Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
There is just some nice features that uneducated people of technology must not have.

It's either a complaint/lawsuit, or deal with crappy speeds from walmart.

But I pity those with 1mbit connections and lower...​
 
'[T]he "overall amount in controversy exceeds" $5 million'. What does that even mean? They were charged more once after finding out that the feature was enabled and they feel that it's controversial enough to sue for damages worth $5 million?
My guess is also something like "pain and suffering" lmao
 
Ok, question, what are you people doing that you are using soooo much data? Seriously? I'm on my phone 24/7 practically... With 3 other phones on my plan and never even hit 15g...... So what exactly are you doing to go over? And another thing, if a few bucks in overage breaks your bank, maybe you shouldn't have an iPhone. Get a prepaid. Also, if and overage is going to break your bank, maybe set up an text alert from your provider to warn you??? I dunno, take some responsibility in your life??? F$@#
 
So since I'm an Apple fanboy who happens to have a brain and doesn't m defend Apple about everything...

These people have a fair point. It's a feature that turns wifi off and eats data, and it's turned on automatically with no warning when you update to iOS 9. I could see it being a problem for people who have weak wifi connection.
I totally agree, I live in rural Canada and we get 50kbps download on a good day from our wifi. We have cellular LTE but it costs a fortune ($20/GB). I almost went over because of this feature, but at the same time, is it worth suing over? We always say companies need to innovate more, but it seems everytime they do someone sues them.

To me it's stifling innovation, just for personal gain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5105973
So before wifi assist, if my crappy wifi cut out and I switched to cellular, the only way I knew this had happened was to look at my phone. Now, if my crappy wifi ALMOST cuts out and I switch to cellular, the only way I know this had happened is to look at my phone. If you've enabled mobile data for an app, you risk using it anywhere anytime.
 
There are legitimate lawsuits.

This is not.

This is an OPTIONAL feature.

The Wifi icon goes away when you're on cellular. It's not like you don't realize you're using it.

Nothing but greedy lawyers trying to make a buck.


If you think you're on WIFI you're not checking. Sure its optional but turned on by default and with no warning from Apple. Even I dont know all the IOS9 settings. And I am a savvy user.

Yes, there is no way the incurred 5 Mil or damages, but I am sure the asked "Saul" and he set the number.

I totally agree, I live in rural Canada and we get 50kbps download on a good day from our wifi (I've been trying to post this for 10mins now!). We have cellular LTE but it costs a fortune ($20/GB). I almost went over because of this feature, but at the same time, is it worth suing over? We always say companies need to innovate more, but it seems everytime they do someone sues them.

To me it's stifling innovation, just for personal gain.

Companies need to error on the side of caution. This feature should be off by default. Apple made the call and customers choose to sue because of it. Apple only has themselves to blame.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm confused as to how this feature allows people to go over. My wife will stream music from either Spotify or Pandora on her commute all month and sometimes at work. She will check out videos and various other media on her break. My wifi at work is laughable. I finally stopped using it and just use my phone as I always would. Even with all the usage that would typically go on wifi I don't even kiss my data cap. This is all LTE, wifi assist is just that, assist. I don't know how all overages occur. Maybe you should check your home network for issues as well.
 
You haven't even seen your first bill yet to know if this is actually going to be a problem. Lawyers need to chill with these easy paychecks, but the U.S. Justice Department is the enabler that keeps them coming back for more.
There are
People who have been running the beta for months. I'm not saying this is a legitimate lawsuit, but there are likely tens of thousands of people who have seen multiple bills. I never understand where the value for the suit comes from though. $5 million in overages? Prooooooobably not even close lol.

I'm confused as to how this feature allows people to go over.
Let's say you love on a house where you have bad cinema ficitiy to your wifi at the other end. You're streaming music while cleaning (or whatever) and not lying attention to you dropping off of wifi intermittently.

I said before, I think the lawsuit is BS. But I do see the potential to go over. I personally love the feature. I like to run around our complex and it will pickup the wifi while running of our unit, the gym, and the entertainment center. Before the update I would have music stutter so I would always just turn wifi off before heading out. This is no longer s concern.

