Apple updates Australian store to further clarify 4G abilities of new iPad

2

Comments

  • paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,131member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    See how clean and easy that was? No need to change the definition of 4G or talk about how technically Apple is correct. This is the way it should be done in every market where they sell the new iPad. No pain or effort in clarifying.



    Absolutely. Or words to the same effect depending on territory. It should have been done from the get go. A non brainer.
  • paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,131member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post


    I will be quite worried if they and any other manufacturer is able to call their next phones "4G" if they won't work on 4G anywhere in the world except the US (not to mention if you go to the US (or travel internationally anywhere) you have to disable data anyway to avoid $10,000 data fees.)



    The ACCC is quite correct that any phone that says "4G" must work on Australian 4G, not be clarified in smaller print as "this doesn't work on current Australian 4G networks". They've been pushing quite hard generally for any important 'fine print' to be the same size as the prominent slightly-misleading (but true) headlines.



    So in Apple's case, they would need to say in equally big writing



    "Wi-Fi + 4G (not 4G compatible)"



    It would have been just the same if the "iPhone 3G" didn't work on 3G networks, just 2G. But it did work on 3G, so no problem

    The "iPhone 4" was nice marketing.... make the "4" connection without actually saying "4G".



    I am sure Apple would be able to phrase it a little better. I am surprised Apple even mentioned 4g in any marketing outside North America. It was pretty obvious somebody would cry foul.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    You can call it whatever you want, as long as you're not misleading your customers. Beating about the bush by using ambiguous definitions and hiding essential information in footnotes is what's not ok.



    The information is now up front; the text is unambiguous. It contains the simple "not compatible" that was missing before from the Australian page (and still is from the UK page).



    Right below the giant buttons for the iPad WiFi + 4G options it says:
    Quote:

    The iPad with Wi-Fi + 4G model can roam worldwide on fast GSM/UMTS networks, including HSPA, HSPA+, and DC-HSDPA. When you travel internationally, you can use a micro-SIM card from a local carrier. You can also connect to the 4G LTE networks of AT&T in the U.S. and Bell, Rogers, and Telus in Canada.



    You call that hiding? It also lists a second set of info at the bottom of the page.



    Then we have under Wireless and Mobile:
    Quote:

    UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA (850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz); GSM/EDGE (850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz); 4G LTE (700, 2100MHz);



    You call that hiding? ? It also lists a second set of info at the bottom of the page.



    Then we have:
    Quote:

    Really really fast is your only option.

    The new iPad supports fast mobile data networks around the world, including HSPA, HSPA+ and DC-HSDPA.2 So you can browse the web, stream content or download a film at incredibly fast speeds: up to 21.1 Mbps with HSPA+ and up to 42 Mbps with DC-HSDPA.



    Is there anything ambiguous or confusing about that? ? It also lists a second set of info at the bottom of the page.



    Who in their right mind could have read any of that and thought "Surely it must support LTE in my country despite no evidence to suggest it does? No one... in their right mind.



    So we either have Apple not doing enough because they still state 4G, a bunch of pathetic crybabies looking for a rich tit to suckle, or we have a bunch of hypocrites.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    They never advertised 4G LTE for other countries, clearly marked on every page that 4G LTE only worked in the US and Canada. The problem was that it said 4G... and it still does.



    I'm not sure that there is any issue with what was said, but instead, the issue was the manner in which the information was communicated.



    It is much more clearly communicated in the present form. And there is more information in the current version, information which was not clearly set forth in the previous version.



    Apple was good and wise to change it in the manner that they did.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,069member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    See how clean and easy that was? No need to change the definition of 4G or talk about how technically Apple is correct. This is the way it should be done in every market where they sell the new iPad. No pain or effort in clarifying.



    They had up a disclaimer about where LTE did work right on said page. It's not their fault that the carriers didn't train their employees correctly or that buyers lack proper reading comprehension to get that 'only works with X and Y' means if you are on Z it doesn't work.



