Apple rebrands 4G LTE iPad as 'iPad Wi-Fi + Cellular'

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 158
    hungoverhungover Posts: 602member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    Somewhat true, but I think the point is that Apple is yet again being singled out here for an error they went out of their way not to commit.  Other companies market 4G LTE products in these countries using the same sort of language and no one has ever taken them to court over it.  Other companies have even called what Apple was calling 3G last year "4G" and sold the products in these countries.  


     


    Apple waited until they not only had 4G speeds but also used technology commonly referred to as 4G before even claiming "4G" as a moniker.  They've been way nicer and fairer overall than any of the other companies, yet they are the one's pilloried in the press.  Now that they've walked it back a bit we can probably expect class action lawsuits hoping to cash in on Apple's "admission" that they did something wrong.  


     


    It's just tiresome having to see Apple singled out like this time after time.  It's stupid, and I agree with with Tallest Skil on this one. 



    I don't recall seeing any other maker marketing a product as 4g in the UK. Do you have any evidence?


     


    yes apple are being singled out by the ASA but that is because they have singularly broken the law.

  • Reply 102 of 158

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    I'd suggest that you find some friends with IQs over 60.

    Since Apple was factually correct, it doesn't matter if uneducated people jump to the wrong conclusions. Advertising does that all the time.


     


    What a tool. Re-read your post, seriously. Then re-read it again, then wise up.

  • Reply 103 of 158
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    COP OUT.


     


    What's with these countries? This isn't Apple's problem. It's an international problem that every country needs to come together and fix.


     


    Define what 4G is. Period. Make it illegal to misrepresent that. Problem solved.





    I politely disagree with you, sir. It is Apple's problem and it is Apple's responsibility. If I buy a plane ticket to Brest (France), I definitely don't want to land in Brest (Belarus), on the grounds that the airline system made a small mistake, but it doesn't matter, it's Brest anyway. It seems to me that if Apple is not aware/capable of manufacturing/not willing to manufacture iPads that function in 4G elsewhere than in the US, it should advertise it as "iPad 4G-US" or not advertise 4G at all.


     


    Right now, it seems either sloppy (Apple, unaware that 4G doesn't work outside of the US borders in the same way as it works inside those borders?), it seems arrogant (who cares about the-rest-of-the-world, we're f***g America, we _are_ the world!), or it seems dishonest (who cares if it doesn't really work outside of the USA, we can always claim our not-American clients can just use their 4G iPads in the USA if they come on a trip and be done with it, them stupid money-spenders!).


     


    Anyway, I believe Apple made the right decision in Australia when they offered to buyers to bring their iPad back, and I guess even Apple can make mistakes.

  • Reply 104 of 158
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post


     


    If you refuse to accept the point that the advertising was misleading and that misleading advertising is wrong, then there's simply nothing more I can do to explain it to you. You have clearly closed your mind to the possibility that Apple might be at fault.


     


    Misleading advertising is wrong. That's why Western societies have watchdog bodies which pull companies up on it. It's necessary to protect the consumer, who has much less bargaining power than a company like Apple does. All I can say is that you need to start looking at this from the perspective of the consumer, rather than the perspective of defending Apple to the death.


     


    [edit] Here's a better analogy. A gallon in the UK is about 1.2 times the size of a gallon in the US. What if I sold a car in the US and said that it did 40 miles to the gallon, but omitted to mention that I was talking about UK gallons? The American consumer would (rightly) assume I was measuring in US gallons, and would hence buy a car which was 20% less efficient than they thought it was. That is misleading advertising. That is broadly similar to what Apple was doing (except the Apple example is worse, because the iPad doesn't work at all on some 4G networks).



    Excellent example. The only question is, did Apple lie on purpose, or is Apple unaware that US gallons aren't UK gallons? I guess Android fanboys will go for Apple lying and Apple fanboys will keep pretending that US gallons are UK gallons and uneducated people should create their own measuring unit (anyway, use litres like everyone :p ). In the meantime, I hope (and tend to believe) it is a mistake from Apple.


     


    After all, if Ariane 5 can explode, or the American Space Shuttle can explode, it does prove than even gigantic projects can fail spectacularly due to small assumptions (Ariane exploding was "someone will remove that comment line before the launch"... bad assumption, and Challenger died to a joint, frozen, which should have been checked, if I remember well). Maybe someone made the assumption that "marketing will know that this iPad only has 4G in the USA" and no one got aware of that before the iPad went on sale. If the only issue with such a complicated piece of hardware is a marketing f$$$-up, things aren't that dire, are they?


