Apple screws Ipad 3 customers with iPad 4

Carl, I think you are missing the Stephen's point. I hear alot of condescending remarks from some to others who are raising legitimate points. Stephen's main point, like others in the UK, EU, is not that Apple simply released a new product. The issues are:

1) iPad 3 was sold in those markets as advertised that it would work on newer 4G or those areas equivalent systems. This is the famed statement that Apple Store clerks were telling buyers "it's future proof". As an Apple Share Holder and one who regularly travels to the UK, I can assure you clerks were saying this. When a corker bought hers in the UK, I had to ask the guy what he meant by "future proof." He Said any bugs would be addressed with software updates. Now, that makes sense as most of us know there are always bugs that software updates fix. The connectivity problem is not a software caused bug, and the only way to fix it is a new iPad with the right hardware. Now, whether this "futute proof" was an Apple directive remains unclear. For those in the US, its not an issue as the iPad 3 can draw to 3G which won't be fully gone for another 2-3 yrs or use a smartphone with 4G and utilize the hotspot wifi of the phone. UK/EU dies not have that luxory.

2) Apple knew of the issue. While Apple prides itself on secrecy, they're Genius clerks in the stores, at least here in the states readily share bug issues. I've had similar experiences with tech support, and I knife many who work for Apple who readily give updates regarding the product issues.

3) Knowing the issue in EU/UK, Apple is stuck in a way for if they told customers in those regions to hold off because the iPad 4 was coming, word have spread around the globe. What do you do with a surplus of iPad 3s as world wide buyers stop buying the 3 awaiting the 4? This IS why buyers were not told.

4) I cant feel too bad for those running into return issues from Resellers. Buy from Apple direct is best for many reasons. For example, Best Buy in the US wants $95 for 1st service plan on Macbooks, while Apple's 1st yr is free

The reality is, Apple released 4 because they knew the issue in EU/UK. This was the same flaw as the original antenna placement in early iPhones. And when Jobs was leading, he readily put it out there to consumers that a new design was forth coming. He didn't release a new phone in 6 mos. He spent the needed time to make the fix, and released on the next year model.

As I've posted before, in the US, this type of maneuver would immediately bring scrutiny by regulators and Attorney Generals here, and it already has per my peers with the California Dept of Justice. Though bring in that field, I think Apple is fine here as I said, this doesn't affect 3s here. Yet, in the EU, a much more regulatory system in place. If I was one who wants to be heard, don't post here, but file complaints with regulators in EU/UK

Ha! I don't knife many ego work for Apple, but rather "know many"

Carl I guess you don't own an Ipad 3 or do and don't live in the EU.

JL1365 I think you have some very valid points.

1) As JL1365 says the 3 was marketed as 4G in the EU. I quickly became apparent that the 4G would not work in the EU, but no official statements were made on this from Apple. Had I known at the time of purchase that a new updated usable 4G version would come out already in October I would have waited to buy no doubt. Point is I didn't. Only Apple knew but wasn't sharing the info. Again as JL1365 states this was most likely kept secret as long as possible in order not to stop the sales of the Ipad 3 completely.

2) Of course I know that new versions come out all the time. My point is that a product life cycle of only 6 months might not be such a wise move from a strategic marketing perspective. Apple products are not cheap and if you know that a new and in this case severely improved version (in the EU) is likely to be released within 6 months why would I buy the current version - only religious apple fans or people with no monye issues just wanting everything new regardless of the cost, would do this. Instead of the anticipation that apple is know for up to product releases customers get a sense of anxiety instead that their recently purchased apple product might be the next to go in the grave. And note there is a big difference between making a new version and making a product totally obsolete (no longer sold nor supported by apple). The resale value will be close to zero meaning that I will be too costly for ipad 3 owners to sell of their now obsolete product to buy the new iPad.

3) I don't think that apple owes me anything but some concern for their customer base. As many others in this thread has noted it appears that apple has moved from the Steve Jobs focus on innovation to a more narrow profit oriented focus. Then they compete on anything but the innovation and in a pure pricing-game they will loose. If you see the share price it has dropped some 20 pct. from September 2012 i.e. a reduction in market value of USD 138 billion. If I was apple I would care more for my customers than this.

In Denmark there are currently court trials on banks that happily sold bank-shares only 3 months before the bank went bankrupt with shareholders loosing everything. I know this is not the same, but I wonder how apple can happily sell iPad 3's well knowing that it will be obsoleted (not only replaced with a newer version) within the very short term. It's not fun to buy "The New Ipad" only to see it become obsolete a couple of months later.

Yes they were constructive, I suggested ways to improve informing consumers through proper naming of products. Your replies are just words of 'stop whining' which I find completely uninformative 'extra' information that you do not have to input. I am not attacking you but practices which you having nothing to do with.

This thread being here with DELETED posts and the rest of the deleted threads shows Apple only allows this to keep from a complete riot, just allow enough to justify responses such as yours.

Yes the reseller is at fault, but the consumer has a difficult time if buying from apple/applestore is not easy or possible and rely on the staff. The reseller is effectively acting as an agent, if there is a warranty issue apple is eventually the one involved is it not? When smokers sue over a bad product they sue the tobacco company not the local deli that sold the packet right?

