Slashdot Mirror


Samsung Galaxy Ad Misleads With Fake Interviews

unassimilatible writes "A Samsung ad campaign for the latest Galaxy Tab is misleading, to say the least. Actors pretending to be real people in fake interviews in a fake magazine misquoting a bad first-gen Galaxy tab review, are exposed — by the actual review writer. Netizens 'are having fun pointing out other curious things about the interviews, such as the fact that "leading New York real-estate CEO Joseph Kolinski" raves about the 8.9-inch Galaxy Tab even though the only 8.9-inch Tabs that Samsung itself had on hand at CTIA were non-working models.' Kolinski is actually an actor, not a CEO, Jim."

224 comments

  1. Double Post? by exomondo · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Double Post? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry, it's all my fault. I think the editor read this comment I made and took it seriously. My bad.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Double Post? by adolf · · Score: 2

      Modded your comment up. Thanks for the reference.

      (And they say there's no way to both post and moderate in the same story! Hogwash.)

    3. Re:Double Post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually this post is a fake not a double post. It was written by a professional writer and not a Slashdot member. If the fake post is well received Slashdot hopes to run more fake posts.

    4. Re:Double Post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded your comment up. Thanks for the reference.

      (And they say there's no way to both post and moderate in the same story! Hogwash.)

      you just undid your moderation you dimwitted dipshit fuck

    5. Re:Double Post? by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      Alternate accounts.

    6. Re:Double Post? by adolf · · Score: 1

      All of you fail.

      The comment I modded up was part of the previous story. The comment I replied to was beneath this newer dupe.

      Context, FTW.

    7. Re:Double Post? by antdude · · Score: 1

      Are you the one who caused all the dupes? ;)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    8. Re:Double Post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they say there's no way to both post and moderate in the same story!

      The comment I modded up was part of the previous story. The comment I replied to was beneath this newer dupe.

      Make your mind up.

    9. Re:Double Post? by YoshiDan · · Score: 0

      NO U

    10. Re:Double Post? by adolf · · Score: 1

      Which part of "dupe" do you not fully understand?

  2. Horatio says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The odds of the Galaxy interviews being genuine... *sunglasses* ...are astronomical.

    YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

    1. Re:Horatio says... by jd · · Score: 1

      Are those the Peril-Sensitive Sunglasses?

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Horatio says... by toriver · · Score: 1

      No, they are "just to add another difference to this CSI show in case the totally different location and actors aren't clue enough" sunglasses.

    3. Re:Horatio says... by jd · · Score: 1

      Damn. Peril-Sensitive Sunglasses would make the fight scenes more interesting than usual.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:Horatio says... by toriver · · Score: 1

      Indeed... *puts on sunglasses*... they would.

    5. Re:Horatio says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always wondered whether it best to have a pair of Peril-Sensitive sunglasses (love Rigel's Revenge!) or HHGTTG's simple towel. When thought about long enough I realize the additional virtues of the towel - being able to suck on it for protein, for example - ultimately was more usable than sunglasses that offered only one level of protection.

  3. You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We call that a dupe.

    1. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by exomondo · · Score: 1

      We call that a dupe.

      quick! he's not using the terminology i use, tell him he must be new!

    2. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      We call that a dupe.

      It's like parking your car right next to a car that looks just like the story that was posted yesterday morning (or something like that).

    3. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sure wish I could just hold someone right now. But no one is there. Such is life, eh?

    4. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      Does a cat count as someone?

    5. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is well known that, "a cat is fine too."

    6. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, in that case I would just want to shoot the cat.

      But no cat is there. Such is life, eh?

    7. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by avgjoe62 · · Score: 2

      Cats are the ONLY ones that count as someone. In their world view, you exist merely to operate a can opener.

      As soon as a reliable can-opening robot is developed, we will be unnecessary.

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    8. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by jd · · Score: 1

      Not quite. Until the cat-operated remotely-operated opposable thumb device is complete, humans will also be needed to open doors, change TV channels and write lolcat captions. Cats have progressed on the last of those, with the new plug-in for speech recognition devices, but it is limited to the Breaking News section at present.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    9. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Repetition drives retention.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    10. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STFU noob.
      A double post is when someone makes 2 consecutive posts in the same thread.

    11. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by camperslo · · Score: 0

      As soon as a reliable can-opening robot is developed, we will be unnecessary.

      Perhaps the cats would still like our companionship, at their convenience?

      I think we need robots more than the cats do. Some robots that have no trouble wandering around radioactivity could be really handy about now. And when we need to tell one what to do I guess there will be an app for that...

    12. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We call that a dupe.
      A double post is when someone makes 2 consecutive posts in the same thread.

      quick! he's not using the terminology i use, tell him he must be new!

      Thank your betters for educating you. Ignorance is regrettable; stupidity is dishonor.

    13. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Pah! The last dupe I saw wasn't a functioning model, so it doesn't count.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    14. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "quick! he's not using the terminology i use, tell him he must be new!"

      Holy shit, your UID is almost a million higher than mine. YOU MUST BE NEW HERE!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    15. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Sproggit · · Score: 1

      "quick! he's not using the terminology i use, tell him he must be new!"

      Holy shit, your UID is almost a million higher than mine. YOU MUST BE NEW HERE!

      And yours is nearly a million higher than mine... I most be old here!

    16. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Right.

      And when material like this astroturf puff-piece is posted twice, it's called a Microsoft marketing campaign.

      Hint: They REALLY want you to dislike Android.

    17. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Vesperi · · Score: 1

      I must be undead here in that case.....

      --
      "Linux is not our destination, it is simply the open road to tommorow"
    18. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Rozzin · · Score: 1

      What does that make me?

      --
      -rozzin.
    19. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Petroleum product?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    20. Re:You must be new here, or an editor by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      "What does that make me?" by Rozzin (9910)

      It's over nine thousand!

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  4. Really /.? by vgerclover · · Score: 1

    Really /.? I know that dupes happen, but this is ridiculous!

    1. Re:Really /.? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2

      Really /.? I know that dupes happen, but this is ridiculous!

      Don't blame me, I marked it as a 'Dupe' in the fire hose.

    2. Re:Really /.? by beuges · · Score: 1

      That's not ridiculous... this is :)
      http://www.dhiren.za.net/files/pictures/slashdupe.jpg

  5. Shittiest editor ever award? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    samzenpus == worst "editor" of all time. Even Katz looks decent in comparison..

    1. Re:Shittiest editor ever award? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, no, kdawson is the worst ""editor"" -- he's so bad, he needs nested scare quotes. samzenpus is the worst mere "editor".

  6. I am shocked!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertizing is a lie, film at 11. Move along....

  7. Re:Let the Android fanboys by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 3, Funny

    Apple sucks, so we have to copy everything they do.

    So what you're saying is that if Samsung is going to copy Apple's astroturfing campaigns, they need to do a better job of it?

  8. Apple has won by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like it or not, Apple is the most wanted brand lof tablets and phones. You can add flash, hdmi, double rainbows to your tablet but if Steve Jobs didn't produce it then it is regarded as pig shit by the masses.

    Samsungs status = Told.

    1. Re:Apple has won by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1, Troll

      Like it or not, Apple is the most wanted brand lof tablets and phones. You can add flash, hdmi, double rainbows to your tablet but if Steve Jobs didn't produce it then it is regarded as pig shit by the masses.

      Samsungs status = Told.

      No, it's regarded as pig shit by Apple afficionados, people that would believe in the infallibility of Apple even if it did turn out pig shit. The rest of us look at the overall value proposition, and may or may not decide to buy Apple based upon our actual needs. The phenomenal success of Android in the handset market shows very clearly that not everyone considers Apple a "must buy." And that's only reasonable: no single product, or product line, can hope to serve everyone's needs.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Apple has won by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      no single product, or product line, can hope to serve everyone's needs.

      Not so sure about that. Air is pretty much universally popular.

      I'm just waiting for iAir to come out. You're breathing it wrong!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Apple has won by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      People were saying that about iPhones and Android-based phones are already far outselling iPhones.

      When it comes down to it, there are people like me who will neither pay a premium price for something that looks pretty nor pay a premium price for something that is so locked down to be useless for the tasks they need to do with it.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    4. Re:Apple has won by node+3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it's regarded as pig shit by Apple afficionados, people that would believe in the infallibility of Apple even if it did turn out pig shit.

      No, AC has it right. Android has been on tablets for what, half a year now? No one is buying them. I seem to recall a bunch of predictions back in March and April last year that by Fall 2010, iPad would be outsold by the plethora of inexpensive but more powerful Android tablets.

      Instead, iPad completely owns the tablet market. Android is barely a footnote.

      The rest of us look at the overall value proposition, and may or may not decide to buy Apple based upon our actual needs.

      That's funny. Do you really think the average consumer is going to methodically evaluate the iPad compared to Android tablets and make a choice based on specs?

      Judging the overall value proposition will happen, but it won't be made based on the criteria you are thinking it will be. 15 million people made a value proposition in 2010 for the iPad. Right now Apple cannot make iPad 2's fast enough.

      The phenomenal success of Android in the handset market shows very clearly that not everyone considers Apple a "must buy." And that's only reasonable: no single product, or product line, can hope to serve everyone's needs.

