Yeah that labelling is under the box, so when you get home & open the shipping package then get to the white box, then if you look under it, it has that sticker there :P
Unfortunately the law doesnt work that way here the advertising doesnt give the warnings, a small disclaimer isnt the issue its false advertising, adds & posters say, 4g.
As soon as the iPad was announced, I checked apple.com/au and saw the big fat disclaimer on the 4G claim, and all subsequent advertising has the same.
It is a 4G product, subject to the availability on your local carrier. Non-issue, and the ACCC is wasting my money pursuing this.
Yeah that labelling is under the box, so when you get home & open the shipping package then get to the white box, then if you look under it, it has that sticker there :P
Huh. Apple sells these inside "shipping packages"? Since when? Or is that an Aussie law, too? Or did you make that up, just now?
Apropos on nothing, I got an email from a guy who wanted to buy a guitar I'm selling online, he wanted me to ship it downunder, apparently because it turns out they are twice as expensive as in the US of A (I declined). I guess I now know why.
Personally, i am not going to buy into this 4GLTE carrier service until they remove the data usage restrictions. If i plan on downloading a couple of 1080p movies in one month, that uses up all your data usage for the month at $50 for 5G? That means in order to rent 2 1080p movies (3G each), that's going to cost over $50 in 4G LTE charges, plus the movie rental price. THAT'S JUST A RIPOFF!!!!
Personally, i am not going to buy into this 4GLTE carrier service until they remove the data usage restrictions. If i plan on downloading a couple of 1080p movies in one month, that uses up all your data usage for the month at $50 for 5G? That means in order to rent 2 1080p movies (3G each), that's going to cost over $50 in 4G LTE charges, plus the movie rental price. THAT'S JUST A RIPOFF!!!!
When you buy the model with cellular connectivity you still get WiFi. That's why it's called WiFi+4G. SO if you plan to download 1080p movies then you should do it over WiFi... just as you would do if you only bought the WiFi-only model.
Except that the box already says that it will only run on 3G speeds.
No, it doesn't. For crying out loud, it was mentioned earlier that this sticker was placed on the box by Telstra and only on launch day stock. There must have been only a few hundred that saw it at most.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldfullerton
And perhaps Telstra needs to explain why they chose the 1800 MHz band rather than 2100 MHz band that has been supported by far the most popular devices in the market place for several years now.
Why? 1800MHz is a perfectly legitimate band that's widely used across the Asia Pacific and Europe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
Whatever.
So Apple broke Australian law. Who cares? There wasn't any malicious intent.
Just give Apple a slap on the wrist, remove any advertising that mentions 4G and offer refunds to customers (I bet no-one takes up this option!)
This whole process has been played out thousands of times. The only reason we hear about it now is because it's Apple.
Exactly. Quote of the day.
To put things in perspective, events like this happen. Daily. To a lot of companies.
Apple is human at the end of the day. People make mistakes, learn from mistakes, and move on. You all should, too.
I knew that they are building a case against apple, based on the 4G issue.
This is all based on Australian law, they have a pretty good case.
the thing is, when apple loses all the will probably have to do is pay a fine & change the box from saying 4G to 3G, & refund some people that are upset.
Its pretty simply, the box says 4G, the iPads 4G isnt compaitble with 4G in autsralia...people are buying it expecting it to work on 4G here, if something cant do a funtion as advertised then they consider that missleading & based on that, ACCC will very likely win the case here, it doesnt really matter, just means they will have to repackage, so eh.
Good. Someone who is directly involved with ACCC.
I would suggest that you take appropriate action.
1. Why aren't you going after all the carriers who claim to offer 4G (or who sell the iPad knowing that it doesn't meet your definition of 4G)?
2. Why don't you get in line with the rest of the world and use the same international definitions as everyone else if your goal is to avoid confusion?
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
Apparently the "rest of the world" uses the same LTE bands and the US and Canada are the only ones that don't use them.
Quote:
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
Wow, ignorance at it's best lol. The "rest of world" doesn't use the same LTE frequencies as the US so it's the US and Canada who are the odd ones out, not Australia.
Looks like this will be sorted in mediation of sorts. See:
The Federal Court has accepted an undertaking from Apple Pty Limited in response to an urgent application filed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) earlier today.
The ACCC has alleged that the promotion of the "iPad with WiFi + 4G" by Apple Pty Limited and Apple Inc is misleading because it represents to Australian consumers that the product "iPad with WiFi + 4G" can, with a SIM card, connect to a 4G mobile data network in Australia, when this is not the case.
