Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Paid NFL $400 Million To Use Surface, But Announcers Call Them iPads

mpicpp sends this news from Business Insider: Prior to the season, Microsoft and the NFL struck a 5-year, $400 million deal with one of the major components being that the Microsoft Surface would become "the official tablet of the NFL," with coaches and players using the Surface on the sidelines during games. But Microsoft and the league ran into a problem during week one of the season when at least two television announcers mistakenly referred to the tablets as iPads, giving a huge rival some unexpected exposure. The biggest blunder for the league came during the nationally televised Monday Night Football game when ESPN's Trent Dilfer joked about how long it took Cardinals assistant head coach Tom Moore to "learn how to use the iPad to scroll through the pictures." In a separate incident, Drew Brees of the New Orleans Saints was spotted by Fox commentator John Lynch using a Surface on the sideline. Lynch remarked that Brees was "not watching movies on his iPad.

405 comments

  1. Hahahaha by Shaman · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's rich.

    --
    ...Steve
    1. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      What did you expect from retards?

    2. Re:Hahahaha by phrostie · · Score: 5, Informative

      I use an android tablet to control and display timed exposures(or digitally zoom planetary objects) with my telescope/camera at star parties.
      everyone always assumes it's an ipad.
      ipad has become a generic term for a tablet.

      the NFL thing is funny, but not surprising.

    3. Re:Hahahaha by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Wait. You run with a crowd nerdy enough to regularly attend star parties, but none of them are nerdy enough to recognize an operating system?

    4. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Surface RT?

    5. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      give MSFT ceo some kleenex!

    6. Re:Hahahaha by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's dark, silly.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:Hahahaha by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wait. You read slashdot and have been here long enough to have a six-digit user-id, but you're not nerdy enough to recognize a device versus an operating system?

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:Hahahaha by bigfinger76 · · Score: 1

      Whoa. That is dark.

    9. Re:Hahahaha by TWX · · Score: 1

      What can I say? I'm in a snarky mood this morning and my caffeine hasn't kicked-in yet.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    10. Re:Hahahaha by Warbothong · · Score: 1

      Wait. You run with a crowd nerdy enough to regularly attend star parties, but none of them are nerdy enough to recognize an operating system?

      How does one "recognize an operating system"? Even if there's a fanboi wallpaper, it can't be seen most of the time (assuming the machine is actually used for something). If I'm running a full-screen astronomy app, how would you know the OS?

    11. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly.

      iPad has become like "Kleenex", the term has become generic for "tablet"

    12. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing clueless nerds with respectable geeks.

    13. Re:Hahahaha by cyberchondriac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well honestly, IT is one nerd niche, amateur astronomy is another. I can believe it.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    14. Re:Hahahaha by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Yes, all nerds are master of OS's and tablet recognition.

      I'm going to go out on a limb and say they enjoy astronomy more then what ever the hell you think a nerd should do.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    15. Re:Hahahaha by geekoid · · Score: 1

      What do you use to connect the device to your telescope?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    16. Re:Hahahaha by bigman2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Going along with the story...

      I use a Surface Pro to connect to my Canon camera for macro shots. Super cool, full control of the camera, tethered shooting (straight to Surface) which is then automagically uploaded to SkyDrive. Full screen preview, editing on the Surface, etc.

      I can do tons of work directly on the Surface, really works out nice.

      Every day I swear that I will "Strangle the next person that calls this an iPad", but that hasn't happened yet. But each time someone does that, I take the time to point out the USB port, the fact that it can run full Photoshop, etc. etc.

      iPads were a cruel joke played upon people who thought they were getting a device that could actually DO something. iPads are great for consumption, but once you move beyond NetFlix, they are not good for much.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    17. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and there all high

    18. Re:Hahahaha by rsmoody · · Score: 1

      Crescent wrench to a Crescent brand adjustable wrench.
      Channel-Locks to Channel-Lock brand slip-joint pliers.
      Weed eater to Weed Eater brand line trimmer.
      Vise Grips to Vise Grip brand locking pliers.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    19. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An interest in astronomy doesn't make one a gadget geek. They are not really related things.

    20. Re:Hahahaha by Minwee · · Score: 1

      What do you use to connect the device to your telescope?

      I'm betting it's duct tape.

    21. Re:Hahahaha by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Yep. Like Kleenex is the generic term for tissue.

    22. Re:Hahahaha by Reeses · · Score: 1

      When an app is running, you can't see the OS. And depending on the apps UI/graphic design, there may be no indication which OS it's running on.

      Simple mistakes for most people.

      --
      Reeses
    23. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the Surface == Charmin?

