Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So, let's summarize all the completely off things people have said so far on this thread: :D

1. But LTE *is* 4G! - Not the issue here. The issue is that you can't get any 4G (LTE or otherwise) using the new iPad in some of these countries, due to the difference in frequences supported.
2. But others are doing it as well, citation: T-Mobile is advertising a 4G that's slow, AT&T is advertising 4G even though it doesn't cover the entire US - Again, not an issue. The issue here is not how fast it is, it's that the frequencies don't match - anywhere in a given country!
3. Those damn Europeans and their frequency fragmentation - Actually, they are less fragmented in Europe than we are here in US. They are just different from us.
4. Europe needs to "get with the program" and use the same frequency as US - Oh, where do I even begin? :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure I missed some, but even with this many on just a few posts, it makes you think: what in the world? :confused:

You missed one. Its Apple's disclaimer that the 4G only works on certain providers in certain countries and they even list them for you on the website. Maybe people should research the products they are going to buy before they buy them.
 
The US announced the frequencies that were going to be dedicated to 4G far, far in advance. If you'll remember, the 700MHz spectrum was freed up when the US killed off the analog TV broadcast spectrum. There were public auctions of the various "blocks" or ranges of frequencies. Ring any bells?

It's simply unfortunate that there are different frequencies used for LTE but that doesn't change the fact that Apple went with only the north american frequencies and thus shouldn't market it as LTE where it's incompatible.

No they don't. Am I the only one who hear/read the disclaimers that said 4G not available in all areas?

The problem is, I know 4G is available in my area in the form of LTE, but it turns out that the 4G of the new iPad is incompatible.

From Apple's website. When you see something with an "*" or a little number by it, that means there is a footnote. READ IT. It is not that hard.

"2. 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."

Insufficient, not all marketing is centered around the website.

Honestly, if you're stupid enough to believe anything Apple says you deserve to get scammed. A frivilous lawsuit.

What lawsuit? So far, the only thing that has been done is consumer boards doing their job and reacting to numerous consumer complaints
 
Last edited:
Doesn't anyone know how to read fine print anymore????????

You shouldn't have to... Apple should be more clear about about 4G claims. 4G is a major feature of the iPad.. that only works in North America.

Strong consumer protection laws are a good thing.
 
Sorry, yes, they do :

http://www.apple.com/uk/ipad/features/


If they didn't, that tidbit wouldn't be on their UK site. Yes, the 2 points to small print saying this is a US only feature... why then display it on their UK site ?

I like how you ignore the footnote when responding to my post. Maybe the reason they let people know it works on 4G networks is because people are not stationary. Maybe, just maybe, people who live in Europe travel and may be more interested in a device that is 4G in locations that they travel to. Or maybe they will be moving soon. The point is, it is a mobile device in an age where people are more mobile than ever. I see nothing wrong with letting people know all the capabilities of the iPad when there is clearly a footnote describing the limitations.
 
Fact 1) "4G is different from 4G LTE."
Fact 2) "4G LTE also misleads consumers since it's not true 4th Gen."
Fact 3) "Only 4G LTE Advance is true 4th Gen 4G."
 
I like how you ignore the footnote when responding to my post.

Uh ? I specifically mentionned the footnote. Maybe you should read my post again ?

Again, why even bother listing it on the UK site and adding a footnote saying it doesn't apply, especially considering you can't click the footnote, you have to manually scroll down to see what it means, and then find out it doesn't apply to the UK.

It would be much easier and less confusing if they simply didn't mention 4G on international pages where it doesn't apply. This is what these agencies are claiming.
 
Doesn't anyone know how to read fine print anymore????????

I'm also the sort of person to check-out the small print, but it doesn't excuse false advertising. Let's be fair - Apple are prominently advertising the 4G capabilities in countries where it can't work. That would kind of be like Ford selling an amazing new, hyper-efficient car only to turn around to its customers and say "Oh yeah, the fuel you need isn't available".

I still say that Apple should be above all of this - their products sell like hot cakes. It's a shame they appear to have stooped to false advertising.
 
Does anyone know if other companies are advertising HSPA+ devices as 4G in Europe and Australia and if so if its been deemed ok to do this? If so Apple should be fine.
 
Wirelessly posted

Why dont countries standardize around the world. Stpuid

Airspace is crammed. To standardise 4G internationally may mean that certain countries need to completely change all their TV sets or every radio the emergency services use just to match-up.

It couldn't work. More likely would be an iPad that is country specific and is built to recieve 4G in that particular country.
 
From Apple's website. When you see something with an "*" or a little number by it, that means there is a footnote. READ IT. It is not that hard.

"2. 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."

This isn't the point. If someone like Hitachi tendered for some High-Speed train infrastructure opportunity with an American company like Amtrak calling their trains "High-Speed - 200mph+) and buried in the fine print that they only went 200mph+ on Uzbekistan's bespoke 5ft 7.5" gauge railway system and in fact only went at 150mph on your gauge, Amtrak would be on the phone to their lawyers quicker than I could say "Class Action Lawsuit".

