys something 'subsidized' does in no way take away from their ability to complain when companies like ATT aren't interested [in] releasing an update for [an] EOL phone. Your argument is that same bs that people use to blame the victim in other situations.

I think its a different situation where someone willingly binds themselves in a contract with an entity that is known to be shady and manipulative towards its customers than say a situation where a person is victimized and are not to blame for it. I mean, I know people who bitch and complain constantly about their *insert carrier* bill, only to turn around and reup for another 2 years just to get the latest and greatest at a "cheap price." Exactly who does the fault lie with in that case? Not to absolve ATT from their BS. Its why I bolted the minute my last contract was up and won't ever tie myself to a carrier again. 

Okay I understand this. But off topic to the point. Also, the fault still lies with the company supplying the phone. Why supply the phone in the first place if they aren't even going to support it? I have an international 830, so I don't deal with ATT. Whatever. If I want att service because it is the best in any area.. Or whatever reason I have. (Doesn't matter to anyone) Am I at fault because they may not support the phone THAT I WANT? Also, who else supplies that Lumia 830 that I WANT? The customer is not at fault for the choices that the service makes.

AT&T wouldn't hesistate to push the update if they weren't being charged money.
EDIT:  The update that does not exist

That is actually NOT the case, particularly depending on your carrier. For instance, you can't buy an "international" version and put it on Verizon's network.

Unless you get the new Moto X, iPhone or Nexus 6. I am sure there are other options out there too.

Not exactly, many of the phones are only available through the carriers. It's not about discounts anymore because those old subsidies no longer exist. The problem is that due to the carriers all having different radio bands; the average customer is not going to sift through the spec data to find what frequencies are supported and compare those to the ones their carrier uses.

This is rather funny as that is exactly what I did. But you are right, regular customers are not going to do that even though the information is sitting there available for anyone to see.

They're never cheaper through the carrier, they almost always cost more unless you buy a device within a month of its launch. Regardless, just flash the phone with an international firmaware and then update to Denim.  There's guides all over the internet on how to do it, and it is as easy as using Windows Phone Recovery Tool, but you use Nokia Care Suite instead.

I would argue that you cannot buy an unlockd and unbranded phone easily. You have to be aware of their existance and you have to do it over the internet. There is no shop selling these. Buying off the internet, quite often you are buying international versions which require some investigation on compatibility. Go to Expansys (even US) and see if you find any phone that says works on T-Mobile, and/or AT&T LTE bands. They don't. They give you bands and frequencies, and it is up to you to try and find what the carriers are using. You can easily end up with a phone that does txt and voice on your network, but only 3G data.  These are challenges the average american hasn't had to deal with. You go to a carrier store, you get a device, it works....on that carrier. It has only been recently that devices with enough rasdios to cover multiple carriers have been readily available, but they certainly have not been broadly marketed, so their existance isn't even well known. BTW, not defending this, just saying they way things work over here is steeped in tradition, and there are those (the carriers) that benefit from it not changing.

People walk into Apple stores every day and purchase unlocked iPhones. You wrote a big ol' post that was wrong. 

Not as easy as you might think. Take the 930/Icon for example, if you are on ATT/T-Mobile in the US it was impossible to get a LTE enabled version, locked or unlocked.

It's purely out of convenience. Overall people spend more because of the overpriced plans on contact.

Well in this case it is not cheaper if he has to buy a new phone to get windows 10.

Why are the carriers involved in OS updates in the first place? That's fked up.

EOL??? It came out under a year ago...

We have the same problem in Canada.

How much does it cost to unlock a phone in the US? Generally, I mean

AT&T at the moment is either free or under $1.  Not an issue

It's not that at all. It's that somewhere along the line, they got the dumb idea on their heads that the best way to compete is with phones locked to carriers. In reality, they'd have more success luring subscribers away if those people could easily bring whatever devices they already own. They'll figure it out eventually.

Carriers in the US aren't dumb pipes yet. Elsewhere the consumer has the greater power and say. This due to fact people in the US have become too used to getting subsided phones as opposed to the rest of the world; where pretty much everyone buys unlocked.

Country Variants are mostly or even only being sold outside of carriers and that's definitely not a US only thing.

It's called corruption bud. Carrier specific hardware is just a way to make switching carriers more difficult on the customer by forcing them to incur the cost of new hardware at the same time. The telecommunications companies in the united States have been this way almost since inception. Over the course of their history, At&t especially, have endeavored to utilize unfair and fraudulent business practices to ensnare customers into a one sided arrangement that favors the provider over the consumer. Examples of this are the breaking up of At&t into the so called "baby bells", confusing and or hidden charges on bills (which they were first penalized for on land lines then later again for cellular lines) and of course the most recent throttling so called unlimited data plans. The legal history of the us coms market is out on the web, you should look it up if you ever get the chance.

All those features should be available with Windows 10 mobile, right?

This is Deja vu. Anyone remember the 820?

