http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/ Engadget Comments for Apple, AT&T get sued for misleading 3G claims, again http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
what a dick]]>Mar 20th 2009 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
I'm just saying, if Apple or AT&T wish to offer the world, they better provide it....
]]>Mar 20th 2009 2:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 3:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 3:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/ O
R
I
N
G
]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
And of course, the iHatters cattle follow in a stampede spewing poison. ]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
I particularly like "look how simple and easy it is" with the tagline underneath saying "process simplified and steps removed".]]>Mar 20th 2009 4:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 7:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/

It was Firestone and ford that got sued and that was a big deal because people died and got seriously injured. The two cases don't even have a thing to do with each other so what are you comparing them for?

Guess when your a Windoze user you get used to ignoring the important details...]]>Mar 20th 2009 7:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
What do they do, wear hats all day long?

I believe that when it's a speed issue, the carrier should be at least mostly responsible, especially if they've advertised that they have full 3G service in the area in question. If other devices aren't having the same issue, then we can start blaming the manufacturer of the device. Plus, the carrier should endeavor to make sure that the device doesn't have any issues with the 3G network before they start advertising it's capabilities. I've never been too happy with AT&T's service myself.. seems to be a lot of dead areas on their network where you can't even get a signal, let along a 3G signal.]]>Mar 20th 2009 9:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Yes, I do realize that I was making fun of another poster's spelling and then went and made a stupid mistake of my own. I'm truly sorry. =D
]]>Mar 20th 2009 9:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
If the phone could not get a fast/reliable AT&T connection anywhere, not just where this dude lives, then it could be argued as false advertising. That is a big if.

By the same token, he would have to prove that all iPhone 3Gs are technically not capable of delivering 3G speeds and that Apple, knowing this, advertised otherwise. This is false of course, so he won't be able to prove it. As for AT&T coverage, I do believe there is a clause in the contract that stipulates that coverage may not be uniform in all areas.

Either way, you're given 30 days to test it out and return the phone if it does not work for you. His case is going to get thrown out of court like bad milk.]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Wireless availability, especially in the US, is patchy and unreliable. It has nothing to do with Apple specifically.]]>Mar 20th 2009 5:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Lame.]]>Mar 20th 2009 6:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Im in maine now, we just got 3g, a very tiny area is covered, my home yes, but my work no. so i feel that i should get more coverage, can i have a cool million for this?]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 3:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
That's because all the people flocked to AT&T for iPhone, leaving plenty of bandwidth for all the rest of you.]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 4:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 5:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
My BlackBerry Bold on AT&T usually only gets about 1mbps.

Sure, AT&T's 3G can theoretically go faster but in my experience it's not even close right now. I also get AT&T's 3G in less places than Sprint's.]]>Mar 20th 2009 6:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Here's a clue, Sprint's EVDO Rev. A network is the fastest, period.
7-8Mbps is on a good day in a well connected city, but not ridiculous at all. ]]>Mar 21st 2009 6:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 21st 2009 8:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
If anyone here had intermittent 3G data, never mind having calls routinely drop (wtf!), we'd be on a competing network within a week or two. ]]>Mar 20th 2009 2:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
I don't have a choice. Attached to a corporate contract.]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/Mar 20th 2009 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Really iKurt Mark III you fucking apple idiot. Did YOU read the article before you said that?]]>Mar 20th 2009 2:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
His slowdown is caused by a loss of 3G service, not the 3G being slow. This is pretty obvious if you have even mediocre comprehension skills.

Accept that you screwed up while in a rush to hate on these companies and move on, defending yourself any more is just embarrassing.]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
"His slowdown is caused by a loss of 3G service, not the 3G being slow. This is pretty obvious if you have even mediocre comprehension skills."

Say it with me now, SLOWdown.]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
"Filed in the United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Damone Dickerson claims that Apple misrepresented the speed, strength and performance of the 3G network."

"This isn't the first lawsuit claiming Apple and AT&T mispresented the speed of the 3G network."

and right here in engadgets post.

"who has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey that again takes aim at the pair over allegedly misleading claims about 3G speeds "

Need i say more?]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Granted, I don't think this guy should get a few million bucks for it - just enough to cover his legal costs. AT&T should be forced to either upgrade their 3G infrastructure or stop the false advertising.

If the FCC and monopoly law in this country wasn't so fucked up in the first place - a reasonable argument could be made that AT&T shouldn't be allowed to have an exclusive partnership with Apple to carry this phone. I honestly believe we'd all be better off if the FCC forced phone mfgs to provide devices that work equally on all networks.

Just my two cents though...]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Yeah that shows how much you know about telecom. Intermittence is one thing, where a fast signal is constantly interrupted so badly (CRCs, aborts, carrier transitions, etc), thereby causing the phone having to re-establish a link to a cell. A slow but constant connection is something completely different, caused by a number of things or merely by virtue of distance from the nearest cell. To the customer they may appear like the same thing though.

Now, you're full of it. You're simply accusing AT&T of blatantly lying about their services being able to deliver a certain speed while knowingly being aware that it is not so. As I made you aware above, there are a number of things that may cause an otherwise fast signal from working well in certain places. That does not mean that the network itself is not fast. That would be like suing Ferrari because yours can't go fast in rush hour traffic.