Today Apple Pty Ltd provided an undertaking to the Federal Court that until further order or hearing, Apple Pty Limited would as soon as is reasonably practicable and by no later than 5 April 2012:
display a statement that the ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX Networks? in its promotional materials, on its website and online store
distribute signage with the same wording to resellers to be displayed at points of sale
contact by email any persons for whom Apple Pty Limited has an email address and who have purchased the ?iPad with WiFI + 4G? between 16 March and 28 March 2012 (including pre-orders prior to 16 March 2012) including statements to the effect that ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX Networks? and that such persons are entitled to return the product and request a refund within a timeframe specified in the email.
A directions hearing has been scheduled for 16 April 2012 at 9:30am. A mediation has been ordered for 18 April 2012. A hearing on liability has been set down commencing 2 May 2012.
Let's see how many folks in your country want a refund.
Also, in the process of the litigation, it might end up that, according to international definitions, Telstra's network might in fact get redefined s '4G'.
The point is I support the ACCC in pursuing this matter against Apple. Sure, there's definitely elements of theatre here but their premise is legitimate.
What I do suggest though is a very, very bloody simple solution: DC-HSPA+ ~ for all intents and purposes if you're getting up to 20mbps or more with that, that's 4G [insert long debate on ITU even though nobody in real life gives a flying fart about the ITU standards].
So, ACCC please sit down here, Apple, please sit down here, Telstra, sorry buddy, come sit here. ACCC, you agree to chill the f**k out if Apple says 4G "DC-HSPA+", Telstra shows DC-HSPA+ coverage and reasonable expected speeds, and Apple states clearly DC-HSPA+ only for 4G, not LTE or WiMax. Apple, good on you for offering refunds, most people won't give a damn, but good on ya for offering it.
Now we all clear? Good.
1. Apple benefits by still calling it 4G. Nerds will complain to the end of time that it's not "4G" by ITU, ETU, TIS, ASD, ABC, DEF, GHI, whatever.
2. ACCC flexes muscles and gets big evil yank corporation to play by local footy rules
3. Consumers covered by educating them on what 4G as per Apple/ACCC/Telstra is
4. Consumers now learn, oooh, I have DC HSPA+ that gives me 20mbps instead of lousy 1mbps regular 3G.
Sorted. Everyone wins. Now please get out of my office.
The point is I support the ACCC in pursuing this matter against Apple. Sure, there's definitely elements of theatre here but their premise is legitimate.
What I do suggest though is a very, very bloody simple solution: DC-HSPA+ ~ for all intents and purposes if you're getting up to 20mbps or more with that, that's 4G [insert long debate on ITU even though nobody in real life gives a flying fart about the ITU standards].
So, ACCC please sit down here, Apple, please sit down here, Telstra, sorry buddy, come sit here. ACCC, you agree to chill the f**k out if Apple says 4G "DC-HSPA+", Telstra shows DC-HSPA+ coverage and reasonable expected speeds, and Apple states clearly DC-HSPA+ only for 4G, not LTE or WiMax. Apple, good on you for offering refunds, most people won't give a damn, but good on ya for offering it.
Now we all clear? Good.
1. Apple benefits by still calling it 4G. Nerds will complain to the end of time that it's not "4G" by ITU, ETU, TIS, ASD, ABC, DEF, GHI, whatever.
2. ACCC flexes muscles and gets big evil yank corporation to play by local footy rules
3. Consumers covered by educating them on what 4G as per Apple/ACCC/Telstra is
4. Consumers now learn, oooh, I have DC HSPA+ that gives me 20mbps instead of lousy 1mbps regular 3G.
Sorted. Everyone wins. Now please get out of my office.
But it sounds like Apple was prepared to do this all from the start. Sounds to me that the ACCC was simply trying to get Apple to pony up some money as part of a fine and realized they had an unwinnable case, or like you stated in 2., they just wanted to be publicly seen as "doing their job for the Australian consumer". I just wonder if Telstra told the ACCC to shut up ... before it became apparent that their customers will have to buy new hardware once real 4G hits the market.
Apparently the "rest of the world" uses the same LTE bands and the US and Canada are the only ones that don't use them.
Actually, the EU's recommendation is to use bands around the 700 - 800 region ... It's just that countries are refusing or slow to implement because those frequencies are allocated to analog TV signals and their DTV are behind North America.
Actually, the EU's recommendation is to use bands around the 700 - 800 region ... It's just that countries are refusing or slow to implement because those frequencies are allocated to analog TV signals and their DTV are behind North America.
