There's been a lot of concern raised recently about Apple's use of the term "4G" to describe the cellular connectivity in the new iPad. There seems to be some confusion. I decided I'd try to make sense of it.

In the past, Apple has always been very careful when discussing the data connectivity in its products. For example, during the introduction of the iPhone 4S, Phil Schiller specifically mentioned HSDPA and 4G:

If you follow the phone industry, these numbers might sound familiar: 5.8Mbps up, 14.4Mbps down. Where have I heard that before? Well, this is what the majority of our competitors claim when they're talking about 4G performance.

The Motorola Atrix 4G, the LG Thrill 4G, the HTC Inspire 4G - they even put it in their names. We're not going to get into a debate in the industry of what's 4G and what isn't, that's for others to talk about. What's most important, when it comes to real world performance, is that the iPhone 4S is just as fast as all these phones.

The introduction of the third generation iPad was the first time Apple claimed one of its products had 4G capabilities. It seems that Apple's definition of what classifies as 4G is support for LTE. From the iPad 4G page on Apple.com:

The new iPad supports fast cellular networks around the world — including 4G LTE networks in the U.S. and Canada. So you can download content, stream video, and browse the web at amazing speeds. And if you’re in a location without a 4G LTE network, you’ll still get access to fast 3G networks including HSPA, HSPA+, and DC-HSDPA.

Most of the time Apple mentions the connectivity in the new iPad, they refer to it as "4G LTE". Even Apple's own data connectivity icon contains this phrase. This suggests Apple considers LTE to be "4G". Apple never mentioned 4G when introducting the iPhone 4S, even though competitors who were using similar technology in their phones at the same time flouted it. This suggests Apple doesn't consider HSPA, HSDPA/HSUPA, HSPA+, or DC-HSDPA to be "4G".

Why is this the case?

What Is 4G?

The maximum downlink speed for the fastest network which the iPad 2 and iPhone 4 can run on, HSDPA, is 7.2Mbps.

The maximum downlink speed for the fastest network which the iPhone 4S can run on, HSPA+, is 14.4Mbps.

The maximum downlink speed for the fastest network which the new iPad can run on, LTE, is 73Mbps.

This was clearly explained and demonstrated in Apple's keynote in March.

From Wikipedia's 4G page:

In March 2008, the International Telecommunications Union-Radio communications sector (ITU-R) specified a set of requirements for 4G standards, named the IMT-Advanced (International Mobile Telecommunications Advanced) specification, setting peak speed requirements for 4G service at 100 megabits per second (Mbit/s) for high mobility communication (such as from trains and cars) and 1 gigabit per second (Gbit/s) for low mobility communication (such as pedestrians and stationary users).

Since the above mentioned first-release versions of Mobile WiMAX and LTE support much less than 1 Gbit/s peak bit rate, they are not fully IMT-Advanced compliant, but are often branded 4G by service providers. On December 6, 2010, ITU-R recognized that these two technologies, as well as other beyond-3G technologies that do not fulfill the IMT-Advanced requirements, could nevertheless be considered "4G", provided they represent forerunners to IMT-Advanced compliant versions and "a substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed".

This last sentence is key. Apple clearly believes that HSPA+, the fastest cellular network technology in the iPhone 4S, does not provide a "substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities with respect to the initial third generation systems now deployed", therefore rendering it not a 4G technology. This is a fair call on Apple's part, as the improved performance between the 7.2Mbps and 14.4Mbps downlink of the iPhone 4/iPad 2 and iPhone 4S respectively doesn't seem like an overly "substantial level of improvement", however the improved performance between the 14.4Mbps and 73Mbps downlink of the iPhone 4S and new iPad seems extremely substantial.

The controversy being brought up with regards to Apple's use of 4G branding in countries outside the US is now somewhat clearer. We now know what Apple considers 4G and what Apple does not consider 4G. And we know why.