Yep.  Still using mine.  An orphan in almost every possible sense of the word, but still a good phone.  We'll see what happens when WP10 is released...

Many non-US folks don't understand that Americans choose subsidized phones because there is zero difference between monthly rates versus non-subsidized phones. So why pay two or three times more for the same phone?

Because with non subsidised phones you are pretty much gauranteed to get updates and you aren't tied into using a phone that you may not like for 2 years. Yes you pay more initially but over the life of the contract it pays for itself. If I chose to go from the 930 I'm using to a Google Nexus device then I can, even if I'm only a couple of months into my contract.

Exactly. When the Lumia 735 came in Portugal (end of October) it had a cost of 230€ unlocked or 190€ at Vodafone, for instance. The difference basically payed itself, as it would cost around 40€ to unlock the phone, and Vodafone was not worth it.

You are on a tech site talking with techies. The average phone user in the US (and I expect all over the world, has little understanding of phone updates/upgrades. They don't hover around the blogs and forums, scurring for information. When is it happenning, what is in it, will my phone get it? Most are oblivious until the device tells them there is an update. Even iPhone users, with the annual media canpaign about the wonderous new devices that are coming out, aren't often aware that the new OS that comes with it, is likely coming to their phone as well.

Actually this is no longer the case. Now, even The Big Four offer cheaper no contract plans. And in terms of ATT and T-Mobile, no contract prepaid plans are available that have coverage that is just as good as postpaid for vastly cheaper prices.

Except there is a difference in services, especially with data.  If one merely uses voice and text and precious little date, or only data at home or places they frequent that have wifi, then yes, it can be cheaper on pre paid.  But overall post paid options still have the overall better full feature deals.

I get 20GB of data on Cricket for $55 flat and it uses the AT&T network. That is quite a bit less than actual AT&T plans (can you even get a 20GB plan for under $100?)  Sure, it is limited to 8Mb down, but that is plenty for a phone.

Well, as some people said, the US have too much power. Good thing that my UK Lumia 830 came with Lumia Denim when I first got it in March.

This really isn't the place to get political, but to make a long story short... One of our political parties that had a lot of power in the 80's convinced a lot of REALLY stupid people that handing the country over to the corporations was a good idea. Posted via the Windows Central App for Android

Man! We don't have shit like that in Finland! But we hsve ridicilous laws and pay taxes about everything.

Mathias, we have it easy in Denmark. All phones are sold unlocked and unbranded and will get all updates directly from the manufacturer. Before I moved to Copenhagen I've lived in both the US and in Spain (I'm originally Spanish). In the US you're just tied to your carrier and there's not much you can do. The vast majority of consumers in the States buy phones directly from the carrier for a cheaper price ($200 being the highest price you will normally see phones for) but then they force you to stick with them for 2 years on a contract. In Spain it's slightly better now, but it used to be a similar story. All phones would be sold with customizations everywhere (I've even had old Symbian phones from Nokia that had the entire Menu replaced by the carrier's own, which was way more limited but tried to force feed you their paid content).

Phones in the United States are subsidized by carriers. That means that instead of paying $700+ for a phone consumers only have to pay $100 to $200 up front. Except that this leaves you stuck in a 2-year contract on an overpriced plan. So really, you're amortizing nearly double the real cost of the phone over those 2 years. Of course, those carriers are expensive whether or not you're on a contract, but it does make it expensive to jump to another carrier offering a better deal. We do have low cost carriers that are much less expensive and work more like carriers in Europe. That, of course, means paying full price for a phone. Americans are a bit too comfortable with credit, and they love being able to get a new phone every year. So paying the lower price makes that feasible, even if you're spending the difference on the plan. Carriers have even started offering more absurd and expensive plans specifically catered to people who want to replace their phones frequently. However, there is another problem here. Often, when a new phone is launched you won't be able to find an unlocked version for quite a long time. Carriers expect deals that make phones exclusive to their network. The Lumia 830 is a pretty good example of that. And buying the international version often isn't an option because we'll lose the ability to access LTE.

Thank God Microsoft is resolving this bullcrap when Windows 10 Mobile comes out.

Or so they say. I'll believe it when it happens.

This.

Lol didn't they say that about wp7 then wimp out just as quickly as they did with xb1's drm policy

Ditto

Let's see how long AT&T takes to approve & deploy the Windows 10 Mobile update to existing Lumia users. I suspect my Lumia 1520 will receive the W10M update in Q2 2016.

Yes, but theoretically with the new devices finally coming out with Win 10 pre-installed, this should be less of an issue for a lot of folks. Posted via my HTC One (M7)

the830 was supposed to be first shipped with denim too...... well now we see that didint

My UK Lumia 830 was shipped with Lumia Denim.

I doubt the 92x/1020 will ever get it.

This ^ I was rather surprised that Denim even came to the 1020 from at&t.

That's optimistic

Carriers still control phone updates in the USA even the Windows 10 Mobile update, so if you have AT&T and they have not rolled out the update for Denim, you can count on not receiving the WP 10 update, unless you do it yourself. AT&T is not a customer friendly company.