    24. Re: Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's a Unix system, I know this!"

    25. Re:Hahahaha by nblender · · Score: 1

      yes. I used to channel my inner-rainman and get all bent out of shape whenever someone complimented my "Land Cruiser" by saying "Nice jeep!"... Now I take it for what it's worth, a good natured compliment from someone who could care less what species my truck is.

    26. Re:Hahahaha by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
      Yep, that's precisely what I was thinking...the iPad with the general public, has become a generic word for 'tablet'.

      Kinda like Kleenex is pretty much any facial tissue you blow your nose on, Xerox is any copy machine, and in the south, Coke pretty much means any type of carbonated beverage (as in "hey, you want a coke or something?" "Yes", "Ok, what flavor?")

      Coke-or-something being one word when asked...

      But yes, I've heard before people asking, "what kind of iPad do you have there?"

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    27. Re:Hahahaha by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Informative
      Here is an interesting page showing how to use DslrDashboard (open source) with TP-Link Battery Powered Wireless router along with LR Timelapse to have a really powerful way to control your camera. Except for the LR Timelapse portion, the DSLR dashboard is open source and you're using Open WRT. The hardware on the battery router is pretty much identical to a commercial offering (whose name escapes me right now) that is charging $$$$$$ for this type of set up.

      I've got the components, and hope to find a weekend free soon to hook it to my Canon 5D3 for some time-lapse and other controlled shooting. I figured it nothing else, this would breathe a bit more useful life back into my old Motorola Xoom tablet.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    28. Re:Hahahaha by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      And, to many many people, jeep is a generic term.

      Originally it meant "General Purpose" vehicle. The Jeep has been made by many different companies over the years , Willys and AMC for example, but also made under license by a bunch of others.

      And, the reason Chrysler owns it now, is because when they had whatever similar vehicle and ran an ad campaign that said "it was the best keep-like vehicle", they lost a trademark suit. They subsequently decided to buy it.

      So, to many people, a jeep is a short wheel-base four wheel drive vehicle which includes the "cute ute's" as well.

      And, yes, almost nobody except someone who has owned one really cares about the distinction. And once you no longer own one, you stop caring too. :-P

      Me, I decided a gutless tent on wheels wasn't really what I wanted out of a vehicle. ;-)

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    29. Re:Hahahaha by fizzer06 · · Score: 1
      I got that when I hired on to the signal department as an assistant signalman on the BN Railway in 1981. A signal inspector told me to get a "Kearney" out of the work van. I told him I'd be glad to as soon as he told me what the hell a Kearney was.

      It was a split bolt connector and it was not made by Kearney.

    30. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait. You read slashdot and have been here long enough to have a six-digit user-id, but you're not nerdy enough to recognize a device versus an operating system?

      Is an Android tablet a device, an operating system or both?

      I think that's more a question for lawyers than nerds.

    31. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a nerd. Wtf is a star party?

    32. Re:Hahahaha by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      Is a 6 digit user ID a sign of an account being old?

    33. Re:Hahahaha by oldmac31310 · · Score: 0

      They're sure they put their iPads there on the table. Can you see the difference?

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    34. Re:Hahahaha by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      My vice grips is not a vice grips. Good point.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    35. Re:Hahahaha by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      In the 700K range you'd have to be at least . . . 12? dunno if that's "old" these days.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    36. Re:Hahahaha by dourk · · Score: 1

      And I thought 6-digiters were the young kids.

      --
      Wake up.
    37. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tablets (and phones) is also a subset of the IT niche, and one many of us do not care about.

    38. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's a crap definition of nerds. True nerds are autodidactic polymaths...no matter what "niche" gets them off the most

    39. Re:Hahahaha by Linsaran · · Score: 1

      And I thought 6-digiters were the young kids.

      Nope, we're in our teens, which means I need to borrow the car or at least get a ride somewhere.

      --
      In a bit of shameless internet panhandling, I accept Litecoin Donations at Lbd2oH9QsthD1GfuUXPyka12YxvWJYnBVf
    40. Re:Hahahaha by plopez · · Score: 1

      no. I think 4 is though

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    41. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which points out that Apple is the one that needs to sue them to protect their own trademark, otherwise they might lose it if it becomes too generic of a term and is applied to any tablet like this.

    42. Re:Hahahaha by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Wait. You run with a crowd nerdy enough to regularly attend star parties, but none of them are nerdy enough to recognize an operating system?

      How does one "recognize an operating system"? Even if there's a fanboi wallpaper, it can't be seen most of the time (assuming the machine is actually used for something). If I'm running a full-screen astronomy app, how would you know the OS?

      in addition, they really don't give a rats ass. Only slashdot nerds get buthurt if you call their Coby an iPad.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    43. Re:Hahahaha by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0
      So hve you told the professional astronomers about your great discovery?

