Say you buy a phone online, it’s comes in DOA/bricked due to being tampered with in-transit.
Seems better then unknowingly getting a tampered with phone with spyware hooked in, and like my oneplus 6t just gives a generic “bootloader unlocked” that most end-users wouldn’t really understand by comparison.
Idk still seems too destructive to me as well but I can see some possible rationale.
Pixels have a pretty strong warning on boot for unlocked bootloaders and an easily-typed URL with a detailed explanation.
That seems like enough to me from the manufacturer side. Of course I can imagine someone ignoring the warning; people sometimes climb into tiger enclosures with predictable results, but it shouldn’t be on device manufacturers (or zoo management) to prevent all possible negative outcomes.
A design that results in a hard brick on “tampering” is unusually destructive.
Say you buy a phone online, it’s comes in DOA/bricked due to being tampered with in-transit.
Seems better then unknowingly getting a tampered with phone with spyware hooked in, and like my oneplus 6t just gives a generic “bootloader unlocked” that most end-users wouldn’t really understand by comparison.
Idk still seems too destructive to me as well but I can see some possible rationale.
Pixels have a pretty strong warning on boot for unlocked bootloaders and an easily-typed URL with a detailed explanation.
That seems like enough to me from the manufacturer side. Of course I can imagine someone ignoring the warning; people sometimes climb into tiger enclosures with predictable results, but it shouldn’t be on device manufacturers (or zoo management) to prevent all possible negative outcomes.
I don’t disagree at all, this is my most charitable take, definitely just ends up being anti-consumer.