Know who they should be suing? The damn wireless carriers! The **** they pull, data caps, excessive fees and charges. Yeah, how about the carriers instead.
The problem is there isn't a potential suit there. You get what you sign up for. Who you have companies like att promising unlimited data and not delivering, you have the potential for a suit.

I totally agree, I live in rural Canada and we get 50kbps download on a good day from our wifi (I've been trying to post this for 10mins now!). We have cellular LTE but it costs a fortune ($20/GB). I almost went over because of this feature, but at the same time, is it worth suing over? We always say companies need to innovate more, but it seems everytime they do someone sues them.

To me it's stifling innovation, just for personal gain.
Realistically the only innovation this is stifling is a setting being on versus off by default. I think the number is absurd but it's a legitimate problem for some. Who have this on by default? Just add it to "tips" and make sure the user is alerted that there are a ton of newer features in iOS they don't know about before being given the option to turn tips off by default.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So since I'm an Apple fanboy who happens to have a brain and doesn't m defend Apple about everything...

These people have a fair point. It's a feature that turns wifi off and eats data, and it's turned on automatically with no warning when you update to iOS 9. I could see it being a problem for people who have weak wifi connection.

This lawsuit is rubbish. Wifi Assist only works on the app in the foreground, meaning only the app you're currently using. It does not work for video or music apps so it's kind of hard to go over your monthly data limit using wifi assist.

Even if you go over the limit most carriers charge about $10 per gig. Their overage charges wouldn't have been more than a gig, this is simply greedy people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sbailey4
This lawsuit is rubbish. Wifi Assist only works on the app in the foreground, meaning only the app you're currently using. It does not work for video or music apps so it's kind of hard to go over your monthly data limit using wifi assist.

Even if you go over the limit most carriers charge about $10 per gig. Their overage charges wouldn't have been more than a gig, this is simply greedy people.
Even if it's in the foreground, I could be on a image intensive website in safari and use over 100 MB of data without realizing it, especially if my phone is in landscape mode which hides the status bar indicator.
 
The lawsuit is fair, but requesting $5 million discredits this as anything more than an attempt to make money.
A weird one. Whilst in isolation I agree it’s like why slap a Premiership footballer with a £10,000 fine? Some will earn that in a day.

I’m glad the suit is being brought about. It’s getting increasignly annoying of Apple to do stuff like this and they need a slap on the wrist - I can’t slap them but maybe my lawyer can.

New feature to tout? Have it as part of the set up assistant for your users to choose. But no, it’s on automatically like Bluetooth and Wifi even though my previous preference was for it to be off.
It’s especially galling in light of the fact that on an unlimited paln I can’t get past the 100MB download restriction. Also for all you that say this is the carriers, please back it up before you reply.
Apple could easily make large downloads come from another IP that’s recognised by your carrier and blocked.
 
HOW DARE APPLE DO SOMETHING THAT MAKES FOR A BETTER USER EXPERIENCE! I'D RATHER HAVE AN APP SIT AND SEARCH FOR SERVICE FOR 5 MINUTES THEN SWITCH OVER TO LTE LIKE IT HAS ALWAYS DONE THAN DO SO QUICKER SO I HAVE A LESS CRUMMY EXPERIENCE AND SPEND THE SAME DATA I ALWAYS HAVE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HEK and sbailey4
You need a bit more realism in your thoughts. The general public doesn't read release notes. I would bet you most tech literate people don't read release notes. Release notes tend to be read by people specifically interested in that type of subject matter. Pro tip: If the term "release notes" is part of your defense, you've already lost. :cool: It's like expecting someone to read the car manual to diagnose an electrical problem. The likelihood of that happening is next to nil except with someone who is specifically interested in cars and dyi auto repair.

Don't get me wrong. The feature is nice. It can be helpful. It should have been opt-in. Opt-in allows the consumer to make a conscious decision that could affect their cellular service. Default on allows for situations like this class action to occur.
I personally have the feature off because I would never use it. Should it be a step in Setup Assistant, yes. People can't pass the responsibility off to Apple though. If you own a device, you should know how it works and how to correct its problems. Then again, look who Apple markets to...
 
