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

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 158
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    mnemonic wrote: »
    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...

    What part of "ITU which sets the international standard says that the iPad already supports 4G" do you not understand?
  • Reply 122 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    What part of "ITU which sets the international standard says that the iPad already supports 4G" do you not understand?


     


    Surprisingly, only "which", "the" (the first one), and "already".


     


    A~nd no wink emoticon…

  • Reply 123 of 158
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,020member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    What part of "ITU which sets the international standard says that the iPad already supports 4G" do you not understand?


    There you go, banging on again like this is important in the context of the argument. Keep hitting that drum, brother.

  • Reply 124 of 158
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    djsherly wrote: »
    There you go, banging on again like this is important in the context of the argument. Keep hitting that drum, brother.

    In post #121, mnemonic said "Of course, however there might be a slight issue when the iPad will actually support a true 4G technology. "

    According to the ITU which sets the standard, it already uses a true 4G technology. So why in the world would you think it's not relevant in the context of the argument?
  • Reply 125 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    Yet another stupid analogy from an Apple hater.


     


     


    No, actually it is highly analogous this the Apple 4G situation.  It is a probably the best analogy I have read on this topic.  Well done Euphonious!


     


    What we have from you is another automated denial from an AppleBot.

  • Reply 126 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Likkie View Post

    No, actually it is highly analogous this the Apple 4G situation.  It is a probably the best analogy I have read on this topic.  Well done Euphonious!


     


    What we have from you is another automated denial from an AppleBot.



     


    Said as an Aussie who doesn't seem to understand the issue here.

  • Reply 127 of 158
    euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Said as an Aussie who doesn't seem to understand the issue here.



     


    Huh? Why on earth is it relevant whether he's Australian or not? :s

  • Reply 128 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post

    Huh? Why on earth is it relevant whether he's Australian or not? :s


     


    That's what this is all about. If he bought it due to the vague advertising, that's a problem and he can easily return it. But it's the advertising that is the problem, not the device. The gallon analogy itself is faulty, but it's certainly close.


     


    We want to keep talking about cars, then we only need one word: gas (well, petrol).


     


    Let's say the car's performance is based on the gas put into it… but gas that is sold in one place is only partially compatible with the car. You can't get race car performance in a race car out of standard unleaded.


     


    "But the problem isn't that the right gas isn't sold, it's that the car doesn't accept it. It's the car's problem."



    It's a problem for both parties, not one. The only problem for the one party comes in the vagueness of the advertising of gasoline acceptance.


     


    Which becomes confusing to try to keep within the metaphor, so you know what I mean.

  • Reply 129 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Said as an Aussie who doesn't seem to understand the issue here.



     


     


    Since this whole ridiculous debacle is about a Marketing problem in Australia, I would have thought being an Aussie would be 50% of the qualification required for a proper understanding of the problem.


     


    You see this problem isn't really about the technology its about the misleading use of the truth in marketing.  Thats against the law in this country as it should be everywhere.

  • Reply 130 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Likkie View Post


    You see this problem isn't really about the technology its about the misleading use of the truth in marketing.  Thats against the law in this country as it should be everywhere.



     


    Right. And when the information about the US and Canada was appended, the issue was resolved. Anyone wronged by confusing advertising need only return the iPad and be done with it.

  • Reply 131 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Right. And when the information about the US and Canada was appended, the issue was resolved. Anyone wronged by confusing advertising need only return the iPad and be done with it.



     


    That's not satisfactory in this country.

  • Reply 132 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Likkie View Post

    That's not satisfactory in this country.


     


    So what's satisfactory?

  • Reply 133 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    So what's satisfactory?



     


    Well, what Apple have done recently (i.e. changing the product name) seems to satisfy what is required, but that is for the ACCC to decide.


     


    This excerpt from an article I read in the Sydney Morning Herald seems to sum it up:


     


     


    Quote:


    The ACCC said in a statement that "any move" by Apple to cease using the '4G' descriptor in marketing "would mitigate against the ACCC's concerns" but would "not deal with any past conduct". It added that the legal action against Apple was "continuing" and going to trial on June 4.


  • Reply 134 of 158
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,020member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post





    In post #121, mnemonic said "Of course, however there might be a slight issue when the iPad will actually support a true 4G technology. "

    According to the ITU which sets the standard, it already uses a true 4G technology. So why in the world would you think it's not relevant in the context of the argument?


    It's been said multiple times in this thread and elsewhere, yet you refuse to acknowledge this: the fact that it is 4G capable is not relevant. I don't think that anyone is disputing that, so you should just let it go.


     


    If it is being sold as a 4g device then it better well be able to do 4g in the market in which it is sold. The definition of 4G varies by market, despite what the ITU says 4G is. You keep parroting ITU ITU ITU like it's some kind of slogan but it's irrelevant from the consumer's point of view. From the consumer's point of view, here in Australia, it does not do 4G. It simply does not. This is in spite of what ITU tells you 4G is. We're talking about consumer law here, not hair splitting on definitions. Why do you not get this?


     


    It is not to the point that is theoretically possible to use 4G if you get on a plane and go to merika. In this country, you are not allowed to hide in fine print what you are asserting. It can be construed as misleading or deceptive conduct and the ACCC can (and did) take action under the Australian Competition and Consumer Law (2010), Shedule 2 from memory. This is a federal act and applies to all corporations in Australia.


     


    The fact that the product itself was called 4G makes it worse. 


     


    THAT is why the ITU definition is irrelevant. I think I've explained it as well as I can over numerous posts. The point is to educate, not pillory, but it's clear you do not want the first, and prefer to engage in the second.

  • Reply 135 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

    If it is being sold as a 4g device then it better well be able to do 4g in the market in which it is sold.



     


    Define 'market'.


     


    Quote:


    In this country, you are not allowed to hide in fine print what you are asserting. It can be construed as misleading or deceptive conduct and the ACCC can (and did) take action under the Australian Competition and Consumer Law (2010), Shedule 2 from memory. This is a federal act and applies to all corporations in Australia.




     


    Then Australia better get to suing Apple for every single other product they sell. I see fine print on every product page. 

  • Reply 136 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Define 'market'.


     



     


    Australia.  Haven't you been following along?? :)

  • Reply 137 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Likkie View Post

    Australia.  Haven't you been following along?? :)


     


    So the entire country, then. So are there complaints that people have to drive all the way out to the bush to shoot off their guns instead of being able to shoot them in Canberra? 

  • Reply 138 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Define 'market'.


     


     


    Then Australia better get to suing Apple for every single other product they sell. I see fine print on every product page. 



     


    Well, if it is discovered that they are hiding something in that fine print, then there may be a court action.

  • Reply 139 of 158
    likkielikkie Posts: 42member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    So the entire country, then. So are there complaints that people have to drive all the way out to the bush to shoot off their guns instead of being able to shoot them in Canberra? 



     


     


    You asked for the market to be defined. 


     


    I don't see what this has to do with guns, which BTW are also illegal here.  You can't just shoot them off, city or country.

  • Reply 140 of 158
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Likkie View Post

    I don't see what this has to do with guns…


     


    Then read my analogy for what it is instead.


     


    Quote:


    …which BTW are also illegal here.





    Better bone up on my modern Australian educational shorts, then. Could have sworn you guys could have guns.

Sign In or Register to comment.