Wifi Calling on Unlocked Phones?

@GLIMMERMAN76 I've read the part about basic call/text.  The part I don't get, is what happens if you are unable to make the call, say if it would've worked over one of the new LTE short-wavelength bands (obviously requiging VoLTE)?  

Or if it would've worked over VoWiFi, clearly another step removed, but still, call/text isn't working, particularly if there's something emergent.

I think if someone really took them to task over this, they could show that people with branded devices are able to make calls in a good many areas that non-branded devices would fail in.  This, to me anyway, shows exclusion from basic call/text, since AT&T is providing the signal for both.  

I'm sure there's some weird loophole, or maybe they're playing chicken, but either way it's as bit odd to me.

@lizdance40 I'm with you, I think this will be a Darwinian thing, often the case with AT&T, unfortunately.  They wonder why things are "dropping" sales, well, they are sort of failing to ever be at the forefront, ever, and even to keep pace with most of the others. Eventually, people will decide, even with good coverage, that that's their model, and either they're okay with it or not...

---

@lizdance40 wrote:

---

---

If the FCC certifies a phone, and ATT's own system recognizes the device (see photo of my non ATT devices on my bill) The problem is not inclusion, its exclusion.  Verizon isn't the only, or even the first to except non carrier phones.  T -mobile does it best, of course.  ATT will Whitelist devices, but without their own coding, they exclude them from the services we are asking for.  

As the OP has written, why is his BB excluded, when it's the same as the one ATT sold?   

The Samsung Galaxy S7 has different model numbers, but is in every way the same device, so why is the unlocked version excluded?

There is no reason.  The phones don't need to pass more hurdles.  ATT just has to stop looking for its own code and let the phones work.  

 

ATT excludes all 4 phones.  Yet identifies 3 of them.  Who does that make sense?

 

 

---

@lizdance40This part is baffling to me too.  Saying it's not a "certified" model is one thing for a one-off import, but entirely different if we're talking about a device (such as my wife's Win 950, which they sell) where they simply refuse to recognize it, why?

I've tried getting them to fix the 950 issue, so at least it shows up, but currently I can't get it past the previous phone on that line, an older 920, which hasn't been in service for over a year.  This, despite the fact that they sell/sold many 950s, but still are refusing to recognize the other one.

I can't get my 6P recognized either, cool deal that your Pixel works though, although I sort of wonder why that one, exactly?

I have tried both call and chat, to no avail, I've gotten nowhere getting this fixed.  I know it's not going to magically enable my features, but why block these in their DB, just because they didn't sell them?  Maybe if they list them accordingly, it implies something?  That comes back around to your devices though...

@pgrey

The 6p is grey out as unknown, but if I call ATT knows what phone is on the line.

The moto did not require APN settings and show without photo.

The pixel gets a photo, and it's even the correct color, didn't program APN

none of the phones have VoLTE or wifi calling.  

I have hope for the Pixel.  Maybe next years pixel.   

@pgrey

see thats the thing I can turn off LTE on my pixel xl and get better coverage with 3g in most areas here in IL.

@lizdance40 Yep, exactly, I'd bet that AT&T knows 100% on all these phones, they just don't want to show them the same way they do branded devices, they're trying to differentiate.  If my 6P wasn't recognized, I'd have a whole different mess.  I never had to set up my APN on it too, all three valid APNs auto-populated, and it selected the "best" for the phone scenario, even though advanced LTE isn't supported (interesting as well, if you think about it).

Weird that the 950 gets rejected though, as AT&T sells the same device, their branded version anyway. I realize the model # is different, but realistically they're exactly the same phone, but as you mention previously about the Samsungs and others, they're drawing the distinction, my guess is for some sort of legal reason.

I wouldn't begrudge them the 6p and similar, if non branded versions of phones they did sell were not also excluded.  Like the MS 950 and @ggendel 's BB Priv.  

Wait, I always say "...give us and inch we want the whole yard ", so I want it all.  

Wow.  I sparked this thread here....

@ggendel

Based on your question/statement, I have no stance on qualified unlocked phones .  I do not fully understand what you mean by that either.  If it is unlocked from a carrier (not sold/sponsered officially by ATT), then ATT is not willing or obligated to provide all of the services capable to it, even if the device supports it.  There some devices that have the exception...

@nate.0  Oh,  man.  We're trying to rock the boat here!   

ATT is holding out for no good reason.  While the party line is "Att doesn't have to".  (Yeah we know, we are the chief choir).  BUT......The hope is that enough pressure, enough non ATT phones or enough people move to other carriers, than ATT has to wake up and smell the java.  Currently they are going with swimming up stream or sticking their head in the sand.  

How do I turn on email notifications for threads?

@nate.0 Upper-right-corner, Options drop-down (button), choose "Unsubscribe".

You'll miss all the fun though ;-]  

Yeah, we know they're not obligated (willing is open to interpretation), at least under the current situation.  I personally think that some of these "Advanced" features will eventually become "standard", particularly now that a bunch of them are close to 100% market penetration.

Some of us here think that it'd be great if they'd just step up, in the meantime, delight their customers (like us), and create some really positive PR.  Oh, and they could offload their network too, if WiFi call/text ever got pervasive.  Granted, a conversation pales by comparison to even a short video (data-wise), but there's also total number of connections, another chunk of overhead.  I bet the numbers would be significant, say if 35% of calls moved to WiFi...