      No, the "phenomenal" success of Android in the handset market (nice selective criteria there, iOS has greater market share than Android overall) shows that people have multiple criteria when choosing a cell phone beyond simply the OS and quality of the phone. This includes things price (how many of those Android phones were free with a contract?), carrier choice, and a physical keyboard. None of these things apply to the iPad.

      On the tablet, Android has to compete with iOS directly, and so far it has failed miserably.

    5. Re:Apple has won by narcc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Like it or not, Apple is the most wanted brand lof tablets and phones. You can add flash, hdmi, double rainbows to your tablet but if Steve Jobs didn't produce it then it is regarded as pig shit by the masses.

      You know what's funny? The #1 best selling smartphone brand in 2010 in Canada, US, UK, and Latin America was Blackberry.

      The big news in early March wasn't that Android overtook Apple in share of US smartphone subscribers -- it was that Android overtook RIM. Apple doesn't and hasn't even come close. See for yourself:

      October 2010: Apple 24.6%, Android 23.5%, RIM 35.8%
      January 2011: Apple 24.7%, Android 31.2%, RIM 30.4%

      Given the data, it doesn't appear that Apple is even close to the "most wanted" brand of smartphone, let alone phones in general.

      Apples status = Told.

    6. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 0

      No, AC has it right. Android has been on tablets for what, half a year now? No one is buying them. I seem to recall a bunch of predictions back in March and April last year that by Fall 2010, iPad would be outsold by the plethora of inexpensive but more powerful Android tablets.

      No AC is not right and neither are you. Android 3.0 marks the official support for tablets and there are more than half a dozen models launching in the space of the next few months. And exactly the same thing will happen as happened with phones except Apple have less lead in time.

      That's funny. Do you really think the average consumer is going to methodically evaluate the iPad compared to Android tablets and make a choice based on specs?

      I'm sure it's a decision made of different factors - price, specs, form factor, features, brand etc. Just as it is with phones. One person might want a tablet that plays all their vids and an HDMI out. Another might want a smaller screen for reading books. Another might like a tablet with a built in keyboard. Another might want which is durable and cheap for kids to play with. If you think exactly one price and form factor suits everyone you are wrong.

      Judging the overall value proposition will happen, but it won't be made based on the criteria you are thinking it will be. 15 million people made a value proposition in 2010 for the iPad. Right now Apple cannot make iPad 2's fast enough.

      They probably can't. Doesn't mean it's going to last or that the same thing happening with phones isn't going to happen with tablets because it will. The iPad 1 & 2 are nice bits of kit but they are expensive, VERY restrictive, and have enjoyed relatively unfettered exclusivity thus far. All that is changing as we speak. Motorola have launched a tablet. Samsung have launched 2 tablets, Asus have launched 2 tablets. LG, HTC, Dell, Acer et al will be next.

    7. Re:Apple has won by node+3 · · Score: 1

      People weren't staying away from the Android tablets that most certainly did exist (and failed miserably) over the last year because of it not having "official" tablet support (which is complete retroactive bullshit, there were official Android tablets shipped in 2010, these weren't simply using the non-controlled open source version of Android). The limitations of pre-Honeycomb tablets wouldn't be terribly apparent in the store. If people actually wanted Android tablets, they would have sold well and just had high returns if Gingerbread were insufficient as a tablet OS.

      Your notion that people want all sorts of different sizes and feature sets is overstated. The iPad 2 easily satisfies 90% of consumers who might prefer slight differences in... What exactly? The only major potential desirable difference is screen size.

      Your assertion that the iPad is "VERY restrictive" is laughable. For most people, iPads are the exact opposite of restrictive. You also seem to have missed the memo that iPads have HDMI and physical keyboards.

      So, *maybe* there will be some people who will like the idea of a 7" tablet enough to go with Android instead, but it's not going to be many.

    8. Re:Apple has won by zioncat · · Score: 1

      Given the data, it doesn't appear that Apple is even close to the "most wanted" brand of smartphone, let alone phones in general.

      Apples status = Told.

      Instead of inferring customer's desire from current market share numbers, wouldn't it be more accurate to survey them directly about which smartphone they would want to buy? And somebody helpfully did:

      Apple Inc.'s iPhone is the most desired device among users shopping for smartphones, beating the BlackBerry and Google Inc.'s Android as consumers prepare for the holiday season, according to Nielsen Co.

      In a survey of U.S. shoppers looking for a smartphone, 30 percent said they wanted to buy an iPhone, according to a Nielsen survey from August through October. Phones running Google's Android software placed second with 28 percent.

      Apples status = Real.

    9. Re:Apple has won by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Android has been on tablets for at least 2 years, probably longer. Stop trying to ignore anything that isn't made by your own favorite manufacturers.

    10. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1

      People weren't staying away from the Android tablets that most certainly did exist (and failed miserably) over the last year because of it not having "official" tablet support (which is complete retroactive bullshit, there were official Android tablets shipped in 2010, these weren't simply using the non-controlled open source version of Android). The limitations of pre-Honeycomb tablets wouldn't be terribly apparent in the store. If people actually wanted Android tablets, they would have sold well and just had high returns if Gingerbread were insufficient as a tablet OS.

      Yes they were staying away. Partly for lack of support, partly for lack of choice and partly for lack of an affordable model. I consider myself very pro Android but I've steered clear of an Android tablet and intend to continue to do so until they become more affordable. I could cite all sorts of reasons Android is great but I'm not so blinded to buy something in spite of its faults.

      I was very tempted by the Archos 101 save for the OS version it runs and it not being compatible device as per CDD. I considered the Tab to be a giant phone bloated with useless features and a high price. I'm sure I'm not alone in those opinions. I think this year will be a lot different and the evidence can be seen of new tablet announcements coming from all over the place.

    11. Re:Apple has won by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Actual sales numbers are rather more useful than customers' desires as a way of measuring market share.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    12. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Right now I'm tingling in anticipation of the frothing-mouthed Android apologists who can't wait to tear you apart. I love to watch them twitch and flop when someone slaps them with a dose of reality.

    13. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Ha!! I sure am enjoying this. Yes, motorola has launched a ridiculously expensive, partially functional, poorly performing product that I believe is already being shut down. Where is your comparably priced Android tablet which is going to kick the iPad off its perch? Right now it's all vapor.

      You need to wake up and face a bit of reality. While the iPad may not enjoy this lead forever, one reality you have to face is one factor is not present in the tablet wars, the cellular carrier. The fact that the iPhone was exclusive on AT&T for 3 years gave Android an opportunity to gain traction via Verizon. (Yes, I know the US market is not the world, but this is the reason Android is even alive in the US). Now that iPhone is also on Verizon lets wait and see how the Android phones fare when they have to compete head to head? Verizon is already trying to give them damned things away now that the iPhone is on the network. While it's correct to say no device works for everyone, I would make the assertion that the iPad will appeal to a much larger segment of the population than the Xoom or other Android copycat.

      As for you last paragraph, exactly HOW is the iPad expensive when no one else can seem to match the price? Hmmmm? Is anyone other than rabid Apple haters complaining that the iPad is "VERY restrictive". . . .(answer, NO!)? And the reason the iPad has unfettered exclusivity is that Apple built their first, and everyone else is still in copy mode since they don't seem to be able to have an original idea. I think you should sit down and have a drink because you are going to have to face an unpleasant reality at some point . . . ..your precious Android is not as great as you think it is.

    14. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Yes, you certainly do see a lot of announcements. Unfortunately that's all you see, announcements. The Android tablet market at this point is largely vaporware. The few that have been released have looked good on paper, but received shitty reviews. It doesn't bode well for Android apologists' ability to sleep at night.

    15. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Deny it all you want but there are half a dozen tablets in the process of being released in the next couple of months. As for price matching, there are already tablets which undercut the iPad by a significant amount - the Nook, Archos 101, Advent Vega just being some examples that come to mind. And there are many new models coming with the advantage of running Android 3.0. Samsung's new Tab will undercut the iPad. The Asus Eee Pad will undercut the iPad. I expect by year end that a dozen or more decent brand name tablets will undercut the price of an iPad, all offering Android 3.0, possibly with a few webOS & Windows tablets in there too.

      It really is funny to have people pretend that the iPad represents some magic featureset / price that absolutely cannot be beaten. It shouldn't have to be pointed out that a quick look at what happened in the smart phone market pisses all that idea.

    16. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      I would say the Android toehold in the US is largely due to iPhone being locked into AT&T for 3 years. If iPhone would have been available on multiple networks here I doubt Android would have much market share. We'll have to see how it fares against iPhone on AT&T and Verizon going forward, but I think we'll see a slip in Android sales on those two networks.

    17. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      The Nook? Really? No wonder it undercuts it, because it's not a F'in tablet, it's an e-reader! Not familiar with the other ones, but if those are Apples vs oranges comparisions like you did with the Nook then I'd say you're full of shit. And please explain to me how these wonderful Android tablets, which "significantly" undercut the iPad price, are almost unheard of outside of Android apologists?

      If all you're looking at is price then Android truly is a shitty solution. I certainly don't think the iPad is perfect, nor that its feature set/price can't be beat. I just believe that there is nothing beating it now, and all the vapor ware that has been announced so far is clouding the Android apologists' minds. And just so you can pull your head out of your ass a little faster, the phone market is not the same as the tablet market. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can start to make some arguments that make sense.