      Thank God the Microsoft Surface came along so we can now finally do this.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    44. Re:Hahahaha by Pontiac · · Score: 1

      I joined sometime in 1998 or 99 and have a 6 digit number.. a low one but still 6.

      --
      If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. --Red Adair
    45. Re:Hahahaha by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      I lost a game of Scrabble because my aunt wouldn't let me use "jeep". I claimed that since the letters aren't capital, it meant "short wheel-base four wheel drive vehicle". Didn't do any good. ;)

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    46. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah! I see it plain as day. The difference is that you're a douchenozzle and the OP isn't probably because he's high.

    47. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an asshole and I annoy 2 people here at work all the time. I call one guy's 76 land cruiser a jeep and the other guy always talks about his porches which he pronounces Pour Sha, and so I just call it Porsh. I never let either of their corrections slow me down a bit and always stay consistently "wrong" just cause it makes their OCD flare up outta control!

    48. Re:Hahahaha by Zynder · · Score: 1

      You mean duck tape ;)

    49. Re:Hahahaha by phrostie · · Score: 2

      there is an adapter called an OTG cable. it's like a USB with a couple of wires/pins flipped.
      you can make one out of a USB, but they are so cheap it's not worth it.
      there are a number of Apps, I like DSLR Controller the best.
      you'll need a canon or nikon dslr with live view. a T2i or newer is recomended.

       

    50. Re:Hahahaha by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      who could care less what species my truck is.

      Your inner-Rainman is broken.

    51. Re:Hahahaha by phrostie · · Score: 1

      the other amateur astronomers are all really sharp, but we're there to help expose the average joe/jane to science and astronomy. most people just don't really care about operating systems. it's no big thing.

    52. Re:Hahahaha by phrostie · · Score: 1

      DSLR controller is a good example of that, but most people don't even notice the gui.
      once they discover that they can zoom and pan that's all they think about.

    53. Re:Hahahaha by phrostie · · Score: 1

      you get 10-20 telescopes together and let people look at what they've been missing.

      http://nightsky.jpl.nasa.gov/

    54. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll learn that nerds aren't just generic iknowitall nerds. Some of them are very stupid people when it comes to anything but their interest. They're practically autistic.

    55. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iPad isn't a computer. It's a TV.

      Microsoft's failure to understand that is why the Surface's sales have never even momentarily threatened to come anywhere near the iPad's.

    56. Re:Hahahaha by AJWM · · Score: 1

      No.

      Now get off my lawn.

      --
      -- Alastair
    57. Re:Hahahaha by rockout · · Score: 1

      You should've checked a scrabble dictionary, online or hard copy. Jeep is a legal word in scrabble.

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    58. Re: Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who needs an id?

    59. Re: Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Respectable geeks? I don't think I've met any if those.

    60. Re:Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple have just dispatched a Corporate hit team to silence you - They actively DEFEND their trade marks

    61. Re: Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I-tried

    62. Re:Hahahaha by StenD · · Score: 1

      So we are middle aged with 5?

    63. Re:Hahahaha by doccus · · Score: 1

      Aren't most of these announcers former NFL players? Just a few too many tackles, then?

    64. Re:Hahahaha by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      giving a huge rival some unexpected exposure.

      should be: diluting a rivals' trademark

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    65. Re: Hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who uses a blinding tablet display at a star party??? People who hate night vision? People who enjoy light pollution?

    66. Re:Hahahaha by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      I'm "overrated", and your favorite company had to pay the NFL to use your awesome computer.You know, the one that is going to replace our laptops?

      Reminds me of the old Rodney Dangerfield joke where his parents had to tie a porkchop around his neck to get the dog to play with him.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  2. football can cause brain damage by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    and a lot of the Announcers are former players

    1. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or maybe they just don't give a fuck whether it's an iPad, Surface or some kind of Android tablet.

      You know, just like the rest of us...

    2. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most of "the rest of us" do give a fuck if it's an iPad or a not-iPad :)

    3. Re:football can cause brain damage by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think that was a slashdot poster "rest of us" but a whole world "rest of us".

    4. Re:football can cause brain damage by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Yes, absolutely. And did you know that football can cause brain damage and a lot of the announcers are former players?

    5. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another anonymous, but I think the "whole world 'rest of us'" DOES care if its an iPad, Surface, or Android... the profits for a particular device... do not lie.

    6. Re:football can cause brain damage by i+kan+reed · · Score: 0

      Profits lie all the time.

      Homeopathic remedy companies make bank.