     


    And contrary to Challenger, nobody died, so get a glass of Merlot and enjoy, chill...

  • Reply 105 of 158
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member

    I politely disagree with you, sir. It is Apple's problem and it is Apple's responsibility. If I buy a plane ticket to Brest (France), I definitely don't want to land in Brest (Belarus), on the grounds that the airline system made a small mistake, but it doesn't matter, it's Brest anyway. It seems to me that if Apple is not aware/capable of manufacturing/not willing to manufacture iPads that function in 4G elsewhere than in the US, it should advertise it as "iPad 4G-US" or not advertise 4G at all.

    Right now, it seems either sloppy (Apple, unaware that 4G doesn't work outside of the US borders in the same way as it works inside those borders?), it seems arrogant (who cares about the-rest-of-the-world, we're f***g America, we _are_ the world!), or it seems dishonest (who cares if it doesn't really work outside of the USA, we can always claim our not-American clients can just use their 4G iPads in the USA if they come on a trip and be done with it, them stupid money-spenders!).

    Anyway, I believe Apple made the right decision in Australia when they offered to buyers to bring their iPad back, and I guess even Apple can make mistakes.

    Funny how the Apple haters manage to come up with the stupidest analogies.

    So landing a plane in the wrong country is equivalent to factually advertising a tablet correctly - but uneducated consumers reach the wrong conclusion? Maybe you need to come up with a REAL analogy, not a ridiculous comparison.

    What a tool. Re-read your post, seriously. Then re-read it again, then wise up.

    Is that supposed to be a rebuttal? How about a rational argument as to what I said that was wrong?

    hungover wrote: »
    I don't recall seeing any other maker marketing a product as 4g in the UK. Do you have any evidence?

    yes apple are being singled out by the ASA but that is because they have singularly broken the law.

    OK. So all you have to do is tell us exactly what law Apple has broken. Cite the specific section of the law that was broken and your evidence.

    euphonious wrote: »
    If you refuse to accept the point that the advertising was misleading and that misleading advertising is wrong, then there's simply nothing more I can do to explain it to you. You have clearly closed your mind to the possibility that Apple might be at fault.

    Misleading advertising is wrong. That's why Western societies have watchdog bodies which pull companies up on it. It's necessary to protect the consumer, who has much less bargaining power than a company like Apple does. All I can say is that you need to start looking at this from the perspective of the consumer, rather than the perspective of defending Apple to the death.

    Sorry, but if no one has explained to you that advertising, by its very nature, tries to make things look more attractive than they are, then you're either a 4 year old or hopelessly deluding yourself. Did you back that kid who sued because he didn't get laid after using a certain after shave, too?

    If you can point to anything Apple said that was factually wrong, then you have a point. Otherwise, you're whining over nothing.
    euphonious wrote: »
    [edit] Here's a better analogy. A gallon in the UK is about 1.2 times the size of a gallon in the US. What if I sold a car in the US and said that it did 40 miles to the gallon, but omitted to mention that I was talking about UK gallons? The American consumer would (rightly) assume I was measuring in US gallons, and would hence buy a car which was 20% less efficient than they thought it was. That is misleading advertising. That is broadly similar to what Apple was doing (except the Apple example is worse, because the iPad doesn't work at all on some 4G networks).

    Yet another stupid analogy from an Apple hater.
  • Reply 106 of 158
    hungoverhungover Posts: 602member


    I import products from the USA to resell in the EU.


     


    I have to re-label some of the products, either because the name is deemed misleading or because the product description/claims go beyond the legally accepted levels of implication.


     


    Whilst I would rather not have to shell out the extra money, I am mindfull of the fact that I am not forced to import the products. By and large I try to adhere to the law. If I make a mistake then the Powers That Be will ask me to make the requisite changes, granting me a period of grace. In the main they are not interested in punitive measures, they are however oblidged to uphold the laws that exist to protect consumers.


     


    The onus was on Apple to ensure that they were compliant. They messed up. They should have said sorry and moved on. I really don't see what the argument is about.


     


    Most firms tweak their product to suit the nation state. Apple obviously didn't want to do this, the economic case for not doing so is compelling but if it were that important then they should have just stuck to allowing customers to purchase through grey channels.

  • Reply 107 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post

    It seems to me that if Apple is not aware/capable of manufacturing/not willing to manufacture iPads that function in 4G elsewhere than in the US…


     


    The chips didn't exist to serve everywhere at once. I don't know if they do yet


     


    Quote:


    …or it seems dishonest (who cares if it doesn't really work outside of the USA, we can always claim our not-American clients can just use their 4G iPads in the USA if they come on a trip and be done with it, them stupid money-spenders!).