It's frankly hilarious to hear people moaning about individuals who feel they have cause to complain to their advertising regulators. These people (including myself) have nothing to gain monetarily, we just feel like a company is taking liberties with their advertising practises.

The criticism is certainly hypocritical coming from a land where people can (rightly or wrongly) attempt to sue fast-food companies for making them fat...
 
Last edited:
First off I live in Sweden. The problem up here is that Apple are calling it WiFi+4G. But 4G in Sweden equals LTE and the iPad doesn't support the LTE frequencies we use, so WiFi+4G is misleading. Because of our strict consumer laws I am sure Apple will be forced to change the name to WiFi+3G.
 
All that is going to happen is Apple will offer to take returns for anyone unsatisfied, and no one will take them up on it.
 
Out of interest, did you know your iPad wouldn't work when you bought it or is it as a result of this fall-out that you now realise?

And would you return it if Apple UK are forced to allow you to?

I very nearly bought a new iPad (Wi-Fi + 4G) on the proviso that once my UK Operator's 4G Network was up and running (most likely next year sometime), my device would support it. I think for £650+ I could reasonably expect some future-proofing, particularly from a device CALLING ITSELF 4G.

Luckily I saw some features on tech sites (this + others) explaining the lack of support for 800/2600MHz LTE hours before I would have pre-ordered.

More than likely I'd have been happy with "3G" speeds, but I declined to purchase as a matter of principle, having felt I'd been misled. I subsequently complained to the ASA.

Apple UK may have accepted a return, but they might also have caused a fuss and contested my assertion that the device was not fit for purpose based on their misleading advertising, so I instead didn't make the purchase and highlighted the issues to the ASA.
 
There seems to be a lot of misinformation about the state of European 4G networks among some of this forum's American users. While not blanket covered, a lot of countries, including my own, actually do have 4G networks up and running. And I am talking about LTE networks here, not just souped up 3G ones.

I can't speak for the rest of Europe, but us Swedes don't appreciate this kind of bait and switch marketing. Apple made a questionable decision in settling for two chips (respectively) that only supports American networks. They were fine with making two distinct versions for (roughly) Verizon and AT&T. So make one for European standards? Either that, or take your false advertising and shove it back up that mendacious hole it came from. No homo.
 
Uh ? I specifically mentionned the footnote. Maybe you should read my post again ?

Again, why even bother listing it on the UK site and adding a footnote saying it doesn't apply, especially considering you can't click the footnote, you have to manually scroll down to see what it means, and then find out it doesn't apply to the UK.

It would be much easier and less confusing if they simply didn't mention 4G on international pages where it doesn't apply. This is what these agencies are claiming.

Seriously????? You can't click it so it is not good enough? That is ridiculous.

I did read your full post, you mentioned the footnote when responding to someone else, not me. And if you read my full post, you could see a reason for listing 4G as a capability. Also, when you click on the "Learn More" about the ipad on the website for the UK it does not mention 4G at all (although I have no idea if this was the original way the website looked or if Apple has changed it).
 
First off I live in Sweden. The problem up here is that Apple are calling it WiFi+4G. But 4G in Sweden equals LTE and the iPad doesn't support the LTE frequencies we use, so WiFi+4G is misleading. Because of our strict consumer laws I am sure Apple will be forced to change the name to WiFi+3G.

Problem is Allmänna Reklamationsnämnden is completely powerless. They can issue "recommendations", but the companies are free to just give them the finger (just look at Ryanair).
That's just a fine socialist country where companies are free to do whatever they want and the consumers are completely powerless. If a company sends a scam invoice to an individual it's up to the individual to prove that it's invalid.
 
Even if Apple changes the name to just iPad Wifi+3G or Wifi+Data for Europe, everyone else in the world knows this as the 4G iPad.

Apple should just not mention 4G on the boxes shipped to Europe and take 4G off their European sites.

This is just so stupid. Europe is so far behind with 4G and LTE and has to use a different frequency. This is part apple's fault but Europe really needs to get with the program.

Exscuse me?

I think your find the US is the fault for the frequency fragmentation, all carriers in the EU use the same frequency bands, then the US started to launch GSM networks on weird wacky frequencies.
 
This isn't the point. If someone like Hitachi tendered for some High-Speed train infrastructure opportunity with an American company like Amtrak calling their trains "High-Speed - 200mph+) and buried in the fine print that they only went 200mph+ on Uzbekistan's bespoke 5ft 7.5" gauge railway system and in fact only went at 150mph on your gauge, Amtrak would be on the phone to their lawyers quicker than I could say "Class Action Lawsuit".

It's frankly hilarious to hear people moaning about individuals who feel they have cause to complain to their advertising regulators. These people (including myself) have nothing to gain monetarily, we just feel like a company is taking liberties with their advertising practises.

The criticism is certainly hypocritical coming from a land where people can (rightly or wrongly) attempt to sue fast-food companies for making them fat...

So I can't criticize but you can? Thanks for filling me in on that little tidbit. Also, your analogy is so far off it is not even funny. Those would be two sophisticated companies negotiating and a class action lawsuit would require more than one company suing another company. And you better believe they would pore over the contract first and read all the "fine print".
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.