    As for the returns thing, that's standard policy for the first 14 days anyway. all they might be doing is extending it a little so if someone comes in on day 20 it's fine. But they generally do that anyway on a case by case basis as long as it isn't crazy excessive like trying to return it six months later.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,069member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    No it didn't Solip. I mentioned that more than once the past few days. There was no mention that 4G wasn't available to Aussie buyers when they ordered their iPad directly from Apple's order page. There is now.



    It's listed as "up to 4g" and they clearly said that LTE only works in the US and Canada. They had it on the info pages, they had it again on the ordering page (right under the buttons to select your model). You might not have bothered to look but it was there. Just like it is there on other stores like the UK.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,069member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Except that it still says WiFi + 4G and there many people saying that you can't call it 4G unless it works with Australia's 4G LTE network.



    it's a model name. Not a promise of service. By that logic they shouldn't have called the iPad 2 Wifi +3g in the US since you would only get EDGE speeds on T-Mobile and any of a dozen regional carriers that rented service from T-Mobile.



    the 'new' iPad has the equipment for 4g/LTE. That's why the model is named that. Apple was very clear that they weren't promising you could get that service everywhere. Well clear if you could and bothered to read at above a 3rd grade level
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,835member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    It's listed as "up to 4g" and they clearly said that LTE only works in the US and Canada. They had it on the info pages, they had it again on the ordering page (right under the buttons to select your model)



    The statement on the order page never once said 4G wasn't available in any country outside of North America, even in a footnote. Instead it said it was available in North America when traveling with no claim it was the only place.



    Why all the efforts to somehow show that Apple had already done what it could to avoid confusion when the changes they've now made make it obviously clearer and unambiguous
  • drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    ...

    1. None of the pages you cite is the oder page

    2. The important info is in footnotes, instead of upfront

    3. A long list of technical abbreviations is equivalent hiding from the average consumer. all the information provided is for what the device CAN do, not what it CAN'T (which was important)

    4. Stating that it works with American providers does NOT necessarily mean that it DOESN'T with local ones. Buyers may well consider this some extra feature for travellers and disregard it

    5. The UK order page is particularly egregious, stating that "4G coverage is not available in all areas and varies by carrier." The natural assumption of the UK buyer is likely to be "4G coverage is not available in all UK areas and varies by carrier.", while what is meant applies worlwide.

    Each of the above points ALONE is sufficient evidence that the previous text was misleading. Taken together, I see no point in continuing the discussion. Apple didn't either, hence the change.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,835member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post
    1. None of the pages you cite is the oder page

    2. The important info is in footnotes, instead of upfront

    3. A long list of technical abbreviations is equivalent hiding from the average consumer. all the information provided is for what the device CAN do, not what it CAN'T (which was important)

    4. Stating that it works with American providers does NOT necessarily mean that it DOESN'T with local ones. Buyers may well consider this some extra feature for travellers and disregard it

    5. The UK order page is particularly egregious, stating that "4G coverage is not available in all areas and varies by carrier." The natural assumption of the UK buyer is likely to be "4G coverage is not available in all UK areas and varies by carrier.", while what is meant applies worlwide.

    Each of the above points ALONE is sufficient evidence that the previous text was misleading. Taken together, I see no point in continuing the discussion. Apple didn't either, hence the change.



    He knows all that. IMO he has a different agenda in the works.
  • gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,344member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    the changes they've now made make it obviously clearer and unambiguous



    It's unambiguous if you read it, and I'm glad it's on the first line under the heading. Unfortunately a large proportion of people don't read much beyond headlines



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    Well that's the name of the product. If people get confused by that despite the clear text "It is not compatible...", then it's their own fault.



    Is it the name? Or is it a description?

    Either way, I'd consider it odd if I bought an "iPad White" and it was black, even if there was information under the "iPad White" heading that said "not available in White".



    If the iPad was compatible with 4G in Europe but not the US, and in the US it was labelled "Wi-Fi + 4G", and then in the line under it said "not compatible with US 4G networks", would that be acceptable?
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post


    It's unambiguous if you read it, and I'm glad it's on the first line under the heading. Unfortunately a large proportion of people don't read much beyond headlines









    Either way, I'd consider it odd if I bought an "iPad White" and it was black, even if there was information under the "iPad White" heading that said "not available in White".







