Apple May Need To Rethink 4G Claims (and Pay Refunds) In More Countries 105
redletterdave writes "After the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) won a battle with Apple after alleging the Cupertino-based company was misleading customers about its third-generation iPad, authorities in other countries are now assessing the compatibility of the new iPad with local 4G LTE networks to see if their customers should deserve refunds too. The UK's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) confirmed on Tuesday that it is investigating complaints of Apple's misleading '4G' claim, while Sweden and Denmark are also reportedly considering investigations, after agencies within both countries received 'several complaints' from customers about 4G connectivity. Even though these countries carry broad LTE coverage, the new iPad isn't supported on any of those networks."
Re:They need to rethink 4G claims in the USA, too (Score:5, Informative)
Funny story: When the iPad on AT&T displays "4G", it's connecting to HSDPA or HSPA+. When it shows "LTE", it's connecting to 4G LTE.
Re:Look at the actual adverts... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.apple.com/uk/ipad/
Ultra-fast 4G. Full speed ahead.
Designed with next-generation wireless technology, the new iPad with Wi-Fi + 4G connects to fast data networks around the world.
Re:But in the ads (Score:5, Informative)
It specifically says which LTE networks are supported. Is the new standard for ads now to be that only the largest print claims count?
If they sell their iPad in $country saying it 'supports LTE' than yes, as a customer I expect to be able to use LTE in THAT COUNTRY. Putting in the fine print 'only if your in the US or Canada' is misleading advertisement.
That may not be a problem in the US, but in other parts of the world, especially in Europe, ads are expected to be truthful and not misleading. Trying to wiggle out by using the fine print to basically negate the statments you make in big letters may run afoul to consumer protection.
And I still wonder: Why did Apple use a chipset that only supports the LTE frequencies used in the US and Canada? There are chipsets that support the other frequencies.
Would it have been to expensive to build two or three different models for different markets? Would it have been to expensive to use a chipset that supports all frequencies (assuming such a beast exists)?
Or is it just once again the America-centric world view that Apple (and other companies) have shown more than once in the past?
Re:4G does not yet exist (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Look at the actual adverts... (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, that is misleading - even if it dose say at the bottom:
It implies that 4G will work "around the world", yet it only works in the US and Canada... not even the UK market where this is advertised. The Australian page has the exact same copy.
Re:our car can go 100mph! (Score:1, Informative)
Yeah, if only Apple had advertised it without qualification.
But they didn't:
http://www.apple.com/ipad/4g/ [apple.com]
"The new iPad supports fast cellular networks around the world — including 4G LTE networks in the U.S. and Canada.*"
"*4G LTE is supported only on AT&T and Verizon networks in the U.S. and on Bell, Rogers, and Telus networks in Canada. Data plans sold separately. See your carrier for details."
Hence this whole claim is BS.
Advertising is advertising, but they explicitly said, in descriptive text AND foot notes what countries the 4G works in.
Re:4G does not yet exist (Score:5, Informative)
Faster theoretically maybe but not in reality, I've got a "4G" HSPA+ T-Mobile phone (which is the fastest of all the fake "4G" networks) and an AT&T LTE phone and where I can get an LTE signal it destroys the HSPA+ network. The fastest I've ever seen on the HSPA+ network was 5MB, the slowest LTE I;ve seen was 10MB.
In any case IMO the blame does indeed fall with the ITU, they set the "4G" barrier artificially high so that LTE let alone WiMax wouldn't get there, which invited the carriers to say fuck it and start slapping the "4G" label on their existing 3G networks. If the ITU had just said that LTE and WiMax were 4G we wouldn't have this problem.
Not even close to 4g (Score:2, Informative)
I have AT&T in the DC Metro area here with "4g" (HSPA+).
It's pretty rare that I can even break 1mbps, let alone the theoretical max of 14mbps. The very best I've seen is around 5mbps and that was in one very rare instance.
Seriously until they can get at least near LTE speeds which are close to broadband, it's pretty ridiculous for them to claim they've leapt forward a generation.
Re:4G does not yet exist (Score:5, Informative)
Outside of the US, only LTE has been advertised as 4G. You can call it a translation blunder if you like, but Apple is really the first manufacturer to call a non-LTE device 4G in many countries. This is the backlash.