    18. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1
      The Nook Color is a tablet running Android. Just because it doesn't meet your definition of a tablet is irrelevant. It is a tablet, it serves it's purpose and it is affordable. Let me state again for your benefit It really is funny to have people pretend that the iPad represents some magic featureset / price that absolutely cannot be beaten. Just because you love your iPad doesn't mean everyone should do likewise.

      The Nook is smaller form factor, perfect for book reading a bit of browsing. The Archos 101 kicks the crap out of the iPad at playing videos. The Vega is a powerful dual core tablet for half the price of an iPad, perfect for hackers. And they're last years models. Many prominent models are coming down the pipe this year. It is quite obvious what will happen whether a zealot such as yourself chooses to acknowledge it or not.

    19. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 0

      Read my post again dipshit. I clearly state that I don't believe the iPad feature set/price are unbeatable. I just believe they have not been beat yet. Perhaps you could save time arguing with yourself if you could read and comprehend my post.

      And the Nook is NOT a tablet. It's an e-reader. It's a functionally limited device that can in no way compete with what an iPad can do. For you to say otherwise is ignorance at best, or outright lying at worst.

      HOW does the Archos 101 kick the crap out of the iPad at playing videos? Specifics please.

      The Vega is perfect for hackers you say? Great, it's perfect for 1% of the population. What a WONDERFUL device, with NO mass market appeal.

      As for models coming down the pipe, until they are selling they are VAPOR! The iPad is one year old, is on revision 2, and is selling right now. It's not "coming soon" like the rest of the wannabes.

      Seriously, for someone who obviously thinks he's intellectually superior to anyone who wants an iPad, you are a mental midget that has no clue what the average user wants.

    20. Re:Apple has won by zioncat · · Score: 1

      Actual sales numbers are rather more useful than customers' desires as a way of measuring market share.

      Huh? Whether Apple is the "most wanted brand" of smartphones or not is the point of contention here. Sales numbers being useful for measuring of market share is neither here nor there.

    21. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Ah I understand now. Your colossal intellect appears to have trouble comprehending other points of view.

    22. Re:Apple has won by node+3 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, where again are all the iPad-killing Android tablets? First, you say they are coming over the next few months (but let's ignore that that has been the case for a year now!), now you say they've been out all this time?

      But that's really the point. There are little book tablets, and big geek tablets, and dumpy video tablets, yet even combined, they pale in comparison to the iPad. But, we are assured, Real Soon Now this will all change...

      You also bring up the straw man that the iPad can't satisfy everyone. You're right, it can't. But no one is claiming that. But they can (and clearly do) satisfy more people than all other tablets that existed since the first tablet ever created *combined*. All this in only nine months!

      Geeks have an over-inflated sense of relevancy. If we listened to you, we'd all be running dumpy Archos MP3 players, Linux desktops and Linux netbooks. But we aren't. The most successful geek recommendation is Firefox, and even that is not the market leader.

      Android's success in the phone market is an anomaly, and is not an indication that people actually prefer the OS. It's an indication that the phone market has strong primary considerations before even choosing a handset. And once those are addressed, artificial influences that come into play.

      When forced to compete head-to-head without these influences, in the form of the iPad and iPod touch, Android fails miserably.

      Who knows, maybe consumers prefer a 7" tablet? Doubtful, but possible. But they definitely don't give a shit if they have to buy a $29 adapter to get an SD slot, or if the App Store is "closed" (clue stick: so is the Android Market), or whatever other feature tickles your geek fancy.

      And above all else, one thing is extremely apparent: they don't actually prefer Android the OS over iOS the OS.

    23. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      I comprehended your point of view just fine. It's just that you were wrong.

    24. Re:Apple has won by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Right now I'm tingling in anticipation of the frothing-mouthed Android apologists who can't wait to tear you apart. I love to watch them twitch and flop when someone slaps them with a dose of reality.

      Ha. Thus speaks a true Apple apologist. Jobs is not God, Apple is not forever, nor is it perfect. And "frothing mouthed"? The only frothing I usually see is Apple fans who just can't STAND even the slightest criticism of their chosen supplier of shiny objects.

      Hypocrite. Learn to handle differing opinions. It makes you more tolerable.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    25. Re:Apple has won by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      nice selective criteria there, iOS has greater market share than Android overall

      Oh? Not according to Techcrunch. Nice lie there.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    26. Re:Apple has won by node+3 · · Score: 1

      nice selective criteria there, iOS has greater market share than Android overall

      Oh? Not according to Techcrunch. Nice lie there.

      Come back when you learn how to read.

    27. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1
      No need to put words into my mouth. I stated quite clearly there are half a dozen brand name tablets coming over the next few months. I stated quite clearly that it is perfectly possible to produce tablets that undercut the iPad and provided examples that already exist and upcoming tablets which are known to as well. I never said at any point in this thread or any other that last year's tablets running Android 2.x were "iPad-killers". What is entirely obvious is that Android 3.0 represents the official entry into the market and it is going to sell in large quantities.

      Just as a point on a 7" tablet, it really depends on what it's being used for. The Nook Color is 7" and has sold 3 million devices so clearly some people like the form factor. I expect people who want a device primarily for reading books probably prefer a smaller form factor. BTW I strongly believe Amazon will have an Android tablet soon - their app store initiative doesn't make any sense except in that context.

      Now some people would balk at 7" and would want something larger. Just like smart phones you can expect Android tablets in all kinds of shapes & sizes. Some might have keyboards, some might have 4:3 aspect ratio, others 16:10 or 16:9. Some might have a 10.1" screen, others at 5", 7", 9", etc. Some might have lots of storage, some might have little but ship a micro SD. etc.

      The point being one size does not fit all and the market will reflect that in the features they focus on and the prices they charge.

    28. Re:Apple has won by intheshelter · · Score: 1

      Again with the Nook! The Nook is NOT a tablet, it's an e-reader, and your disingenuous attempt to categorize it as a tablet has failed. It's a very limited use device which could not be mistaken for a tablet. If detractors would call the iPad limited and chastize Apple for it, then the Nook is almost non-functional in comparison and should not even be mentioned in the same sentence. Quit trying to coopt e-readers devices as tablets and then using them as an example of a lower priced, high sales product that is competing well with the iPad. They are not even remotely in the same category and you know it.

    29. Re:Apple has won by DrXym · · Score: 1

      The Nook Color is a tablet moron. It's a 7" capacitive LCD device running android. It's main purpose might be as an ereader but it ships with other apps including a web browser. It's a tablet. Grow up ffs.

    30. Re:Apple has won by biglig2 · · Score: 1

      Not quite sure that analogy works, because they have vendor subsidies helping to keep the price down.
      And of course, as usual, it needs saying that Apple don't care that Android has more market share. Firstly because they are making most of the money in the market, and secondly because they cannot increase their market share anyway, because their product is selling as fast as they can make it.

      As for your specific requirements, Steve Jobs agrees with you. He's made it very clear: there are some people who do not want a curated experience on their phone, and those people should get an Android device instead. (He would caution you to be careful, because not all Android phones are as open as you think, but he completely gets that iOS devices are not for you.)

      --
      ~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
    31. Re:Apple has won by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1
      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    32. Re:Apple has won by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      I don't think Steve Jobs cares anything more about me beyond wondering whether or not I have a healthy & compatible liver he can buy from me.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  9. If willing suspension of disbelief works... by symbolic · · Score: 1

    ...for movies and stories, why not for ads?

    1. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Because ads are not intended as entertainment, but rather as propaganda. People know this, and take a dim view to being brazenly lied to.

    2. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by SIR_Taco · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wait... are you saying Skittles don't come from rainbows?!
      Bastards!

      --
      I say don't drink and drive, you might spill your drink. Before you get behind the wheel just stop and think.
    3. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because ads are not intended as entertainment, but rather as propaganda. People know this, and take a dim view to being brazenly lied to."

      Do you really think all those folks in the pharm-biz ads are real people with real heart disease, bad sinus problems, bad hearts, etc, etc? Do you really believe those people in those ads wearing white coats are real doctors.
      Do you think those people in the Ford ads are real people ready to trade in their Toyota's?
      How would you like to own your very own bridge? I can arrange it for you.

    4. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 2

      Because ads are not intended as entertainment,

      What utopian world did you just come from? This ad campaign by VW was more entertaining than 99% of the shows on TV, then and now.

      FYI I have never worked for or owned a VW product.

    5. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by martin-boundary · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Let's be clear. The whole point of putting people disguised as patients and doctors in ads is because the majority of ordinary people actually believe they are real patients and doctors. You know it, I know it, advertisers know it. It's a lie designed to bring in customers, and it works.

      So what's your beef? You want to pretend such psychological tricks aren't evil because you're bored of someone pointing out the obvious? Or maybe you're just a troll who likes to be contrarian?

    6. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also because it's against the law to lie in advertisements. I'm kind of curious whether Samsung just failed to run this by their lawyers or whether their lawyers decided it was okay under US advertising law and FCC regulations for endorsements.

    7. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because ads are not intended as entertainment, but rather as propaganda. People know this, and take a dim view to being brazenly lied to."

      Do you really think all those folks in the pharm-biz ads are real people with real heart disease, bad sinus problems, bad hearts, etc, etc?

      I despise those adds, and if I had the power, I'd ban them as an affront to the public benefit.

      Do you really believe those people in those ads wearing white coats are real doctors.

      I'd be glad to ban those too.

      Do you think those people in the Ford ads are real people ready to trade in their Toyota's?

      That kinda thing I'm actually less upset with, what with it not being medical or health related. As long as any claims they do make are factual, it's not a problem with me.

