If you ask me nicely, I'll get on my knees without you having to bamboozle me with things I know nothing about.
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.
One-Third of iPhone Users Mistakenly Think They Have 4G
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you ask me nicely, I'll get on my knees without you having to bamboozle me with things I know nothing about.
First: if Apollo and Zeus are the names of the prior and current ones, yes, it would be easier for "me" -- maybe more likely someone in my family or circle of not very tech friends-- to remember the differences between those two names, and to refer to them that way, than to figure out whether 3GS and 4 are model identifiers or references to something in their respective capabilities or specs.
I am not trying to be snarky about this. If we follow certain technologies, then we are much more familiar with the details of their ambience, gadgets and accessories than we even realize. You would not confuse "4GB" with "4G" any more than you'd confuse "megabyte of storage" with "kilobytes per second". To us, both of those comparisons are apples vs. oranges. But to people who don't routinely follow this level of detail in computing or telecom technologies, all those letters and numbers are abstracts, so any references to stuff like storage, memory, chip (16GB... 256MB... A5) and so forth are easily confused with any model numbers like iPhone 3G or iPhone 4.
Second: confusion is not limited to people thinking to buy a new versus immediately prior model. It often occurs when people are just trying to find out something about how a refurb or used model, or the one they bought new 2 years ago, will work with some accessory, for instance.
What model is it? "Umm.. well, it says MacBook Pro under the display...." -- you know you're going to have a long conversation...
What model is it? "Umm... well, the back is sort of curved, and it's shiny...." ok... not the original iPod touch...
ok so then you look on the About panel and it offers up "Model MC011LL"
but I can look right now in Mactracker and that's the thing's ORDER NUMBER (and yes, that was on the box, yep, if you ever had a box in hand, but don't forget now, you are the kid's parent trying to identify this device so as to find out if a certain case will fit it)...
and anyway no one speaks about them by order number, especially since order number sounds like something personalized to your own past purchase, no?
and so Apple, if pressed, will tell you that the real MODEL number is A1318....
and that they also call that model the iPod third generation, which is what some people call their later 2nd gen ones because they didn't buy a 2nd gen but they bought the one that came out after that one...
and we LAUGH at these people and call them IGNORANT ????
No. They are just confused.
And why would they not be confused. We throw around terms like " MBP 13 mid 2010," wtf is that, does it work like cars where a "new" car is born in September the previous year? So a 2010 came out in 2009? No. Is mid 2010 the latest one? No? So is there a mid-2011? No? What's the latest one? Oh... the EARLY 2011. "OK, gimme that one."
Now I will mock this guy because he's not aware that a newer one will be out rsn so he's a jerk to fall for "the old one." ???
Come on! We can do better than this, really.
I Have an iPhone 4G
…or at least, that's what Best Buy thinks they shipped me.
I had to get my iPhone 4 replaced, and since I purchased it through Best Buy, I went back to them to get the replacement. They had to ship it off to Apple, and when it came back, this is what we saw…
That box was one that just HAD to be kept.
…or at least, that's what Best Buy thinks they shipped me.
I had to get my iPhone 4 replaced, and since I purchased it through Best Buy, I went back to them to get the replacement. They had to ship it off to Apple, and when it came back, this is what we saw…
That box was one that just HAD to be kept.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice photoshop on the box.or at least, that's what Best Buy thinks they shipped me.
I had to get my iPhone 4 replaced, and since I purchased it through Best Buy, I went back to them to get the replacement. They had to ship it off to Apple, and when it came back, this is what we saw
That box was one that just HAD to be kept.
Best Buy does a much better job on their box graphics.
I'm not calling anyone ignorant...
IMO, it's easier to go by numbers and such than names, regardless of the product. If I am looking to buy a new graphics card, what do you think is easier, to look at, for example the 6xxx series of gpu's and I already know higher numbers are going to be better products, or if I have to look through 10 arbitrary names like Trout, Bass, Marlin, Flounder, Tuna, etc? How do I know which is the best, and which is the entry level?
I just feel it's a lot easier to have numbers that tell you iPhone 3G or 3GS obviously comes before the iPhone 4.
And what would you rather people identify what model of mac they have? Using model numbers is more confusing to most people than saying I have a 2010 mbp, or a 2011 iMac.... and that's essentially an irrelevant argument because you probably can't even find 2010 mpbs for sale in retail stores anymore. The only people who have to be concerned with that are the ones buying used products. And those people are obviously already doing some sort of research and know a bit about the product before buying it second hand. If someone is buying a new mbp, they don't get to ask apple for a mid 2009 vs the most current edition...
I just don't ever see how random names can be easier to use for people whom aren't competent on the subject. If you asked someone who doesn't know much about computers if tiger, leopard, snow leopard, or lion is the most recent version of OSX, they probably would have no clue and it would be a wild guess. If you ask someone which is the most current; 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, or 10.7, I bet almost everyone could tell you....
^^^^ I don't disagree with some parts of your post. A lot of it, actually. I get that 10.6, 10.7 is easier for grasping how current an OS is than by using Snow Leopard and Lion. You're right.