You seem to think that people know about technology to spot the differences easy as pie. I could, but I'm sure my parents couldn't spot an iphone from any other phone and therefore must rely upon the salesperson. e.g. if all consumers were tech savvy enough as you suggest they should be they would not buy a mac...you could easily buy off the shelf hardware at half the price with equal to or greater specs than the Apple equivalent and then install OSX on there. It can be done, but how many consumers are even aware that is possible?

Report a reseller? Oh you know I've been to various resellers with ill informed staff including K Mart, Big W, Myer, Target, etc. places which probably sell more Apple gear than Apple itself...have you seen any store have their reseller status 'revoked' because of a complaint? I haven't seen any sanctions imposed on anyone, Please! You keep your job at Apple.

And if you read my original post, I'm not saying it was broken, it was in essence bought not fit for the purpose being the wrong version as sold by stupid staff i.e. never wanted in the first place. Now I do not know which consumer laws apply as it was bought overseas so I'll cut you off with the 'reseller should do this or that' because as you are aware the policy rests with the reseller and consumer rights are dependent on jurisdiction.

JL1365 wrote:

The reality is, Apple released 4 because they knew the issue in EU/UK. This was the same flaw as the original antenna placement in early iPhones.

That simply is not true. If you knew the facts of the matter you'd know that Apple was caught in the middle on this issue and not the cause of it. It was in fact the manufacture of the chip (Broadcom) that was the cause. They told Apple that they could not supply Apple with enough new chips for the iPad3. Apple did not want to have one iPad3 with one chip, and another iPad3 with the newer, so they held off until the manufacture could produce enough chips to supply the needed numbers for the iPad. There are other reasons why Apple brought out the iPad 4 when they did. It was not one thing, but Apple wanted to address the Broadcom issue as soon as they could, and doing it now via the iPad4 was the right time.

I simply don't see how your reply has anything to do with what JL1365 writes. If Apple would solve a chip issue by releasing a newer version in the same year as the iPad 3 why would they market the product as "The New iPad" with one of the greates selling propositions being the 4G??? Had they said that nobody would have considered buying the iPad 3 in March.

mickeyau wrote:

Yes the reseller is at fault, but the consumer has a difficult time if buying from apple/applestore is not easy or possible and rely on the staff.

I agree that Apple should be naming its products in a more logical manner. It's almost as if they go out of their way not to name a product logically, but that said it IS their product to name, and whateverthey choose to do is no excuse for consumers to whine about it. The responsibility of buying the right product falls at the feet of the consumer. If someone is confused between two similar products, then it is their responsibility to research both products and learn the differences between them. You cannot rely on 'off the street' sales clerks just because they work at a certain store. The more a consumer is confused over two similar products, the more it behooves them to learn the differences.

mickeyau wrote:

When smokers sue over a bad product they sue the tobacco company not the local deli that sold the packet right?

Actually that would be wrong. People sue who ever they can (unfortunately). They go after the biggest pockets first but that doesn't stop them from going after other places.

mickeyau wrote:

have you seen any store have their reseller status 'revoked' because of a complaint?

Yes of course. If enough people complain then it happens. This is one of the reasons for such organizations as the BBB to use one example.

mickeyau wrote:

Now I do not know which consumer laws apply as it was bought overseas so I'll cut you off with the 'reseller should do this or that' because as you are aware the policy rests with the reseller and consumer rights are dependent on jurisdiction.

So let me get this straight, you bought something as important (and costly) as a iPad overseas, knowing that if something went wrong with it that you'd have no recourse? Sorry but that was YOUR fault. YOU made that decision, not Apple. Take ownership of your decision instead of trying to pawn it off on someone else or some company. Mark it up to a learning experience.

Ah now I see you truly did not read my original post...I said my uncle, who lives overseas, sent me the ipad after he bought it for me as a present. Which is why I am obviously not in a position to do anything about it from where I am.

I see you've put it back on the consumer...I guess you should tell Apple to stop suing others for 'copying' their products and that the legal argument should be that even if there are 2 almost identical looking products sold with the same name they should inform themselves fully and not rely upon marketing material or sales staff who might tell them the wrong thing.

It's called vicarious liability, you don't sue the 'deepest pockets' only...you can't just sue someone for no reason, Apple are ultimately responsible for their products.

The BBB? So you are wanting a third party to try to force Apple to do something (even though they have no real power to) before they should change their policy? Ah I see...Has that been successful in revoking a reseller's status? Please do tell. Do you see the fine print Apple uses to satisfy a Court Order to provide an apology to Samsung in the UK? That's the best a Court can do what is your complaint going to do?

mickeyau wrote:

I said my uncle, who lives overseas, sent me the ipad after he bought it for me as a present.

Then that would be your uncles fault, and not Apples. I would think that common sense would dictate that something like a gift certificate would have made more sense. He also could have purchased from the Apple store and sent the (US version) iPad to you. Many other options. Anyway what's done is done, but the point is don't blame Apple for someone else's bad decision making.

mickeyau wrote:

Apple are ultimately responsible for their products.

