Australian government, Apple can't reach deal on branding of 4G LTE iPad
Apple and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission tried and failed on Monday to mediate a dispute over the naming of the new 4G LTE-capable iPad.
The ACCC believes the branding of the device as "iPad Wi-Fi + 4G" in Australia is misleading to consumers because the new iPad cannot access any 4G LTE networks in Australia. As a result, the commission is trying to have Apple rename the device.
But so far, the company has refused the ACCC's requests, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. Apple and the ACC took part in a mediation on Monday, but the two sides were not able to broker a deal during those discussions.
Because no deal was reached, there will be a hearing with Justice Mordecai Bromberg of the Federal Court in Melbourne. Though the two sides came to terms on other matters, the name of the new 4G-capable iPad remains a sticking point between Apple and the ACCC.
In March, the government watchdog group accused Apple of "misleading" customers into thinking its newest iPad runs at fast 4G LTE speeds in Australia, while LTE connectivity for the device is actually restricted to North America.
"The ACCC alleges that Apple's recent promotion of the 'new iPad with WiFi + 4G' is misleading because it represents to Australian consumers that the product 'iPad with WiFi + 4G' can, with a SIM card, connect to a 4G mobile data network in Australia, when this is not the case," the ACCC said in a statement
Apple quickly complied with the ACCC by updating its online store in Australia with more prominent text informing consumers that the 4G version of the new iPad does not work with LTE networks in Australia. The company also sent out an e-mail to Australian customers offering them a full refund if they are unhappy with their new iPad.
But the device is still advertised in the Australian Apple store as a model featuring "Wi-Fi + 4G." The note accompanying the new iPad on the store states that while it connects to "very fast cellular networks," it is "not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX networks."
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Comments
NA also means "Not Applicable"
how about " Wi-Fi + Australian LTE + NA 4G". where NA = North America...
NA also means "Not Applicable"
Why not just WiFi + Cellular data?
I've always disliked the xG labels, they tend to just be confusing
Personally I think the ACCC are being a bunch of douches on this issue allowing a colloquial marketing term take precedence over an industry defined term but Apple doesn't seem to have much choice in the long run. It seems unlikely Apple will succeed in the long run.
Why not just WiFi + Cellular data?
Uh oh! Get ready for people to "educate" you on how it doesn't connect to 'cells' and how that's only used by ignorant Americans.
I've always disliked the xG labels, they tend to just be confusing
I have an idea that gets rid of these complex and confusing terminology based on technology people don't understand. It's ludicrous to use these terms for marketing.
Oddly, no one batted an eye when Verizon was advertising their CDMA2000 1x as part of the "Nation's largest 3G network" campaign. Technically they are correct but in comparison with AT&T they weren't any farther ahead (and perhaps far behind) in terms of comparable data rates as EDGE is is faster than 1x.
What I'd like to see is a change that represents the maximum theoretical throughput of the highest common technology That means that when I am connected to LTE at 73 Mbps it's being represented as the speed in an easily digestible way and if I'm connected to DC-HSDPA at 84 Mbps or HSPA+ at 160 Mbps I'll know which is actually faster, and not have the latter two say '3G' while the former say '4G'. That does no good to anyone.
Uh oh! Get ready for people to "educate" you on how it doesn't connect to 'cells' and how that's only used by ignorant Americans.
in the Antipodes we call it a mobile or mobile phone, which does sound somewhat more logical than a cell phone... why 'cell phone' ...anyone?? (an ignorant Antipodean)
Id like to know how many iPad returns Apple received. Id be my left arm none or very few. Telstra is the only company offering 4G and I think the ACCC should speak to them about even calling it 4G
Give me a break! Apple has already offered a full refund and clarified the text on their website.
Small minded gov types just need their 15 min of fame to remind themselves that their still relevant. Unfortunately the judge is also employed by the gov, which does not want to lose face so Apple may not get a fair shake.
Apple is being uncool about this. It is clearly misleading and everybody knows it. For all but Norh Americans, 4g should be removed from the marketing.
This is not the marketing anymore. They want THE DEVICE NAME to be changed. They don't like the "iPad WiFi+4G" name.
Oddly, no one batted an eye when Verizon was advertising their CDMA2000 1x as part of the "Nation's largest 3G network" campaign. Technically they are correct but in comparison with AT&T they weren't any farther ahead (and perhaps far behind) in terms of comparable data rates as EDGE is is faster than 1x.