     


    I don't see how that's dishonest. I realize this is all speculation on the past, but it would have worked out well to call it the "iPad Wi-Fi+4G" on the US and Canadian sites and the "iPad Wi-Fi+3G" on all other sites… but with a same size, same font, slightly grayer appendix next to the name "(4G US-only)".




    That way they get to advertise LTE support, but the disclaimer is blatant enough to not have had this happen.




    I dunno, Apple handled this rather poorly, but the people saying it "isn't 4G" are as deluded as anyone saying Apple did no wrong here. I don't know that there IS the latter, but I'm just saying. image

  • Reply 108 of 158
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member



    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    Yet another stupid analogy from an Apple hater.


     


    Care to explain to me what is 'stupid' about it, other than the fact that it contradicts your point of view? Because in my experience, people who resort to attacking the person generally do so because they're losing the argument.


     


    I'm not an Apple hater at all. I own an iPhone and an MBP and I love them both. I think Apple makes some extraordinary products.


     


    All I'm doing is holding Apple to the exact same standard that I would hold any other company. If this story was about Samsung or HTC doing exactly the same thing, then I would make the exact same criticisms. You need to stop seeing things in such a black-and-white way, as if everybody has to either 'love' or 'hate' Apple. There is a very fertile middle ground. I think that Apple fully deserves the success it's experienced, but I also think that Apple - like every other company - has flaws, and this incident demonstrates one of them.


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    Did you back that kid who sued because he didn't get laid after using a certain after shave, too?


     


     


    No, because that is what's known legally as a 'mere puff'. It's not legally enforceable because no reasonable person would seriously believe that using an aftershave could get you girls. The 4G issue is different, because it could mislead a consumer who was displaying a sufficient level of scrutiny into thinking that the product did something which it doesn't.

  • Reply 109 of 158
    hungoverhungover Posts: 602member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    The chips didn't exist to serve everywhere at once. I don't know if they do yet


     


     


     



    Far point, but they could have released versions that would work in the countries that they were being sold in, or they could have saved a few pennies in the states that have no LTE and used cheaper non-LTE chips, or sold them without suggesting that they had features that are not relevant to those areas.


     


    Caveat emptor is a pretty poor way for any firm to conduct themselves.

  • Reply 110 of 158
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    euphonious wrote: »
    Care to explain to me what is 'stupid' about it, other than the fact that it contradicts your point of view? Because in my experience, people who resort to attacking the person generally do so because they're losing the argument.

    No, it was simply a stupid analogy.

    In the iPad situation, Apple is advertising the device as 4G. It will receive LTE and HSPA+ signals if you have the right frequency. But even if your country doesn't have the right frequency, the device still receives LTE and HSPA+ signals if you go to a country that does. That is, the DEVICE is fully capable even if your network is not. Furthermore, Apple was very clear in their launch exactly which countries were supported with LTE> And even if you continue to use it in a country which is not supported, it will still work, albeit somewhat slower. And since the advertising says "UP TO 4G", they were entirely accurate even if you don't accept the world standard ITU definition.

    Your stupid analogy was to claim that it was equivalent to an airline sending you to an entirely different country. I'm still at a loss as to how you think that's even remotely comparable.

    If you wanted to use an airline analogy, the closest analogy would be if Apple advertised a plane capable of speeds up to 550 mph. You calculate that it should take 7 hours to get to Paris. However, Canada and the UK implement speed limits for the airplanes and won't let them fly over 400 mph - so your flight to Paris takes 9 hours instead of 7. That's nothing like getting you to the wrong country - and also not Apple's fault. The plane is capable of 550 mph even if local rules won't allow it to achieve that speed.
  • Reply 111 of 158
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    Your stupid analogy was to claim that it was equivalent to an airline sending you to an entirely different country. I'm still at a loss as to how you think that's even remotely comparable.


     


    You're reading the wrong post... I never mentioned an airline!


     


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    If you wanted to use an airline analogy, the closest analogy would be if Apple advertised a plane capable of speeds up to 550 mph. You calculate that it should take 7 hours to get to Paris. However, Canada and the UK implement speed limits for the airplanes and won't let them fly over 400 mph - so your flight to Paris takes 9 hours instead of 7. That's nothing like getting you to the wrong country - and also not Apple's fault. The plane is capable of 550 mph even if local rules won't allow it to achieve that speed.


     


    You keep making this point, and it keeps being flawed for the same reason. '550 mph', unlike '4G', is a term which is only capable of one possible meaning and therefore incapable of being misleading.

