Australian government, Apple can't reach deal on branding of 4G LTE iPad - Page 2

This is an American company trying to force false terminology onto countries where the right terminology exist.

In the UK we don't consider HSPA+ to be 4G, we don't even consider DC-HSPA 3G despite the fact it gets near-same-speeds as LTE.

Some of us don't consider LTE to be 4G, and it isn't 4G. I only consider LTE-Advanced to be true 4G. I know in the UK the ONLY phone I know of that ever mentioned what speeds it could connect to is the iPhone 3G, we don't call phones or tablets here by what connectivity they have, because we know it will just work on whatever network we wish.

as long as it isn't an American product.

I've actually come close a couple of times. For example, Puerto Rico's antipode isn't far from the western part of Australia.

However, I've actually did it once - and I've been to both parts of the antipodes. I've been in Shanghai, Beijing, and Dalian China (and a few other smaller cities). The antipodes for those three are reasonably close to Buenos Aires where I've also been.

http://www.google.com/finance?client=ig&q=NASDAQ:AAPL

Google is down almost identically, in sync with AAPL!!! So I wonder if that is related to Australia "What's In The Name" and US DOJ "eBook-AntiTrustGate"!!! Plus the usual Options and Rumors Speculations, vs TRUE VALUE INVESTORS!!!!

We all can guess, as they do at http://www.techinvestornews.com/Apple

CONGRATULATIONS to those who bought close to the bottom of today's

Range\t582.30 - 610.28
52 week\t310.50 - 644.00

thus far. $50 - 60 Drop Off High Same Old Movie. We'll see it again when AAPL $$ shifts UP another $100, $200 etc!!! Not IF, but WHEN!

Happy Spring to all!!!

Yes! You nailed it - its because its an AMERICAN company

That makes perfect sense¡ The world should abide by only your definitions¡

In the US, we don't consider it 4G, either. AT&T does. This has nothing to do with "America".


I somehow doubt that.


Mhmm…

I did a check of the 4 largest UK carriers and couldn't find any (current) phones that state a generational network speed in the name. This doesn't mean that they didn't in the past, but it's surely leaning heavily in favor of vendors never using that branding in the UK.

Agreed. I too was originally confused but then again I went to the site, read the info and saw that Apple was in fact telling the truth but in this case truth is not the issue. It is perception and Apple has already lost the perception race. People are generally to stupid (not the fine AI subscribers) to bother to read let alone comprehend what something says. They just want to stick the card in and go, go, go... I knew this would come back to bite Apple in the ass and it did. They should change the wording, and move on. Australia has a woody right now for Apple.

We got no returns although we are ready to fulfil Apple's offer.

Need more stock, we ran out two days ago.

No we don't and that's where the problem lies, that and the ACCC seem to think we have the reading ability of preschoolers.

You know every iPad user in Australia and know for a fact that not one was returned by this event?

No, they just don't like companies misleading consumers.

Why not?

Who's to blame if people buy 4G phones from the US via the Internet and they don't work anywhere else?

I blame America.

"Cellular" and "cell phone" are not a part of the Australian vernacular. "Mobile phone" is used.

In what way?

Does the new iPad with mobile connectivity work with 4G LTE? Yes

Does it have the hardware capable of it? Yes

Does it work in limited areas? Yes

Was this advertised? Yes, via a footnote.

Is it false advertising to say it doesn't have 4G LTE? Yes

If you dont know then I'm not going to teach you.

...and WiMax is?

You left out the parts where a new iPad which takes a SIM, purchased in Australia HAS the hardware AND the capability of connecting to 4G LTE networks in a limited geographical area, as was advertised from day one on Apple's website.

Saying it doesn't is a lie.

None of the hundred or so we sold as I said, perhaps the ACCC has a point, people can't comprehend the written word very well any more.

Yawn....perhaps you should work for Apple's marketing department if you think that's ok.

Ahh you sell Apple gear...all makes sense now. Biased much?

Want to buy a Galaxy Tab 10.1, a Note, HTC One X, Galaxy S 2, Nokia Lumia?

You want it I'll sell it to you.

Biased? Not much.

So are you saying that the New iPad with mobile connectivity DOES NOT contain a chip capable of connecting to 4G LTE networks in limited geographical areas?

The only thing is, it does.

I already have a HTC One X but thanks for the offer. Not really interested in going Android for a tablet.

Like I said, if that's the way you look at it then you should work for Apple's marketing department. Your logic is just as flawed as their's.

To have an argument, you must have evidence.

Here's a picture of the 4G chip in the iPad (highlighted in seafoam).



Your argument is defeated.

A lot of people seem to share that sentiment.

