this post was submitted on 04 May 2026
264 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

84502 readers
3583 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
264
Where to buy a non-Apple, non-Google smartphone (www.theregister.com)
submitted 6 days ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 73 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Anyone want to bet Cellular Providers will start blocking or tack on additional network fees for non-Apple/Google phones?

[–] schwim@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago

I have been thinking the same. There's no way govts will go so far as to try to threaten individual websites for allowing visitors using VPNs but leave the carrier as a loophole to this effort.

I expect at some point to have to stop using a carrier because of this.

[–] Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Support for a device on each cellular provider isn't automatic. There is are certification and approval steps that cost them money upfront.

Charging fees is unlikely to recuperate their network engineer costs so from a consumer perspective it'll look like blocking but that's not the reality. It's that the device wouldn't be in their supported device list.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 days ago

Yeah. They don't need to block them, they just won't work, and they won't support them.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Fine. Wifi calling is good enough for me. VoIP never went away

[–] schwim@piefed.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wifi calling still routes the call through your carrier.

Or do you mean using voip services that operate independently of a carrier? The problem with those is that many services block voip numbers due to the rampant abuse by bots and scammers. As an example, I would not be able to sign up for my medical portal or any of my billing sevices as well as others(I tried to register with a voip number to protect the cell number I've used for decades).

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

The patter. WiFi calling is just more commonly understood so I said that.