Israel's iPad ban and the Wi-Fi specification

Everyone has been tumbling over the news item that Israel banned iPad imporation and has actually impounded a few of those at the port of entry. Everyone opinion I've read including those of even Israeli lawmakers seems to beat up that decision as unreasonable. Some blog commentaries have even suggested ulterior theories. I am using the same facts proposed by some of these opinions to argue the opposite case: that Israel may actually have a point.

It is a fact that requires no evidence that there are many iPhones and Blackberry devices in Israel. Many have argued that the iPad Wi-Fi chip is the same standard unit that is installed in these other hand-helds and so advance an argument that Israel's decision to selectively ban the iPad is arbitrary and unreasonable. An unnamed Apple spokeswoman was even quoted as saying, "iPad complies with international industry standards for Wi-Fi specifications."

When I heard that response, i wondered, "international industry standard for Wi-Fi specifications"! Up to that moment, I was also like, "Israel should relax, men, what's all that about?". But this statement got me thinking. I said, anytime a corporation equivocates, there must be a need for it. What are my problems with these statements? First, if it's just as simple as using an identical Wi-Fi chip, then, yes Israel's action sounds arbitrary. But then, turn it around and ask yourself, does the same argument not make a credibility point for Israel? Israel could say, "We don't have a problem with Apple products or mobile devices. We allow iPhone, we allow BlackBerry, we allow MacBook Pro. So, believe us when we say that iPad has something that the others do not." My issue with the "international standards" statement is not so simple to explain without some geek speak, but I'll try. The statement can be both true and false. Yes, there is one and the same set of international industry standared for Wi-Fi specifications. That set of specifications is the IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n. But what is missing in that statement is that it does not show that different countries have laws that further restrict the use of all 14 Wi-Fi channels defined by IEEE 802.11. To help you understand this, 802.11 was originally reserved for medical equipment. Later when it became successful in computer networks, it became necessary for countries to determine which channels they allow for use on internet equipment based perhaps on what channels they have already assigned to, say MRI equipment or heart pacemaker diagnostic equipment. Europe (like Israel) allows all channels except channel 14 while North America further disallows channel 12 and 13. This would look like US equipment would be compliant in Europe and Israel. Some have advanced this claim as evidence of compatibility. But wait.

Aside from specifying the central spectrum and power restrictions of each channel, there's also the little known but major interference concern of 802.11 clause 17 which restricts spectral mask. Spectral mask defines the permitted distribution of power across each channel. In essense, within the channels allowed in your contry, a station can only use every 4th or 5th channel without overlap. A theoretical simplification is that American devices may 1,6,11 while European devices uses 1,5,9 and 13. This is designed to produce signal attenuation that would produce minimal interference of devices on other channels (provided it is farther than 1 meter away and operating within allowed power levels. You can see further geek details here or see a summary here and here.

So, there are several ways that something can get screwed up for one country but not the other and if a country is prudent enough to discover it, we should not bully them for looking out for themselves.

It's not like iPad can do no wrong, anyway! I love the device, I am going to buy one but it's still built by man. For instance, even though it alse uses a well-tested, well-understood DHCP algorithm for leasing IP addresses, Princeton University has reported iPad problems on their network and has gone ahead to block some iPads from access because the devices were not playing well on that network. It is reported that Apple is currently engaging Princeton to create a patch. My point being, iPad could still use well known chips or technologies but yet have some flaws that may need to be fixed.

On a more social note, do you think we'll show this surprise if these were equipment made in Russia and impounded by US customs? We'll jump to believe the US communications people and expect Russia to clean up the problem.

So, I suggest, we give Israel a break. It's called benefit of the doubt. Let Apple engage Israel and address the problem. The Israeli market is bigger than it seems. The whole world goes to Israel quite often. It is a large tourist nation of extreme historical, political and religious importance. The iPad is going to be an ultra-mobile gadget even more than the phone, since they come unlocked. It should be configured to play well in all countries. Bravado won't do it. Just as Apple has engaged Princeton to solve the DHCP bug, they should engage Israel to study the complaint with a view to a solution.