OK, so you're incapable of understanding analogies.
Take a 200 mph car. Now, try to go 200 mph in Manhattan. It's not possible. Does that mean the car can't go 200 mph?
Or take a typical mid-western ice storm in February. Roads are covered with ice. There's no way in the world your car is ever going to get to 200 mph - you'll be off the road long before that. Does that mean that the car can't go 200 mph?
Or perhaps a traffic block where the police are out in force and arrest anyone going over 50 mph. Does that mean that the car can't go over 200 mph?
You need to differentiate the capability of the product from the ability of the infrastructure (roads, laws, or wireless network) to support all of the capabilities. An 4G iPad doesn't suddenly become non-4G when you cross a border. It retains the 4G capability, but the local infrastructure does not support it. It is up to the consumer to know the local rules.
By the same logic, if I buy a Ferrari that will go 220 mph and am cruising along at 200 mph in Germany and then cross into France, is it Ferrari's fault that France doesn't allow that kind of speed?
And, of course, that even ignores the fact that under international standards, 4G is supported in most of the world since HSPA+ meets the legal definition of 4G. And don't start with the 'we should go by what consumers think rather than standards bodies'. The average consumer has no idea what is happening and their opinion is worthless. That's why we have standards bodies.
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that the issue is fraudulent advertising. That is not the issue here.
Instead, the issue is misleading advertising. As such, mere factual correctness doesn't go far enough. It is entirely possible to mislead an audience and to cite only facts.
You need to understand the issue before proposing an opinion about it. Otherwise, you are likely to mislead the audience by commenting on something not in issue.
It's more than just that, in Australia anyway, as it is illegal to have something in big bold letters then hide the clauses in the small footprint saying it's something else. This is where Apple went wrong.
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
Zither Zather Zuzz is correct - the issue is that the claim is misleading, not that it is false.
If that's the case, then stop whining. Advertising is ALWAYS misleading.
I suppose you were supporting that kid who sued because he used a certain after shave and didn't get laid, right? After all, the ads were misleading.
So why are you picking on Apple when every company in the world uses misleading advertising? And why should Apple get sued for misleading advertising when it's a commonly accepted practice?
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
The car analogy is stupid and inapplicable to markets that offer other 4G devices than the iPad. One can buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4G in, say, Sweden, and it will download at speeds up to 100 Mbps on a local 4G net, so shouldn't one expect that the iPad 4G sold in Sweden can get the same speed on the same network (which it cannot)? You have to include in the silly car analogy that one car cannot go up to 200 mph in the same city in which another car advertised with the same speed can.
The car analogy is stupid and inapplicable to markets that offer other 4G devices than the iPad. One can buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4G in, say, Sweden, and it will download at speeds up to 100 Mbps on a local 4G net, so shouldn't one expect that the iPad 4G sold in Sweden can get the same speed on the same network (which it cannot)? You have to include in the silly car analogy that one car cannot go up to 200 mph in the same city in which another car advertised with the same speed can.
The car analogy is stupid and inapplicable to markets that offer other 4G devices than the iPad. One can buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4G in, say, Sweden, and it will download at speeds up to 100 Mbps on a local 4G net, so shouldn't one expect that the iPad 4G sold in Sweden can get the same speed on the same network (which it cannot)? You have to include in the silly car analogy that one car cannot go up to 200 mph in the same city in which another car advertised with the same speed can.
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
I don't and I never said so. The average consumer may. And it's not bizarre to expect performance to match specifications, that's what they are for.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
The car analogy is stupid, just drop it. 4G isn't simply "high performance". A device will either connect to a 4G network or not, there are no degrees here.
You present so many straw man arguments that you're practically arguing with yourself. Maybe you should consider whether you really disagree with everyone because of difference in opinion, or just to be argumentative.
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
You keeping talking about this legal definition of 4G as if a) it's important, and b) it actually exists. Just because you keeping saying it is and it does doesn't make you right. In spite of everything to the contrary, various national consumer bodies taking action, and Apple itself relabelling the device, you persist. Huge kudos for continuing to fight the fight.