    7. Re:football can cause brain damage by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I bet Apple does though. The last thing they want is "iPad" becoming so generic they lose the trademark, like hoover or cellophane or escalator or sellotape.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:football can cause brain damage by sg_oneill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Speak for yourself. If its someone elses kit, I really couldn't give a damn. Whatever works for yo.

      Some folks love their surfaces. Some folks love their droids, and I kinda like my iPad. And we're all right, they are all the best device for whoever has it and thinks its right for them.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    9. Re:football can cause brain damage by TWX · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh, for a moment there I thought you'd use the wrong homophone for prophet...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    10. Re:football can cause brain damage by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For Apple, the genericization of the term iPad is a double-edged sword. It waters down the trademark, while at the same time pointing everyone back to the source. It is one of the reasons I believe AppleWatch is not an iWatch. In fact, the whole "i-Thingy" is probably dead now. As for the NFL and Surface, that is gonna be a long term problem. The term "Surface" is an actual word, used beyond computers. It is really a dumb name to use for trademarked device.

      And a Surface is nothing more than a crappy overpriced under performing laptop that wants to be a tablet. Either that, or an expensive Tablet that also wants to be a laptop. You need a laptop, you'll buy a full laptop for less than the cost of a Surface, and have a better machine. AND if you need a tablet, you buy tablet for less than a Surface. And if you need both, you get both, and use them both.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    11. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Surface 3 is actually pretty god damned good, and review across the board pretty much confirm that. I understand why you'd want to poop all over it, but the Surface RT days are long since over. That said, I own an iPad and I'm hesitant to leave an established ecosystem, but will likely give the Surface another look when it's time to refresh.

      Cue the "shill" cries for not thinking everything MS does is shit.

    12. Re:football can cause brain damage by chemicaldave · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. In all your examples, the trademark becomes part of the lexicon of the general public but the owners still retain the sole rights to sell the product under that trademark. People call all bandages Band-Aids, yet there is only one Band-Aid brand. Same goes for Hoover, and Cellophane. Now when grandpa types into Bing "where to buy an iPad" he's going to be directed towards Apple, even though he might have been thinking of the Surface tablet he saw during the Steeler's game.

    13. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "In fact, the whole "i-Thingy" is probably dead now"

      iHopeSo....

      Also...agree 100% with the 2nd paragraph...

    14. Re:football can cause brain damage by bigman2003 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Surface user here to respectfully disagree. The Surface is an awesome device that can be used for all sorts of good.

      When people see me using my Surface as a tablet, they are then amazed when I show them the USB port (so simple...but why not on iPad?) and keyboard. Yes, the keyboard seems strange at first, but I really do use my Surface about 50/50 keyboard on/off. I've been popping that thing on and off for a few years and I really like it.

      When people see me using it as a laptop, they are then surprised when I take off the keyboard, pop out the kickstand, and use it as a movie viewing tablet. OR, when I am out in the field and pop open Photoshop express to do some quick photo editing with my fingers. In about 6 seconds (really) I can have a photo cropped and 'shared'.

      You are right, it is a tablet that wants to be a laptop, and a laptop that wants to be a tablet. Not cheap by any means but worth it for me.

      I can tell you that from my perspective, this is the best device in either the tablet or laptop class for my use. Previously my Surface was also my desktop- but a new job brought on a ridiculously over-powered desktop that I would be crazy not to use. Now my Surface spends the day as my music player until I need to go out, then it is my usual note-taker.

      ***All that being said, we have a few other SP2's floating around in my organization that are barely used because people have no idea what they can/should be doing with them. Some were purchased after they saw my 'success' and I really want to say, "hmm...maybe you should have gotten an ipad..."

      --
      No reason to lie.
    15. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iNoun isn't going anywhere as far as Apple are concerned. iTV, iWatch, HiV etc.

    16. Re:football can cause brain damage by magarity · · Score: 1

      I bet Apple does though. The last thing they want is "iPad" becoming so generic they lose the trademark, like hoover or cellophane or escalator or sellotape.

      The becoming generic is a longer term problem than the immediate one of the commentators mocking the guy who seemed to be having trouble scrolling around.

    17. Re:football can cause brain damage by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      USB port? Why is that important? I don't carry mice, keyboards or even thumbdrives. USB is the new Floppy. About the ONLY thing I use USB for these days is charging my peripherals. Wireless (Bluetooth, WI-FI) are much more important features to have, and quite honestly, are ubiquitous on devices. Heck properly configured Projector uses Ethernet for displaying, no Display Port dongle needed.

      And having used an iPad and Surface, I always go back to my Android tablet, as it just gets everything right. Size is right, keyboard (Swype) is perfect for one handed fast typing. Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, optional 4G for connectivity. Plenty of apps. iPad keyboard and the onscreen Surface keyboard is unusable for me after using Swype. And let me know when Surface speech to text is as good as Android, and is as usable across all applications like Android's.

