Sweden, UK may also investigate Apple's '4G' marketing for new iPad - Page 3

I meant 4G on the iPad...

Good case in point, though... you have to be very clear or people will misunderstand.

Do a quick check where the LTE standard was first implemented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution). The first country to have a working LTE network was actually Sweden.

Agreed. The iPad WiFi + 4G is not at all false advertising. This is ridiculous. The iPhone 3G didn't run on T-Mobile's 3G network, or even Verizon's or any other CDMA network across the world, yet for some reason no one sued Apple for that!? Now all of a sudden when Apple says 4G it MUST work on ALL 4G networks all over the world!? 4G is not a singular technology. Just as with 3G there are different incompatible technologies involved.

Just seems to me that someone is just stirring up the next anti-Apple scandal. Sure there ARE going to be some people that actually want and need "4G" and will buy solely on that feature, but I seriously doubt most people care.

The only people who have anything to argue are those that went into an Apple store and were told by an Apple employee, that the new iPad will work on your carrier's 4G network at 4G speeds when in fact it doesn't, it may fall to 3G speeds.

I agree if it was sold as '4G', however in this specific case Apple sells it as '4G LTE'. Which is too specific to be misinterpreted.

No, I think they should call it the iPad Wifi + 700/2100 LTE US and Canada 4G + UK/OZ/AUS/DEN 3G edition - maybe less confusing?

The problem is that the countries (including Portugal where I live) do have 4G connectivity, just that they use different frequencies to those used in North America. It's not "gullible" if a customer who lives in a country which has proper 4G networks expects that a device marketed as 4G should be able to use those networks at 4G speeds.

They should just name it iPad Wi-Fi + 3G/LTE-USA because it will never be capable of LTE in other countries if the frequencies are not compatible.

In the USA the term 4G was just a transition marketing word but now it doesn't have the same panache since we have LTE. Anyone with the slightest interest in technology, in the US, would not be buying a 4G anything unless it was LTE.

Deceptive advertising is illegal in many countries.

So then what would be your answer to the Swedes who do have 4G LTE service, but not on any iPad 4G. Might many of them expect it to work unless it's plainly specified otherwise? Or even the Aussies who also have 4G LTE on Telstra?

What's different about this to the iPhone 4S showing "AT&T 4G" when connected to an HSPA+ cell? And that doesn't seem to have created the same amount of controversy.

Of course, but the law has no teeth (at least in North America), and hasn't had for about 40 years or so.

I know in Canada at least, when the rules were codified in the 70's most of what we now take as "normal" was considered illegal. The laws haven't changed but no one enforces them and the few times it's pushed forward by a (necessarily wealthy) third party, the petitioner basically fails almost 100% of the time.

In any case my point was more philosophical. Advertising is based on deception. The whole point of it is to misdirect or fool the consumer into thinking something is A when it's really B. All adverts are this way in that their purpose is to manage perceptions, not to state true facts about a product.

I don't think this is true at all.

AFAIK, the LTE standard as originally defined has not been implemented anywhere on the planet so far. It requires everything to be IP based for starters.

TeliaSonera's 4G LTE network is a complete implementation of the LTE standard only failing falling short on the max throughput which is around 80 Mb/s instead of the 300 Mb/s which the standard describes.

IP based have GSM been since it introduced GPRS (2G)...

We are not talking about North America. Especially in Europe, but in many other countries too, there aren't the corporate lobby groups and law are written to protect consumers first.


There is a fine line between implying something and stating it as fact. You can imply but you cannot deceive. A beer commercial may feature attractive women and imply you will get lucky if you drink this brand of beer. But they are not allowed to state as fact that you will score with that cute blonde.

Has Apple crossed this line? I don't know but it is certainly on the edge.

If it doesn't support 4G in a country then they shouldn't effing well advertise it as 4G in that country. HOW HARD IS THAT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND.