That makes you a troll and the real iTard.]]>Mar 20th 2009 4:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Once again, it doesn't matter how you spin it, his connection is slow, and it doesn't matter why it's slow or what's causing the slowness his connection is slow.

You can keep coming up with more bullshit all you want, but can you answer one question. Is his connection slow, or is his connection not slow? Regardless of all your variables and telcom genious you want to throw into it. Answer that one question, slow connection or not slow connection?]]>Mar 20th 2009 4:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
All I did was prove I comprehended the article just fine, multiple times it mentioned slowness. So one of you explain where comprehension was off?

Like i said, you people will defend them to the death, even if the comment isn't directly aimed at them. Go find a wolf, sheep.]]>Mar 20th 2009 4:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
I went with AT&T and experienced no such problems =)]]>Mar 20th 2009 5:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Besides, I seem to remember something I read awhile ago.. something about a.. um.. I dunno.. Oh, that's right.. A law against monopolies?

Personally, I believe this sort of thing should be covered under this (if it isn`t already and the FTC is just too lazy to do anything about it). How many of us would like to go and buy a new computer and be told that it can only be used if it's connected with Time-Warner? Not knocking Time-Warner here, but what if you wanted to use Verizon? or lived in a location that wasn't serviced by Time-Warner? You'd be out of luck and probably pretty damn pissed off. Especially if Verizon had a better deal.

You can buy an iPhone from anywhere, as long as it's unlocked. But, of course, you can only use it if you pay AT&T for the privilege. This is complete crap and should be addressed immediately. And the iPhone obviously isn't the only culprit here either. The G1 can only be used if you're willing to sign on with T-Mobile. And we can say the same about almost every mobile device that has ever been created! After all (to use the example) if we had the ability to use our iPhones on more than just AT&T`s network, AT&T would be forced to upgrade and fix the problems. Otherwise, they`d pretty much be telling their customers to move to a competitor. All of the federal funds that are currently being used to pad CEO pockets should be more devoted to ensuring that we have choices when it comes to the companies we deal with. End of story.

There should be a class action lawsuit, but not against Apple or AT&T. It should be against the government agency that has allowed this whole thing to happen. If Microsoft can be sued for having a media player preinstalled in Windows (and we`re NOT EVEN BEING FORCED TO USE IT!) then this should NEVER be acceptable.]]>Mar 20th 2009 10:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
No such law. Do not confuse anti-trust behavior with a monopoly]]>Mar 21st 2009 1:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
the whole reason network providers pay big bucks to phone mfgs is so that they get new convertees

I don't like the contract system but i dont mind having exclusive devices, it's what makes your service attractive.

also, if you had said the iPhone should be on t-mobile i'd agree with you....but verizon and sprint? i assume you know that they use cdma instead of gsm, which you know... would mean apple would have to create a totally different device to accommodate that requirement.

apple isn't stupid enough to waste money on more R&D when they are already making boatloads and it would only dilute their brand image. look at motorola, they whored out their RAZR and now it's so commonplace they can hardly sell anything else. if you dilute the iPhone, the "coolness" factor goes down (remember when the razr was 500 bucks with contract??) if the coolness factor goes down less people will want it.. sure the apple fanatics and super geeks will love it's features and buy it but the average joe who walks into a cell store will gloss over it much like the razr now gets glossed over

so think about it, then post. there is no room for universal phones in the US it would require major restructuring on many companies part ]]>Mar 21st 2009 10:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
Please tell me the difference between these circumstances and the ones of Microsoft and Windows Media Player. I'm always excited to learn something new.

Whether or not there is a law against monopolies, the relationship between AT&T and Apple CAN be called a monopoly according to the definition* of the word, since not even T-Mobile is allowed to carry the phone in question (despite having the correct technology to do so) and therefore you cannot use the phone (even though you can buy it anywhere) unless you agree to AT&T's terms and conditions, not to mention their prices. In other markets this type of behavior would not be allowed. Why is it "OK" in the cellular market?

* Definition of monopoly: "a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller; 'a monopoly on silver'; 'when you have a monopoly you can ask any price' ..."

@V Langs

"there is no room for universal phones in the US it would require major restructuring on many companies part"

I believe that the fundamental reason that the cell phone markets have not gotten much cheaper even as technology evolves is BECAUSE the companies refuse to do any "major restructuring" to cope with the future demands that new technology and new ways to use technology will put on their networks. Nothing is truly forcing them to do so. Competition is the only way features will improve and prices will drop at all and this will not really start to happen until all companies are properly competing with each other. A large company like Apple (or Google with the G1) should not be allowed to skew the market by only providing the rights to offer their technology to one service provider.]]>Mar 21st 2009 3:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/video-windows-mobile-6-5-now-with-less-honeycomb/]]>Mar 20th 2009 2:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/20/apple-atandt-get-sued-for-misleading-3g-claims-again/
screw this idiot who didnt read his contract before signing ]]>Mar 20th 2009 3:38PM