How can you say this? I don't care how 'small' they are - they are either professional or they're not...either they stand by the products they sell and recommend you buy or... they do not? it would seem not and maybe that is why they remain 'small'.
Here's how this goes: Motorola releases the update, which degrades cellular radio performance on Wind's network. A manager or executive in Wind's handset acquisitions department calls up their rep at Motorola and tells them about this. That person promises to bring it to the engineering department. The ticket is prioritized near the bottom, because tickets from carriers like Verizon and AT&T and Vodafone, who generate 100 times more revenue for Motorola, are much more important to them. Wind is extremely lucky if their ticket is seen by an engineer before Motorola drops support for the phone in a year or two.
That sucks, but there isn't really anything they can do about it.
And I certainly would not call this phone compatible once updated...I guess you would have to actually own the phone to understand how bad it is...
The fact that the radio performance is poor doesn't make it not compatible, any more than your wireless router would be considered not compatible with wifi if it just had really weak range.
Ok and so, if this is not CRTC domain, who is supposed to regulate the integrity of cell phone providers, then the onus is on the retailer to furnish a product THAT ACTUALLY WORKS with their bandwidth. I am sure that if Best Buy sold me something that didn't work they would take it back and give me something that did.
said, you can take your business elsewhere. Or you can pursue this with Motorola yourself. If Best Buy sold you something that didn't work, I'm sure they would take it back. But if they sold you something that did work until a manufacturer software update months later made it less effective, I can guarantee you they would do nothing for you.
You say "this MARGINAL loss has pushed it over the line for you". Ha ha! the phone is not a phone MOST of the time - it is not MARGINAL
Think of the connection between your phone and a cellular network like a seam. With Wind's weaker network, that seam was severely frayed. When you switched from your LG to the Moto, it was hanging by a thread - hence the need for "sweet spots". And the marginal drop in performance with the Lollipop update was enough to break that seam entirely. It only takes a 5% drop in performance to make a huge difference for you, but that's still a marginal decline.
But this phone? I am sure Wind knows this phone is useless yet they keep selling it - and they won't take it back - this is where I have a problem. If they expect to be taken seriously and GROW as a company they have to stand by their product or just keep getting flogged in forums like these ...which I am sure steer people clear away from their service. Customer service is customer service - end of story. They have to walk their talk and they do not.
It had been more than three months. No carrier will take back a device after that much time, regardless of the reason. Even the best electronics return policies are only 90 days.
Anyway, you asked who is accountable and the answer is Motorola. Wind didn't produce this update, and while their network is weak, it didn't get any weaker. They didn't do anything here - Motorola did.