Apple changes iPad Wi-Fi + 4G name

This is lame from Apple. Dumbasses. They should have just called it iPad 3, and have been done with it. Now they're adding even more to the confusion. So now it will be called - "The New iPad WiFi + Cellular". Lame.

Your average non-technical Apple is going to be scratching head big time.
 
Saajid said:
This is lame from Apple. Dumbasses. They should have just called it iPad 3, and have been done with it. Now they're adding even more to the confusion. So now it will be called - "The New iPad WiFi + Cellular". Lame.

Your average non-technical Apple is going to be scratching head big time.
Click to expand...

+1
 
Saajid said:
This is lame from Apple. Dumbasses. They should have just called it iPad 3, and have been done with it. Now they're adding even more to the confusion. So now it will be called - "The New iPad WiFi + Cellular". Lame.

Your average non-technical Apple is going to be scratching head big time.
Click to expand...

Relax.

It has nothing to do with the iPad generation naming scheme. It is the differentiation between wifi-only and wifi+cellular (previously described as wifi+3G) as functional differences between the devices. It is purely a descriptive add-on, necessitated by the hoards of retards that expected 4G functionality, even though they live in an area or country with no 4G service.
 
SiriS said:
Relax.

It has nothing to do with the iPad generation naming scheme. It is the differentiation between wifi-only and wifi+cellular (previously described as wifi+3G) as functional differences between the devices. It is purely a descriptive add-on, necessitated by the hoards of retards that expected 4G functionality, even though they live in an area or country with no 4G service.
Click to expand...

Those "hoards of retards" are Apples target market that want a simple easy to use device thats not complicated.

Since all ipads come with wifi wouldnt it just have been simpler to have an ipad 3 AND and ipad 3g/LTE no need to make the name long like some cheap chinese products.

Apples forte has always been ease of use and lack of complications...they should stick to it.It has made them billions already.
 
Last edited:
SiriS said:
Relax.

It has nothing to do with the iPad generation naming scheme. It is the differentiation between wifi-only and wifi+cellular (previously described as wifi+3G) as functional differences between the devices. It is purely a descriptive add-on, necessitated by the hoards of retards that expected 4G functionality, even though they live in an area or country with no 4G service.
Click to expand...

More so, it represents a poor choice by Apple to implement a 4G chip that only supported US carriers -- this type of crap makes me concerned about the quality of Apple's products going forward.

One can only hope this is a sufficiently swift enough kick up their butts to limit this type of crap going forward.
 
falcon786 said:
Those "hoards of retards" are Apples target market that want a simple easy to use device thats not complicated.

Since all ipads come with wifi wouldnt it just have been simpler to have and ipad 3 AND and ipad 3g/LTE no need to make the name long like some cheap chinese products.

Apples forte has always been ease of use and lack of complications...they should stick to it.It has made them billions already.
Click to expand...

I suppose they could have made it simpler. Although then people would complain that they didn't know the iPad 3G included wifi, so they bought the other one. Fact is they sell one product in the tablet market - iPad. That tablet comes in two flavours, wifi and wifi+4g. How difficult is that to understand?

As usual I suspect a lot of fuss is being made by 0.00001% of users. The rest just applied their brains.
 
[)roi(];8231167 said:
More so, it represents a poor choice by Apple to implement a 4G chip that only supported US carriers -- this type of crap makes me concerned about the quality of Apple's products going forward.

One can only hope this is a sufficiently swift enough kick up their butts to limit this type of crap going forward.
Click to expand...

I didn't realise they are only compatible with US carriers' LTE (700Mhz). Might be a ploy by Apple to force the rest of the world to follow the 700Mhz standard, as at the moment the US is miles ahead in LTE roll out? They have the clout to do it - and it makes sense to not have to cater for every and each flavour of LTE different countries implement. Interesting topic, will read up some more.
 
SiriS said:
I didn't realise they are only compatible with US carriers' LTE (700Mhz). Might be a ploy by Apple to force the rest of the world to follow the 700Mhz standard, as at the moment the US is miles ahead in LTE roll out? They have the clout to do it - and it makes sense to not have to cater for every and each flavour of LTE different countries implement. Interesting topic, will read up some more.
Click to expand...
The same crap occurred with the CDMA vs GSM I.e. America just assumed the world would follow it, history shows us Europe's implementation is the better global standard to follow, and I'm sure LTE will be no different.

