Apple May Need To Rethink 4G Claims (and Pay Refunds) In More Countries

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."

Comments

4G does not yet exist

[imagined.by]

Currently, there's not a single commercial 4G network deployed anywhere on the planet. LTE is officially 3.9G, so every manufacturer or carrier that advertises 4G is bullshitting just as much as Apple. Which doesn't make it better, but still.

Re:4G does not yet exist

[raitchison]

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.

Re:4G does not yet exist

[tlhIngan]

I blame this part on the 4G standards body. If they had taken a hard stand when some carriers advertised "4G" when they were not, then AT&T and Apple and the like wouldn't have much room to argue. Instead there's some wiggle room as they can argue that 4G designation applies to them as well.

Yeah, and it's highly annoying. If you want an LTE device (phone, stick, hotspot, whatever), you can't just look at 4G devices, because an annoyingly large number of them are really just HSPA+.

Now, technically Apple sells the iPad as 4G, with LTE support. But since the iPad also supports HSPA+, if other HSPA+ devices are sold as "4G" devices, Apple's in the clear as it's just LTE is not supported and following everyone else's convention of calling HSPA+ "4G".

Now if Apple sells it at 4G LTE, they're in trouble since the "LTE" part doesn't work.

Heck, maybe at the end it'll clarify "faux G" from real 4G.

Re:4G does not yet exist

[Carewolf]

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.

Re:They need to rethink 4G claims in the USA, too

[teh31337one]

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...

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[moronoxyd]

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:our car can go 100mph!

[Anonymous Coward]

How DARE they say anything bad about my precious Apple! I must make metaphors that dont make any sense or relate in any way to the subject at hand to make them sound stupid!

See how you sound?

The fact of the matter is the VALID metaphor would be selling a car claiming it will do 90mpg, only it only works on fuel that doesnt exist yet, which is essentially what Apple did.

Re:Look at the actual adverts...

[MightyYar]

Yeah, that is misleading - even if it dose say at the bottom:

4G LTE is supported only on AT&T and Verizon networks in the US, and on Bell, Rogers and Telus networks in Canada. Data plans sold separately. See your carrier for details.

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!

[Baloroth]

If you advertise a device as "4G-LTE" compatible without qualification, and it not compatible with 4G-LTE in that country (where you are advertising it as 4G-LTE compatible), that is misleading advertisment.

The car analogy would actually be saying "This car can go 100mph!" when it can only go 100mph if you drive it down a hill. Technically correct, but not actually an applicable statement in most situations where you actually drive the car, and therefore misleading advertising.

And yes, advertising is often misleading (that is a fair amount of the point of advertising), but to advertise a device so that it looks like it has worldwide 4G capability (which they did) when it does not (which it doesn't) is false advertising.