The Rest Of The World

I live in the UK. We don't have any 4G LTE coverage here. At least not yet. The new iPad is still marketed on Apple's UK site as supporting 4G, even though there are no 4G networks here. Apple is making no false claims: make no mistake, the new iPad supports 4G. Why should Apple hide this fact, just because no UK carriers support 4G?

The wording on the UK iPad's data connectivity page is extremely careful and clear. The phrase "LTE" appears once: here. This is not misleading at all.

In Australia, three carriers officially support the new iPad: Optus, Telstra and Vodafone. Out of these three carriers, one claims to support 4G LTE - Telstra. The problem Apple faces here is that Telstra's 4G LTE coverage is on a different frequency to the supported 4G frequencies of the third generation iPad. The iPad supports LTE frequencies of 700MHz and 2100MHz. In Australia, only the 1800MHz LTE frequency is supported by Telstra. This means that even if you buy a 4G iPad in Australia, and subscribe to Telstra's LTE service, you will only receive DC-HSDPA speeds.

This is unfortunate, and a limit of technology. But Apple is not trying to make any false claims. In fact, Apple is extremely clear on the iPad's 4G page that 4G LTE is only supported in specific countries:

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.

iPhone 4S on AT&T - The Odd One Out

Unfortunately, the state of 4G throughout Apple devices isn't quite that simple. That's a screenshot of an iPhone 4S. It clearly shows "4G" in the menu bar. But we've determined already that Apple doesn't consider HSPA+, the fastest data connection which the iPhone 4S supports, to be 4G. The term "4G" doesn't appear once on Apple's iPhone 4S website.

So why does 4G appear in the menu bar?

Well, it turns out that AT&T know HSPA+ isn't 4G, but they're trying to push it anyway. My guess is that AT&T forced Apple to allow them to display that 4G menu bar item. 4G LTE coverage is being heavily promoted by Verizon - that must make AT&T want to retaliate somehow.

Here's a screenshot of the data downlink on a new iPad, with Verizon 4G LTE coverage. Doesn't quite match AT&T's fake 4G, does it?

What Have We Learned?

Wireless networking is a crazy world. Different carriers, different frequencies, different standards. It's a big, hairy mess. Apple has tailored every country's iPad 4G page to show the carriers which support the iPad in that country and has clearly stated which countries and carriers support 4G LTE.

In Australia, because of the confusion, Apple is offering free refunds, no questions asked.

If anything, what we can draw from this whole charade is that Apple is honest and open to customers and willing to go beyond the call of duty to ensure every buyer is satisfied and happy. What more could we ask?

On the other hand some carriers seem happy to be sneaky and push confusion onto customers by bending the truth. I'm glad I'm in the UK where this 4G stuff isn't a problem, but if I were in the US, I'd be on Verizon. Their support rocks.

Why Protection

I recently described how I bought my iPhone, along with my reasons for doing so. One of these reasons is my desire to upgrade to the most recent iPhone each time there's a new release, so I'm always up to date. I try and do this at the lowest cost possible.

When I upgrade to a new iPhone, I sell my then-old phone to help cover the cost of upgrading. This has worked out well in the past for me, because Apple products hold their value. One way to ensure you get the highest possible resale price for your old iPhone is to keep it in the best condition you can.

Because iPhones are pretty much slabs of glass with a computer inside, the most important part of the device to protect is the screen.

This way of thinking led me to purchase a ZAGG invisibleSHIELD iPhone 4/4S Screen Protector for my iPhone 4S. This type of screen protector consists of two sheets of plastic - one for the front and one for the rear of the device.

What Works

The ZAGG invisibleSHIELD is manufactured from a "Military grade patented material" which ZAGG describe in this way:

The authentic invisibleSHIELD film features Nano-Memory technology, which is visible as a very subtle texture in the surface of the film. This superior component of this screen cover offers four main competitive benefits:

• Durability - Self-healing properties offer unbelievable resistance to scratches and damage, and will extend the life of your device.