Much of the thread, though, has been about iPhone users confounding the designations for their iterations of the phone -- 3G, 3GS, 4 -- with the name used for the level (generation...) of communications tech their phones and / or carriers can provide them -- 3G, 4G. And, that the resellers and accessory makers further muddy the waters, throwing in device-generational references, where they go and supply 3G as meaning third gen iPod touch. That gets some of the non-tech-savvy who do actually try to follow tech references into wondering if their iPod touch can now be used with cell towers. Why? They've half-learned that 3G means something about cellular network speeds.
So on balance right now I'd have been happier seeing the iphone iterations as names. And ok, alphabetical release: Apollo... Zeus.
This thread wouldn't even exist if Apple's iPhone releases and the available net tech designations these days were farther out of phase.
For instance if all the carriers already had 4G tech up when the 2nd iPhone came out, who knows what Apple would have called their second iphone... iphone 2, maybe. Since they didn't do that, and since there's so much current possiblility to confuse network tech names with generational names and iPhone release names, that's why my vote would have been for the alpha names. Anything to get away from the closeness of the existing names for network levels / specs versus releases of smartphones.
Bottom line, we live in an era where more and more people will have access to high tech gear. Most of them do not want to know a whole lot about the innards of the thing or the specs of two things that must interface. To the extent that they MUST know whether two devices are compatible, we need to make that process simpler and easier. I don't see enough of this happening right now.
Are our own uses of language and choice of designations user-friendly? Not really. Industry (and the already tech-savvy) need to step up to the plate and be more helpful. It's in everyone's best interest to reduce the confusion. Where I think we went wrong was in ever starting down that path of calling things by generations.
Much of the thread, though, has been about iPhone users confounding the designations for their iterations of the phone -- 3G, 3GS, 4 -- with the name used for the level (generation...) of communications tech their phones and / or carriers can provide them -- 3G, 4G. And, that the resellers and accessory makers further muddy the waters, throwing in device-generational references, where they go and supply 3G as meaning third gen iPod touch. That gets some of the non-tech-savvy who do actually try to follow tech references into wondering if their iPod touch can now be used with cell towers. Why? They've half-learned that 3G means something about cellular network speeds.
So on balance right now I'd have been happier seeing the iphone iterations as names. And ok, alphabetical release: Apollo... Zeus.
This thread wouldn't even exist if Apple's iPhone releases and the available net tech designations these days were farther out of phase.
For instance if all the carriers already had 4G tech up when the 2nd iPhone came out, who knows what Apple would have called their second iphone... iphone 2, maybe. Since they didn't do that, and since there's so much current possiblility to confuse network tech names with generational names and iPhone release names, that's why my vote would have been for the alpha names. Anything to get away from the closeness of the existing names for network levels / specs versus releases of smartphones.
Bottom line, we live in an era where more and more people will have access to high tech gear. Most of them do not want to know a whole lot about the innards of the thing or the specs of two things that must interface. To the extent that they MUST know whether two devices are compatible, we need to make that process simpler and easier. I don't see enough of this happening right now.
Are our own uses of language and choice of designations user-friendly? Not really. Industry (and the already tech-savvy) need to step up to the plate and be more helpful. It's in everyone's best interest to reduce the confusion. Where I think we went wrong was in ever starting down that path of calling things by generations.
Ok. So its Agreed. People who know very little about 'high tech gear' have access to it, and everything needs to be dumbed down because some of these people can't be bothered/don't have the time to educate themselves about the products they are using.
A few of the posters here started the 'Apple are tricking people' rubbish.
I can picture it now... (Upset consumers conversation with lawyer.) "Apple miss sold me a phone. I am positive that the name indicated I was getting something far better than I did so Apple must owe me something, because after all, It is up to them to make sure I know everything about the product i'm buying because I'm stupid".
Lets face facts. It isn't documented anywhere that the iPhone 4 is a 4G device... because it isn't.
Having read through this thread, I really think that people buy these devices because 'everyone has them'.
A little anecdote I would like to share with this misconception is the time I went to work. The boss ask his assistant 'what iPhone model do I have?', in which the assistant replies 'I think you have the iPhone 4 because there was only the iPhone 3 and the iPhone 4, and the iPhone 4 is the latest one'. LMFAO!
Seriously, the iPhone 3G has led people to believe that they have the iPhone '4G' and the iPhone 4 has led people to believe that they have an iPhone '3'. A similar thing happened when the iPod Touch was released shorty after the iPhone was announced; people thought it was an 'iTouch'. Get it right people, it's called an iPod Touch.
A little anecdote I would like to share with this misconception is the time I went to work. The boss ask his assistant 'what iPhone model do I have?', in which the assistant replies 'I think you have the iPhone 4 because there was only the iPhone 3 and the iPhone 4, and the iPhone 4 is the latest one'. LMFAO!
Seriously, the iPhone 3G has led people to believe that they have the iPhone '4G' and the iPhone 4 has led people to believe that they have an iPhone '3'. A similar thing happened when the iPod Touch was released shorty after the iPhone was announced; people thought it was an 'iTouch'. Get it right people, it's called an iPod Touch.