I'm not very well versed in LTE; are those the same bands as used in the US for LTE?
And "EU recommends"? That doesn't sound very much like the EU. Not to get political, but if there's one thing I admire about the EU is that it forces its constituents to enact change quickly and efficiently (even though the changes themselves aren't always things with which I agree).
Maybe that's the German influence, who knows.
Seems to me like they would have not only forced a change to DTV, but they would have also made that bandwidth available for LTE the very next day as part of the same legislation.
But it sounds like Apple was prepared to do this all from the start. Sounds to me that the ACCC was simply trying to get Apple to pony up some money as part of a fine and realized they had an unwinnable case, or like you stated in 2., they just wanted to be publicly seen as "doing their job for the Australian consumer". I just wonder if Telstra told the ACCC to shut up ... before it became apparent that their customers will have to buy new hardware once real 4G hits the market.
I don't think Apple Cupertino/ Apple Australia knew exactly what it was supposed to do following the iPad announcement. Prior to the ACCC sabre-rattling, I don't see anywhere Apple trying to clarify anything about it not being Telstra 4G LTE compatible, nor it being DC-HSPA+ compatible... aside from whatever small disclaimers they may have had. (Small stickers don't cut it in Australia, AFAIK).
I knew it wasn't Telstra LTE compatible because of the keynote, yes, local media did cover it but without much help from Apple.
I found out about DC-HSPA+ only from Whilrpool.net.au forums from user reports. I might have gotten the DC-HSPA+ aka "4G" iPad if I had known about it. To this day there is no mention of it as a "feature" of "high speed wireless data" or what not, other than it being listed in Tech Specs.
There's definitely been a slip up by Apple Australia, taking a bit of Telstra with it.
Of course the ACCC is definitely out to be seen as doing stuff, like I said they've been quite unhappy about 1-year limited warranties with companies ~like~ Apple and Telstra where most gadget warranties are 1-year with Apple and Telstra continuing to sell extended warranties.
As for Telstra, I'm not sure if Telstra strong-armed ACCC in any way, they've been fairly okay (mobile, not fixed-line) the past few years. Yesterday I was 200m up from sea level in a fairly obscure park/reserve 80km from the CBD and I still get solid 850mhz 3G signal, with 2G going to SOS only. Telstra Mobile, at least, is not that bad, so I don't see a big conspiracy on their side. They are probably simply focused with ~their~ LTE because Telstra Mobile alone can guarantee that 90% of the population of the whole continent will get 50+mbps mobile data sustained by 2020, through LTE which will be the last mobile hurrah of this decade, IMHO, before "5G" comes along post-2020 ~ even if "5G" comes before 2020 I doubt it will reach widespread adoption outside of capital cities. Keep in mind that the centre-right half of the Australian government may scuttle the national 100mbps-inital fibre rollout, leaving 4G LTE to pick up the pieces in keeping essential fast Internet services chugging along for the world's most isolated cities.
Perhaps hiding DC-HSPA+ is a scam by Telstra to get people to buy 4G LTE stuff, but then again, as per their coverage maps, they simply say what speeds at what location, and 4G is marketed without much deception. In some ways, I wonder why they even stealth-upgraded DC-HSPA+ without as much as a peep, maybe they were planning it as part of NexG "3G/3.5G", but LTE became too pressing that they simply "abandoned" significant effort into DC-HSPA+.
Just guessing but for Telstra Mobile this is more of a small bump in the road, it's got big tasks ahead of it. Of course iPad 4/5/6 and iPhone 5/6/7 will be good but they know eventually the baseband chips will include their LTE bands, their choices are generally along the lines of Asia Pac LTE common bands.
I would also venture that Apple Australia, in getting ready to mediate with the ACCC, is probably looking at how it can make its case for DC-HSPA+ ~as~ 4G and then just have to deal with "damages" regarding LTE confusion, then after this back-and-forth, will probably update consumer education with what's 3G, what's 3.5/4G DC-HSPA, what's 4G LTE, etc.
To me, Apple and Telstra are the best local entities to enable a decent consumer experience for this 3g --> 4g transition, and at the end of the day, that's probably all the ACCC really wants before it feels it has done enough and can go off to the pub for a beer. Obviously Apple is the whipping boy here, fairly or unfairly, but the ACCC clearly wants this to be some sort of example in everyone sorting their communication out with regards to the 3g --> 4g transition.