      To be honest though, I prefer the character ads. The last Ford commercial I recall was their Race of the Century one. That was cool. Of course, that was several years ago, so that shows how much I've paid attention to them. Toyota, now, I like their ads with the Sponsafier. They are pretty silly, but the tool IS fun.

      How would you like to own your very own bridge? I can arrange it for you.

      It better not go to nowhere.

    8. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by martin-boundary · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sorry, I think you're confusing the purpose of the ad with its form. Being entertaining is the form, but entertainment is not the purpose: The purpose is to convince people to buy VW cars, and that's propaganda.

      Similarly: Nigerian spam messages are usually funny, but their purpose is to scam people.

    9. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by slick7 · · Score: 1

      ...for movies and stories, why not for ads?

      Why not for the truth?
      Caveat Emptor

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    10. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Wait... are you saying Skittles don't come from rainbows?! Bastards!

      Next thing you know, we'll find out that Cheetos don't come from cheese.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    11. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Similarly: Nigerian spam messages are usually funny, but their purpose is to scam people.

      Not quite. The 419ers aren't trying to be funny or entertaining ... they're intended to be taken seriously (and by the people that fall for them, they are.) That the rest of us find them hilarious is irrelevant.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    12. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I think you're confusing the purpose of the ad with its form.
      Being entertaining is the form, but entertainment is not the purpose: The
      purpose is to convince people to buy VW cars, and that's propaganda.

      I don't think it's as simple as that. What about Star Wars? Is that entertainment or propaganda? The franchise has certainly grossed more money from the merchandise than the movies. Which is probably the case for many movies that are geared toward kids.

      From a marketer's perspective a television show itself is just one big vehicle for advertising. You even have product placement in the show and movies themselves. Really if you boil it down, it's all about making money in the end anyhow.

    13. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      It's true that movies in general have a long history of being used for propaganda (eg all the way back to Goebbels and wartime movies). But if it's hard to decide the true purpose for some movies, does that mean it's hard to decide for all others as well? Is it hard to decide the purpose of Samsung Galaxy ads, for example?

    14. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no advantage in disbelieving reality, whereas entertainment, advertisements and other forms of fiction require you to "participate" by suspending your disbelief... you don't have to "believe" but if you're too busy trying to disprove them, they don't work.

      I think you were looking for "why not more truth in advertising" but unfortunately, truth must be too expensive for the samsung galaxy tab.

    15. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      What I don't understand is how anyone can be positively influenced by a drug ad that has some dude rapidly saying (so that you hopefully won't understand the individual words) all the negative consequences. My final impression is "This can kill me. Maybe the cure is worse than the disease?"

      Or the ones that go "At this price, they won't last long!" So that means what, that it's so cheap it'll fall apart first time I use it?

    16. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by CaseCrash · · Score: 1

      Like the ads with future Chinese people laughing about how the US screwed up with government spending and they own them now. It's all theater to influence your thinking. Monkey see, monkey think,

      (Although it was a pretty decent 30 second sci-fi movie, considering what passes for sci-fi today)

      --
      No, that link you posted to a web comic we've all seen a hundred times is not "obligatory."
    17. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by PipsqueakOnAP133 · · Score: 1

      Cuz to imagine having the world end in a disaster in 2012 sounds interesting and entertaining, but having to imagine that people actually like Android tablets is more sad than anything else.

    18. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      I sprayed a whole can of deoderant into my armpits today, but somehow the girls don't come quite as close as the commercials promise.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    19. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly what he meant.

    20. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      "Because ads are not intended as entertainment, but rather as propaganda. People know this, and take a dim view to being brazenly lied to."

      Do you really think all those folks in the pharm-biz ads are real people with real heart disease, bad sinus problems, bad hearts, etc, etc? Do you really believe those people in those ads wearing white coats are real doctors.

      If those ads claim these are actual patients with actual health problems or actual MDs, with actual names and actual professions other than "actor in a pharma commercial" - they fucking better be.

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    21. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? That was stunningly unfunny and dull. Surely you mean 'as bad as 99% of the shows on TV'?

    22. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought Cheetos came from Cheetahs? I assumed they ground the marrow or something.

    23. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      get rid of the ipad and try the whole thing again.

      most girls won't want to be involved with a thick hipster wannabee.

      to a girl with brains, you might as well be carrying a large turd around with you if you hold any apple kit.

    24. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Or the ones that go "At this price, they won't last long!" So that means what, that it's so cheap it'll fall apart first time I use it?

      You do realise that the phrase means they won't last long on the shop's shelves, because everyone will want to buy one and take it away? Don't you?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    25. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Or the ones that go "At this price, they won't last long!" So that means what, that it's so cheap it'll fall apart first time I use it?

      You do realise that the phrase means they won't last long on the shop's shelves, because everyone will want to buy one and take it away? Don't you?

      And yet, isn't it curious how my interpretation is often closer to the end result? :-)

    26. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by toriver · · Score: 1

      There is no advantage in disbelieving reality

      Well, if reality really sucks, there can be. See Pan's Labyrinth or Life is Beautiful for examples. Or people abusing strong hallucinogens.

    27. Re:If willing suspension of disbelief works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait... are you saying Skittles don't come from rainbows?!

      No, idiot. They come from unicorns with kidney stones.

  10. New info about Samsung's Galaxy Tab 2 by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    This Slashdot story is now out of date! I have NEW INFORMATION!

    I just found out that the people in those GALAXY TAB ads... are ACTORS! That's right! You heard it here first!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:New info about Samsung's Galaxy Tab 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apple Advertising also uses Actors I found out.

      I learned this the hard way when I was at a bus stop, and decided to play with the PC sitting on the seat next to me, well I thought it was a PC, but when I reached for the Joystick, the bloody thing hit me.

  11. I for one am shocked. SHOCKED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That "average people" used in a television advertisement turned out to be PAID PROFESSIONAL ACTORS deployed for direct commercial advantage.

    Where did this country go wrong?

  12. Slash Bash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why exactly is /. bashing the Samsung Galaxy? And, Paranormal Activity was real.

  13. Dupedy dupe dupe dupe by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    Quick, someone delete the submitted topic. We already have had this conversation before.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  14. Not surprising... by froggymana · · Score: 0

    If you are surprised that ads are misleading and if you find "actors pretending to be real people" out of the ordinary then you should really go outside for a little bit.

    Go on, the fresh air will be good for you, and will give you a chance to get rid of that "Mom's basement" smell.

    --
    "To prevent this day from getting any worse, I'll just read ERROR as GOOD THING" 1GJU8xLuDKDxEs4KLf8fAGyptoDsqvEsBT
    1. Re:Not surprising... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking exactly the opposite. Maybe they should come inside for a while. Obviously, they have been living in the woods for their entire life and have never even seen a TV much less watched one.

  15. Not a dupe. by Gary+Perkins · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not exactly a dupe. The story here isn't that they are actors, it's that Samsung's marketing copied a writer's review -- one that is NOT a good review of their product, and used it in a fake magazine. Read the source.

    1. Re:Not a dupe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for saying this. Indeed, Samsung never tried to pass off the interviews as real. I watched the first half of the full version event. It was merely a creative (but cheesy) way of showing off the product. The gimmick was "What is your Tab(let) Life?" To show the different reasons why different people with different lifestyles would want to buy a Samsung Tablet they created mock ups to demonstrate. Everyone there knew they weren't actual testimonials. Samsung never implied or even hinted that they were real. It is supposed to be obvious to anyone with sufficient IQ.

  16. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Joseph Kolinski (or alternatively Korinski) was the CEO of a leading New York real-estate and he had a real 8.9-inch Galaxy Tab. He would definitely be raving about Galaxy Tab...Duh!

    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Joseph Kolinski (or alternatively Korinski)

      If you're asian.

  17. I'm confused... by BlueScreenOfTOM · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So wait... I'm confused, who do we hate again? The Galaxy Tab runs Android, and Android is open source, so they are good, right? But Android is created and managed by Google, who is hoarding our personal data and undoubtedly invading our privacy rights, so they are bad, right? But the Galaxy Tab's main competitor is Apple's iPad, and the iPad's OS is a walled garden that prevents me from doing what I want with a device I purchased outright, so competition against that is good right? But Apple's walled garden keeps bad things out and good things in, so paying a premium for it is totally worth it and justified, so Android is bad, right?

    I'm so confused.

    1. Re:I'm confused... by kent_eh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So wait... I'm confused, who do we hate again?

      Marketing people. They'll lie equally about a product we like and one we hate.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    2. Re:I'm confused... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Why can't we go back to the good old days when the marketing meant finding out what people want* and directing R&D toward that thing, instead of what we have now, where they take any old product and just tell people it's the thing they want....

      *or will want, when they find out it exists.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    3. Re:I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So wait... I'm confused, who do we hate again? ...
      I'm so confused.

      Sounds like your brain fell on the ground. It happens.

    4. Re:I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left out... and Google has decided to not release the Android Tablet OS as open source until some unknown future date when they deem it safe.

    5. Re:I'm confused... by herojig · · Score: 1

      And the interesting aspect is that we are all tools for these fools, from the paid actors to the paid and unpaid bloggers to the fanboy posters on /. Bad press is just press, and look at all the free advertising that Samsung has gotten over this - much more then the original commercial could have ever achieved. And after using a Galaxy, I can see why they would really need all of this viral publicity just to sell a few million units of a newer design - ugh.

