Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What The Banned iPhone Ad Should Really Look Like

Posted by samzenpus on from the truth-in-advertising dept.

Barence writes "To demonstrate just how misleading the latest (and now banned) iPhone television ad really is, PC Pro has recreated it using an iPhone 3G and a Wi-Fi connection — with laughable results. Apple was forced to pull the advert today after the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) decided it exaggerated the speed of mobile browsing. 'In the 30-second clip the iPhone is shown loading a webpage, finding its current location in Google Maps, opening a PDF from an email and finally taking a phone call. The ASA concluded that the iPhone cannot do what was shown in the mere 29 seconds afforded in the advert, ruling that it was misleading.' Try it for yourself and you'll undoubtedly agree."

9 of 463 comments (clear)

  1. This is tipical for apple by brejc8 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple should really be slapped for repeatedly misrepresenting their products. I will buy a beer to anyone who can find a single photo of any of their products on the store website. Every single one has been hand generated usually with incorrect proportions.

    --
    Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
  2. Re:Not a good example by dave420 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The guy spent over a minute and a half fumbling around on keys? I don't think so. If I were a betting man I'd put a few cents on you owning an iPhone. I'd also put a few more cents on you posting the above message to rationalise your purchase to yourself. But then I'm cynical like that.

  3. In the UK by Colourspace · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Thats weird, because I saw the UK advert last night and it states quite clearly at the bottom of the screen that operations have been sped up etc, and does not appear to make any claims to the advert being true to life.... Is this the British ASA or is there an ASA elsewhere in the world (i.e. the USA)?

  4. 1 million dollars for reading this post! by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This ruling was made in the UK. We have slightly different advertising standards to the US. In the UK, the sort of thing you're suggesting is not allowed:

    I will give you all 1 million dollars* for reading this post!
    .

    .

    *1 million imaginary dollars

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    1. Re:1 million dollars for reading this post! by myvirtualid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So I can rotate those dollars 90 degrees and they are real dollars?

      Whoa, slow down there, bucko - I think you might confusing rotation with projection.

      Project those imaginary dollars onto the real axis and you'll get exactly what this post is worth!

      Homework assignment: Using this reasoning, show the recent financial troubles could have been predicted using simple vector analysis. Bonus points from computing the cross-product of Al Greenspan and Warren Buffet.

      --
      I'm here EdgeKeep Inc.
  5. Re:True, but shouldn't be. by SudoScience · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You're right that they should be honest, but no ads are. Yet most of the arguments against the ad being banned are that everyone is doing the same thing. Well maybe I'm an idiot but doesn't that then make the point that we ought to enforce such a standard on all ads then? If they're all lying then they all should be punished, rather than allowing everyone to lie as much as they want.

    The "they're doing it too" excuse is just weak overall. Maybe you could argue that the standards are applied unevenly, but still that's only a good argument for applying the standard evenly rather than dropping all standards whatsoever.

  6. Re:No, this is typical for virtually anyone sellin by FLEB · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it's an evolutionary result, though. Industrial manufacturing introduced a glut of consumer goods to the world, and made it possible that multiple players could be in the same market trying to sell essentially the same thing, or at least the same thing with normally imperceptible differences. One company who advertises could take a market-share far disproportionate to the comparative advantage they have against a company with a similar product, but no advertising. Increased publicity ability gave the means, and anyone outside the competition really just can't compete.

    --
    Information wants to be free.
    Entertainment wants to be paid.
    You just want to be cheap.
  7. Either the cretins at PCPro Mag are morons... by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...Dishonest, or just incompetent. The same goes for the UK Ad council responsible for demanding the ad be pulled. I couldn't help but make a video this morning to see what the results should really look like...

    Try 48 secs and that is with me flubbing a bit, waiting for GPS to lock and timing a call to myself.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwbZkkJhfcA

    I don't even like my iPhone that much, but there are better reasons to dislike it than simply fabricated, untruthful criticisms.

    --
    We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
  8. Re:Not a good example by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just recently got to try out a Mac. It has been over a decade since the last time I used one. What shocked me most was just how crappy and unintuitive their UI was. Since UI is basically what Macs have used as their primary selling point since the beginning, I had just taken peoples word for it that it didn't suck. Hands down, it is the least intuitive UI have have ever used short of a command line.