    If the iPad killed your firstborn child, that would be OK if it said so in a footnote somewhere. Oh, and if you could get a refund. And the lawyers would go crazy with their class action suits.



    /s
  • hill60hill60 Posts: 6,960member
    In related news the ACCC have proposed a new Australian National Anthem



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    They never advertised 4G LTE for other countries, clearly marked on every page that 4G LTE only worked in the US and Canada. The problem was that it said 4G... and it still does.



    So what happens if an Australian travels to the US and runs up a huge bill roaming onto a 4G network?



    It's no longer clear, thanks to the ACCC.
  • wakefinancewakefinance Posts: 855member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    The statement on the order page never once said 4G wasn't available in any country outside of North America, even in a footnote. Instead it said it was available in North America when traveling with no claim it was the only place.



    Why all the efforts to somehow show that Apple had already done what it could to avoid confusion when the changes they've now made make it obviously clearer and unambiguous



    This is exactly the right point. It's fallacious logic to take a list of positive statements (iPad works on 4g here) and assume that everything not included in that list is a negative (iPad works on 4g nowhere else). That would be equivalent to seeing an advertisement for a value pack (the huge box) of cereal and assuming that the regular size is no longer sold.
  • onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Here is the Order



    Quote:



    No: (P)VID271/2012

    Federal Court of Australia

    District Registry: Victoria

    Division: General



    AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION & CONSUMER COMMISSION

    Applicant



    APPLE PTY LIMITED ACN 002 510 054 and another named in the schedule

    Respondent





    ORDER



    JUDGE: Justice Bromberg

    DATE OF ORDER: 28 March 2012

    WHERE MADE: Melbourne



    UNDERTAKING

    Upon the First respondent giving the following undertaking:

    1.\tThe First Respondent undertakes to the Court, whether by itself, its servants or agents, on a without admissions basis, in connection with the supply or offering to supply or promoting the supply of the ?iPad with WIFI + 4G?, to:
    (a)\tuntil the hearing of this proceeding, or further order, include the following statement:

    ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMax networks?

    prominently near references to ?4G? in promotional materials which:
    (i)\tare displayed in the First Respondent?s retail stores in Australia;

    (ii)\tare displayed on the website located at www.apple.com/au/; and

    (iii)\tare displayed on the First Respondent?s Australian on-line store located at http://store.apple.com/au/

    as soon as is reasonably practicable, but in any event, no later than 5pm on Thursday, 5 April 2012;
    (b)\tuntil the hearing of this proceeding, or further order, provide Australian resellers with signage which it directs to be displayed prominently at points of sale which includes the statement:
    ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMax networks?

    as soon as is reasonably practicable, but in any event, no later than 5pm on Thursday, 5 April 2012; and

    (c)\tcontact by email any persons for whom the First Respondent has an email address and who have purchased the iPad with WIFI + 4G in Australia between 16 March 2012 and 28 March 2012 (including pre-orders made prior to 16 March 2012), such email to include statements to the effect that:
    (i)\t?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMax networks?; and

    (ii)\tSuch persons are entitled to return the product and request a refund within a time frame specified in the email,

    as soon as is reasonably practicable, but in any event, no later than 5pm on Thursday 5 April 2012.
    THE COURT ORDERS THAT:



    1.\tThe Applicant?s interlocutory application dated 28 March 2012 be dismissed.

    2.\tThe costs of the interlocutory application be reserved.

    3.\tThe proceeding be fixed for a speedy trial (on an estimate of two days), to commence on 2 May 2012, on the question of liability only.

    4.\tThe Applicant file and serve a Statement of Claim on or before 3 April 2012.

    5.\tThe First Respondent file and serve a Defence on or before 12 April 2012.

    6.\tThe Applicant file and serve its affidavits for the trial on or before 19 April 2012.

    7.\tThe First Respondent file and serve its affidavits for the trial on or before 26 April 2012.