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    6. Re:I'm confused... by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      the galaxy tab uses 2.3, not honeycomb, so the source code is available.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    7. Re:I'm confused... by indiechild · · Score: 1

      Why are you confused? Most Slashdot posters seem to think what Samsung is doing is OK and reasonable -- presumably because they're a competitor to Apple. If Apple did the same thing as what Samsung did, they would of course be evil scum and low-life baby killers.

    8. Re:I'm confused... by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      Why can't we go back to the good old days when the marketing meant finding out what people want* and directing R&D toward that thing, instead of what we have now, where they take any old product and just tell people it's the thing they want....

      *or will want, when they find out it exists.

      apparently people dont really want marketers to "find out what people want" either...

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
    9. Re:I'm confused... by bmo · · Score: 1

      Never. Because it's boring and it doesn't sell product.

      Rail as much as you want against marketing, but if you can't sell product, especially if it's non-utilitarian, you go out of business. Fast.

      And I work on the making side of things, not the sales.

      This story is a non-story and not news for nerds. If you are surprised by this marketing technique, you're just the gullible person they're targeting.

      --
      BMO

    10. Re:I'm confused... by Rantastic · · Score: 1

      Why can't we go back to the good old days when the marketing meant finding out what people want* and directing R&D toward that thing, instead of what we have now, where they take any old product and just tell people it's the thing they want....

      Let's see, which makes more money... Convincing people to buy things they don't need or want, or the first way.

      --
      Ask Slashdot: Where bad ideas meet poor googling skills.
    11. Re:I'm confused... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      I don't think he's railing against marketing, he's railing against people who mistake advertising for marketing. Advertising is just one bit of marketing and is preceded by finding out what the customer actually wants, building it, developing a way to get it to them, and then advertising. Those proceeding steps are needed because just advertising doesn't work any more as there are too many alternate choices. Likewise, companies who make great products who can't advertise also fail because nobody knows about the products. Marketing has been the whole kit and kaboodle and is based on getting what people want into their hands because that's what makes the most money. However, we have idiots who think that all marketing is just advertising and whoever throws the most money at telling people that their stuff is the best will come out on top when that isn't what happens.

    12. Re:I'm confused... by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      That's what they did before, when they tried to build the one, true car that everyone would like. And thus the Edsel was born, and it was presented to horrified crowds.

      I said, Edsel, not Prius.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    13. Re:I'm confused... by Belial6 · · Score: 0

      Those are the words of a fanboy. No, nobody would be criticizing Apple for doing the same thing. Apple DOES do the same thing. You don't think that guy in the Apple ads really is an Mac do you? Do you really think the other guy really is a PC? Do you think Apple even asked them what kind of computers they use on a regular basis? No. Ads use actors. Apple does it. Samsung does it. And so does pretty much every single company that does advertising. Using actors is the norm. THAT is why people are saying this is OK. Because it is what is expected of ads, not because they have some beef against Apple.

      If you honestly think it has ANYTHING to do with Apple, you really should seek professional help. No hyperbole in that statement. You have a real honest to goodness disorder going on.

    14. Re:I'm confused... by Altus · · Score: 1

      The toppings contain potassium benzoate....

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    15. Re:I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, keeping "bad things" like Opera browser is indeed a "good thing", but not for the customer.

    16. Re:I'm confused... by feepness · · Score: 1

      Sony of course.

    17. Re:I'm confused... by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why can't we go back to the good old days when the marketing meant finding out what people want* and directing R&D toward that thing, instead of what we have now, where they take any old product and just tell people it's the thing they want....

      Let's see, which makes more money... Convincing people to buy things they don't need or want, or the first way.

      Capitalism is based on selling people anything that will make you money, the underlying product/service is irrelevant.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    18. Re:I'm confused... by toriver · · Score: 1

      To quote Dilbert: "Our customers want better products for free".

    19. Re:I'm confused... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you confused? Most Slashdot posters seem to think what Samsung is doing is OK and reasonable -- presumably because they're a competitor to Apple. If Apple had done the same thing as what Samsung did, they would of course be evil scum and low-life baby killers.

      http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2008/8/Apple-%28UK%29-Ltd/TF_ADJ_44891.aspx
      http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2008/11/Apple-%28UK%29-Ltd/TF_ADJ_45381.aspx
      http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2007/6/Apple-%28UK%29-Ltd/TF_ADJ_42723.aspx
      http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2008/7/Apple-%28UK%29-Ltd/TF_ADJ_44676.aspx

      They also had to pull an ad that claimed that their computer with a G4 processor was faster than an Intel one which ran a real world OS and another ad for claiming that thye made a supercomputer for the desktop. When it comes to outright scumbagginess Apple have no equals.

    20. Re:I'm confused... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      It looks like the edsel was, in fact, actually mostly hype. According to the wikipedia article, it seems to have been designed primarily to be built using existing product lines....

      Seems to me it's a prime example of the the risk averse, "hollywood blockbuster" strategy of building a huge advertising campaign out of a product that is only mildly differentiated from the other products on the market...

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    21. Re:I'm confused... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Precisely.

      If your product can't do something better, or cheaper, then what the hell are you doing, then?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  18. advertisements are lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Advertisements are lies. Why is this news again?

  19. well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by jsepeta · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    1. Re:well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by whisper_jeff · · Score: 1

      There's a significant difference between an amusing and obviously fictitious commercial where an actor claims to be an inanimate object and a commercial where people claim to be consumers of a product giving their opinion and turn out to not, in fact, be consumers of the product. Then again, I'd have thought that was obvious.

    2. Re:well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also a significant difference between apples and oranges.

    3. Re:well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Whoosh?

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    4. Re:well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by DrXym · · Score: 1
      There's also a significant difference between someone randomly asked their opinion of a device someone asked their opinion of a device in return for cash or a free device. Offer me an iPad 2, point a camera at me and I'll say it shits rainbows if that's what you want to hear.

      It's pretty obvious that anyone who appears in these promotions is rewarded for it, whether it is because they're an actor, or a normal user.

    5. Re:well Apple ads claimed this guy was a pc... by toriver · · Score: 1

      Yes: Apple is an American electronics hardware company or a British music label, and Orange is a British telephone operator.

  20. Re:This, too, is a dupe by drb226 · · Score: 1

    The television lies

    I was suddenly reminded of Galaxy Quest. Coincidence?

  21. also by obarthelemy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Happy smily kids eating at Mickey D are, in truth, a bunch of bratty whiners.
    Continental doesn't really Love to Fly, they much prefer counting their money while laughing at stranded customers
    Dell never really cared about customer satisfaction, but, at best, about being a bit less unsatisfactory than the competition, and cheaper.

    and

    No, we can't. Not really.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    1. Re:also by wrook · · Score: 0

      No, we can't. Not really.

      Which made me think, "Is Guantanamo Bay closed yet?". And Wikipedia tells me "No", with US Secretary of Defence Gates saying, "“The prospects for closing Guantanamo as best I can tell are very, very low given very broad opposition to doing that here in the Congress.”

      I'm not an American, so I suppose I could be forgiven for just assuming it was closed. But I wonder about Americans in general. Do Americans in general understand how much of the communication they get from politicians is simply advertising (or, slightly less politely, propaganda). Perhaps I'm mistaken in the idea that one of the "Yes we can"s was referring to closing Guantanamo Bay, but I don't think so.

      The thing is, is it *really* more plausible that the to-be-elected Obama had *any* idea how to close Guantanamo bay as it is to believe that the people you see in an ad are *really* the people that they portray. I don't mean to single out Obama since lack of sincerity is hardly a fault exclusive to the Democratic party let alone US politics. But the number of people who believe in Obama curing all ills almost to the point of declaring him a messiah, puts this matter in sharp relief for me.

    2. Re:also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And maybe slashdot isn't reeeaallly stuff that matters, or news for nerds.

    3. Re:also by anegg · · Score: 1

      When my kids came home from elementary school lauding the coming of Obama (apparently most of the teachers thought he was The One and gave every impression of that to the kids) I asked them this question:

      "How can you tell if a politician is lying?"

      Being of a young and impressionable age, they didn't know. The answer, of course, is "His/her lips are moving!" When I told them this, they indignantly told me that Obama wasn't lying. I asked them how they knew - and they got very thoughtful. The same principle applies to advertisers. They are not in business to tell you the plain unvarnished truth about their product. They are there to convince you to buy their product. Always assume that everything you see in a commercial advertisement is, at least in part, a lie. Its not a trusted friend giving you good advice. Its not your family physician giving you his/her honest opinion. Its not your neighbor from down the street. Its a sleazy slimeball trying to convince you that "we have some stuff in the truck left over from another job" [no, its not, and its not "hot" merchandise either - its just cheap crap worth less than the paltry sum we are going to convince you to pay because you think its "hot"]. Its all distortions of truth, known otherwise as lies.

      I used Obama here not to pick on him specifically, but to make the point that all politicians lie, either directly or by implication or by omission. To believe otherwise is to show your naiveté. Advertisers are no different. To convince a large group of people, all with differing ideas and opinions, that your candidacy (or product) is THE answer, means that you are probably being at least slightly misleading about either your intentions or your capabilities to realize your intentions (or your product's features or your product's total costs).

      I view advertisements *at best* as an indication that a product I might want to check out for myself exists. Nothing more.