      I get a giggle out of Surface commercials when they tout "Photoshop" on a tablet. It is woefully underpowered for running Photoshop for anything more than basic tasks. Because I can tell you, nobody doing Photoshop work professionally, is going to go Surface, and casual users aren't gonna buy Photoshop to run on Surface.

      I'd rather have a full Laptop for when I need it, AND an Android Tablet for when I need something bigger than my phone on the go. And for the cost of a fully setup Surface Pro, with all the bits needed to be a "real" computer, is more expensive than a Tablet and better laptop (with touch screen). Midrange Surface Pro 3 (no keyboard) is $999. Lenovo IdeaPad with similar specs is $729.99, A decent Android Tab is 200-250 depending on features. I think Surface is a product that is neither a Tablet (too big) nor a Laptop (too small).

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    18. Re:football can cause brain damage by JoeZeppy · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they just don't give a fuck whether it's an iPad, Surface or some kind of Android tablet.

      You know, just like the rest of us...

      Well, on the surface, I'd agree with you. Ha ha, see what I did there?

      But usually in a marketing deal like this, memos come down explicitly stating that the brand name should be used often and conspicuously when referring to the product. Otherwise, whats the point of spending the money?

    19. Re:football can cause brain damage by shoor · · Score: 1

      I agree calling the thing 'Surface' could lead to confusion. If an announcer said something like "the coach is checking his Surface now", what percentage of viewers might have thought he was referring to something other than the gadget in the coach's hand?

      --
      In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
    20. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just that those who choose ipads and surfaces are all brain dead. So yeah, if you're brain dead, then those others work just fine. :)

    21. Re:football can cause brain damage by umghhh · · Score: 1

      I think you must be old to say such things. Young people frequenting /. (of which there is a majority here) tend to fight till the last click to prove superiority of their devices.

    22. Re:football can cause brain damage by tapi0 · · Score: 2

      I get a giggle out of Surface commercials when they tout "Photoshop" on a tablet. It is woefully underpowered for running Photoshop for anything more than basic tasks. Because I can tell you, nobody doing Photoshop work professionally, is going to go Surface, and casual users aren't gonna buy Photoshop to run on Surface

      you say this in reply to a poster who's telling you that he uses photoshop on his surface?
      From the phrasing ("in the field") I'd also say that use is professionally. Now, your full time photoshop pro may not use it exclusively, but you've kinda replied to your own counterargument.

      As someone above also said, there's enough room for people who like/use android, iPad, or Surface so your preference is valid. Personally though, the cost comparison is only one aspect - you're happy to use one device for one thing and another for some other use case, but for may people the convenience of not having to assess if they'll need the laptop, the tablet or the phone (or lug around all of them) is a benefit that outweighs the slight cost difference.

    23. Re:football can cause brain damage by David_Hart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      USB port? Why is that important? I don't carry mice, keyboards or even thumbdrives. USB is the new Floppy. About the ONLY thing I use USB for these days is charging my peripherals. Wireless (Bluetooth, WI-FI) are much more important features to have, and quite honestly, are ubiquitous on devices. Heck properly configured Projector uses Ethernet for displaying, no Display Port dongle needed.

      Obviously you do not travel much or you take your laptop with you when you do. I only take my tablet and use it to back up my photos to USB sticks and watch video (Micro-SD cards) on the airplane. I agree that Bluetooth is better for connecting mice and keyboards. However, USB sticks are much more useful and universal for transferring data.

      What's more telling is that every tablet vendor that does not have built-in USB ports have USB adapters. The only reason why they don't include a USB port (likely a 25 cent part) in their tablets is because they realize that they can make more money on selling the peripherals.

      In the same theme, having a micro-HDMI or DisplayPort is a must have for me as well. I use it to hook up to TVs when on vacation to watch movies.

    24. Re:football can cause brain damage by Mister_Stoopid · · Score: 1

      What if I need a real computer that I can use while walking around and holding it in one hand?

      "Real computer" here means "I can copy the binary off my desktop computer and it will run".

    25. Re:football can cause brain damage by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree calling the thing 'Surface' could lead to confusion. If an announcer said something like "the coach is checking his Surface now", what percentage of viewers might have thought he was referring to something other than the gadget in the coach's hand?

      I would have gone with "The coach is checking his fondleslab now", but saying that kind of thing can get you fired nowadays.

    26. Re:football can cause brain damage by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      I personally don't care what toilet paper I wipe with as long as it doesn't irritate the cookie doe cutter.

