"This mobile cannot be unlocked"

[Ext User(tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com)]

Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
knowlege would be appreciated...

[Ext User(Simon Templar)]

tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com wrote:
> Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
> N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
> they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
> Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
> knowlege would be appreciated...

NO, they are talking SHIT. What they should be saying is that they
REFUSE to unlock these phones.

Unfortunately there isn't BB5 unlocking available to the public yet but
I know many people overseas are working on it.


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.
http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.

[Ext User(Michael)]

"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
news:444ce7de$1_3@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com. ..
> tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com wrote:
> > Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
> > N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
> > they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
> > Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
> > knowlege would be appreciated...
>
> NO, they are talking SHIT. What they should be saying is that they
> REFUSE to unlock these phones.
>
> Unfortunately there isn't BB5 unlocking available to the public yet but
> I know many people overseas are working on it.

So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
UNLOCKED" is true

[Ext User(Simon Templar)]

Michael wrote:
> So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
> UNLOCKED" is true

There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is
purchased at full retail price without contract there should be no
reason for the phone to be locked in the first place. If phone is
purchased as part of a contract there is no reason why they should
refuse to unlock it once the contract expires.

Companies that FORCE people to stay with them rather than encourage
people to stay with them is stupid in the long run. If they provided a
decent product at a respectable price they would not have to LOCK people
in because they will WANT to stay.


--
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may
belong to.
http://web.acma.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452

73 de Simon, VK3XEM.

[Ext User(R1rob)]

If you read the contract it says for the 6280 that after 12months they can
unlock the phone for free.
Dunno if this is still current for 3, it was 6 weeks ago.

Rob

<tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:n4mp42hd2596pfoo43c0o1loreh3kvrqbp@4ax.com...
> Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
> N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
> they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
> Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
> knowlege would be appreciated...

[Ext User(Jonathan Wilson)]

> There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is
> purchased at full retail price without contract there should be no
> reason for the phone to be locked in the first place. If phone is
> purchased as part of a contract there is no reason why they should
> refuse to unlock it once the contract expires.
If you are on a contract, there should be no reason to lock the phone as if
someone leaves before their contract is up, they have to pay out the
remaining cost of the phone (or whatever it is)
The main reason to lock a phone is if they are selling you a phone below
what it would normally cost (which is why Telstra locks prepaid phones but
not contract phones or phones bought outright)

[Ext User(Michael)]

"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
news:444e37e6_1@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
> Michael wrote:
> > So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
> > UNLOCKED" is true
>
> There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is

Not really.

If I say "the sun CANNOT rise in the West", I am right until proven wrong

> purchased at full retail price without contract there should be no
> reason for the phone to be locked in the first place. If phone is

You get no say in whether the phone can, should, or would be locked

> purchased as part of a contract there is no reason why they should
> refuse to unlock it once the contract expires.

If its in the T&C's, tough titties.

> Companies that FORCE people to stay with them rather than encourage
> people to stay with them is stupid in the long run. If they provided a

Then fuck off elsewhere

> decent product at a respectable price they would not have to LOCK people
> in because they will WANT to stay.

Crapshit.

LOCKING usually occurs to cover a SUBSIDY

ie. you, Mr. Kenny Customer, gets SOMETHING for cheaper than its cost

Wanker

[Ext User(horacewachope@gmail.com)]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:45:20 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
>news:444e37e6_1@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
>> Michael wrote:
>> > So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
>> > UNLOCKED" is true
>>
>> There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is
>
>Not really.
>
>If I say "the sun CANNOT rise in the West", I am right until proven wrong

And if I say "Michael J Ellis CANNOT sustain an erection without
pharmaceutical assistance", am I right until proven wrong?

[Ext User(tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com)]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:52:48 GMT, "R1rob"
<r1robTAKE_THISOUT@hotmail.com> wrote:

>If you read the contract it says for the 6280 that after 12months they can
>unlock the phone for free.
>Dunno if this is still current for 3, it was 6 weeks ago.
>
>Rob
>
><tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>news:n4mp42hd2596pfoo43c0o1loreh3kvrqbp@4ax.com...
>> Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
>> N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
>> they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
>> Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
>> knowlege would be appreciated...
>

Will check it out - thanks. And thanks to all else who replied, and
weren't both pedantic & telstra dunny cleaners.

[Ext User(tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com)]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:30:27 +0930, horacewachope@gmail.com wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:45:20 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
>>news:444e37e6_1@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
>>> Michael wrote:
>>> > So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
>>> > UNLOCKED" is true
>>>
>>> There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is
>>
>>Not really.
>>
>>If I say "the sun CANNOT rise in the West", I am right until proven wrong
>
>And if I say "Michael J Ellis CANNOT sustain an erection without
>pharmaceutical assistance", am I right until proven wrong?
>
>
>
You assume he has something to erect...

[Ext User(Michael)]

<tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:24c152tdq6tong3u68027aher66ivbfjj8@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 10:52:48 GMT, "R1rob"
> <r1robTAKE_THISOUT@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you read the contract it says for the 6280 that after 12months they
can
> >unlock the phone for free.
> >Dunno if this is still current for 3, it was 6 weeks ago.
> >
> >Rob
> >
> ><tim_welsh_eliot@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> >news:n4mp42hd2596pfoo43c0o1loreh3kvrqbp@4ax.com...
> >> Are "3" right about his? Am looking at Nokias, specifically 6280 &
> >> N90, will wear their contract & hope to switch to another telco when
> >> they have 3g up & running. Three.com.au can't be lying to me & the
> >> Australian public, can they? Any answer from anyone with technical
> >> knowlege would be appreciated...
> >
>
> Will check it out - thanks. And thanks to all else who replied, and
> weren't both pedantic & telstra dunny cleaners.

You poor baby . . . get a life

[Ext User(Michael)]

<horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rq1152hb4cfb8irig4prtpc0hdkrn81rhp@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 08:45:20 GMT, "Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Simon Templar" <usenet@vk3xem.net> wrote in message
> >news:444e37e6_1@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
> >> Michael wrote:
> >> > So until it is, wihch might be never, their statement of "CANNOT BE
> >> > UNLOCKED" is true
> >>
> >> There is a big difference between WILL NOT and CAN NOT! If a phone is
> >
> >Not really.
> >
> >If I say "the sun CANNOT rise in the West", I am right until proven wrong
>
> And if I say "Michael J Ellis CANNOT sustain an erection without
> pharmaceutical assistance", am I right until proven wrong?

No, because you have no basis for your claim.

I can say, with 100% confidence and proof, that the sun has ALWAYS risen in
the West on this earth. Also, I can say, that Michael J Ellis CAN sustain an
erection without pharmaceutical assistance.

Also, will 100% confidence, the OP's phone has never been unlocked, ever,
anywhere in the world