I have a thought... Like most owners of Titan phones, we have had them about a year maybe less. For me it will be a year sometime in December. Like most, I signed a two-year contract.
My thought is this, that contract (I am sure I can find it laying around somewhere and read it... for the first time) surely states what we are expected to do and what they are expected to do. If we all bought phones that AT&T no longer wants to support due to the OS being replaced (WP 8.xx) then they can replace my phone with a phone that is current in technology. My grounds for this would be, it is obvious that the updates to the OS have been available to other WindowsPhone devices but somehow AT&T has decided to ignore this release for some reason or another. Not sure if AT&T rolled these updates out to other phone but if they didn't, then this argument would be even stronger.
If I were to cancel my contract today, AT&T would enforce the penalty or charge back or whatever you want to call it. However, we have phones that are not up to date according to the current release available for the WP7.xx platform. This is flat wrong and may be a pursuable argument.
Thoughts????
It is possible that this argument could be relevant...however, you may have to look at it from another standpoint that would make your argument have flaws. For instance, our devices are not the only devices that are not updated to current technology. -Meaning Android users that are still on Froyo, Gingerbread, ICS...etc could argue the same thing. I just want to point out that Android users have it slightly worse than us at this point, in which updates are "rarely" seen on these type of phones. Updates are pushed out from the OEMs to the carriers, but still the carriers refuse to forward the updates to the phones. I remember reading an article about Android phones and updates on a random tech site just recently. Basically it stated that updates to these types of phones on the US carriers are "very" limited and rare. Oh look I found the article!
http://news.discovery.com/tech/android-ice-cream-sandwich-jelly-bean-updates-121013.html
So with that said, I'm sure that if you tried to cancel your contract with them and enforced your argument you stated here, you will still be entitled to the penalty of canceling the contract. This maybe a different argument but I have seen where carriers have made people still pay the penalty charges even if a person has to cancel the contract due to legal/personal reasons (death, going out of the country, identity theft, etc). If I could give an analogy to contracts on phone carriers, they would be like "student loans." -Both entity's motto suggests "somebody has to pay for something."
Now going back on topic, if by some miracle ATT gave into this argument, I would be overwhelmingly surprised because millions of customers could do the same exact thing you wanted to do. Contracts with carriers are carefully worded to where loopholes like this can't happen.
Anyway, if you happen to try this argument of yours and it works, let me know. I would be right behind you on this! As a tech enthusiast, I am always wanting more -in terms of current technology. I consider my phone to be another piece of technology that I've personalized to enhance my own technology experiences. Most people who own phones, would have another viewpoint -which is basically just a "communication device." Since I've been on ATT ever since they merged with Cingular, I know abandoned updates on phones, such as in our situation, is extremely frustrating. A typical user who only uses the phone for means of communication would probably not even acknowledge that phones "have updates" that enhance the user experience. But then again, that is why I am here on XDA -to better myself with this. Ever since Windows Mobile 5, I've learned that if you want to enhance your experience with these devices this is the place to be. Over the years on this forum, I've learned that getting what you want and need for your phone is easier than it looks.
Anyway, I think this post is long enough. lol. If anybody else wants to chime in and explain some further reasoning of why this argument would not work...then be my guest. Till next time....
