Why is ATT disabling visual voicemail on Pixel phones?

---

@gr8sho wrote:

@lizdance40 If it’s as “easy” as providing a standard program, why doesn’t Google provide something similar as part of android instead of leaving it up to carriers.  I must be missing something obvious.  

---

Because every android manufacturer takes the basics and makes it their own spin.  Samsung, LG, Motorola, etc. Samsung is the worst.  They love redundancy with their branding on it.  The Stupid Bixby button for example when google assistant does it all better.  

   Not that I mind. I prefer the 3rd party app to the built in.

---

@eldaino wrote:

As I wrote VVM on iPhone is an Apple program, not ATT, Verizon, etc.  Android phones don’t get VVM on prepaid, but it works on iPhones becasue it’s built into the iOS

 

@lizdance40 omg. folks. Android has visual voicemail built into the OS. I don't know how many more times I can type it out. 

 

If att doesn't want to enable it on their own branded android phones fine. But them going out of their way to BLOCK it on an unlocked pixel (something i've already verified they are doing and that we still don't have a reasonable answer for outside of 'greed' and 'its not a phone you gave us money for!') is unacceptable. 

---

I don’t know what phone you’re using, but VVM is a carrier feature.  That’s a blanket statement that isn’t true for all android phones.  

It’s not built into my non carrier oneplus, but the 3rd party app works on ATT postpaid.   It is built into my carrier branded Samsung, but I cannot activate it on (Verizon) prepaid.  It’s not built into my son’s Razer phone, or my other sons Moto Pure.  It is built into the Pixel 3, but will only work on Verizon postpaid.  

   Greed?  How do your figure?  ATT VVM app is free, you don’t pay for it.  So where do you come up with greed?

BTW, until the last couple of years the VVM access was always a 3rd party app.  Older branded phones still ave to use the app.

I don’t know what phone you’re using, but VVM is a carrier feature.  That’s a blanket statement that isn’t true for all android phones.  

It’s not built into my non carrier oneplus, but the 3rd party app works on ATT postpaid.   It is built into my carrier branded Samsung, but I cannot activate it on (Verizon) prepaid.  It’s not built into my son’s Razer phone, or my other sons Moto Pure.  It is built into the Pixel 3, but will only work on Verizon postpaid.  

 

I"m specifically talking googles hardware. Visual voicemail is a native feature of android, and has been for some years. why one plus doesn't use androids native visual voicemail is a question for one plus. your sons razer is an older device and all the motorola phones, however pure they are, especially if they are from the razer era, aren't running the proper versions of android that have it built in anyway. 

It isn't true for all android phones because not all android phones run up to date software. this isn't an issue with googles phones. 

Your original statement ended with 'this isnt an issue with iphones because its built into ios'....the same is true for android, but carriers have their hands in the pot. The pixel is the first android phone that gets treated the way apple treats its iphone (full stack hardware software approach, no carrier bloatware or interference, and still very different from the 'stock' looking motorolas of yore.)

At any rate, I've accepted the reality: att wont allow it because they're being att about it, going out of their way to block a feature thats built into the os. I've put in a tmobile sim. A verizon sim and ordered a project fi sim and ALL of these still allowed me to use the feature without forcing me into a 3rd party app. Preference for a third party app is irrelevant; its the principal of why they're doing it is the problem. (though it doesn't seem like your experience with the 'built in vmm' has ever actually been with native android, as your samsung was the only one to have it and even then, it was samsungs version, which is quite different than the stock approach.)

@lizdance40

Greed?  How do your figure?  ATT VVM app is free, you don’t pay for it.  So where do you come up with greed?

BTW, until the last couple of years the VVM access was always a 3rd party app.  Older branded phones still ave to use the app.

 

I mean that's easy. What other reason does att have to block a built in feature native to the phone and the phones operating system? To push me towards getting a 'full featured' device on the next program (or whatever its called) replete with redundant apps, no guaranteed updates and extra software i cant uninstall? not to mention the hideous branding? 

Seriously, even if you wanted to argue that att wanted to guarantee some sort of experience 'standard'....the fact that the option is being denied is silly. I have the option if i use an iphone. They reserve the right to put whatever software they want on their branded devices....but again, for the like 200th time lol, it's craptastic of them to proactively block a feature on a phone when that feature works with every other provider except them. 

All they've really done is solidify the decision to not use them going forward. The beauty of not financing your device with your carrier. 🙂

---

@eldaino wrote:

@GLIMMERMAN76

 

 

Its easy ATT did not give or google did not ask for the IMS config for ATT's voice mail.  Or ATT is using a system that they built and its not supported by googles system just like native RCS support..  

This is the first android phone ever to get Wifi calling on ATT period which is a win for android folks.  People tend to forget the pixel series was built with verizon's network in mind.  There are users reporting problems with it on T-mobile at this point.

 

The first statement kinda gets closer to the truth...but again, it doesn't explain why an os-level feature is being disabled, outside of 'well because we can'. Native vvm works on every other network you use a pixel device on....and the one network it doesnt work on, is the same network whose solution a few posts above was 'just download our app!' So lets be real here...is it really google not asking for the ims or is it att being att? 

 

Second statement: not true. I had wifi calling (and hd voice) on my pixel 2 xl no problems. So its not the first. Also, the pixel is NOT build with verizons network in mind, its built with the most popular networks here in the US in mind; they are just their exclusive carrier partner. Its a fully unlocked phone. 

---

@eldaino

You did not have wifi calling on ATT with the pixel 2 xl sorry that is a blatant lie.  Maybe another carrier but not ATT.