It's so awesome when we have people we can look down on, huh?
Some of the smartest people I know have no clue when it comes to technology. Not being able to keep track of every little advance in some esoteric field of communication technology or the newest, biggest, buzziest acronym that comes along doesn't make someone a moron. Get off your high horses.
Well put. I wonder how many of these geniuses here understand and could explain the technology in the cars they drive? Do they have double overhead cam? What's a cam? Can they get four instead of two? Eight, 12? How about engine displacement? That doesn't sound good, does it? So we must want less, rather than more displacement, right? Or maybe we should just buy a car without any engine displacement, but that might be expensive.
I feel sorry for the friends of some of these people who go to them for buying advice. They're going to get long and arcane answers, and go away confused and feeling like idiots if they don't follow the advice. They'll only do it once, though.
What a fraud
Tsk, tsk. And you thought you could fool people on a technical forum with this crap? Go away and don't come back.
or at least, that's what Best Buy thinks they shipped me.
I had to get my iPhone 4 replaced, and since I purchased it through Best Buy, I went back to them to get the replacement. They had to ship it off to Apple, and when it came back, this is what we saw
That box was one that just HAD to be kept.
Tsk, tsk. And you thought you could fool people on a technical forum with this crap? Go away and don't come back.
Or how about we buy a car that "Just works". Sounds familiar? Well Honda is doing very well on that principle.
I don't know if I would consider them to be doing "very well" considering a decrease month to date in almost every single Honda division when comparing sales from June 2011 and June 2010.
I've been satisfied with my purchase since Dec 2006. But that was a purple patch for Honda. Which auto maker is doing insane profits right now?
I didn't say that they made crappy cars, just that they have not really been doing that great in sales. Every model of car they sell except for the fit (which increased by 20%) and the Element (+4%) decreased in sales, and that includes Acura models as well, and most models decreased by double digits. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't say that's doing very well.... car sales in total were down 31.6% and truck sales down 14.2%
Probably because Kia is cheaper and "good enough". Honda makes rock-solid vehicles that look good and perform super reliable.
in fairness, why wasn't the first iphone called "iPhone 1", and the second iPhone 2? you can't arbitrarily assign a name to something and then change that, and say "what? huh? we didn't do that"
iPhone 1 = 2G(edge) data device (also in fairness, the community named it the iPhone 2g, not really apple)
iPhone 2 = 3G data device, so apple called it the 3G, although it's a second generation device. it differed from the 2G in no way internally. just a plastic case on the back, presumably for less 3G radio interference.
iPhone 3 = 3G data device, different hardware, faster, so tack on the S.
so far, all devices are named in terms of the data radio.
iPhone 4 = 3G data device. technically the 4th iteration of the device, so now we reverse established nomenclature and go BACK on naming the device by the radio, and go back to generational nomenclature?
if apple is anything, it isn't stupid. i'd contend that its pretty obvious they chose to do this to obfuscate, and get a leg up. they knew they wouldn't have a competing /real/ 4G device on the market before other companies do, so Apple is playing off the ladies' tee (so to speak) while they wait for 4G to become more widely adopted by carriers, and reliability and battery life come into clearer view. this will work with a majority of the population who doesn't know/care about technology, as much as they care about having the newest fashion. you will have people like me who have followed the cellular industry for decades before the iphone came to life, who will see right through this.
iPhone 1 = 2G(edge) data device (also in fairness, the community named it the iPhone 2g, not really apple)
iPhone 2 = 3G data device, so apple called it the 3G, although it's a second generation device. it differed from the 2G in no way internally. just a plastic case on the back, presumably for less 3G radio interference.
iPhone 3 = 3G data device, different hardware, faster, so tack on the S.
so far, all devices are named in terms of the data radio.
iPhone 4 = 3G data device. technically the 4th iteration of the device, so now we reverse established nomenclature and go BACK on naming the device by the radio, and go back to generational nomenclature?
if apple is anything, it isn't stupid. i'd contend that its pretty obvious they chose to do this to obfuscate, and get a leg up. they knew they wouldn't have a competing /real/ 4G device on the market before other companies do, so Apple is playing off the ladies' tee (so to speak) while they wait for 4G to become more widely adopted by carriers, and reliability and battery life come into clearer view. this will work with a majority of the population who doesn't know/care about technology, as much as they care about having the newest fashion. you will have people like me who have followed the cellular industry for decades before the iphone came to life, who will see right through this.
(my point being, you conveniently skipped a step. "first original iphone, mumble mumble mumble...iphone 3G! 3Gs was 3rd, now logically, iphone4!")
Nice photoshop on the box.
Best Buy does a much better job on their box graphics.
I obviously don't spend a lot of time in the MacRumors forums, which is why I didn't see your replies for nearly ten years. But just for the record: that wasn't a photoshop. The markings on that box were absolutely real, and that's why it was so funny that I decided to share.
Hope your lives have been filled with happiness and success in the last decade.