      Having said that, the guy in that Samsung Galaxy piece on YouTube looks almost just like those guys trying to convince me that they had some high quality speakers left over from another job... carnival hawkers all have a similar look. Learn to spot it, and learn to enjoy the show. But don't think you are getting anything real from it.

    4. Re:also by DrXym · · Score: 1

      I think in Obama's case he really did want to close Guantanamo and then encountered reality. There is no point undermining your own campaign pledges once you discover you're fighting a losing battle.

  22. Not new... Watch TruTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I watched the premier of "southern fried stings" and the entire show had the feeling of Reno 911.
    This is on a network called TruTV and it was chalk full of actors doing re-enactments but the show never disclosed it.

    So... this isn't new, but it is also not something we should accept either.

    1. Re:Not new... Watch TruTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] chalk full [...]

      Unless these re-enactments took place at schools, the word you want is chock.

  23. As has been done for decades by Snaller · · Score: 1

    What world are you living in?

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  24. I posted this in the last story on this too... by jmac_the_man · · Score: 2

    BREAKING NEWS: Justin Long isn't really a Mac. Also, Jon Hodgeman isn't really a PC.

    1. Re:I posted this in the last story on this too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But we knew it was an ad - though to be honest this Samsung piece, what a load! I wandered where Samsung found three lovers of a device that you cant find any where to buy?

      The thing is though, they dont show them doing anything you cant do on an iPad, and the iPad is cheaper! I never ever thought I would say that about an Apple product.

      The things that Android can do that iOS cant do is actually quite hard to sell to the public who just basically dont care, but it is sad that the best iPad is one that's been jailbroken. Once Apple offer wireless music sync, the iPad will actually be a really cool device. For now, I'll just have to live with streaming from my iTunes library until there is an unteathered jailbreak.

    2. Re:I posted this in the last story on this too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And did anyone think a magazine called "Galaxy Tab 8.9" used in an advertisement for the new "Galaxy Tab 8.9" was a real magazine?

    3. Re:I posted this in the last story on this too... by Burb · · Score: 1

      Or for UK readers, Mitchell and Webb?

      --

    4. Re:I posted this in the last story on this too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't the Intel "Rock Star" a fake scientist as well?

  25. Oh no... by $pace6host · · Score: 1

    This completely overturns my blind faith in the veracity of advertisements. If this one commercial contains fictional people, why, they all could! And what about the so-called "facts" they tell me? Maybe my beer really isn't less filling!? Maybe it doesn't really taste great!? What will I do?!?!

    1. Re:Oh no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are laws in a lot of places that differentiate and ban ads that are intentionally deceptive/fraudulent. When you watch a McDonald's ad with smiling happy families, you know they're actors. When you see an ad, like in this case, where false names and job titles are given to people who don't even exist, that's clearly fraudulent, and I'm totally fine with making it illegal.

  26. Surprising... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    How can you tell that a marketing guy is lying? His lips are moving.

    How can you tell that a marketing guy is omitting important information? His lips aren't moving.

    1. Re:Surprising... by compro01 · · Score: 1

      You should also check their hands. Some of them might be mutes.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    2. Re:Surprising... by rikkitikki · · Score: 1

      What's the difference between Marketing and Sales? Marketing knows that they're lying.

  27. Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by flimflammer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do people still honestly believe that commercials/advertisements/testimonials portraying consumers offering their opinions on the product are genuine?

    This is business as usual. I would wager a guess at 95% of all commercials don't use genuine consumers. The remaining 5% (Vonage for example) have that little notice at the bottom that says something to the effect of "We offered them products and services for their endorsement in this commercial."

    1. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      Stop polluting my positive dream world with your negative logic.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    2. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by whoop · · Score: 1

      And wrastlin' is real too, dammit!

    3. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is a HUGE difference.

      Ads with fake customers/doctors/specialists on it don't tell you at any time that those are REAL. They don't tell you that they are fake, either.

      If anybody asks, then they'll tell you, sure, they are actors. Some people do realize that fact, most don't, but even if you do realize it's fake, it still sort of works at a subconscious level.

      In the Galaxy 2 presentation, Samsung's engineers say "It's good to see this REAL LIFE experiences", etc, etc. (Emphasis is NOT mine, they actually put the emphasis on the word REAL) ... several times. Now, in most cases they just let you assume that they are real customers, in this case, they are lying to you.

      For example, Chinese manufacturers put "3G support" on most of their tablets. If you ask, they'll tell you that it "Supports external 3G". That is, you can connect a modem to it through USB and it'll work. Same thing for GPS support. Now, sure, it's not honest, but it's not as bad as if they were telling you "Internal 3G, just insert your sim card", and it didn't have internal 3G at all.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    4. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, what if someone has this kind of "real life experience" but is showing an actor to express it? Because, you know, average Joe is not that good of an actor and might not be a good candidate to show him in ads, for many reasons.

    5. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that whole reality-thing is horribly annoying when you want to show something real-life. Average Joe doesn't look good enough, doesn't act real enough and he cannot use the device to its full potential. He's just too imperfect and cannot convey how happy he is with our product.

      What harm could there be in polishing his opinion a little? It's not like it changes the fundamental idea that somewhere, some guy probably doesn't hate our product.

    6. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave misleading ads to crApple as they are goodier at it.

    7. Re:Um. Business as usual? Or didn't you know? by DrXym · · Score: 1
      I think using actors is dishonest but using real people paid for their time (e.g. with a free Galaxy Tab) would hardly be any more so. If Samsung / Apple / Sony / Motorola / etc. gave me a free device I would be more than happy to encapsulate in convenient gushing sound bites exactly what they wanted to hear.

      Yes it's a wonderful device and oh I'm really so much more productive now and it gives me more time with the kids and I whip it out in restaurants to email the presentation to the boss before enjoying my social life and now I'm so wonderfully creative that I'll just pretend to be thoughtfully painting this picture that this device inspired me to make. Later on I might even make a dress inspired by the picture of autumn leaves I snapped while frolicking outside.

  28. Obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Umm, did you really expect anything else? First, how could anyone be happy with a Samsung, and second, when was the last time a Korean was honest?

  29. Re:black holes; poisoned vaporized warring planets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I've got the code now. Most amusing.

  30. Re:This, too, is a dupe by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

    Galaxy Quest? Is that another Samsung device?

  31. Nothing New by Demonantis · · Score: 1

    I hope this reporter(?) hasn't seen any commercials with doctors in them. They are actors too. I would hazard to say that everyone on TV are actors. Yes I am including the news and reality TV.

    1. Re:Nothing New by Pesticidal · · Score: 1

      Yeah I've even heard similar accusations against professional wrestling!

  32. Re:This, too, is a dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No just Samsung lies, buy apple they are always honest and straight forward.

  33. That's horrible. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

    It impedes upon my ability to believe everything that I hear without doing any actual research about it myself! Ban it immediately!

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  34. This is so interesting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is so interesting! cutting blade

  35. This cutting edge truth brought to you by Apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that everything we see in advertising is a fabrication designed to mislead, I wonder who decided to highlight this particular set of lies?

    Who has the most to lose? Who has the most to gain?

    Yup. Nooooooow you're getting it!

  36. So, Let me get this straight by Rayzed · · Score: 1

    All this time, I was believing everything I saw in commercials. Am I now to believe that:

    1) The Ford F150 that I got when I traded in my Toyota Corolla will NOT get better mileage, and my voice will NOT get deeper when I talk about it.
    2) Cialis does NOT come with two free bathtubs?
    3) ....

    I'm sorry, I just can't continue. My dreams have just been shattered against the jagged rocks of reality, and I need to go get my iPad to pray to Jobs for new direction in my life.

  37. The Jolly Green Giant by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 1

    is also not really jolly, green, or a giant.

  38. Re:This, too, is a dupe by mind.the.oranges · · Score: 0

    For once the annoying bot is +1 insightful.

  39. Re:This cutting edge truth brought to you by Apple by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    It wouldn't be so obvious that there was an agenda if the acting in the ad wasn't sooo bad. It looks like one of those really bad retail/fast food training videos.

  40. This is news? by Stiletto · · Score: 1

    Really? Hands up if you're actually surprised that they use actors in advertisements. Jeez, people were you born yesterday? Newsflash! Everything in advertising is a lie designed to get you to buy a product you don't need. I thought parents taught this shit to kids when they start watching TV...

  41. Not just any dupe by degeneratemonkey · · Score: 1

    But a dupe of a really terribly unimportant story. Getting paid to advertise the Galaxy Tab, are we?

  42. Re:Let the Android fanboys by node+3 · · Score: 1

    Apple sucks, so we have to copy everything they do.

    So what you're saying is that if Samsung is going to copy Apple's astroturfing campaigns, they need to do a better job of it?

    Well, they could start copying Apple by actually finding real people who like their products. Remember Ellen Feiss?

  43. It's worse in Japan... by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

    In DOCOMO commercials in Japan, the actual Galaxy Tab pretends to be Ken Watanabe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y8fjslHJuk

  44. Maybe they have another job. by 91degrees · · Score: 2

    Actors will have another means of supplementing their income.

    Look at reality TV shows. Where do you think they find people who are so eager to put themselves out there? Casting studios are a good bet. Of course, on the TV show, they'll pick a job other than "actor" when they say what they do.

    So, perhaps Mr. Kolinski does run a small real estate firm on the side. Perhaps Joan Hess does write about travel. She's certainly presented a travel related TV show.