With the new iPad out of the way I guess some more will have to make do...

...a man's gotta eat.

I never said it didn't have a 4G chip.

Your argument is defeated.

Huh. I distinctly remember


To which your reply was


It's exactly what you said.

How is that saying it doesn't have a 4G chip?

If that's the way you want to pretend that words work, then you should work for Webster's.

I know how words work but thanks for your comment.

The ACCC argument against Apple is just plain silly, just as the DoJ argument against Apple is silly.

How is the manufacturer of a highly desirable global wireless product supposed to advertise its products when the control of the construction of mobile networks, the allocation of frequency bands to network operators, and the adoption of network protocols is controlled by others? Do they want to suggest that Apple should only produce a product that supports all allocated 2G, 3G, and 4G frequency bands, all existing network operators, and all existing wireless protocols?

Maybe one day that will be possible in a product called the iBrick, but in the meantime perhaps the ACCC should focus its attention on sorting out the allocation of frequency bands and the adoption of wireless protocols in Australia, so that all products like the iPhone and iPad can access networks established by all network operators?

That is actually what the consumers of these current and future products actually require!

I think that they want to suggest that Apple not advertise capabilities which require inter-continental travel to access.

This will all be moot in a few months when Apple starts selling the iPad with support for international LTE frequencies. We're just waiting for an updated cellular chip.

I feel sorry for the international buyers of the US version though. Perhaps Apple will offer an upgrade.

I do think Apple made a big mistake on this one by not including international frequencies from the getgo.

"Months"? No, no. This is the model we have until next year.


Which is exactly why it's not happening… They're not going to pop out a new model "months" after the current one. They have a nice year-long update policy.


Agreed, but if the chips didn't exist, the chips didn't exist.

Fortunately, in most cases, the networks there don't exist, either.

What doesn't exist is the ability to pair more than 2 LTE operating bands for the MDM9600 baseband chip. Apple could have used different operating bands for various markets if they felt that was in their best interests.

I'm sure you've seen me remark on the upcoming issue with the supposed MDM9615 to be used in the next iPhone and the fact that the ability of 5 UMTS operating bands only arrived in 2010. Even if the 6th gen iPhone can take 5 LTE operating bands I don't think it will be enough which may lead to Apple splitting the iPhone models up per country for the first time ever.

Steve's dead but what's stopping Apple from taking command and getting someone to create a chip that CAN do it all? They have the history, the gumption, and they certainly have the money.

Steve (well, whoever actually did it) asked Intel to shrink their Core 2 to fit in a smaller computer. And they did it. And now Intel's taking that line of chips and kicking Apple in the crotch as they photocopy Apple's designs and sell them as though it was their idea.

Unfortunately technology doesn't work that way. You can't just throw money at everything and have it magically come true or we would have seen an iPad WiFi + 4G that had a dozen LTE operating bands this year.

I assume Apple is working with Qualcomm on this but there is a limit to what can feasibly be done. Apple and Qualcomm have already done wonders with the power efficiency of their current world mode chips but there is a limit.


The SFF chip that Apple used was demoed by Intel well before the MBA released. It seems to me that Intel created the SFF chipset and Apple made it popular by having it put into production, not unlike Corning's Gorilla Glass.


PS: I have no idea what your comment about Steve being dead has to do with anything.

As someone living in Australia I'd like to point out that there is only one network claiming to be "4G" and that belongs to Telstra (the formerly government owned company that dominates telecoms in this country). The quote above from here points out that, even though this is the fastest network in this country, it should not be called "4G".

The ACCC is trying to protect consumers from the possibility of, through misunderstanding the labels, buying a product that will fail to meet their expectations. I am not pretending that most consumers understand the true meaning of "4G". Of course they don't understand it - they are consumers not engineers/geeks/marketers or any other category of people who have a vested interest in keeping up with these things. Consumers here in Australia have a network that they now believe to be a "4G" network. If someone such as Apple then advertises a network device as being a "4G" device then it is not unreasonable that consumers would expect the 2 to work together. In the case of the Australian Telstra network and the newest Apple iPad they will not work together. I would have thought Apple would understand this and prefer not to confuse and confound their customers. This iPad is not going to work with any network in Australia as a "4G" device any time soon and so to call it "4G" here is wrong.

To my mind Telstra are wrong to call their network "4G", the ACCC are wrong to allow Telstra to call their network "4G" and Apple are wrong to advertise the iPad as being "4G" in any country but especially in Australia. The world will not see a true 4G network for a good few years and I'm not sure how the marketers will address it's arrival. Perhaps they will talk about "Full 4G" like they talk about "Full HD" for broadcast TV.