Let's face it. You're not in one of those places where this is an issue. You can't speak on the matter because you simply have no idea.
The car analogy is stupid, just drop it. 4G isn't simply "high performance". A device will either connect to a 4G network or not, there are no degrees here.
You present so many straw man arguments that you're practically arguing with yourself. Maybe you should consider whether you really disagree with everyone because of difference in opinion, or just to be argumentative.
So why are you picking on Apple when every company in the world uses misleading advertising?
Why am I picking on Apple in particular? Well, mainly because this is a thread about an Apple product on a website called Apple Insider...
I repeat: the fact that other companies do it doesn't make it any more acceptable for Apple to do it. The fact that people commonly steal things doesn't make it OK to steal things.
Why am I picking on Apple in particular? Well, mainly because this is a thread about an Apple product on a website called Apple Insider...
I repeat: the fact that other companies do it doesn't make it any more acceptable for Apple to do it. The fact that people commonly steal things doesn't make it OK to steal things.
I'm still waiting for you to explain what Apple did wrong. The iPad connects to 4G networks.
Well, since we all seem to be idiots, how about enlightening us and doing something good today.
Try us out. Maybe we can be brought out of the darkness after all. Pretend you're the Firstborn dropping a monolith in front of some hominids.
Actually I think of you being much lower than what you described. I'm not going to repeat the many valid arguments that you have already ignored as you didn't get them then so I doubt you would get them now.
Either way, it's obvious Apple have finally realised it needed to do the right thing and now have finally put it in place.
Don't take it out of the context. The iPad 4G will NOT connect to the 4G network in Australia while the Galaxy Tab 4G will; the iPad 4G will not connect to the 4G networks in Sweden either, while competing 4G products do. Based on what competing products do in many markets, and based on what Apple is advertising, potential buyers could easily be misled to believe that a 4G iPad bought in their country connects to the 4G network in their country as do other 4G products sold in their country.
Apple has recognized the mistake in their marketing and amended it in several countries. Why is a bunch of cheerleaders still too daft to understand that and continues a losing and silly argument? Don't you have trust and respect for Apple's actions?
I'm still waiting for you to explain what Apple did wrong. The iPad connects to 4G networks.
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).
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
iPad Mobile would suffice.
But Wi-fi access is also mobile. Not long ago, even laptops were called mobile computing. So I think mobile would be confusing.
Could be. I just don't think that the word "cellular" is the best choice. Could be that "mobile" is no better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
Aren't they indeed, telling you it is acceptable to go 120MPH by the simple fact that is on the speedo?
Nope. Not even close.
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
You seem to be under the misapprehension that the issue is fraudulent advertising. That is not the issue here.
Instead, the issue is misleading advertising. As such, mere factual correctness doesn't go far enough. It is entirely possible to mislead an audience and to cite only facts.
You need to understand the issue before proposing an opinion about it. Otherwise, you are likely to mislead the audience by commenting on something not in issue.
It's more than just that, in Australia anyway, as it is illegal to have something in big bold letters then hide the clauses in the small footprint saying it's something else. This is where Apple went wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT
If that's the case, then stop whining. Advertising is ALWAYS misleading.
I suppose you were supporting that kid who sued because he used a certain after shave and didn't get laid, right? After all, the ads were misleading.
So why are you picking on Apple when every company in the world uses misleading advertising? And why should Apple get sued for misleading advertising when it's a commonly accepted practice?
You're a hypocrite, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly
We're not going to agree on the analogy. I've never seen a "Ford 200mph" being sold in any market. I'm not sure that's because ford is incapable of such a thing.
You still need to point out where this legal definition of 4G lives. Certainly not on any statute I'm familiar with. Standards <> statutes. There are many standards, such as isofix, which simply are not legally recognised here.
