Flood ATT Twitter for Bootloader unlock?

---

Flood ATT and Moto's twitters for a bootloader unlock. ATT seems to be pretty responsive to theirs. Everyone get on twitter now and spam the **** out of it until we get some responses. It'll be a shame to have the atrix a year from now and still waiting for gingerbread.

United we Stand.

Originally Posted by riotburn

Flood ATT and Moto's twitters for a bootloader unlock. ATT seems to be pretty responsive to theirs. Everyone get on twitter now and spam the **** out of it until we get some responses. It'll be a shame to have the atrix a year from now and still waiting for gingerbread.

United we Stand.

ATT isn't going to be the one to target. Be frustrated with Motorola.

Still, a Twitter campaign probably won't change much. Look at the Milestone, Droid X. Motorola's already gotten hell from their consumers on those devices. But, that didn't stop them from encrypting this one.

lets see how badly it's locked first, why cry to them if it can be unlocked fairly quickly..
and moto did make statements about being better with the updates, I say give them a chance to do better.

2.3 should be released for the phone by Motorola at some point wont need to wait for custom roms to get that, however thats only if you dont want to wait for the "official" release

All bootloaders are locked. The problem with motorola is that they sign/encrypt theirs. The odds of bruteforcing their bootloader without some sort of leak is highly unlikely.

Yea but if we, by the small chance, get ATT to agree, then its even better ammunition against Moto.

I believe in the dev forum they said the bootloader is signed. Is there a difference between signed and encrypted?

I would really love to get cyanogenmod on this.

Originally Posted by kennethpenn

ATT isn't going to be the one to target. Be frustrated with Motorola.

I'm not so sure about that. I have a fair suspicion that Motorola is somehow contractually obligated to AT&T to NOT unlock the bootloader. Just a hunch, but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes. Granted, I'm probably wrong, but can anyone show evidence to the contrary?