  45. Oh, samzenpus... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Rob Rozeboom dupe dee dup.
    Dupe dee dupedee dupe dup. Until one day, da dupe dupe-e dupe dupe.
    Dupe da ddupe got teetley dumb.
    From the creators of 'dup' and 'tum ta tittaly tum ta too', Rob Rozeboom is: 'Da dupe dee dupe da teeley dupe-e dupe dumb'.
    Rated PG-13.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  46. Re:This, too, is a dupe by halowolf · · Score: 1

    The difference being that Galaxy Quest was actually good...

  47. Re:Let the Android fanboys by DrXym · · Score: 1

    Apple sucks, so we have to copy everything they do.

    So what you're saying is that if Samsung is going to copy Apple's astroturfing campaigns, they need to do a better job of it?

    Well, they could start copying Apple by actually finding real people who like their products. Remember Ellen Feiss?

    It should be easy enough to find real people. Find a bunch of poncy photogenic "creative" types, give them a tablet for their troubles and let them gush profusely about how the device changed their lives. People will whore themselves out quite readily and say any shit you want them to say when there is a shiny toy for their troubles.

  48. what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    here in germany we had such commercials since the concentration camps.. how is this new?

    1. Re:what? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      here in germany we had such commercials since the concentration camps.. how is this new?

      You mentioned the war but I think you got away with it.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  49. Re:This, too, is a dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Deception is a founding element rooted deep at the core.

    What's funny is that the people who believe such things tend to listen to right wing talk radio. For some reason they seem to believe angry men with hours of air time to fill more than educated people they know personally.

  50. Several months before the product's release... by ammoQ · · Score: 1

    ... SHOCKER: Those persons have not been using stuff from the future for months. They just pretend to.

    How could any sane person expect anything else? This whole affair is just stupid.

  51. Its a commercial ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone wants to sell you something and they stretched the truth a little. /shocker

    Its a commercial ... if you believed anything they said, well ...

    There is a sucker born every minute.
    A fool and his money are soon parted.

    Is this really so hard to understand?

  52. Re:This, too, is a dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello.

    I am the real Michael Kristopeit. This well known troll above me has been using my name and slandering it for quite some time now by posting his misanthropic ravings. Please help me take my name back. My name is Michael Kristopeit. I am a single gay man living in Michigan and this asshole has taken my identity on slashdot.

  53. Re:Let the Android fanboys by intheshelter · · Score: 1

    You sure are bitter against Apple, aren't you? You're such a genius, but you can't even conceive of the idea that Apple users gush about Apple products because they actually like them?

  54. (Serving Suggestion) by slashdotard · · Score: 1

    It's not a lie!

    It's not fraud!

    It's a serving suggestion!

    What? Where's the beef? Well, it's -- Look! Over there! A unicorn!

    --
    me. --a by-product of public education
  55. Reminds me of that PBS News Hour caper by sgt_doom · · Score: 1
    Back around 2003, I watched that pathetic News Hour on PBS (the one where 87% of the "guests" all happen to be members of the Council on Foreign Relations, and they especially love to have that Beschloss presidential historian -- whose wife was an employee/hedge fund expert of the Carlyle Group and has since moved on to one of the Rockefeller foundations, along with neocon piece of crap, Richard Perle, also a constant guest) on whether stock options should be counted as part of one's salary.

    I was interested in contacting the "liberal" response guest, an identified NY University business economics professor -- took me three months to finally track her down as she had no connection with NYU, nor ever had, but WAS a member of the NY chapter of the Screen Actors Guild (she didn't realize she was posing as an imposter but was misled into believing it was an audition).

  56. gimme a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A day of TV will provide Americans with nearly a dozen fake doctors telling them that their particular drugs are so wonderful that they should be added to the drinking water so everyone can enjoy their benefits. And -this- makes the headlines on Slashdot?? Seriously f--cked up reporting priorities.

    And speaking of fake testimonials, even fake doctors are not a problem worth tackling until all the real doctors on peer-reviewed journal editorial boards are removed from the payroll of all the major pharmaceutical companies. Like that will ever happen.

    1. Re:gimme a break by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Is not this all normal? All the time TV ads show happy 'customers' who are in fact actors.

  57. Our great leader loves Galaxy Tablet by rossy · · Score: 1

    The Great leader loves the Galaxy Tablet! There will soon be several applications that will download different photographs of our great leader using his Galaxy Tablet!
    Hurry and get yours today!

    --
    Ross Youngblood
  58. This is 'news'? by lpq · · Score: 1

    It's an "ad" -- of course they use paid actors! That is the norm.

    Even when they say 'real person', that simply means they aren't a robot, but they can still be a paid actor...etc.

    This has been the norm in advertising for decades.

  59. TomHudson the 1 eyed CYCLOPS: Step inside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're pitiful, and now I know who the AC troll is that's been stalking me here for MONTHS now!

    (It's YOU, with your own words quoted telling others to do so with you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 as my proof thereof!)

    You also kept a JOURNAL on me? Hilarious, but... I am going to use that against you, & let others see the scumbag troll you really are:

    http://slashdot.org/journal/250596/The-Alexander-Peter-Kowalski-threads--with-pics

    That one, from your journal? HILARIOUS! Why? Because here are the facts, vs. your libellous fictions you stupid cunt:

    ---

    1.) I own my own home, and rental properties, PAID IN FULL no less (so I'd advise you stop the libel, or else - & trust me: Ask Arstechnica if I have backed that up before, or see below) - and you tried to say in your journal I "live with my parents"? That's libel, asshole, in case you didn't know it!

    This is easily verifiable via public information &/or tax records if you wish... as I have NOTHING to hide.

    I.E.-> In fact - I am actually, believe-it-or-not, one of the single largest PRIVATE land-owners in my city (many lots/tracts of land, as yet still undeveloped though, that I intend to turn into more rental complexes in the future in fact).

    In fact, I am ALMOST where I have always wanted to be, & worked 16++ yrs. in the Computer Sciences for: INDEPENDENT of having to work @ all! Almost there... can YOU same the same? I doubt it... especially when yoiu botch your contracts with customers... see below, lol!

    ---

    2.) You cited Arstechnica there too. They impersonated me on their forums and stalked me for nearly 5 yrs. online site to site, only to have their own personal websites removed for making literal death threats to me, posting my personal information, and libelling myself. In fact, ask Jeremy Reimer or Jay Little about that much (CrystalTech.com ousted Little, & Reimer got HUGE portions of his website forcibly removed after the police were informed of all of this (Det. Felton B.C. CA police in fact, where HE lives)).

    Why?

    Because I made them BOTH look like fools at Windows IT Pro forums (widely respected) in regards to Exchange Server and at NTCompatible.com on DRIVER_LESS_THAN_IRQL errors in drivers/hardware interfaces... they also stalked me to both those sites, to their dismay (see above).

    Arstechnica: HOME OF THE UNDERACHIEVERS OF THE INTERNET, because I asked them ALL 1 simple question back in 2001 after they attacked & impersonated myself:

    "What have you all ever done that was noted as good by peers in respected publication, trade shows, newspapers, books etc. in the field of the computer sciences"

    Not a single 1 had a thing to put up - just like yourself when I asked that of you & I had a dozen (partial list only on my end of my FAVS only, there are many more & I did them while you probably where still in diapers I wager in the computer sciences)...

    It really, lol, "set them off", & truths like that do, & I suspect THAT is why you have libelled myself (bad move)... just like I am doing to you, here now.

    You brought it on yourself - I know your real name as well, this is where I have you BY THE BALLS (that is, IF you had them, & your posting as "Tom" here seems to say you WISH YOU DID, lol) if I wish, legally, in fact should I choose to exercise it, for libel.

    ---

    3.) You're also stalking me as an AC & your OWN words prove it here:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544

    There are LAWS against online stalking too, you sick freak! Or, don't you respect the law? Apparently not.

    "Hell hath no fury like a woman"? More like Hell hath NO STUPIDI

  60. TomHudson libels others online? See inside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're pitiful, and now I know who the AC troll is that's been stalking me here for MONTHS now!

    (It's YOU, with your own words quoted telling others to do so with you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 as my proof thereof!)

    You also kept a JOURNAL on me? Hilarious, but... I am going to use that against you, & let others see the scumbag troll you really are:

    http://slashdot.org/journal/250596/The-Alexander-Peter-Kowalski-threads--with-pics

    That one, from your journal? HILARIOUS! Why? Because here are the facts, vs. your libellous fictions you stupid cunt:

    ---

    1.) I own my own home, and rental properties, PAID IN FULL no less (so I'd advise you stop the libel, or else - & trust me: Ask Arstechnica if I have backed that up before, or see below) - and you tried to say in your journal I "live with my parents"? That's libel, asshole, in case you didn't know it!

    This is easily verifiable via public information &/or tax records if you wish... as I have NOTHING to hide.

    I.E.-> In fact - I am actually, believe-it-or-not, one of the single largest PRIVATE land-owners in my city (many lots/tracts of land, as yet still undeveloped though, that I intend to turn into more rental complexes in the future in fact).

    In fact, I am ALMOST where I have always wanted to be, & worked 16++ yrs. in the Computer Sciences for: INDEPENDENT of having to work @ all! Almost there... can YOU same the same? I doubt it... especially when yoiu botch your contracts with customers... see below, lol!