Comments
Yeah that labelling is under the box, so when you get home & open the shipping package then get to the white box, then if you look under it, it has that sticker there :P
Unfortunately the law doesnt work that way here
As soon as the iPad was announced, I checked apple.com/au and saw the big fat disclaimer on the 4G claim, and all subsequent advertising has the same.
It is a 4G product, subject to the availability on your local carrier. Non-issue, and the ACCC is wasting my money pursuing this.
As soon as the iPad was announced, I checked apple.com/au and saw the big fat disclaimer on the 4G claim, and all subsequent advertising has the same.
It is a 4G product, subject to the availability on your local carrier. Non-issue, and the ACCC is wasting my money pursuing this.
lol yeah right...big fat disclaimer. You mean in small print at the bottom.
Yeah that labelling is under the box, so when you get home & open the shipping package then get to the white box, then if you look under it, it has that sticker there :P
Huh. Apple sells these inside "shipping packages"? Since when? Or is that an Aussie law, too? Or did you make that up, just now?
Apropos on nothing, I got an email from a guy who wanted to buy a guitar I'm selling online, he wanted me to ship it downunder, apparently because it turns out they are twice as expensive as in the US of A (I declined). I guess I now know why.
Personally, i am not going to buy into this 4GLTE carrier service until they remove the data usage restrictions. If i plan on downloading a couple of 1080p movies in one month, that uses up all your data usage for the month at $50 for 5G? That means in order to rent 2 1080p movies (3G each), that's going to cost over $50 in 4G LTE charges, plus the movie rental price. THAT'S JUST A RIPOFF!!!!
When you buy the model with cellular connectivity you still get WiFi. That's why it's called WiFi+4G. SO if you plan to download 1080p movies then you should do it over WiFi... just as you would do if you only bought the WiFi-only model.
Except that the box already says that it will only run on 3G speeds.
No, it doesn't. For crying out loud, it was mentioned earlier that this sticker was placed on the box by Telstra and only on launch day stock. There must have been only a few hundred that saw it at most.
And perhaps Telstra needs to explain why they chose the 1800 MHz band rather than 2100 MHz band that has been supported by far the most popular devices in the market place for several years now.
Why? 1800MHz is a perfectly legitimate band that's widely used across the Asia Pacific and Europe.
Whatever.
So Apple broke Australian law. Who cares? There wasn't any malicious intent.
Just give Apple a slap on the wrist, remove any advertising that mentions 4G and offer refunds to customers (I bet no-one takes up this option!)
This whole process has been played out thousands of times. The only reason we hear about it now is because it's Apple.
Exactly. Quote of the day.
To put things in perspective, events like this happen. Daily. To a lot of companies.
Apple is human at the end of the day. People make mistakes, learn from mistakes, and move on. You all should, too.
I acutally work for the ACCC.
I knew that they are building a case against apple, based on the 4G issue.
This is all based on Australian law, they have a pretty good case.
the thing is, when apple loses all the will probably have to do is pay a fine & change the box from saying 4G to 3G, & refund some people that are upset.
Its pretty simply, the box says 4G, the iPads 4G isnt compaitble with 4G in autsralia...people are buying it expecting it to work on 4G here, if something cant do a funtion as advertised then they consider that missleading & based on that, ACCC will very likely win the case here, it doesnt really matter, just means they will have to repackage, so eh.
Good. Someone who is directly involved with ACCC.
I would suggest that you take appropriate action.
1. Why aren't you going after all the carriers who claim to offer 4G (or who sell the iPad knowing that it doesn't meet your definition of 4G)?
2. Why don't you get in line with the rest of the world and use the same international definitions as everyone else if your goal is to avoid confusion?
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
Apparently the "rest of the world" uses the same LTE bands and the US and Canada are the only ones that don't use them.
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
Because this is government we're talking about.
3. Why don't you pressure the carriers and government to use LTE standards that are consistent with the rest of the world so that LTE devices from other countries work in Australia?
IOW, instead of just raising a fuss over a minor issue, why don't you do something about it?
Wow, ignorance at it's best lol. The "rest of world" doesn't use the same LTE frequencies as the US so it's the US and Canada who are the odd ones out, not Australia.
The Federal Court has accepted an undertaking from Apple Pty Limited in response to an urgent application filed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) earlier today.
The ACCC has alleged that the promotion of the "iPad with WiFi + 4G" by Apple Pty Limited and Apple Inc is misleading because it represents to Australian consumers that the product "iPad with WiFi + 4G" can, with a SIM card, connect to a 4G mobile data network in Australia, when this is not the case.
