I have it on and it hasn't used up very much data for me. That said, they should probably have had it default to off since we all know how despicable these companies have gotten with their data caps and steep penalties. THAT said, I think the lawsuit is silly because people should take responsibility for their own settings.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Hit With Class Action Lawsuit for New Wi-Fi Assist Feature
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And it happened to me several times that I then went about my business at a location where I knew to have good WiFi and thought I was using WiFi but I wasn't because I had turned it off manually before.
It seems pretty crappy that neither Apple or some network providers actually let their customers know about the change. I know on my previous phone contract I was pretty close to my usage limit most months 
At least now here in the UK my current provider (o2) sent me a text message to tell me about the feature, and how to disable it if needed - although it's now somewhat moot given the increasing prevalence of all-you-can-eat and high-usage accounts (I now have a 30Gb cap).
At least now here in the UK my current provider (o2) sent me a text message to tell me about the feature, and how to disable it if needed - although it's now somewhat moot given the increasing prevalence of all-you-can-eat and high-usage accounts (I now have a 30Gb cap).
Yes, lets sue, because someone is too incompetent to use their phone properly and adjust settings.
All phones maintain a constant connection to their cellular signal, even on wifi.... This feature leverages that connection... simply turn it off.
it would have been nice for Apple to disclose this during the update process and not have it on by default.
It already exists, sort of
You can leave your Cellular Data on and your device will prioritize Wifi over it!
AT&T does not text the individual if they are on a family plan or a business plan, instead they will sometimes text the person with financial responsibility.
People that text and drive, and have an accident will ended up getting sued. Some have lost everything -- both monetary and family members.
And it's their own fault.
Do you really want to use that as a justification for not reading the release notes for a device that can run up data charges if you don't pay attention?
This lawsuit has nothing to do with forcing Apple to do anything for users.
It's about the 40% of any settlement that will go to the attorneys.
It's the existence of the potential threat that's useful.
I may not call a lawyer if a restaurant simply under-cooks my steak, but if I suffer harm from something being under-cooked and the risks not being properly disclosed, then yeah, I might.
In this case, it is something that has caused "real harm," to use your words. People went over as a result of the "feature." (My sister is one of them. She isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, but that's beside the point.)
There's lots of unnecessary and silly litigation out there, but in my personal opinion, this doesn't fall into that category.
My daughter has somewhat weak wifi signal in her room. Nevertheless, it works okay: you can watch videos just fine. Wi-Fi Assist, however, thought otherwise and switched to cellular when she watched Youtube videos, even though cellular was disabled for Youtube in the settings. The bottom line is that the monthly limit for cellular data (750MB) was exceeded in just two days.
Enabling Wi-Fi Assist by default was a bastard move. I'm glad to hear that Apple was hit with a lawsuit for that.
Enabling Wi-Fi Assist by default was a bastard move. I'm glad to hear that Apple was hit with a lawsuit for that.
Good job I read this, turn that rubbish right off! I only get 1.5GB a month usage and I am not letting my phone run up my bill higher, I'm mostly in a WiFi area anyway so it's pointless being on.
I am glad someone is taking them to court, to defend Apple over this is to ignore the facts, Apple likes to enable features by default that it shouldn't, like allowing in app purchases...... Or should I say they like to enable features by default that can cost people a lot of money.
I am glad someone is taking them to court, to defend Apple over this is to ignore the facts, Apple likes to enable features by default that it shouldn't, like allowing in app purchases...... Or should I say they like to enable features by default that can cost people a lot of money.
Well in my country it's illegal to text and drive, in fact it's illegal to use your phone whilst driving for anything, you can use a hands free system but if the Police think doing that is distracting you too much they can pull you over and fine you.
Seems like in your country the law hasn't caught up to the stupidity and lack of intelligence with drivers who do use their phones whilst driving?
Last edited:
no, and i expect even less from iphone users, not everyone is technical and have the time on their hands to read the release notes, look up clickwrap agreement,
the real issue here is whether or not the end user gave conscious consent to have the feature on in the first place.
Nope, iOS 9 only. This would be the exact opposite of what WiFi assist does, it switches you to cell data *if* your WiFi is weak/dropping out. It wouldn't ever switch you from a strong WiFi signal to a crappy cell signal. Also, not possible before iOS 9.
I think we have a completely different concept of "real harm". "Real harm" is serious injury or fraud.
A few extra bucks on a cell phone bill, that could have been avoided by simply paying attention, is not "real harm". If you truly believe that, you will be perpetually aggrieved for the rest of your life, and you should start getting used to it.
I know, people are just so busy during the day. With the ever growing number of social media services who can find time for anything anymore?
Straw man? Alreighty then. Anyway see YOUR post above in bold. I believe you did.
It's a straw man argument because I didn't say that those people can or should sue. I pointed out that not everyone who might be faced with this issue received release notes.
Nice try though.
I understand but everyone DOES have access to the user manual that explains the settings and what they do. If no one chooses to read it that's certainly fine and their prerogative but not the mfg fault if such choice is made. They supplied the info its up to the end user to decide if they want to use it or not. Point is there are tons of settings in iOS that cause the phone to use data. Its the end users responsibility to decide which of them they want to allow or not, this is no different. And the idea that "we didn't know" doesn't hold up. As they say RTFM.
Now IF the feature does not work as stated then its a different story. If it randomly switches to cellular because of a flaw then yeah definitely Apples fault and they should be held accountable.