  • Reply 112 of 158
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    hungover wrote: »
    Far point, but they could have released versions that would work in the countries that they were being sold in, or they could have saved a few pennies in the states that have no LTE and used cheaper non-LTE chips, or sold them without suggesting that they had features that are not relevant to those areas.

    Caveat emptor is a pretty poor way for any firm to conduct themselves.

    Your 'solution' is silly.

    Using non-LTE chips probably wouldn't save any money. Rewriting all the procedures, stocking extra parts, extra QC, and problems created from the switch would exceed the savings.

    Furthermore, why should they do that when some of the countries WILL get LTE of the appropriate frequencies before the iPad is discarded? Apple's way, they'll get a free upgrade if that happens. Your way, they'd be out of luck. Plus, some people actually travel to other countries. The way it works now, if you buy an LTE iPad and travel to the US or Canada (or, in the future, some other countries), it will work at LTE speeds. Your 'solution' would have eliminated that possibility.
  • Reply 113 of 158
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post







    Your stupid analogy was to claim that it was equivalent to an airline sending you to an entirely different country. I'm still at a loss as to how you think that's even remotely comparable.


    I think Euphonious is talking about the gallon analogy, the one that you called stupid in post #106 when you also called him hater. It is a much better analogy than the ones you're trying to peddle; however, the situation is simple enough to not need any analogies.


     


    I also wonder if the iPad - Cellular can really be used to roam on US networks. Wouldn't that require a special 4G SIM card -- one that UK customers likely won't get?

  • Reply 114 of 158
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    I also wonder if the iPad - Cellular can really be used to roam on US networks. Wouldn't that require a special 4G SIM card -- one that UK customers likely won't get?



    iPad comes with a USA 4G compatible SIM which is also backwardly compatible with global 3G protocols.


     


    I still think Apple is big enough to build several different iPads and make it compatible with whatever the fastest GSM or CDMA based frequencies/protocols that are found in each of the major regions in which they want to sell the device. The packaging and branding should address normal network technologies of the locale.


     


    They made a special iPhone for a single carrier in China, I think they should consider expanding that policy worldwide.


     


    Otherwise the only sensible name would have to look like iPad Wi-Fi + World 3G/USA 4G which is just ugly.

  • Reply 115 of 158
    drdoppiodrdoppio Posts: 1,132member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    iPad comes with a USA 4G compatible SIM which is also backwardly compatible with global 3G protocols.


     


    I still think Apple is big enough to build several different iPads and make it compatible with whatever the fastest GSM or CDMA based frequencies/protocols that are found in each of the major regions in which they want to sell the device. The packaging and branding should address normal network technologies of the locale.


     


    They made a special iPhone for a single carrier in China, I think they should consider expanding that policy worldwide.


     


    Otherwise the only sensible name would have to look like iPad Wi-Fi + World 3G/USA 4G which is just ugly.



    Thanks for the info; I fully agree that the most consumer-friendly strategy would have been to build one or more European/Australian models, and have made the same point myself on other threads on this topic. Ambiguous marketing was apparently better for Apple's bottom line.

  • Reply 116 of 158
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DrDoppio View Post


    Thanks for the info; I fully agree that the most consumer-friendly strategy would have been to build one or more European/Australian models, and have made the same point myself on other threads on this topic. Ambiguous marketing was apparently better for Apple's bottom line.



    I don't think they had any devious intent. They are careful enough to provide the correct power plug for the device in each region. They just need to take that sort of attention to detail to the next level.

  • Reply 117 of 158
    mnemonicmnemonic Posts: 6member


    The iPad 3 is not a 4G device, regardless of whether it can connect to a LTE network or not, simply because LTE is not a 4G technology. It's 3.9G at best.

  • Reply 118 of 158
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    mnemonic wrote: »
    The iPad 3 is not a 4G device, regardless of whether it can connect to a LTE network or not, simply because LTE is not a 4G technology. It's 3.9G at best.

    After waking up from the cryogenic chamber did you stop to take a pee first or did you go to logging to AI to comment on a thread?
  • Reply 119 of 158
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member


    3.9G isn't very catchy for marketing departments, though :P


     


    Technically you may be right, but in common parlance I think we've reached the point where it's quite uncontroversial to say that LTE is 4G.

  • Reply 120 of 158
    mnemonicmnemonic Posts: 6member


    Of course, however there might be a slight issue when the iPad will actually support a true 4G technology. On the other hand, they can then just go on and call it 5G...

Sign In or Register to comment.