---

@eldaino wrote:

@lizdance40

 

Greed?  How do your figure?  ATT VVM app is free, you don’t pay for it.  So where do you come up with greed?

BTW, until the last couple of years the VVM access was always a 3rd party app.  Older branded phones still ave to use the app.

 

I mean that's easy. What other reason does att have to block a built in feature native to the phone and the phones operating system? To push me towards getting a 'full featured' device on the next program (or whatever its called) replete with redundant apps, no guaranteed updates and extra software i cant uninstall? not to mention the hideous branding? 

 

Seriously, even if you wanted to argue that att wanted to guarantee some sort of experience 'standard'....the fact that the option is being denied is silly. I have the option if i use an iphone. They reserve the right to put whatever software they want on their branded devices....but again, for the like 200th time lol, it's craptastic of them to proactively block a feature on a phone when that feature works with every other provider except them. 

 

All they've really done is solidify the decision to not use them going forward. The beauty of not financing your device with your carrier. 🙂

---

It boils down to this and has for years on Android its a fractured eco system that google is NEVER going to get back under control PERIOD!  Samsung could if they wanted fork android like amazon has.  Then android phone sales and sales on the play store will tank as samsung accounts for 20ish percent of all smart phones sold in THE WORLD.  With that H company from China coming up really quick on their heals.

@GLIMMERMAN76

couple things:

firstly: its possible I was mistaken about the wifi calling on my pixel 2. i did in fact use it on multiple carriers. My honest mistake, not a blatant lie.

secondly: your second response is SO telling. 'hey att is blocking a feature' response: 'AnDRoid is SO FraGmeNTEd!'. I get it. You're not a fan of android. Googles devices go a long ways towards fixing half of those issues, but carriers like att absolutely don't help with this customer-hostile practices. Samsung needs google. Good luck selling a samsung phone without youtube or gmail. Or chrome. 

However, I see your strawman; we aren't discussing androids fragmentation issues here, because android's fragmentation isn't the reason why this is happening. So bringing that up does nothing to further the conversation or answer the original question posed, you're bringing up an issue thats unrelated and then going off on a tangent on how samsung could fork android and rule the world. Interesting flex, but its irrelevant to the topic at hand. 

Not a fan of andriod?  I make more money off of Android apps than I do iOS apps.

No I brought up the fragmented eco system as it does include the carriers who can't keep thier grubby hands out of the os.  

I gave you the reason it does not work.  It's a IMS profile problem and I don't see att giving a rats about either.  The pixel 3 getting wifi calling at launch was a awesome start.  The pixel 3 xl I was sent did not do wifi calling when I was using it but it was well before public launch.

---

@eldaino wrote:

@lizdance40

 

Greed?  How do your figure?  ATT VVM app is free, you don’t pay for it.  So where do you come up with greed?

BTW, until the last couple of years the VVM access was always a 3rd party app.  Older branded phones still ave to use the app.

 

I mean that's easy. What other reason does att have to block a built in feature native to the phone and the phones operating system? To push me towards getting a 'full featured' device on the next program (or whatever its called) replete with redundant apps, no guaranteed updates and extra software i cant uninstall? not to mention the hideous branding? 

▪️Next is the installment option, I don’t use it. I have upgraded outside ATT for almost 5 years. 

▪️ Ah, another one who hasn’t used a Samsung in a few years.    I just went through a list of what is on my Samsung that I didn’t put there.  Of 115 apps only 7 I don’t use and can’t uninstall.  

Phone, messages, my files, calendar and contacts, Galaxy apps and the S9 tutorial.  Samsung no longer sticks 30 apps we don’t use and can’t uninstall on the phones.  The only stupidity is Bixby.  

▪️  Since VVM is also functional on androids that cost $40 off the prepaid rack (on postpaid accounts) it’s not always a money thing.  And my oneplus works perfectly with the app.  

 

Seriously, even if you wanted to argue that att wanted to guarantee some sort of experience 'standard'....the fact that the option is being denied is silly. I have the option if i use an iphone. They reserve the right to put whatever software they want on their branded devices....but again, for the like 200th time lol, it's craptastic of them to proactively block a feature on a phone when that feature works with every other provider except them. 

 Who said that?   I don’t see anyone claiming any such thing.  Att is not going to bend over to make non carrier androids work as well, because the cannot assure anyone they will.  

   I’m sure they would prefer we all buy from them, but that’s our choice.   We can buy a $40 phone, or a $1200 phone and get the built in features they put on their phones.  Or a fruit phone.  

 

All they've really done is solidify the decision to not use them going forward. The beauty of not financing your device with your carrier. 🙂

---

Cue violins.    So what?  I’ve got one foot (and phone line) out the door.  But I’m not going to blame Verizon if my oneplus 6t doesn’t work as well as their branded phones.  

@lizdance40

that a 40 dollar android phone works fine with a feature that att is proactively blocking helps the case im making against their practices. I work for a corporation, i get how they work. 'sure you can buy your own phone, but maybe not all the things will work...however if you use OUR stuff'....its the same old tune. You just...confirmed it more?

Oh I have plenty of experience with newer samsungs. Yeah they do put less apps on there, but there is still that redundancy and lack of updates. And my brining up the next plan was to illustrate my previous point: att goes out of their way to make their branded phones work better than anything you bring to the table, even if said phone is demonstrably better in every way. (especially in the case of the pixels imo.) It's customer hostile. Plain and simple. I wasnt expecting a musical send off, but man att really needs to rethink it's contributors here: y'all are just making this way easier. The point of this forum is to find answers and the best two ive gotten is: ;att doesn't give a rats' and 'cue violins'. lolol. It's quite perfect and fitting, actually. 

Thanks for the insight guys!