Slashdot Mirror
Dell's Misleading Graphics Card Buying Advice
Barence writes "Dell's website includes a guide to graphics cards for PC novices which contains a dangerous chunk of misinformation. The monitor on the left, labelled as a PC that uses a 'standard graphics card,' is displaying a Windows desktop that's washed out and blurry. The seemingly identical Dell TFT on the right, powered by a 'high-end graphics card,' is showing the same desktop – but this time it's much sharper and more vivid. They're both outputting at the same resolution."
... using words like "misleading" and "unfair." It's fraud, plain and simple.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
There is no such thing as a "standard" graphics card
Why don't they put two naked chicks fondling the expensive card monitor behind it . . .?
And Roseanne Barr behind the cheapo one . . . ?
Then I would know which one to buy!
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Dell’s page says that its picture is for “demonstrative purposes only”
Dell should rephrase it and clearly state that this is for "promotional purposes only" instead.
Yeah, but that difference is about an order of magnitude more subtle than shown on Dell's site.
the images look the same on my low end graphics card. I guess I should upgrade.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
They took it down shortly before the reporters got to it, this was what it looked like before: http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/8082/dellimage2.jpg
Anonymous Coward
From the look of the two monitors on the 'example' page, it looks like they're showing 27 or 30 inch monitors. If that's true, then the comparison of the 'low end' Radeon 3450 at a max of 1920x1200 to a 3470 or higher with a max resolution of 2560x1600 (the native resolution of a 30 inch monitor) will look something close to the example photos.
Not labeling the examples with the types of cards used, resolutions, sizes, etc is close to unconscionable for a business computer comparison / assist site.
The funny thing is that even if that's true, then the lowest end baseline integrated intel graphics chip would match the high end in display resolution, and therefore, sharpness on any monitor Dell sells.
Is this really worth any kind of discussion?
The people who would be fooled by this, would not have the capacity to adjust their monitor settings in Windows, let alone possess the skill necessary to Photoshop an image's brightness and contrast.
So you're saying it's okay to defraud people if they're ignorant?
Here's a tip: everyone's ignorant about something. In fact, everyone's ignorant about most things. You know enough to spot the fraud in the Dell ad, great, good for you. But I guarantee you that there are people working very hard to part you from your money who will do their best to find the gaps in your knowledge -- and they will find those gaps, because you have just as many of them as everyone else does.
Normally, when (not if, when) that happens, people will be sympathetic. In your case, they'll point and laugh.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
I should mention that the VGA cable that was supplied with the monitor is the thickest one I have handled and I have seen a few.
I normally don't like to do this, but wow... that's what she said!
The big difference is that in the UK and EU there's an excellent chance that this is illegal. Strange as it may seem, unlike the US we actually require adverts to be somewhat true - and not just by tacking on a timestretched disclaimer sped up to a garble at the end. For example, the Budweiser "Fresh Beer Tastes Better" ad campaign was ultimately sunk because fresh beer does not, in fact, taste better. Although the ASA eventually cleared the advert on the basis that Bud tastes so bad it actually becomes worse as it ages, the damage was done.
I would urge as many of you that summon up the enthusiasm to send a polite email to the Advertising Standards Authority. Since this portion of the Dell website is aimed at UK customers, they must abide by UK laws.
It's not just misleading, it's actually lying. The pictures are accompanied by the phrase "Images shown are for demonstrative purposes only". But they're not demonstrative of anything like the difference between a high-end and low-end graphics card.
The fact that it's for business users does not in any way excuse Dell for flat-out lying to customers.
"A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
Maybe I'm just cynical, but I ALWAYS expect advertisements to lie. Every claim that is not quantified and expressed in numbers is definitely a lie. Claims that are expressed in numbers are probably a lie. Only specs that are very easy to verify and actually define fitness for purpose can be relied on- like RAM size or dimensions. Claims that are hard to verify like quality or reliability or performance or health benefits will be lies. Salesmen who have vested interest will ALWAYS lie to you. You'll never get honest advice from people who stand to profit from your decision. Even independent sources are often biased one way or the other and often won't give advice that is best for you and your situation.
This doesn't just hold true for tech. This is true for everything you purchase from washing machines and pencils to computers and cars. I still don't understand how some people don't realize this and just walk into a shop and ask someone there to help with their purchase.
--Coder
The ASA are actually one of the most capable regulatory bodies within the UK. I've been continually impressed by them demanding peer reviewed evidence from manufacturers to support their claims, and by the decent balance their provide when people complain about adverts that go against their morals/religion.
A few years ago I read that the average number of complaints to the ASA that lead to the advert people pulled was 1.3 . In other words they take every complaint on their merit rather than from public pressure. So if you think an advert violates one of the standards, there is a good chance you can get it pulled.
The badscience forum provides an excellent Activisim section that can help when constructing these complaints.
1920x1080 over an SVGA port with a low quality cable looks absolutely horrible,
The problem is almost always caused by the sync on the monitor being slightly out of phase with the clock on the graphics card. Back in ye olde days of TFT monitors, before DVI (I had one--I was an early adopter), the auto adjustment was not especially good and you had to tweak the phase slightly using the on-screen controls to get a pin-sharp image. With even really cheap monitors these days, the analog sync is exceptionally good compared to what it was. Almost all crappiness can be fixed by pressing the auto-adjust button.
I regularly use a TFT monitor driven with an analog cable at 1920x1200, and it's one of those modern, thin super cheap looking VGA cables. It looks great.
BTW, VGA is pretty forgiving on short cables. The frequencies aren't that high and any even moderately passable co-ax will do fine, and cheap modern coax is manufacturered to an astonishingly high spec.
And yes, I am a pixel nazi, like the visual equivalent of golden ears. I work in image processing, so I am very sensitive to things like ringing, JPEG artefacts, mismatched resolutions, phase errors, dithering, etc.
SJW n. One who posts facts.