Xiaomi is disabling some of its devices when imported to certain regions
androidauthority.com
androidauthority.com
Is this a common "dark-pattern" these days, to require "activation" for an Android phone? My last experience with a generic Chinese Android smartphone of close to a decade ago was basically "insert battery, SIMs, microSD, and turn on" whereupon it booted quickly to the generic Android "desktop" and was ready to use with no other steps required.
I say this because you can also buy modified devices, for instances Chinese devices that have been reflashed with an international ROM. If it booted without a wizard, you probably had one of these devices. Xiaomi always hated this, I'm not sure why, though a benign explanation is that sometimes these devices are said to come with malware pre-installed, and that's not a good look for Xiaomi (who like all Android manufacturers wants an exclusive right to install their own malware). This is one of the reasons unlocking the bootloader is rate limited and comes with a wait time.
China is wild.
Isn't this what American mobile operators do?
i think you can unlock one phone per month per registered phone number.
this is done expressly with the intent to prevent mass unlocking by 3rd party resellers.
I stopped buying SAMSUNG after that experience.
These locks have started to become less and less common these days though.
My S105G is a carrier device (Telstra), but as you say they're moving to not lock them down anymore which is a lot nicer experience.
First was a DJI drone (this was a few years ago so might be different now). In order to even boot it up you have to download and run their firmware installer on a desktop computer (requiring internet access and potentially gathering God-knows-what data) with the drone plugged in. Then to use the drone you have to install their app which demands access to all sorts of things only tangentially related to the main function of the drone.
Second was a wifi security camera. I'd expect a wifi camera setup to go "turn on, connect to camera's access point, configure via web interface, reboot camera". This one was "install app, grant app all permissions, create account on company web page, verify email address, use account to log in to app, point phone camera at QR code on security camera, app autoconfigures camera with your wifi password, all video+audio goes to their servers, you may access it via (and ONLY via) their phone app."
We did NOT keep that camera much less buy any more of them.
Then again, perhaps avoiding the bigger companies and going to the OEMs or other small manufacturers directly (who would specialise only in hardware, and essentially wouldn't have the resources to set up and maintain the server side, or even an app) might be a better choice.
It does not feel like MY device at all.
Owners in of these phones probably invested a large portion of their earnings to purchase these devices and may need them for critical functions. I wonder if the brick message will even be displayed in the user's local language?
Most likely sanctions are to blame as other commenters suggest.
Whether or not it is depends on how much effort the world is willing to put into it.
There's plenty of software/devices that have never been hacked, but the ones that really test the rule to me are those where the effort to secure them is closely matched with the opposite, iOS, Denuvo, games consoles etc.
> Cuba, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Sudan, and the Crimea region
“I heard you seized a good part of the market share Huawei was forced to cede. It would be a damn shame if something were to happen to you too…”
Trying to render "grey" market as something bad is a trick of brands.
Anything illegal is automatically black market, as that is the definition of black market.
But as a manufacturer, we have to get regulatory compliance for our products from the countries we sell to.
Yes, this is a Big and Expensive deal.
Of course, a grey marketer can physically ship our products from one regulatory regime to another without our permission.
So a countries regulatory authority finds our product for sale in their country and it doesn't comply with the regulations.... what recourse do they have?
The most common one is confiscation from the sellers.
But if the problem is sufficiently widespread, they may choose to put pressure on the manufacturer.... do something about this or we will block the sale of your goods in our country.
It just seems weird to me; have we heard reports that other brands (even US brands) of Android phones have been soft-bricking themselves if brought to disallowed countries?
Even state-owned companies like ZTE were hit seriously after sanction. They admit they only did the violation because they underestimated the enforcement.
Companies get so careful is because themselves could be sacrificed as political bargains.
It may depend on model and location where you buy it.
Lei Jun is now quickly relocating Xiaomi to India. Xiaomi phones you can buy in most of the world now are made, and sold by Xiaomi India, and have no link to Xiaomi Communications (China) whatsoever.
"No link whatsoever" is quite likely not accurate, after all they are licensing the brand, the technology and probably the firmware from the parent entity.
Easy to debunk. The 2020 annual report (the latest available financial report I can find) clearly says
> As we continue to expand our overseas business, revenue from overseas markets amounted to RMB122.4 billion in 2020, representing a year-over-year increase of 34.1% and accounting for 49.8% of our total revenue.
https://i01.appmifile.com/webfile/globalweb/company/ir/annou...
49.8% is not “way more” than 50.2%. Overseas revenue does appear to be growing faster than domestic revenue (the overall revenue grew 19.4% YoY which means domestic revenue grew by 7.7%) so at this rate it could overtake soon, but even then way more is a stretch. I also somehow doubt the low-end business in India is higher margin than their flagship business in China. Hard to imagine earning much profit when you have to compete against $50 or something Jio phones.