Why doesn't Apple simply do what HTC, Samsung, etc... do and put country specific radios in each device? It does suck to know that you're buying a device that doesn't work to it's full potential in your country...

They should put that quote at the of the page in enormous bold letters. That way nobody outside the US/Canada would waste their money buying the WiFi+4G version.

I'd guess this is where the problem really lies. ITU-T bent into the demands of the US operators marketing teams and in that caused a lot of confusion by changing an already quite well known term's definition.

In many parts of the world 4G has been equated with LTE for a long time. It's quite recent (and heavily US-led) to call HSPA+ networks 4G. In Europe for eample 4G has been used much more (dare I say almost exclusively in the past years) in LTE marketing and hardly at all in HSPA+ marketing.

So if you go to such a market, which already has LTE (which in many consumer's view is 4G) and market your device as 4G, but it doesn't do LTE in your country even though it does have LTE, that is confusing. Naturally for the visitors of this site, it's not an issue, but for a vast consumer population it is.

The information about LTE working only in a few networks in US and Canada is on the site yes, but it's in small print, which many, many people do not read.

Technically Apple is correct, but that's not what the case is about.

It's not an apple only problem, it's an industry-wide marketing problem, which may lead to other similar suits with other vendors as well in similar cases.

Regs, Jarkko

For profit. Suck it up and buy.

I feel Apple should have been more clear about this in places where there is incompatible 4G. In the UK it's quite clear there is no 4G (although the fact that future 4G won't work with the 4G iPad is a bit of a sore spot) so no need for us to look into it. But Sweden and Australia certainly have a case.

Don't think it's worth suing over or refunding -people are overreacting here. All Apple need to do is change the advertising in these countries.

LTE networks are full IP. That's how it's been specified and implemented. I can name quite a few LTE networks, where everything is transported on IP. Won't say all, because you'll likely find a few exotic exceptions, but most of the LTE networks are fully standards compliant.

I can also name quite a few 3G (WCDMA) networks, which are completely IP-based in all their interfaces (except radio of course - which transports IP data on top of it).

Regs, Jarkko

I think you need to be more specific, people are likely to be confused about what you're talking about

90Mbps if you count the upload and download speeds together.

But just to illustrate the point of why the Aussies and the Europeans are being a bit silly about this, is that:
1) The ipad with the cellular radio does have a LTE radio.
2) The ITU defines 4G as 100Mbps downstream
3) Australia defines 4G by their government as LTE

So Apple is correct, the iPad is a 4G device, by Australia's definition. Apple even puts warnings on their websites and the devices that say that it does not connect to Australian 4G networks. That's Australia's problem for picking incompatible frequencies, and their carriers problem for deploying LTE on bands that the only chip Qualcomm makes doesn't support. Just like T-mobile's problem for deploying HSPA+ and not LTE on AWS frequencies in the US, and other carriers for using CDMA2000 (like Sprint)

The governments are responsible for this mess. Not Apple.

That's a ridiculous statement. The WiFi/4G iPad will still work just fine in other countries - just not with LTE. So if you want to use the iPad away from WiFi hotspots, you need the 4G model.

And since 3G is faster in many countries than in the US, you won't even be giving up much in the way of speed.


I suspect that they will eventually do so at some point. That doesn't change the facts of the case, though.


It still has an LTE radio whether you can use it or not. That's like not allowing Subaru to advertise their cars as having AWD simply because you only want 2WD. It's there if your carrier can take advantage of it. Whether you can use it in your country is between you and your carrier.

Furthermore, Apple's advertising says "UP TO 4G LTE". What part of "up to" don't you understand?


That's silly - it has an LTE radio in it and there's nothing wrong with advertising it as such. Furthermore, even in countries without LTE, it can still operate at 4G speeds if they have HSPA+.


The whiners would still be complaining. "It says 4G ready, but it will never work in my country".