I expect more from Apple -- they should have implemented a chip which supports a wider LTE band diversity.

It's good for us that there's been such a negative response around the globe, because ICASA and our Gov would never have done anything; so thankfully we follow European standards and thankfully we're not that dependant on our Gov.
 
Saajid said:
This is lame from Apple. Dumbasses. They should have just called it iPad 3, and have been done with it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Regardless of WHAT they call it, the rest of the world call it "iPad 3".
 
[)roi(];8231273 said:
The same crap occurred with the CDMA vs GSM I.e. America just assumed the world would follow it, history shows us Europe's implementation is the better global standard to follow, and I'm sure LTE will be no different.

I expect more from Apple -- they should have implemented a chip which supports a wider LTE band diversity.

It's good for us that there's been such a negative response around the globe, because ICASA and our Gov would never have done anything; so thankfully we follow European standards and thankfully we're not that dependant on our Gov.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have been such an issue of they called it 4G and most of the rest of the world still doesn't have 4G/LTE. But from what I've read now 4G/LTE has actually been fairly widely rolled out in Europe and Asia - albeit on different frequencies than Verizon and AT&T - hence they don't work with the iPad. In which case I would agree that the branding of the new iPad as 4G is simply wrong.
 
Also, don't forget the fact that technically speaking, there are still no 4G implementations out there. LTE Advanced is the only true 4G technology. LTE plain, is still a 3G technology. Remember the whole Cell C 4G/4Gs chaos?
 
SiriS said:
It wouldn't have been such an issue of they called it 4G and most of the rest of the world still doesn't have 4G/LTE. But from what I've read now 4G/LTE has actually been fairly widely rolled out in Europe and Asia - albeit on different frequencies than Verizon and AT&T - hence they don't work with the iPad. In which case I would agree that the branding of the new iPad as 4G is simply wrong.
Click to expand...
I agree, they are at fault.

This one IMO is still going to have a lot of mileage I.e expect some court cases where consumers start suing Apple re they bought the device expecting a faster 4G connection (name linked)...

A stupid schoolboy mistake, not something we accustomed to from Apple.

Saajid said:
Also, don't forget the fact that technically speaking, there are still no 4G implementations out there. LTE Advanced is the only true 4G technology. LTE plain, is still a 3G technology. Remember the whole Cell C 4G/4Gs chaos?
Click to expand...
True... but the fact the iPad 3 has a chip that will never support LTE even at mid tier speeds, outside of the US, really sucks...
 
Last edited:
The problem with the naming here is actually the iPad 2. Had they called the iPad 2 just iPad, like the iPad 1, it would have been fine. Look at the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro - no number to indicate versioning. Same with many other products, like cars.

For some reason, Apple went with iPad 2, when they decided to abandon the numbering convention, people complained. Looking at it from the MacBook Air and Pro point of view, its a silly thing to complain about. Guess it shows how much humans love patterns?
 
SiriS said:
Qualcomm has reportedly launched a multi-band LTE chip, we'll probably only see it in ipad "4" and iphone 5.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/406011-qualcomm-firing-on-all-frequencies

The whole 4G/LTE terminology/spec/marketing issue is bloody confusing.
Click to expand...
Good to know, but still sucks for everyone that bought the IPad 3 that was marketed as a 4G device :(

Strange that they didn't delay until this was available, it's not as if they had significant competition forcing them to release earlier.

In the past many products have been delayed past typical upgrade schedules re unavailability of Intel tech or SSD ram, ...

Still for me a terrible schoolboy error and knowledge of this only compounds my disappointment. :(
 
Last edited:
Why do they feel the need to make 2 different models, anyway?

Make one iPad. Don't need cellular connectivity? Don't stick a micro-SIM in it, then.

Sure it would cost in terms of more radio parts that would have to be paid for. OTOH, it would simplify packaging, inventory control, advertising ... In the long run it would even out.

In a sense this is already happening: Some time back I read that the top-selling iPad2s were the 16Gb wifi and the 64Gb kitchen sink models. The 32s weren't selling that well (this was in the US). Not everybody who bought the 64s immediately put a SIM in it. It's just nice to have the option when you need it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X