    27. Re:football can cause brain damage by bigman2003 · · Score: 4, Informative

      USB is important for a few reasons:

      #1- ingesting photos. OR even better, tethered shooting. Cameras use USB ports for data transfer and control of the camera. The time to preview pictures is while you are taking them, not when you return to the office. Not saying you can't do this with other platforms, but you can do this with EVERY camera using Surface/USB.

      #2- Printers. Sure, wireless printing is great...sometimes. Again, most every printer works with USB. I've been visiting other locations, need to print something and the IT guy rolls his eyes when he sees I need to print a document from a tablet. Once he sees Surface/USB it's like, "Oh..okay, no problem, plug in here." Nobody wants to install some stupid app to let me print.

      #3- Wired networking. Again, wireless is great- but sometimes it is not an option. A wired network dongle has saved me a few times.

      #4- odd peripherals. Just last Friday I had to provide a butt-ton of files to a lawyer for 'discovery'. They provided an external hard-drive (Aegis Padlock Drive). USB...sure, plug that sucker in and I'll give you all the files you need.

      In a professional environment I don't always have control over what I need to connect to. USB has been the most ubiquitous port over the last 10 years. Not having it on your computer locks out out of a LOT of stuff.

      My Surface Pro 2 runs Photoshop just fine. Admittedly I don't use it as my primary editing machine (screen size) but when I need it, it is there. Not sure why you say the Surface is underpowered, I would say it is 'run of the mill' in performance. In 2013/2014 that means, "It is an absolute breeze to do photo editing." Also, the fact that the Surface Pro is an awesome digitizer, with a pen, is icing on the cake.

      I'm not saying the Surface is the be-all and end-all, but it has features that are fantastic. Most of the detractors obviously haven't used one in a professional environment...where an Android tablet or iPad just don't do what I need them to do. Including having a USB port.

      **Someone felt that I was trolling. I'm not a troll, just a person who enjoys using their Surface Pro for work and entertainment. Also, my previous job had me purchasing a LOT of equipment (1,800 users) and I spent soooo much money on iPads it was amazing. Most of those were deemed totally useless once the novelty wore off. I'm just trying to steer people toward what I feel is a very good solution to the mobile computer question.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    28. Re:football can cause brain damage by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Mustang. Is it a car, a type horse or a car with a horse on it?

      If the brand "Surface" was popular enough it wouldn't matter if the name is dumb or not. There are plenty of bad names out there that have become known brand names. Windows is a horrible name if you based yourself on that yet the most known operating system in the world.

    29. Re:football can cause brain damage by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      In fact, the whole "i-Thingy" is probably dead now.

      As someone who doesn't like the Apple Machine, I was a little disappointed when I heard that Apple's payment system was not called "iPay". It really would have fit their brand.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    30. Re:football can cause brain damage by Ravaldy · · Score: 2

      I think all 3 major devices are very good and they each offer something. You telling me the USB port isn't really important makes me think you don't work a technical job where you travel on site. If you do you would find many uses for the USB port. The day to day user may not benefit as much from the USB port but I assure you on site technicians do. I've seen it used to hookup to HVAC equipment, to upgrade printer firmware or to console into a network Switch that isn't yet assigned an IP. These are all devices you cannot access wirelessly. There are hookups for iPads but who wants to invest in proprietary garbage when you can have a generic peripheral that is compatible to your PCs and your tablet.

    31. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a while, yes. Then somebody gets their lawyers involved, it gets declared a generic trademark, and suddenly it's legal to start selling Microsoft iPads. See Aspirin, Thermos or Videotape, which were all trademarks at one time, but which are all generic names in the US nowadays.

    32. Re:football can cause brain damage by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      Glad you mentioned HVAC.

      I can plug into our greenhouse climate control system (like HVAC * 10). USB only...

      USB isn't dead.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    33. Re:football can cause brain damage by Falos · · Score: 2

      > A universal port? Why is that important?
      For interfacing with Whatever The Fuck You Wants and the occasional Anything.

      Apparently it's limited to things in this universe though, so there's a bit of Walled Garden going on, pigeonholing you out from connecting to devices in alternate dimensions or whatever.

    34. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OR maybe americans should start using general words for stuff like that, and not brands. I know there are some examples in my language, where things are called by the brand instead of the general word, some even from decades ago, but mostly the general word is used in here.

    35. Re:football can cause brain damage by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Surface user here to respectfully disagree. The Surface is an awesome device that can be used for all sorts of good.

      It would be great, if it just didn't fscking have Windows on it.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    36. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have another threory for it not being iWatch. It sounds a bit big brotherly, doesn't it?