If you feel that way then take them to court, but just be prepared to hear the judge laugh in your face, that's all I'm saying 😁

mickeyau wrote:

The BBB? So you are wanting a third party to try to force Apple to do something (even though they have no real power to) before they should change their policy?

It's called a intermediary 😉 Of course if your complaint has no merit then you need to take responsibility for that.

JannikMM wrote:

If Apple would solve a chip issue...

There was nothing for Apple to "solve". Apple did not produce the chip, Broadcom did! You need to understand that fact first before anything else will make sense. Broadcom sells to MANY manufactures. Apple was not the only vender waiting for the new chip. Broadcom can only produce but so many chips at a time. Since Broadcom could not guarantee Apple that they would (could) meet Apples production needs, Apple wisely decided to hold off and put the chip in the next version of the iPad.

JannikMM wrote:

Had they said that nobody would have considered buying the iPad 3 in March.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to ask. As worded above it makes no sense, but I can tell you this, that before you use a iPad (any version) you agree to certain terms od use. One of those is that you allow the manufacture (in this case Apple) to make improvements without your consent. This is a standard terms of use that ALL manufactures use. Apple is a business and in case you didn't know businesses are in business to make money. The Broadcom issue was well known to anyone who researched it. Apple didn't hide anything. Just because Apple didn't go out of their way and send everyone a letter in the mail explaining the situation doesn't mean they did anything worng. No other manufacture would have done that either. Most people research products before they buy them. I don't see how it's a manufactures fault when people don't do their own research before buying a product.

I blame Apple for selling a product with a chip that does not work as intended and then not fixing the issue, but just making another product. They marketed iPad 3 as 4G globally knowing that it didn't work. Maybe they should have waited until the chip was ready instead of selling a flawed version of the iPad. To word it correctly (hopefully as I'm not natively English) I mean that if Apple had told me in March that a new version with actual 4G would come out in October I would have postponed my purchase until October. I decided to buy as I expected the next release to be at least 1 year ahead and wanted "The New Ipad". However I cannot buy "The New iPad" twice a year - what's up with that?

I know that Apple is in business to make money. My point is that with this kind of behaviour they are likely to loose customers and thus money in the long run.

You cannot expect customers to do scientific research before buying a product. If you cannot trus the company selling the product you will loose confidence in them and maybe not trust them again, thus hurting the company and its profit. Trust is the number one lesson for any long term business endeavour. As stated previously, look at the drop in share price from September 2012 till now (20 pct. down)! The trust is gone.

JannikMM wrote:

I blame Apple for selling a product with a chip that does not work as intended and then not fixing the issue, but just making another product.

Well the 4th gen was the other product. They could not come out with it sooner because Broadcom couldn't make enough chips. BTW, I don't see you complaining to Broadcom. They were the whole reason that everything happened.

JannikMM wrote:

if Apple had told me in March that a new version with actual 4G would come out in October I would have postponed my purchase until October.

Seriously, do you hear yourself talking? When has ANY manufacture done anything like that? So when you bought your iPad and you set it up and realized that it wouldn't work correctly, you just kept it and didn't return it? Gotta say, that was your fault.

JannikMM wrote:

I decided to buy as I expected the next release to be at least 1 year ahead and wanted "The New Ipad".

Again, that is your assumption and so rightly your fault. Show me where Apple has at any time said that they would release new product one year apart. If you can show such a statement then it is Apples fault and you have a justly claim. However, if you cannot find any place where Apple publicly said such a thing, then it was YOUR assumption, and therefore your mistake.

JannikMM wrote:

You cannot expect customers to do scientific research before buying a product.

Maybe not, but you can still return the product when you learn it doesn't meet your needs. BTW, I do research all of my products, sometimes close to a year in advance, so I know it's not out of the question if something is important enough to you.

JannikMM wrote:

As stated previously, look at the drop in share price from September 2012 till now (20 pct. down)! The trust is gone.

It has NOTHING to do with trust. ALL stocks are falling, mostly because of Greece and how investors feel uncertain towards the economy. And that's 20 points down from their record high, not normal levels. Big difference! The fall has nothing to do with Apple and more to do with the marketplace in general.

"They marketed iPad 3 as 4G globally knowing that it didn't work."

No, that's not true. If you know that's true, you can become very rich by becoming the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit.

"Maybe they should have waited until the chip was ready instead of selling a flawed version of the iPad"

Concentrating on your very first word - "maybe". If you believed that Apple purposely lied, and misled, you'd have posted without the first word.

So you are telling me that Apple was not aware that the 4G standard in Europe is different from the one in the US?

Look! I do not expect that Apple will compensate the iPad 3 owners because it will cost them too much. I'm just saying that as a customer I have lost some trust in the company and will think twice the next time I consider buying from Apple, which I wouldn't before.

Why should I blame Broadcom? At least they were honest about their chip not working.

Regarding the stocks, I don't know which planet you live on? A 20 pct drop is huge even in a bear market and not something the shareholders can be happy about. Do you think it would havdropped 20 with SJ still on board?