Point 1: Correct
Point 2: Incorrect
Point 3: Don't know


Picking incompatible frequencies is LTE's whole problem, but it is the US, where the frequencies allocated to operators are differing from most of the world (1.7/2.1, 0.7. 1.9 GHz in the US).

If you look at this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LTE_networks, you'll notice that MOST of the world's networks use 2.6GHz or 1.8GHz 0.8GHz and 0.9GHz.

Overall the spread is wider than it was in WCDMA which is bad for the consumers as it will take time to get true worldwide working devices. You'll need something like octa-band devices, when the greates at the moment is penta-band

Regs, Jarkko

You just don't get it do you.

HSPA+ is NOT considered to be or advertised as 4G in the UK.

Why? Because the government are planning to auction the 4G spectrum next year so it would be MISLEADING.

Even when we do get 4G the iPad STILL WONT WORK on 4G coz Apple in their wisdom chose not support any of the 4G bands outside the US and Canada.

It's very clear to anyone who doesn't have their head stuck up Apple's backside that Apple have made a mistake and should have stuck with "WiFi + 3G" for their advertising everywhere outside the US/Canada were the bloody thing actually works.

My prediction: The ASA will make Apple change their wording in the UK within the next few days/weeks.

1) It's your prediction. It may or may not come to pass. We'll see.

2) Even if it comes to pass, it's not such a big deal for Apple to tweak its message. It does seem to be based on the governments' premise that the consumer is a bit stupid, and that's condescending. However, as its user base expands to Windows-like numbers, this is an issue that Apple will have to get used to and learn to live with.

3) Despite the fact that a company is philosophically right (which Apple is, in this instance), sometimes, it has to bend to the unfortunate exigencies of media and public policy FUD. Witness, for instance, the untruths about Foxconn, or the lame attempts by the US government to go after Apple over its privacy policies, book pricing and so forth. That's the nature of the beast.

Apple iPad WiFi+Not 4G

Impressive speeds!

I don't think anyone is disputing that Apple is technically correct but for a company that definitely knows what it is doing in terms of communicating with its customer base and marketing in general, and is also a company that is all about making the technology part of its products as invisible and user friendly as possible, hiding behind technical specs or 'the fine print', is weak. I am pretty certain that everybody at Apple knows damn well that people by and large are confused about 4g. So if you if you claim your product is '4g', it better be '4g' (whatever that is, wherever), period. Its not complicated.

But I like your conclusion and full hardly concur - Its the Government!

Apple iPad Wifi + ≥3G.

+1 and funny....

Oh sure... but ask Mr./Ms. Anybody and the vast majority will not know the difference... all they see is the 4G... which leads to misinterpretation.

Most of this shit is a foreign language to most people, so when they see, "the new iPad with Wi-Fi + 4G connects to fast data networks around the world."... most of them will take that at face value (re: 4G connects to fast data networks around the world.)

Who should be educating them at that point is up for debate but Apple could help in the matter by making the disclaimer more obvious, imho.

Blame it on the carriers as they were the ones who started this whole mess called "4G" when the ITU doesn't has already mentioned what can be declared "4G".

Steve Job gone and now Apple is run by a bunch of idiots. First stupid iPad name ( how they gonna call next iPad? New new iPad? Double new iPad?) and then worldwide 4G advertising campaign for a device with 4G support only in North America

So, when do the class action suits start in all of these countries for claiming that LTE is 4G when only LTE Advanced (which has not been implemented anywhere) meets the proposed 4G standard from the ITU-R? I figure you could sue all the carriers, equipment manufacturers, and maybe even the Telco governing bodies in every one of these countries.

Interesting thing is that the reason that LTE in N.A. is in the 700 band is because the Digital TV conversion has been completed and those frequencies were auctioned off. Other countries have NOT adopted this spectrum because they are still supporting analog TV broadcasts.

Consumer protection laws in some countries don't allow the use of overly small print to restrict the consumers rights/expectations below the overall message shown in the big print.