The car analogy is stupid and inapplicable to markets that offer other 4G devices than the iPad. One can buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4G in, say, Sweden, and it will download at speeds up to 100 Mbps on a local 4G net, so shouldn't one expect that the iPad 4G sold in Sweden can get the same speed on the same network (which it cannot)? You have to include in the silly car analogy that one car cannot go up to 200 mph in the same city in which another car advertised with the same speed can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoppio
The car analogy is stupid and inapplicable to markets that offer other 4G devices than the iPad. One can buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 4G in, say, Sweden, and it will download at speeds up to 100 Mbps on a local 4G net, so shouldn't one expect that the iPad 4G sold in Sweden can get the same speed on the same network (which it cannot)? You have to include in the silly car analogy that one car cannot go up to 200 mph in the same city in which another car advertised with the same speed can.
Same here in Australia http://www.telstra.com.au/bigpond-internet/mobile-tablets/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-4G/
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
I don't and I never said so. The average consumer may. And it's not bizarre to expect performance to match specifications, that's what they are for.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
The car analogy is stupid, just drop it. 4G isn't simply "high performance". A device will either connect to a 4G network or not, there are no degrees here.
You present so many straw man arguments that you're practically arguing with yourself. Maybe you should consider whether you really disagree with everyone because of difference in opinion, or just to be argumentative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Really? You expect that every device with the same specs will perform identically? That's a pretty bizarre assumption.
The fact is that 4G speeds vary - just like 3G and 2G speeds. As long as it meets the legal definition of 4G (which it does in most countries unless the country has specifically excluded the ITU definition), it's 4G.
Your comparison is akin to saying "both the Ford Explorer and a Lamborghini are advertised as high performance. Unless the Ford Explorer will go 200 mph and accelerate from 0 to 60 in 2.5 seconds, it's false advertising because it's not AS high performance as the Lamborghini". That is, of course, absurd. Something can be high performance and still have something else that's faster. Similarly, two devices can be 4G and still have one of the devices be faster.
You keeping talking about this legal definition of 4G as if a) it's important, and b) it actually exists. Just because you keeping saying it is and it does doesn't make you right. In spite of everything to the contrary, various national consumer bodies taking action, and Apple itself relabelling the device, you persist. Huge kudos for continuing to fight the fight.
Let's face it. You're not in one of those places where this is an issue. You can't speak on the matter because you simply have no idea.
Indeed, iI still is in fact.
It will connect to a 4G network....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So why are you picking on Apple when every company in the world uses misleading advertising?
Why am I picking on Apple in particular? Well, mainly because this is a thread about an Apple product on a website called Apple Insider...
I repeat: the fact that other companies do it doesn't make it any more acceptable for Apple to do it. The fact that people commonly steal things doesn't make it OK to steal things.
I'm still waiting for you to explain what Apple did wrong. The iPad connects to 4G networks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I'm still waiting for you to explain what Apple did wrong. The iPad connects to 4G networks.
I doubt there is any explanation you will understand/except so why would anyone bother?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
I doubt there is any explanation you will understand/except so why would anyone bother?
Well, since we all seem to be idiots, how about enlightening us and doing something good today.
Try us out. Maybe we can be brought out of the darkness after all. Pretend you're the Firstborn dropping a monolith in front of some hominids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Well, since we all seem to be idiots, how about enlightening us and doing something good today.
Try us out. Maybe we can be brought out of the darkness after all. Pretend you're the Firstborn dropping a monolith in front of some hominids.
Actually I think of you being much lower than what you described. I'm not going to repeat the many valid arguments that you have already ignored as you didn't get them then so I doubt you would get them now.
Either way, it's obvious Apple have finally realised it needed to do the right thing and now have finally put it in place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel
It will connect to a 4G network....
Don't take it out of the context. The iPad 4G will NOT connect to the 4G network in Australia while the Galaxy Tab 4G will; the iPad 4G will not connect to the 4G networks in Sweden either, while competing 4G products do. Based on what competing products do in many markets, and based on what Apple is advertising, potential buyers could easily be misled to believe that a 4G iPad bought in their country connects to the 4G network in their country as do other 4G products sold in their country.
Apple has recognized the mistake in their marketing and amended it in several countries. Why is a bunch of cheerleaders still too daft to understand that and continues a losing and silly argument? Don't you have trust and respect for Apple's actions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I'm still waiting for you to explain what Apple did wrong. The iPad connects to 4G networks.
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).