That's wrong.I know it's Monday, but Verizon very bluntly and correctly calls the 1X network 2G. Only EVDO is 3G.
in the Antipodes we call it
From your PoV isn't Antipode referring to those in the Northern Hemisphere? Meanng, I thought it just meant the opposite from your point of view, not a specific classification like the Latin root australis referring to the South or southern.
a mobile or mobile phone, which does sound somewhat more logical than a cell phone... why 'cell phone' ...anyone?? (an ignorant Antipodean)
Some will argue that you can't call it a cell but if you look at the various definitions in use you can easily counter that a tower comprising of multiple antenna arrays from one or more MNO (mobile network operator) is a structural and functional unit of the tower, hence a cell.
It certainly does make the device "mobile" but so does WiFi since that too is wireless. Hell, one could even define something as mobile without any network connectivity features simply by comparing it to something else in its class that is less mobile. For instance, an encyclopedia on your Kindle eReader is more mobile than the print version due to weight and size.
All that is being overly pedantic if we were to make claims about what you can refer to as cellular and mobile as these are generic terms. But so is 3G and 4G which is why I don't see Apple being in moral right to call their device that connects to HSPA+, DC-HSDPA, and LTE as being 4G. If Apple were to say that it can connect to LTE in Australia then it would be a lie.
That said, when it comes to marketing you unfortunately have to deal with how a term in colloquially known and if you don't control the term you will have to bend to it. In this case Australia has fudged their system by allowing the carriers(?) to make an asinine declaration that has become canon and is now backed by the ACCC, which I don't see Apple getting out of.
That's wrong.I know it's Monday, but Verizon very bluntly and correctly calls the 1X network 2G. Only EVDO is 3G.
They do know, and for a few years, but originally they did not.
edit: Just to be clear, aything in the CDMA2000 category was defined as 3G by 3GPP2.
Also, EV0DO REv.0 is as low as 38.4 Kbps which is still considerably lower than EDGE.
4G in Australia is about as pathetic as the ACCC. The coverage is so bad its pointless having anyway.
Id like to know how many iPad returns Apple received. Id be my left arm none or very few. Telstra is the only company offering 4G and I think the ACCC should speak to them about even calling it 4G
The LTE that telstra offers is as fast, if not faster than many other networks around the world that are also called '4G'. I mean, even AT&T brands HSDPA+ as 4G! Its about time someone sorted the terminology out....
Try it with out the rope?
This is not the marketing anymore. They want THE DEVICE NAME to be changed. They don't like the "iPad WiFi+4G" name.
The Device name is iPad, no? Is the model name wifi + 4g? If the official device name is, as you say, iPad WiFi+4G, I would assume Apple named it so in order to get around the exact issues that are now cropping up. It just seems arrogant, willful and in my opinion - stupid.
Comparisons generally, but specially with car speeds and such are not valid. You don't buy a car because of its higher speed, but some version or other of 4g is available in a lot of countries and offers increased speed, which for many is a significant feature.
I tend to agree with what Apple does and how it conducts its business but this, to me is beneath them. And really, this is not just a device name - it is all about marketing and perception.
From your PoV isn't Antipode referring to those in the Northern Hemisphere? Meanng, I thought it just meant the opposite from your point of view, not a specific classification like the Latin root australis referring to the South or southern.
antipodes plural
Noun
1. Australia and New Zealand (used by inhabitants of the northern hemisphere).
2. The direct opposite of something.
However (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipodes):
In geography, the antipodes (play /ænˈtɪpədiːz/; from Greek: ἀντίποδες,[1] from anti- "opposed" and pous "foot") of any place on Earth is the point on the Earth's surface which is diametrically opposite to it. Two points that are antipodal (/ænˈtɪpədəl/) to one another are connected by a straight line running through the centre of the Earth.
This latter, technical definition is particularly important for circumnavigation records, in order to compare them -- i.e., simply circling Antarctica doesn't count as a circumnavigation, you need to cross 2 antipodes, as well as return to the point you left from for a valid record.
This is not the marketing anymore. They want THE DEVICE NAME to be changed. They don't like the "iPad WiFi+4G" name.
How about "iPad 4G everywhere that uses standard international definitions of '4G', but not in Australia where they make up their own definitions"?
They do know, and for a few years, but originally they did not.
Source? I don't believe that ever occurred, and the Largest 3G campaign you mentioned started in 09 isn't that old and the entire network was already 3G by that point. AT&T took issue with the campaign for how VZ portrayed THEIR network as misleading and tried to sue and dropped it; admitting VZ indeed was larger just not always the fastest...but that had nothing to do with 1X.