Apple proposes refunds for Australian customers unhappy with '4G' iPad [u] - Page 3

Nah, what's really going on is a cultural/geopolitical issue.
While in the states we are conditioned to read fine print and scrutinize advertising claims, that does not apply to other countries and the burden of not implying false claims is put on the manufacturer.

So basically it's like this: you can not make any implicit claims about your product, or it will be considered misleading, even if you explicitly explain the capabilities in fine print.

There may not be a law there that defines 4G strictly as LTE, however it is a commonly held belief. In that sense by the laws there, Apple's ad campaign could be called misleading. I know for anyone from the states this may look like a nanny state, but it's different in other countries.

I worked for a big international outfit in the past and I can tell you cultural divides can be huge!

Bull shit. Go back and re-read the vast amount of media and comments from Americans regarding the iPhone 3G to help you recall how baby like you mob were. It was pathetic and almost without exception y'all blamed apple. Heck there were major tech media writers sprouting that apple was responsible since they invented 3G. It was absurd.

I don't get LTE where I am now either, but the bars say 4G! When I'm in new York they say LTE.

I do miss Sydney though! Really good times there!

The ACC needs to pull its head in... Anyone who thought 4G would work in Australia, isn't smart enough to turn on an iPad, let alone know what 4G stands for. Sounds like sour grapes from rival manufactures. Come on ACC... much bigger issues at hand.

The Trade Practices Act ("TPA") is no longer a powerful piece of legislation. It no longer has any power, as it is no longer in force.

It's been superseded by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 ("CCA"), which came into effect on 1 January 2011. That said, the CCA incorporates virtually everything that was in the TPA. A lot of it has just been restructured. There are some significant additions, though, but none of those are relevant to the current discussion AFAIK.

The relevant section is section 18.

Not sure where the hostility comes from and who "y'all" is?
Are you having a bad day?

That's the point of the legislation. If the product doesn't do what you said it would do, you will be held to account. You can't bury provisos in fine print and expect to get away with it. Basically, what you're saying is that companies should be allowed to bullshit to you. I don't subscribe to that point of view.

Aussie Aussie Aussie Oi Oi Oi ... In other news Huawei is banned or something from contracts involving nationwide 100mbps fibre being rolled out now (National Broadband Network).

Yep I agree, a load of the wise asses are hoping they get a massive discount and never expected to have to give up their iPads. .. and that's why this is a great response by Apple. Don't want it fine, return it and go buy an Etch A Sketch, err I mean Android tablet. But no discounts ... Love it.

Thanks for that response. I just found this in the Wikipedia article on Next G ... "Telstra opted to use the 850 MHz band for Next G in preference to the more common 2100 MHz band, since it requires fewer base stations to provide coverage, providing a lower capital cost." I suppose one can sympathise with Telstra for choosing the 850 MHz band over the 2100 MHz band in such a large country, but had they chosen the 2100 MHz band, this particular problem with the new iPad wouldn't have existed.

I still think this points to the need for all telcos and major mobile device manufacturers to get together and agree on a small subset of bands that can be covered by all devices. Otherwise there will always be this confusion about what devices will work on which networks.

Another way of getting around this problem would be to move the radio transmitter and receiver logic from the device onto the SIM card so that the device becomes network agnostic and the network operator is responsible for ensuring that any device can work on their network. But that would probably create a different set of technical problems.

I'm not familiar with the Australian networks. Did the iPad 2 work on all networks? The original iPad?

NexG right now only means 3G at 850mhz, whereby 850mhz is a common 3G band. Even the iPhone 3G supported it. Telstra's LTE is 1800mhz and devices on Telstra are supposed to use LTE 1800mhz and fall back to 3G 850mhz.

Not sure how 2100mhz is an issue?

I think the concern here is the inability of the industry to truly standardise on what 4G is supposed to be. It's like one hard drive manufacturer saying "Oh, it's 400GB when things are looking good, 3GB when it's not", with another hard drive manufacturer saying you need a custom TD-USB-18200mhz cable for their hard drive.

It's insane!

Yes and yes. Because the 3G used was pretty much as per global standards... otherwise known as "AT&T" in the states. Remember that during the iPhone's lifetime they (Apple) were trying to catch up with the rest of the world in terms of global 3G standards.

I probably sound like a smartass here but my view is that, finally, with the might of Apple the iPad "3" has actually catapulted US users ahead of some other countries (though there's Android LTE devices all around the world, etc... we're talking here about Apple and AT&T).

3G was launched in Australia at least 10 years ago*, for example a big push here was circa 2003-2004 by "3" (Hutchinson Telecom). I remember because I signed on, eager to enjoy the beauty of 3G, only to be let down by perhaps one of the worst phones I had ever owned ~ a Motorola something something.

*I'm sure someone knows the history better than I do

Thanks. In the US, I remember the original iPad only working on the AT&T network and I don't recall any confusion. The confusion may have been present, I just don't remember.

Rubbish, Australian ISP's probably invented shaping, we've had it here for years on our 'unlimited' plans.