    ---

    2.) You cited Arstechnica there too. They impersonated me on their forums and stalked me for nearly 5 yrs. online site to site, only to have their own personal websites removed for making literal death threats to me, posting my personal information, IMPERSONATING ME, and libelling myself. In fact, ask Jeremy Reimer or Jay Little about that much (CrystalTech.com ousted Little, & Reimer got HUGE portions of his website forcibly removed after the police were informed of all of this (Det. Felton B.C. CA police in fact, where HE lives)).

    Why?

    Because I made them BOTH look like fools at Windows IT Pro forums (widely respected) in regards to Exchange Server and at NTCompatible.com on DRIVER_LESS_THAN_IRQL errors in drivers/hardware interfaces... they also stalked me to both those sites, to their dismay (see above).

    Arstechnica: HOME OF THE UNDERACHIEVERS OF THE INTERNET, because I asked them ALL 1 simple question back in 2001 after they attacked & impersonated myself:

    "What have you all ever done that was noted as good by peers in respected publication, trade shows, newspapers, books etc. in the field of the computer sciences"

    Not a single 1 had a thing to put up - just like yourself when I asked that of you & I had a dozen (partial list only on my end of my FAVS only, there are many more & I did them while you probably where still in diapers I wager in the computer sciences)...

    It really, lol, "set them off", & truths like that do, & I suspect THAT is why you have libelled myself (bad move)... just like I am doing to you, here now.

    You brought it on yourself - I know your real name as well, this is where I have you BY THE BALLS (that is, IF you had them, & your posting as "Tom" here seems to say you WISH YOU DID, lol) if I wish, legally, in fact should I choose to exercise it, for libel.

    ---

    3.) You're also stalking me as an AC & your OWN words prove it here:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544

    There are LAWS against online stalking too, you sick freak! Or, don't you respect the law? Apparently not.

    "Hell hath no fury like a woman"? More like He

    1. Re:TomHudson libels others online? See inside by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      JUMP, MONKEY-BOY, JUMP!

      First, I don't past anonymously, you stupid moron. The link you posted proves otherwise.

      Second, I doubt anyone is impressed with your use of the "c" word.

      Third, same goes for making fun of my going temporarily blind in one eye.

      Fourth, it's like I said - you can't help it - you have to attack me whenever you're not busy attacking someone else. Your pitiful ego demands it, because you can't stand that a woman totally p0wns you without even doing anything for months on end.

      I must have really hit a nerve for you to think that any AC post about you was written by me. Let me guess - mommy didn't change your diapers when you were little, and you have a thing against women? Or a female obstetrician, and she slapped the wrong end? And when you mother said "Isn't he a treasure", you father said "quick - lets bury it before someone sees it and say you miscarried."

      Speaking of which, did your parents have any children who survived?

      JUMP, MONKEY-BOY, JUMP! You can't stop ...

  61. TomHudson the online libeller exposed, lol! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're pitiful, and now I know who the AC troll is that's been stalking me here for MONTHS now!

    (It's YOU, with your own words quoted telling others to do so with you here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 as my proof thereof!)

    You also kept a JOURNAL on me? Hilarious, but... I am going to use that against you, & let others see the scumbag troll you really are:

    http://slashdot.org/journal/250596/The-Alexander-Peter-Kowalski-threads--with-pics

    That one, from your journal? HILARIOUS! Why? Because here are the facts, vs. your libellous fictions you stupid cunt:

    ---

    1.) I own my own home, and rental properties, PAID IN FULL no less (so I'd advise you stop the libel, or else - & trust me: Ask Arstechnica if I have backed that up before, or see below) - and you tried to say in your journal I "live with my parents"? That's libel, asshole, in case you didn't know it!

    This is easily verifiable via public information &/or tax records if you wish... as I have NOTHING to hide.

    I.E.-> In fact - I am actually, believe-it-or-not, one of the single largest PRIVATE land-owners in my city (many lots/tracts of land, as yet still undeveloped though, that I intend to turn into more rental complexes in the future in fact).

    In fact, I am ALMOST where I have always wanted to be, & worked 16++ yrs. in the Computer Sciences for: INDEPENDENT of having to work @ all! Almost there... can YOU same the same? I doubt it... especially when yoiu botch your contracts with customers... see below, lol!

    ---

    2.) You cited Arstechnica there too. They impersonated me on their forums and stalked me for nearly 5 yrs. online site to site, only to have their own personal websites removed for making literal death threats to me, posting my personal information, IMPERSONATING ME, and libelling myself. In fact, ask Jeremy Reimer or Jay Little about that much (CrystalTech.com ousted Little, & Reimer got HUGE portions of his website forcibly removed after the police were informed of all of this (Det. Felton B.C. CA police in fact, where HE lives)).

    Why?

    Because I made them BOTH look like fools at Windows IT Pro forums (widely respected) in regards to Exchange Server and at NTCompatible.com on DRIVER_LESS_THAN_IRQL errors in drivers/hardware interfaces... they also stalked me to both those sites, to their dismay (see above).

    Arstechnica: HOME OF THE UNDERACHIEVERS OF THE INTERNET, because I asked them ALL 1 simple question back in 2001 after they attacked & impersonated myself:

    "What have you all ever done that was noted as good by peers in respected publication, trade shows, newspapers, books etc. in the field of the computer sciences"

    Not a single 1 had a thing to put up - just like yourself when I asked that of you & I had a dozen (partial list only on my end of my FAVS only, there are many more & I did them while you probably where still in diapers I wager in the computer sciences)...

    It really, lol, "set them off", & truths like that do, & I suspect THAT is why you have libelled myself (bad move)... just like I am doing to you, here now.

    You brought it on yourself - I know your real name as well, this is where I have you BY THE BALLS (that is, IF you had them, & your posting as "Tom" here seems to say you WISH YOU DID, lol) if I wish, legally, in fact should I choose to exercise it, for libel.

    ---

    3.) You're also stalking me as an AC & your OWN words prove it here:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544

    There are LAWS against online stalking too, you sick freak! Or, don't you respect the law? Apparently not.

    "Hell hath no fury like a woman"? More like He

  62. TomHudson, your own words TRAP your lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your own words QUOTED here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 said you do, and you even told others to do so...

    (So, you're the "AC TROLL" that's been stalking me here, for MONTHS ON END no less, & your own words prove it for me, liar!)

    ---

    "First, I don't past anonymously, you stupid moron. The link you posted proves otherwise." - by tomhudson (43916) on Tuesday March 29, @08:30PM (#35661034) Homepage

    LMAO, see above... after all/again - YOU SAID IT, & even told others to do it, & your own MOUTH trapped you in it!

    (Ah, just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'" as per usual vs. a 1 dimensional NIX unaccomplished NOOB like YOU!)

    You're NOT very intelligent, are you? You only did this to yourself, & the URL above proves that much... & yes, you DO troll & stalk me, as well as tell lies (which my posts above & before the past blow you to bits on) & startup shit with me as well, see here as only 1 single example thereof:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1992296&cid=35192078

    So, Tom: DID YOU, or did you NOT, startup with me there, albeit for once, NOT as AC?

    (Answer the question dummy... lol!)

    ---

    "Second, I doubt anyone is impressed with your use of the "c" word.." - by tomhudson (43916) on Tuesday March 29, @08:30PM (#35661034) Homepage

    LMAO, yup... knew it: I've NEVER met a woman that could handle that word... & it did EXACTLY what I expected it to, which is "Rattle you in your Game/Your cage".

    You have called me names, lied about myself, libelled me repeatedly & publicly (which I disproved easily, here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2051634&cid=35658544 with your own words, & your invalid sources)

    (Don't try "pot calling the kettle black" on me idiot... I'll burn you, everytime, & using your OWN misdoings & words!)

    ---

    "Third, same goes for making fun of my going temporarily blind in one eye." - by tomhudson (43916) on Tuesday March 29, @08:30PM (#35661034) Homepage

    First, ordinarily? I'd take pity on that, & yes, that you're a woman... except you LIBELLED me, and the URL above disproves it all easily, & called me names (pot calling kettle black, & shows me "I cut thru to you emotionally" easily enough)... so please: Don't try the "PITY ME I AM A FREAK" shit.

    You started it, I am finishing you with your own b.s. (& least of all, don't try the "I am a woman" shit - you don't act LIKE A LADY, you AC trolling, stalking, libelling cunt!)

    ---

    "you can't stand that a woman totally p0wns you without even doing anything for months on end." - by tomhudson (43916) on Tuesday March 29, @08:30PM (#35661034) Homepage

    You don't deserve to be treated like a woman... but, since you post with a MAN's name (deceiver), and you start shit with me constantly & surreptitiously too (see top of this post & the URL in fact)? FUCK YOU! You want to act like a man/play with the boys, & you do so like a weasel?? You sowed the wind... here's YOUR whirlwind!

    (I have been meaning to do this for QUITE a while, especially since you libelled me in your journal... I am just TOO damned busy usually to do so, & to be honest? I knew it was going to be easy, and it would make you look like the TRASH you are, so no hurry... you like?)

    ----

    "I must have really hit a nerve for you to think that any AC post about you was written by me." - by tomhudson (43916) on Tuesday March 29, @08:30PM (#35661034) Homepage

    See URL at the top here... eat your lying, libelling, AC trolling & stalking word

  63. chaussures puma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you for your sharing.then welcome you to visit us online store chaussures Puma