Today Apple Pty Ltd provided an undertaking to the Federal Court that until further order or hearing, Apple Pty Limited would as soon as is reasonably practicable and by no later than 5 April 2012:
display a statement that the ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX Networks? in its promotional materials, on its website and online store
distribute signage with the same wording to resellers to be displayed at points of sale
contact by email any persons for whom Apple Pty Limited has an email address and who have purchased the ?iPad with WiFI + 4G? between 16 March and 28 March 2012 (including pre-orders prior to 16 March 2012) including statements to the effect that ?This product supports very fast cellular networks. It is not compatible with current Australian 4G LTE networks and WiMAX Networks? and that such persons are entitled to return the product and request a refund within a timeframe specified in the email.
A directions hearing has been scheduled for 16 April 2012 at 9:30am. A mediation has been ordered for 18 April 2012. A hearing on liability has been set down commencing 2 May 2012.
Release # NR 059/12
Issued: 28th March 2012
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index...fromItemId/142
Of course, what the heck is "very fast cellular networks but not 4G LTE and WiMax"? 3.2G? 3.5G? πG ?
Uh uh. Looks like you and your bosses have been trumped. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...84ff624c48a.01
Let's see how many folks in your country want a refund.
Also, in the process of the litigation, it might end up that, according to international definitions, Telstra's network might in fact get redefined s '4G'.
The point is I support the ACCC in pursuing this matter against Apple. Sure, there's definitely elements of theatre here but their premise is legitimate.
What I do suggest though is a very, very bloody simple solution: DC-HSPA+ ~ for all intents and purposes if you're getting up to 20mbps or more with that, that's 4G [insert long debate on ITU even though nobody in real life gives a flying fart about the ITU standards].
So, ACCC please sit down here, Apple, please sit down here, Telstra, sorry buddy, come sit here. ACCC, you agree to chill the f**k out if Apple says 4G "DC-HSPA+", Telstra shows DC-HSPA+ coverage and reasonable expected speeds, and Apple states clearly DC-HSPA+ only for 4G, not LTE or WiMax. Apple, good on you for offering refunds, most people won't give a damn, but good on ya for offering it.
Now we all clear? Good.
1. Apple benefits by still calling it 4G. Nerds will complain to the end of time that it's not "4G" by ITU, ETU, TIS, ASD, ABC, DEF, GHI, whatever.
2. ACCC flexes muscles and gets big evil yank corporation to play by local footy rules
3. Consumers covered by educating them on what 4G as per Apple/ACCC/Telstra is
4. Consumers now learn, oooh, I have DC HSPA+ that gives me 20mbps instead of lousy 1mbps regular 3G.
Sorted. Everyone wins. Now please get out of my office.
The point is I support the ACCC in pursuing this matter against Apple. Sure, there's definitely elements of theatre here but their premise is legitimate.
What I do suggest though is a very, very bloody simple solution: DC-HSPA+ ~ for all intents and purposes if you're getting up to 20mbps or more with that, that's 4G [insert long debate on ITU even though nobody in real life gives a flying fart about the ITU standards].
So, ACCC please sit down here, Apple, please sit down here, Telstra, sorry buddy, come sit here. ACCC, you agree to chill the f**k out if Apple says 4G "DC-HSPA+", Telstra shows DC-HSPA+ coverage and reasonable expected speeds, and Apple states clearly DC-HSPA+ only for 4G, not LTE or WiMax. Apple, good on you for offering refunds, most people won't give a damn, but good on ya for offering it.
Now we all clear? Good.
1. Apple benefits by still calling it 4G. Nerds will complain to the end of time that it's not "4G" by ITU, ETU, TIS, ASD, ABC, DEF, GHI, whatever.
2. ACCC flexes muscles and gets big evil yank corporation to play by local footy rules
3. Consumers covered by educating them on what 4G as per Apple/ACCC/Telstra is
4. Consumers now learn, oooh, I have DC HSPA+ that gives me 20mbps instead of lousy 1mbps regular 3G.
Sorted. Everyone wins. Now please get out of my office.
But it sounds like Apple was prepared to do this all from the start. Sounds to me that the ACCC was simply trying to get Apple to pony up some money as part of a fine and realized they had an unwinnable case, or like you stated in 2., they just wanted to be publicly seen as "doing their job for the Australian consumer". I just wonder if Telstra told the ACCC to shut up ... before it became apparent that their customers will have to buy new hardware once real 4G hits the market.