• Coverage - Greater pliability and flexibility allows the invisibleSHIELD designs to cover the corners and curves of your device better than the competition.

• Ease of Install - The improved pliability also facilitates easier installation.

• Drop Resistant - Improved grip makes it easier to hang onto your expensive gadgets.

• Glare Reduction - The iPhone 4 screen protector gives your device a slight "orange peel" finish that breaks up glare and reduces finger print smudges, while still creating high resolution screen viewing clarity.

It is remarkably simple to install. ZAGG provide easy instructions and plenty of tools (there's even a liquid spray to lubricate your iPhone's screen) in the box.

It's impossible to deny that these screen protectors are anything short of impressive pieces of engineering. The film is incredibly tough and resilliant to scratches. In one especially stupid moment, I put my iPhone in the same pocket as my keys. Later, when I realised what I'd done and removed my phone, there were a couple of marks on the invisibleSHIELD, however after running my finger over the mark and leaving it for a few hours, any signs of damage which were there had gone. It was almost as if the invisibleSHIELD had repaired itself. It was quite remarkable.

From my research of iPhone screen protectors (before deciding on ZAGG's) it was clear that the invisibleSHIELD offered the most protection. This is undoubtedly true. If your biggest concern is protecting your iPhone's screen from scratches or damage, I highly reccomend the ZAGG invisibleSHIELD. ZAGG even sell a version of the invisibleSHIELD which contains protection for the outer antenna of the iPhone.

The Dealbreaker

Now, the invisibleSHIELD does protect my phone. It makes it more resilliant to scratches. Surely, therefore, I should be happy with it?

Unfortunately, I'm not. I've removed the screen protector from my iPhone and I don't plan to use one again on any of my devices. The texture of the ZAGG invisibleSHIELD is extremely different to that of the iPhone's standard Gorilla Glass screen. The iPhone's screen is extremely smooth and low friction. It's a pleasure to slide a finger around the iPhone's screen and perform gestures on the device. With the invisibleSHIELD installed, the texture became notably more rough. Scrolling through list views felt less accurate and imprecise. It became more effort to interact with the iPhone. Sometimes, I felt my phone wasn't picking up my inputs as accurately as it did without the screen protector.

I added a layer between my finger and the device, which hindered my interactions with my phone. I had intentionally added an unwanted middleman.

With the invisibleSHIELD installed, my iPhone became less enjoyable to use. When I decided to install the screen protector, I knew interacting with the screen would feel different, but I thought I'd get accustomed to it. Unfortunaly, as I regularly use both my iPhone and my iPad and I only installed the invisibleSHIELD on my iPhone, I could compare the textures of the stock iPad screen with the protected iPhone screen. Sliding my finger along my iPad's screen became skating on ice, whereas using my iPhone was like dragging my knuckles over bricks.

I use my iPhone a lot. My iPhone is now "naked", without any screen protection. I would rather enjoy interacting with my phone at the possible chance of scratches than protecting it to the detriment of usability and my satisfaction. Using my iPhone is more pleasant without the invisibleSHIELD.

In short, it feels better without protection (sorry).

Should I Have Expected This?

When describing the invisibleSHIELD, ZAGG say:

• The authentic invisibleSHIELD film features Nano-Memory technology, which is visible as a very subtle texture in the surface of the film.

I would argue that this statement is misleading. The texture is noticably different to that of an unprotected iPhone. It's not even remotely subtle.

• Drop Resistant - Improved grip makes it easier to hang onto your expensive gadgets.

This statement is more accurate. Advertising a screen protector as improving the grip of the device should make it clear that it'll significantly alter the device's feel.

Perhaps I should have expected the invisibleSHIELD to significantly alter the texture of my iPhone's screen. I didn't. I'm glad I learned the benefits and drawbacks of using a screen protector by experiening them myself. I hope this post will help you decide whether ZAGG's iPhone screen protectors are for you.