I wonder when the first holidaying Australian to the US will sue Apple for not warning them about the expense of a 4G network on Telstra's 2c a kb roaming rate.

Maybe they could sue the ACCC.

Im using Telstra next G, its actually very good, the speed im getting is great, kills normal 3G & kills every other carrier we have in australia (we call it 3.5G :P, only weird thing ive noticed, i cant seem to use my new ipad as a wifi hotspot, i thought that was one of the new updates/features with the new ipad :S

I think most people wonder why it can't be simple like you mention. Former Sprint execs have mentioned that Qualcomm, licensing for LTE and so on was not attractive. One even says Qualcomm is double-dipping with LTE, Qualcomm not being a stranger to such controversy, e.g.: http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news...le+Dipping.htm

Part of the push for WiMax was/is because of less patent and royalty encumbrance, though for some reason there appears, IMO, to be less compatibility in the transition between 3G and WiMax vs 3G and LTE ~ maybe because of Qualcomm?

...and don't forget the fried-out combie.

One of the funnest songs. Ever.

Greed, as always.

Cheers. As I recall, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPad and iPad2 generally did not have any confusion. Because 3G was 3G for the most part, no two ways about it.

The fucking problem is with the fucking advertising.

That's not even close to being true.

Let's say you bought an AT&T 3G phone - and then traveled to somewhere that they didn't have 3G coverage. That doesn't make it stop being a 3G phone - and no one in their right mind would blame the phone manufacturer.

Similarly, millions of people bought 3G phones and then went overseas and found that they didn't work. Does that mean that the manufacturer lied when they said that it was a 3G phone?

You're wandering far off base with that answer. It was a 3G device where it was purchased and travel elsewhere with any device has always been the traveler's problem to deal with. The issue here is that the iPad 4g isn't 4G (based on local understanding of what 4G is) in huge majority of countries it's sold in. Even those with 4G LTE service in their country are out of luck unless that country is one of only two, the US or Canada.

You're absolutely right. Looks like I'm a little out of date.

People who mistakenly for whatever reason bought the item expecting a functionality it does not have, have always had the option to return it, for ANY reason and move on.

So if they have, they should. But how many are sold versus the WiFi only ones in any case?

What if the ads said "$1000 cash rebate on all iPads Worldwide!*






*Check locally for details."



Would a refund of the purchase price excuse that?

This whole issue is asinine...

Just look at the iPhone 3G. It didn't work on Verizon's 3G network. It didn't work on Sprint's 3G network. In fact, there were many 3G networks ALL OVER THE WORLD it did not run on. Yet, this was NEVER an issue then. Why not? Were consumers a lot smarter 3 years ago? Or did they actually look at the fine print and MAKE SURE the phone was compatible with their carrier's "3G" network?

There's something else going on here and it has NOTHING to do with consumer confusion. It has more to do with Apple becoming so successful that someone is out there dissecting each product and trying to find ANY fault with it. I mean honestly has any single consumer product in the history of the world EVER been under sooooo much scrutiny? It hasn't even been out out a month yet and how many FALSE faults have been claimed?

Well if you ordered the sim card at the same time you pre-ordered the iPad, the sim card took two weeks to arrive, while the smart cover took 2 days, and the iPad arrived on the advertised day, but late at night. So if you were sitting around waiting for the sim card before trying it, yes it would have been 14 days.

That said, anyone that bought the LTE ipad thinking it was going to work in LTE mode in EU or AU is sadly mistaken, and that's not Apple's fault. You can only support so many bands per generation of radio chips, and the immature level of LTE networks that exist right now make it impossible to say "it will" work on the networks not yet rolled out, even if they some how produced a model with the required radio bands.

Put it this way, all of EU and all of AU need to roll out their 700Mhz networks before Apple can release a "world LTE" model of ipad or iphone. Otherwise only one band may be supported, and that band may not be the one your carrier of choice leased a licence for. Right now the HSPA+ support is good enough for world support until more LTE networks are available. The latency of LTE is just barely good enough to maybe play World of Warcraft on, but you'll be at a disadvantage to anyone on a wired line.

The ACCC notified Apple of it's concerns before the iPad 4G ever went on sale to the Australian public. Apple chose not to address the concerns which is why the ACCC felt it had no choice but to take them to court to force the issue.

Offering refunds is a hilarious option. There's no faster way to stop people from complaining than to say "No problem. Take it back.". I've seen that happening online with the silly "warm" conversation. A guy says "My new iPad runs too hot!!!" Fine. Take it back and get an iPad 2 instead. "What?!? Are you nuts?" Exactly. The new iPad isn't perfect. I sure wish it ran a little cooler and was lighter... but wow, what an upgrade! I can't imagine anyone who really uses an iPad returning the new one.

Yes but they are smart enough to know its called the ACCC....At least get your own facts straight before calling others stupid.