Apparently the "rest of the world" uses the same LTE bands and the US and Canada are the only ones that don't use them.
Actually, the EU's recommendation is to use bands around the 700 - 800 region ... It's just that countries are refusing or slow to implement because those frequencies are allocated to analog TV signals and their DTV are behind North America.
Actually, the EU's recommendation is to use bands around the 700 - 800 region ... It's just that countries are refusing or slow to implement because those frequencies are allocated to analog TV signals and their DTV are behind North America.
I'm not very well versed in LTE; are those the same bands as used in the US for LTE?
And "EU recommends"? That doesn't sound very much like the EU. Not to get political, but if there's one thing I admire about the EU is that it forces its constituents to enact change quickly and efficiently (even though the changes themselves aren't always things with which I agree).
Maybe that's the German influence, who knows.
Seems to me like they would have not only forced a change to DTV, but they would have also made that bandwidth available for LTE the very next day as part of the same legislation.
But it sounds like Apple was prepared to do this all from the start. Sounds to me that the ACCC was simply trying to get Apple to pony up some money as part of a fine and realized they had an unwinnable case, or like you stated in 2., they just wanted to be publicly seen as "doing their job for the Australian consumer". I just wonder if Telstra told the ACCC to shut up ... before it became apparent that their customers will have to buy new hardware once real 4G hits the market.
I don't think Apple Cupertino/ Apple Australia knew exactly what it was supposed to do following the iPad announcement. Prior to the ACCC sabre-rattling, I don't see anywhere Apple trying to clarify anything about it not being Telstra 4G LTE compatible, nor it being DC-HSPA+ compatible... aside from whatever small disclaimers they may have had. (Small stickers don't cut it in Australia, AFAIK).
I knew it wasn't Telstra LTE compatible because of the keynote, yes, local media did cover it but without much help from Apple.
I found out about DC-HSPA+ only from Whilrpool.net.au forums from user reports. I might have gotten the DC-HSPA+ aka "4G" iPad if I had known about it. To this day there is no mention of it as a "feature" of "high speed wireless data" or what not, other than it being listed in Tech Specs.
There's definitely been a slip up by Apple Australia, taking a bit of Telstra with it.
Of course the ACCC is definitely out to be seen as doing stuff, like I said they've been quite unhappy about 1-year limited warranties with companies ~like~ Apple and Telstra where most gadget warranties are 1-year with Apple and Telstra continuing to sell extended warranties.
As for Telstra, I'm not sure if Telstra strong-armed ACCC in any way, they've been fairly okay (mobile, not fixed-line) the past few years. Yesterday I was 200m up from sea level in a fairly obscure park/reserve 80km from the CBD and I still get solid 850mhz 3G signal, with 2G going to SOS only. Telstra Mobile, at least, is not that bad, so I don't see a big conspiracy on their side. They are probably simply focused with ~their~ LTE because Telstra Mobile alone can guarantee that 90% of the population of the whole continent will get 50+mbps mobile data sustained by 2020, through LTE which will be the last mobile hurrah of this decade, IMHO, before "5G" comes along post-2020 ~ even if "5G" comes before 2020 I doubt it will reach widespread adoption outside of capital cities. Keep in mind that the centre-right half of the Australian government may scuttle the national 100mbps-inital fibre rollout, leaving 4G LTE to pick up the pieces in keeping essential fast Internet services chugging along for the world's most isolated cities.
Perhaps hiding DC-HSPA+ is a scam by Telstra to get people to buy 4G LTE stuff, but then again, as per their coverage maps, they simply say what speeds at what location, and 4G is marketed without much deception. In some ways, I wonder why they even stealth-upgraded DC-HSPA+ without as much as a peep, maybe they were planning it as part of NexG "3G/3.5G", but LTE became too pressing that they simply "abandoned" significant effort into DC-HSPA+.
Just guessing but for Telstra Mobile this is more of a small bump in the road, it's got big tasks ahead of it. Of course iPad 4/5/6 and iPhone 5/6/7 will be good but they know eventually the baseband chips will include their LTE bands, their choices are generally along the lines of Asia Pac LTE common bands.
To me, Apple and Telstra are the best local entities to enable a decent consumer experience for this 3g --> 4g transition, and at the end of the day, that's probably all the ACCC really wants before it feels it has done enough and can go off to the pub for a beer. Obviously Apple is the whipping boy here, fairly or unfairly, but the ACCC clearly wants this to be some sort of example in everyone sorting their communication out with regards to the 3g --> 4g transition.