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.
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 is very powerful piece of legislation, and applies whether you're talking about consumer electronics or breakfast cereal.
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 It no longer has any power, as it is no longer in force.
It's been superseded by the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 ("CCA"), which came into effect on 1 January 2011.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.
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.
Not sure where the hostility comes from and who "y'all" is?
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.
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).
Unfortunately I think those complaining are most likely just wanting something for free and have no interest in returning their iPads.
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.
You do realise that plans for the infrastructure were laid out well before many mobile LTE devices were in existence?
Telstra doesn't use 700MHz for LTE because this is used for analog TV in Australia, so no carrier is able to adopt it as yet. And there is nothing out of the ordinary in the 1800MHz band they're using for LTE - look around Europe and the Asia Pacific and you'll see it's widely adopted.
Seriously, this is like the "does it or does it not support 3G" issue all over again. I give Apple two years tops before they release a quad- or penta-band LTE iPad that'll make the majority happy.
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.
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.
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.
I'm not familiar with the Australian networks. Did the iPad 2 work on all networks? The original iPad?
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
Yes and yes. Because the 3G used was the 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. 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).
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.
As someone who has witnessed all of AT&T's antics over the years, I can tell you that if they were an Australian carrier, they would have felt the ACCC's wrath time and time again.
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.
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.
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 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.
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?
Every time this comes up, this thought goes through my head once again: I thought the whole point of LTE (long ago) was supposed to be how worldwide-compatible it was gonna be. What went wrong?
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.
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.
There's a big ass sticker on the BOX that clearly states that the iPad does not operate at 4G speeds in Australia. So where the fuck is the problem again?
The fucking problem is with the fucking advertising.
Comments
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.
Hahaha & eat my Vegemite sandwich?
seriously tho, even tho my new iPad isnt running 4g, its pretty damn quick i love it, its in my bed with me
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 Trade Practices Act is very powerful piece of legislation, and applies whether you're talking about consumer electronics or breakfast cereal.
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.
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.
Not sure where the hostility comes from and who "y'all" is?
Are you having a bad day?
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.
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.
Unfortunately I think those complaining are most likely just wanting something for free and have no interest in returning their iPads.
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.
You do realise that plans for the infrastructure were laid out well before many mobile LTE devices were in existence?
Telstra doesn't use 700MHz for LTE because this is used for analog TV in Australia, so no carrier is able to adopt it as yet. And there is nothing out of the ordinary in the 1800MHz band they're using for LTE - look around Europe and the Asia Pacific and you'll see it's widely adopted.
Seriously, this is like the "does it or does it not support 3G" issue all over again. I give Apple two years tops before they release a quad- or penta-band LTE iPad that'll make the majority happy.
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.
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.
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!
I'm not familiar with the Australian networks. Did the iPad 2 work on all networks? The original iPad?
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
Yes and yes. Because the 3G used was the 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. 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).
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.
As someone who has witnessed all of AT&T's antics over the years, I can tell you that if they were an Australian carrier, they would have felt the ACCC's wrath time and time again.
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.
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.
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 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.
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?
Hahaha & eat my Vegemite sandwich?
...and don't forget the fried-out combie.
One of the funnest songs. Ever.
Every time this comes up, this thought goes through my head once again: I thought the whole point of LTE (long ago) was supposed to be how worldwide-compatible it was gonna be. What went wrong?
Greed, as always.
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.
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.
There's a big ass sticker on the BOX that clearly states that the iPad does not operate at 4G speeds in Australia. So where the fuck is the problem again?
The fucking problem is with the fucking advertising.