Me too!! Apple should've known better. But they had a lot going on during the iPad launch, not just in iPad itself, but all the supporting technologies. In any case, I'm sure Apple will remedy this issue with their Australian customers. And all will be happy again in Apple-ville.

Because the Wikipedia article says .. "Telstra opted to use the 850 MHz band for Next G in preference to the more common 2100 MHz band ...". Now I don't know whether that comment is correct or not. But, if it is, perhaps Telstra need to explain why they chose 1800 MHz rather than 2100 MHz when they probably already knew that Apple would use the 2100 MHz band used by AT&T, and that by choosing 1800 MHz they would not be able to offer 4G LTE support for the run-away best selling tablet device on the planet.

Let just hope that Optus and Vodafone have thought more carefully about their choice of band for 4G LTE or whatever '4G' technology they choose to rollout.

Does everything really have to be a court case? If you're not happy with the product just return it for a refund. Although it is a company's responsibility to advertise their products carefully, shouldn't consumers also know what they are buying? How can Apple users be tech savvy if they don't even know that the new iPad is not compatible with certain networks?

I think that sometimes Apple makes their products so user friendly that even iPad heating is an issue. I guess we always have to find fault in something.

Moving along...

Its very simple really.

We have a 4G LTE network in Australia. Telstra advertises this heavily.

Apple's iPad is marketed as being 4G LTE capable.

Consumers in Australia should rightly expect that the two things that are being marketed to them using the same nomenclature would work together.

At the moment there is a lot of hype surrounding this and the majority of iPad purchasers are aware of these issues. However, in a few months time the hype will have settled down and people buying and iPad won't necessarily be tech savvy, won't be aware of the differences in networks around the world. These are the people that the ACCC is attempting to protect, by making Apple properly advertise the capabilities of the device they are selling in the market they are selling it.

That is not unreasonable. In fact its the law of the land.

Apple offering refunds is a nice gesture, but what the ACCC will want is a clear disclaimer on advertising and marketing materials for the iPad about compatibility. Apple, in doing so would thereafter never have to issue a refund in the basis of 4G compatibility.

Apple is expected to abide by the laws of this country just like any other company wanting to do business here. Anything else is pure arrogance.

Show me one thing for Apple that says it's capable of "4G LTE" in Australia.

I would challenge that. 1800mhz is a prominent and suitable band for 4G LTE. Just because it's not what is supported by the new iPad does not invalidate the band: http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-ne...lte-worldwideq.

At the same time, 850mhz is a suitable choice for 3G. I'm not sure what exactly Wiki is referring to but 2100mhz is not a dominant band from what I can see... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands ... So it's not a band that is even used in the US for "3G" ~ even if Telstra chose this for 3G there would not really be a case for facilitating 4G. Again, at the same time, 2100mhz is by no means a standard 4G band. So 2100mhz has never been a no-brainer choice.

Telstra Mobile at least, has sat down and thought this through. They're not perfect, but they appear to have focused on the service first and foremost, rather than what devices would sell well. Because of a history of government ownership at varying degrees, they have been compelled to at least think a little more about what they are supposed to deliver rather than be let loose purely to the winds of market forces. So I do think they have thought "more carefully" about things, and maybe you're thinking about things in reverse... Because no one knows what Apple is going to release, and Apple can change anything at any time.


I would challenge this as well. The AT&T 3G iPhone did not work ~everywhere~, but it worked in many, many countries. The iPhone 3G and 3GS was extremely widespread despite being officially available in very few countries, especially initially. Same for the history of iPad 3G.

The iPad 4G ~doesn't work~ anywhere except the US and Canada, and I wonder what other countries it works in, would be great if someone fills us in. But there is a distinct difference between AT&T 3G and iPad 4G.

what I see is big letters saying 'Designed with next generation wireless technology, the new ipad with Wi-Fi + 4G connects to fast data networks around the world.'

and in small foot notes down the bottom '4G LTE is supported only on AT&T and Verizon networks in the US; and on Bell, Rogers and Telus networks in Canada.'

I personally think that can be confusing, so I used my dad as a test subject! Surprisingly, he mistaken the new ipad to be 4G capable in Australia. I told him the fact and asked why, he said the phrase 'next generation wireless technology' and 'connects to fast data networks around the world' tricked him because he know 3G and Wifi is not that new, so next generation wireless technology around the world must mean 4G around the world.

Then I showed him the footnote, he laughed and said he didn't even notice they were there.

As you mentioned earlier, technically speaking Apple is correct, but it is still somehow misleading (at least to my dad )

the page my dad read: http://www.apple.com/au/ipad/

1) He should know the footnotes are there because they are noted in the text above as you're reading the info.

2) If "next generation" is confusing then why isn't Australia up in arms about the use of NextG by Telestra? Surely if you think HSPA+ and DC-HSDPA is '3G' then you must think NextG is still '3G' yet they claim it's the 'next generation.' Does the fact that it's trademarked allow them to lie and deceive customers the way Apple is apparently doing?

you are right on that one , many of my friends do think NextG is 4G and I agree telstra is being very misleading by using that name