But honestly what's the difference between this feature and when you lose Wi-Fi and switch over to cellular anyway (besides the indication on the screen)?
And this is really what it all comes down to in the end. The functionality of all of this has been there in iOS pretty much from the beginning. WiFi assists simply enables it to be somewhat more sensitive to turn to cellular earlier when it is determined that the WiFi connection isn't really working instead of turning to the cellular a bit later in that same situation that a phone prior to iOS 9 would do.

It's simply an adjustment of sensitivity of WiFi detection which was likely done in many iOS versions before but wasn't separated out as a separate feature and was just made to the WiFi functionality directly. The signal indicator still changes the same way it did before.

None of this was an issue prior to Apple simply adding an actual user facing option for it, yet it all worked the same way before getting more sensitive with each new iOS version and hardware iteration.

If you think you're on WIFI you're not checking. Sure its optional but turned on by default and with no warning from Apple. Even I dont know all the IOS9 settings. And I am a savvy user.

Yes, there is no way the incurred 5 Mil or damages, but I am sure the asked "Saul" and he set the number.
And you can have the same issue before iOS 9 and WiFi assist when a bad WiFi connection would still be dropped and you would be on cellular data and you'd only know if you looked at the phone. Yet no lawsuits over that being misleading somehow all these years.
So before wifi assist, if my crappy wifi cut out and I switched to cellular, the only way I knew this had happened was to look at my phone. Now, if my crappy wifi ALMOST cuts out and I switch to cellular, the only way I know this had happened is to look at my phone. If you've enabled mobile data for an app, you risk using it anywhere anytime.
It works the same way, just a little more sensitive where it doesn't wait for WiFi to be completely dead and your phone not responding and getting anything for a few minutes and switches somewhat earlier to cut down on the phone not having a connection. The way it works and what you see on the phone is the same as before, just better sensitivity of connection quality (improvements that have more than likely been made in pretty much every iOS version before and hardware updates before, simply without an additional option available for the user in relation to those improvements).

Even if it's in the foreground, I could be on a image intensive website in safari and use over 100 MB of data without realizing it, especially if my phone is in landscape mode which hides the status bar indicator.
And the same thing was there in iOS version prior to iOS 9 without WiFi assist, it would just take a few minutes longer of not having a working connection for the phone to drop it and switch over. Yet no one was filing lawsuits over it working that same way before with the only difference of it being less sensitive and making you struggle with a bad connection a little longer before dropping it and switching over.

HOW DARE APPLE DO SOMETHING THAT MAKES FOR A BETTER USER EXPERIENCE! I'D RATHER HAVE AN APP SIT AND SEARCH FOR SERVICE FOR 5 MINUTES THEN SWITCH OVER TO LTE LIKE IT HAS ALWAYS DONE THAN DO SO QUICKER SO I HAVE A LESS CRUMMY EXPERIENCE AND SPEND THE SAME DATA I ALWAYS HAVE.
We just need to wait a bit more for the next lawsuit which will claim the oppsite that Apple is making phones not have a working connection because when WiFi assist is turned off and the phones aren't switching from bad connections earlier people are missing important notifications and can't do anything on their phones.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
William Scott Phillips was born -- ----- ---- and he lives (or lived) at ------------, Volusia County, Florida, U.S.A. His voter ID number is ---------. His telephone number is (or was) -------------. He registered to vote ------------- and he is registered in the -------------- Party of Florida. He is listed as --------.

Wow, that was pathetic. Nobody cares. Go out and get some air.
 
  • Like
Reactions: louiek and mrxak
You can't sue for "I might be injured in the future".

If you could, I'd sue everyone here for 10 million dollars each for possibly shooting me to death twenty years from now.

This is an attempted cash grab. The correct course of action would be to petition Apple to either change the default on the feature or put u a dialog explaining the new feature.
 
Here's why I don't understand why everyone is freaking out about wifi assist, it tells you when it's activated by default, if you're using wifi assist the wifi bars go away. You see LTE/3G instead (unless you have very poor cell reception).

Literally all wifi assist does is greatly reduce the signal strength threshold before switching back to LTE, but instead of dropping the wifi it clings on in the background and when it's strong enough again switches back, mostly to ensure wifi calling feature doesn't have reliability problems.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205296

"When Wi-Fi Assist is activated, you'll see the cellular data icon in the status bar on your device."
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrxak
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.