    37. Re:football can cause brain damage by NoKaOi · · Score: 1

      I bet Apple does though. The last thing they want is "iPad" becoming so generic they lose the trademark, like hoover or cellophane or escalator or sellotape.

      You mean like "Kleenex" or "Band-Aid"? Oh wait, those are still under trademark, aren't they?

    38. Re:football can cause brain damage by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      The person said they used Photoshop Express to crop photos. Sounds like a basic task and not on Photoshop itself.

      Personally I wouldn't want a Surface just because I don't want the hassle of dealing with Windows. I do that twice a year to run some tax software and the rest of the time I spend in operating systems that are less stressful to me. If others like using the Surface then good for them.

    39. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used the USB port on my surface pro (1) tablet for USB drives, air cards, full size keyboards (that don't cost $50+), the mouse I've used for the last 8 years, for dual monitor use, a usb mug warmer (hah!), a light, as an interface tool (cat5 dongle), etc. Yes, there are sometimes other solutions that also work, but USB is the standard, and I love having it.

      The other thing not mentioned is the active digitizer. Using that with Onenote is life changing. I prefer to hand write notes during meetings because they are free form. Onenote is the only application (that I know of) that can recognize your hand writing and make it searchable (my handwriting makes doctor scribbles look good by the way).

      So what do I use my surface pro for (in order of most common uses):
      As a core i5 desktop hooked up to a monitor, keyboard, mouse.
      As a note taking device
      As a presentation tool
      As mobile reference tool (for referring to spreadsheets etc) as I do setup and training on various projects around the office)
      As a play device at home -web browsing, light reading (i use a kindle if I want to do it for extended periods), etc.
      As a gaming device (I love terraria)
      To watch movies on (works great powering my tv)

      Really, this thing is so flexible and supports so many use cases, it seems I never run out of new things I'm doing with it. Is it the best at any of the above? No. But it is acceptably good at all of them, and I don't have to maintain data, software, etc on other devices. It makes my life easier.

    40. Re:football can cause brain damage by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      "The term "Surface" is an actual word, used beyond computers. It is really a dumb name to use for trademarked device."

      You say that as if Radio Shack didn't successfully get to own the word ""Shack" and force Auto Shack to change its name to Autozone. There wasn't any real similarities between the stores, yet they still got to own "Shack." Fast forward a few decades and now Radio Shack has a metket cap of 83M while Autozone is around 17B. I bet if the batted happened now, Autozone would buy Radio Shack, take the name, and close the stores just to show who's boss. If they held any grudges, now would be the time for payback.

    41. Re:football can cause brain damage by tapi0 · · Score: 1

      Fair enough

    42. Re:football can cause brain damage by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      But AppleWatch might be conflated with the record label of that shite English band, the Beagles.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    43. Re:football can cause brain damage by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      As a professional who edits images and does layout every working day, I have to point out that (in my opinion) small screen devices of any sort are pretty much useless. Any time I have to work on a laptop, I'm drastically slowed down because of the lack of real estate. Last resort only. Cropping images is trivial and a lame endorsement for any small screen device.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    44. Re:football can cause brain damage by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      I call band-aids 'plasters' actually. Clearly I am not 'everyone'. Who ever says Cellophane? Are you thinking of 'Saran Wrap' which I call 'cling film'? Hoover works for me though.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    45. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now now, take a cleanex and dry your eyes. (can you tell it is not a _rea_ cleanex?)

    46. Re:football can cause brain damage by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I'm in IT. When I travel I have iPad, Laptop and CellPhone with me. Additionally, I have a Spare battery that can run both my phone and iPad for a few extra hours apiece. I carry all the cables I might need in my bag. I have a TSA approved bag that opens up wide and zips up when done passing through the XRAY.

      I still don't need USB Sticks. I have a dozen or two from Six years ago, if you want them.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    47. Re:football can cause brain damage by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      #1 Web (box, dropbox, Drive, OneDrive ...)
      #2 Printing? What am I printing again? I email documents or links to documents. I rarely print any longer.
      #3 Wired Networking standard on my Laptops. My cell phone does Wifi tethering (for iPad other WiFi only devices) . There is also Bluetooth for other things.
      #4 Odd Peripherals are connected to my docking station, full of USB. I don't need them typically on the road. Most of the other "odd" peripherals have Bluetooth these days.

      Seriously, I use USB daily, but typically only using the plugs as a power source for recharging my devices. Perma-attached items like Mouse/Keyboard etc excepted.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    48. Re:football can cause brain damage by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I never said it was dead. And the HVAC systems I've seen still use Serial, which requires a serial to USB dongle. I carry one in my laptop back for just such an odd occasion. Haven't used it in about a year.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    49. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The term "Surface" is an actual word, used beyond computers. It is really a dumb name to use for trademarked device."