Yep, because that stuff is there to help a buyer make an informed choice,

Is the human race really degenerating into a pack of illiterate idiots who have to be spoon fed everything at the behest of nanny-state governments?

If so the 'Information age' is a lie.

Oh please lord, everybody read this.

It is not condescending to the consumer to protect them as suggested elsewhere. Putting protections in place does not imply that the average consumer is an idiot. If we spent all day reading the fine print no one would be buying anything.

I know there are some people on here who have done so, but what sane person has the time to read or understand the apple eula, for instance.

Perhaps if government put ANY disclaimers of any size on their election posters, they would work on governing the country and dealing with real issues as opposed to looking for publicity by chasing things like this.

I understand the concept of consumer protection, but Apple has agreed to refund any dissatisfied customers their complete purchase price. It sounds to me that consumers in these countries want to have their iPads AND get paid for owning them because they can't be bothered to do any research before dropping a large bundle of cash on an expensive luxury item.

No email yet from Apple Australia! I'm going to call mah Prime Minizter... Nah, just joking.

Depends. In Australia it might be the tail wagging the dog, the ACCC has become quite aggressive in light of new laws. A recent barrage was regarding limited warranties of only 1 year, and they've definitely been firing various warning shots in the past few months on a range of things. FWIW the Australian media generally did not talk about "4G ripoff" until the ACCC brought it up, and even then the story is about the consumer watchdog, and not about consumers complaining. Also FWIW part of this is because telco salespeople are not as scummy as the UK or Asia, from my experience. Part of it could also be because only Telstra has started large scale 4G LTE rollouts, not Optus nor the even-further-behind Vodafone.


Spoonfed Facebook and brain-cell-reducing Interwebz. Remember when we were kids and watching TV would rot our brain? Now I can go and yell at kids on the Internet whose IQs decrease with every hour spent online. In other words, every generation is either getting smarter or dumber. It's a glass half-empty/full kinda thing.


It is generally frowned upon in Australia and despite arguments about it being a nanny state, there are at least some structures in place and it has and will stand the country in good stead for the next 50 years as everything becomes "Asianised". I know it's the ol' slippery-slope argument, but outside of the developed world, it's sheer chaos. I like waking up in the morning and knowing my government is not out to rape me, at least not as much as in Asia... and that my government would at least be a little concerned if I died in the street because I ran out of money.


It might be something Steve could have done in the past, we don't know. But certainly I think Apple could have done better with the naming.


The thing is that most countries would not allow AT&T to blatantly call 3G 4G, despite ITU or whatever. 4G is 4G, 3G is 3G. In other words, 4G is not 3G, even though we don't really know what 4G and 3G is. The point is that 4G is not what 3G currently is. The distinction can be fine, but it's also quite obvious. Telcos and countries are clear on this. Apple took a leap... of faith, perhaps.


Apple iPad WiFi + ≥2G ... Lest people complain that iPad works on 2G/Edge when it wasn't advertised as such... "Apple didn't say it works on 2G! I'm upset because I have been subject to rubbish speeds when I would have preferred no connection at all! Give me mah refund!"


Should Apple be sued? No. Should Apple adjust accordingly in light of country regulations? Definitely. Also in light of Apple facing a lot of scrutiny over AppleCare.



To me, in Australia it has been following a similar trend but over the past decade there has been various measures put in place to prevent things from spiralling out of control. For example, most insurance can be marketed fairly liberally but the PDS (Product Disclosure Statement) has to be pretty clear. In Australia as well, compared to the US, there tends to be more emphasis on some sort of mediation with various government or non-government body(s) before legal action is taken, it reduces the burden on the court system. Can it be improved? Probably. But it's somewhat different still, the courts are not always expected to be the final arbiter. That said, from recently returning here, I notice that Australia is at a crossroads of sorts, between more economic liberalisation (socially things are rather liberal) and old-school semi(?)-protectionism.