    8.\tThe Applicant file and serve any affidavits in reply on or before 30 April 2012.

    9.\tThe proceeding be referred to a mediation to be conducted on or before 18 April 2012.

    10.\tThe directions hearing of the matter be adjourned to 9.30 am on 16 April 2012.

    11.\tThe parties have liberty to apply on 24 hours? written notice.



    Date that entry is stamped: 30 March 2012



    Deputy District Registrar



    Schedule

    No: (P)VID271/2012

    Federal Court of Australia

    District Registry: Victoria

    Division: General

    Second RespondenttAPPLE INC.



  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,835member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    Here is the Order




    I assumed Apple made the changes on their own. I didn't realize they had already been ordered by a court.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    He knows all that. IMO he has a different agenda in the works.



    To be clear, if I check your posting history I won't find a single post by you claiming that you any name something 4G in Austrailia if it doesn't work on their LTE networks? This isn't a load question as I don't know if you stated that but was stated over and over again over the last couple days on these forums. Again, the name still contains 4G so based in those complaints it's still illegal and customers will still confused because "to Australians 4G means LTE."



    Again, I take issue with Apple making it more clear ( I think it could still be clarified) but I do take issue with the hypocrisy and what is looking like lies about what you can name 4G is Australia.
  • gatorguygatorguy Posts: 14,835member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    To be clear, if I check your posting history I won't find a single post by you claiming that you any name something 4G in Austrailia if it doesn't work on their LTE networks?



    I don't believe so sir. My issues have always been with Apple's lack of clarity, and in my opinion misleading statements.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Again, I take issue with Apple making it more clear ( I think it could still be clarified) but I do take issue with the hypocrisy and what is looking like lies about what you can name 4G is Australia.



    Why do you care what the Australians consider 4G as long as they understand it? Aren't different names for similar foods, animals or activities some of the things that define different people, cultures or countries? That's part of dealing with a worldwide consumer market. they certainly can't do business with China in the same way they do Canada. But you already know this.



    IMO Apple was wrong in their marketing, and now (with a little nudge from the ACCC) they've made a big move towards clarity. I don't think the Australians will be the last to push them in the right direction either.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Why do you care what the Australians consider 4G as long as they understand it? Aren't different names for similar foods, animals or activities some of the things that define different people, cultures or countries?



    Colloquial uses are fine, but you can't take some technical and deem it not lawful because it's not colloquial that crosses a line. Americans use the term cell phones yet they aren't on cell networks. It's not accurate but it's common and accepted yet there are no laws saying you can't call it a mobile. There are also no laws saying you need to qualify that a cordless phone isn't capable of connecting to a MNO simply because it describes itself a cordless. Again, all this info has been on Apple's site from day one and even today it says WiFi + 4G so nothing has been gained. The idiots will still be confused and those in the know will still roll their eyes at that stupidity of all these complaints.
  • gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,344member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    even today it says WiFi + 4G so nothing has been gained. The idiots will still be confused and those in the know will still roll their eyes at that stupidity of all these complaints.



    I'm neither confused nor rolling my eyes. I like that Apple's principles have been understanding what people want and need, even when people SAY they want and need something else. People get fooled by marketing jargon all the time, people think that a device with 100 features MUST be better than a device with 50 features.



    Apple understands what's actually important (mostly), and produces things that people will use effectively.



    Now in terms of "Wifi + 4G", it really won't make any difference to people that the iPad isn't 4G. It's maximum speed is 42Mbps on Telstra 3G, with 6-18 Mbps being commonly reported. Our WiMax network (that is disappearing as it's rolling towards TDD-LTE) has historically been called "4G" too, but is slower than Telstra's latest 3G.



    But the 4G term is very prominent in newspapers and marketing right now, being linked to the new networks here (in Australia) and never associated with DC-HSPA like AT&T is doing. I think Apple should use the terms commonly understood by consumers. And in fact they are not saying that DC-HSPA is 4G, they are saying the device IS 4G, just not Australian 4G. We're in Australia, so that's misleading.
Sign In or Register to comment.