I hope so too but that remains to be seen. MS said back in WP7 days that carriers could only block 1 update but not 2 in a row. Obviously they were able to block updates based on phone models

So in other words Microsoft lied, and nobody seems to be calling them out on it from the press.

Actually, if you look back MS did hedge a little and admitted carriers would be involved in the rollouts. I think while MS wants total control they know until they will have to work with the carreirs. Even Android with their huge market share is reliant on the carriers. How Apple gets away with it is kind of a myastery since the carriers really don't like Apple because the cost share they have to pay Apple is pretty high.

If you say you will get your brother to do something, and you find can't actually get him to, were you lying? Or were you just overzealous in your promise and expectation?  I believe MS had every intention on doing what they said they would, but it just wasn't to be. MS doesn't have the clout with carriers that you would think they would. The carriers have plenty of devices to make money off of. They don't need to sell MS phones. In the US at least, carriers selling phones is the only way they get sold (by and large).  So MS needs (needed) the carriers. So who gets to write the terms of the agreements. If in fact the new strategy is for MS to make the best devices it can to showcase Windows 10 on phones, and not to build a phone business, they don't really need to sell through carriers. It would be prudent if they offered some sort of financing plan for those that are used to using the carrier based ones. (Not subsidised, but they all offer what is essentially a 12, 18, 24 month no interest loan on the hardware, with the payments being a line item on the phone bill) It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The carriers have a tendancy to want unique carrier exclusives, and MS has stated an intent to not make to many phones. Either the carriers will all have to except the same model, or MS won't be on carriers (or MS will cave, but I don't actually expect that). There is precedent oin this country for an unlocked unbranded, multicarrier compatible phone. Lets see if this is what MS builds.

but remember, you need lumia denim to install windows 10 for phones :/

And if you install preview for developers first?

Microsoft needs to come out with unlocked phones immediately available with their new hardware launch!

High end Windows Phones aren't cheap at launch, and nobody is going to buy them unsubsidized. 

If I have the option, I will totally buy my next phone directly from Microsoft if it's unlocked and unbranded.  AT&T burned me on the POS 830, but I was smart and only did the Next12 plan on it.  We'll see if they let me turn it in at 12 months without buying another phone from them.  Otherwise, I'll just pay off the remaining 6 months and toss it in the trash. Unfortunately, switching carriers isn't really an option.  Verizon's no better, T-Mobile's coverage in my area leaves a lot to be desired, and Sprint is a joke.

Why would you think AT&T would let you turn in your phone. That's not the contract. Next 12 is a 20 month no interest loan. At 12 mos you can turn it in for another phone and continued payments, or pay the remainig 8 payments. Nothing says you can hand in the phone. They have no obligation to just let you out of your time payment plan.

Why not get rid of the contract and just go to an MVNO such as Cricket? Same exact service just different company. And way cheaper prices too...

No one? I will. I dont like the carriers and would be more than happy to pay more if needed just to pay them less and not advertise for them.

Microsoft has said that before, at this point actions speak louder then words. Microsoft should release a tool to help people with even pre-WP10 updates if the carriers are screwing them over, instead MS just sits on their ass and does nothing to help curb these carrier abusees.

How can you be so sure AT&T will update their phones to W10?

So does this mean that this phone won't receive Windows 10 Mobile? As I recall, Microsoft said Windows 10 Mobile will come to every Lumia device with the Denim update. Never said anything about the phones without Denim....

Yes, this is my concern! W10 is slated for the 830. However, if the 830 is not going to receive the update, does that mean it won't have the necessary software to even receive W10??!!??? I was an AT&T guy until this. Perhaps I'm stuck with AT&T if they continue with the most choices for WPs. However, it's getting obvious that perhaps it's time to buy unlocked phones apart from buying them directly from AT&T. I guess doing this would eliminate these types of issues in the future.

Why don't you simply buy your phone off contract? You can even buy it by installment.

No, they never said Denim.

They most definitely did say Denim

They did. Check the Windows 10 site that specified which phones will get it (640, 640XL and 435 in the US)

Exactly. Which is why I think AT&T has decided not to allow denim to such a nice phone. If they did, then it would impact their sales of new phones to owners of the 830, because an upgraded Windows 10 Lumia 830 wouldn't need to be replaced for quite a while. What they are likely to get instead are some people getting mad and switching carriers. Some people will just be that mad. Glad my 635 is a Country Variant version so I don't have to deal with a carrier when it comes to Windows 10.

AT&T is withholding Denim because it would impact sales of future phones...lol wtf

Yeah, that or there just aren't enough to justify pushing out the update.

Your logic is flawed, this does not force me to buy a new phone, it forces me to take my 7 lines OFF at&t at a loss of over 5000 per year to their company.

Yeah, I stated it would backfire and people would leave AT&T.

It's likely Microsoft may provide a solution throug