Apple Sued Over 'Lacking' Macbook Display

qu1j0t3 writes "Business 2.0 reports that two MacBook owners have filed a class action lawsuit charging Apple with deceptive advertising, as well as misrepresentation and unfair competition over the use of the phrase 'millions of colors' to describe the capability of the LCD displays in MacBook and MacBook Pro computers. The article likens the complaint to an an angry forum thread, and is more than a little bit skeptical of the plaintiff's motives. Perhaps it's their uncanny attention to detail. From the filing: 'The reality is that notwithstanding Apple's misrepresentations and suggestions that its MacBook and MacBook Pro display millions of colors, the displays are only capable of displaying the illusion of millions of colors through the use of a software technique referred to as dithering, which causes nearby pixels on the display to use slightly varying shades of colors that trick the human eye into perceiving the desired color even though it is not truly that color.'

Comments

Re:Macs for artists

[GundamFan]

Mis-perception of the founding fathers not withstanding...

I for one would rather have a government that does not feel the need to hide from anyone or use any issue as a distraction from issues that are uncomfortable for the current political leaders. For me there are a few issues I would like to see addressed before we worry about legislating medical care and denial of civil rights as examples.

Re:Macs for artists

[sydres]

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religion but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations." - Patrick Henry
and again
  " You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention." George Washington
further
  "History will also afford frequent opportunities of showing the necessity of a public religion...and the excellency of the Christian religion above all others, ancient or modern." Benjamin Franklin
continuing
  "Only one adequate plan has ever appeared in the world, and that is the Christian dispensation." John Jay, ORIGINAL CHIEF-JUSTICE U.S. SUPREME COURT
and again
  "The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent nation of Christians." John Quincy Adams
irregardless of whether they were practicing christians or not the
founding fathers were predominately God believing men perhaps God fearing was too strong a word

Re:not "smited"

[cultrhetor]

To demonstrate a conjugation, you should use the active sense of the verb in nonconditional cases, rather than the passive form for each case. Let's go through the post, Mr. Grammar Nazi: 1. God is a smiter. - You aren't using "smite" as a verb, you're using it as a direct object (noun - person, place, thing, idea): the subject (God) is something: a "smiter." 2. God is about to smite Bob. - This is a conditional use, so at least your passive sense is correct; however, you shouldn't use two prepositions in a row (even if one is part of the verb "to smite"): try "God will smite Bob." 3. God is smiting Bob. - This is an action: the verb + participle makes it passive. If you're giving a conjugation lesson, conjugate the verb, don't turn it into a modifier: "God smites Bob." 4. God has smote Bob. - This is a passive use (technically, the verb consists of two words: "has smote"), which means that, again, you're not conjugating "smite." Try "God smote Bob." 5. Bob has been smitten. - This is acceptable; however, I might avoid the passive use altogether: you don't give an active agent: by whom was Bob smitten? In the future, please remember to ensure correct use when fixating upon the errors of others. I appreciate your time, and wish you a good day, sir.

Re:Macs for artists

[GundamFan]

I would generally agree with your last statement and retract my first.

I stand by the rest of my post. Our current executive branch would have no need to hide behind so called "social issues" if it was acting justly and in good faith with the American people. Even now the leadership of this country is spending much money and effort attempting to maintain the status quo for the benefit of themselves and there cooperate masters and frankly damning the future for short term benefit.