      Yeah! That's as dumb as the company that named their operating system "Windows". Oh wait...

    50. Re:football can cause brain damage by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      There are many other cases. E.g. CNC cad software we use requires a usb dongle for license validation.

    51. Re:football can cause brain damage by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      In this case, both would work.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    52. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, super easy. a real one is spelled Kleenex.

    53. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No excuse. NASCAR commentators never, ever, EVER call it "gas", it's "Sunoco Racing Fuel"

    54. Re:football can cause brain damage by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand my 'ingesting photos' item. I connect my camera to my Surface via USB. Shots are immediately on my Surface. In fact, I don't even save them to the SD card, they are saved directly on the tablet. I have have 'Live View' on, to see exactly what the camera sees. This is NOT something that can be done over a network right now. Additionally, most of what I do isn't within range of a network...even cell.

      I really am a 'mobile worker'. I go out an do stuff...away from networks and people. I carry as little crap with me as possible. Camera, Surface and USB cable are pretty standard.

      Possibly when vineyards are networked I'll be able to work differently.

      Example of what I do: http://imgur.com/a/xQ040 (I am not a pro photographer- just an IT guy who knows how to use a camera well enough to document things.)

      --
      No reason to lie.
    55. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be heavily implying that the last two letters of USB don't stand for "Serial Bus"...

      Bluetooth can transmit many different protocols, including plain old serial, as well as many other custom/weird types of serial protocols. Having 10 such devices paired is possible, satisfying the "bus" part as well.

      On one hand, bluetooth is an improved USB, as no messy wires are needed.
      On the other, USB typically is also used synonymously with "5v power source", while a wireless device needs its own power supply or battery.

      But you might as well list the iPads lack of a PS/2 port, or rs232 DB9 port.
      Both of those are available via USB, and both are available via bluetooth.

    56. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fucking shill

    57. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol, no it isn't. USB and micro sxhd whatever the fuck SD they have now are still extremely popular and infinitely more useful than floppies ever were.

      Not to mention Android tablets are terrible - their effectiveness reduces significantly over time. I have an ASUS Transformer Prime, extremely good tablet when it came out. It's a useless paperweight now and using it is an exercise in insanity, even with the dock.

    58. Re:football can cause brain damage by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Cables are going the way of the floppy. Wireless charging is so good you will never want to go back.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    59. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When people see me using my Surface as a tablet, they are then amazed when I show them the USB port (so simple...but why not on iPad?) and keyboard.

      Those people must be really blown away when you show them a laptop.

    60. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iNoun isn't going anywhere as far as Apple are concerned. iTV, iWatch, HiV etc.

      It's not called the iWatch, but the Apple Watch, which was GP's point.
      Apple may stick with the iNoun for existing product lines, but I agree with the GP's assertion that it's dead for the new stuff. Case in point: Apple Pay.

    61. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious from the announcements they're changing their branding from iThing to Apple Thing.
      Reasons might be that it reinforces the Apple trademark, but I think more importantly, it's been increasingly difficult to find variations of iThing that aren't already taken, and other more or less reputable companies have started to adopt that style for their own products.
      It's pretty difficult for Apple to claim that iCoffeeMaker should belong to them, especially so when they need to more or less be able to do it in every country in the world.

      For example, when rumours started that Apple was working on a tablet device, everyone assumed it was going to be called iTablet. They had to find a new name because by the time they released it, the iTablet trade and domain names had already been registered by speculators. Same with the "iWatch".
      No such problem with "Apple Thing", as it would then be easy for Apple to claim ownership of the name. Same as Google Music, Windows Phone, etc.

    62. Re:football can cause brain damage by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      About half of the iPads I see have a detachable keyboard. Microsoft didn't invent the idea. The USB port is nice but you can get an adapter for iDevices if you want USB. I'm not saying the Surface is useless, and some people really like it, but anybody amazed at Bluetooth keyboards hasn't been keeping up.

      BTW, is that a Surface or Surface Pro? The Pro is intriguing, although I've decided I personally have no use for it.

      The naming is just stupid. If they wanted NFL announcers to use the correct name, they shouldn't have given it a name that is ambiguous when used. If they wanted people to know what they were buying, they shouldn't have similar names like the Surface and Surface Pro.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    63. Re:football can cause brain damage by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      Surface Pro. I do like it.

      The keyboard is nice. As you said, not ground-breaking. But as opposed to a lot of iPad keyboards, "it just works." Snap it on, snap it off. Is it Bluetooth? Honestly, I don't even know. I just know it works well. I assumed the connection was hardware based due to the 5 pins used for the connection.

      Not specifically to you, but to many other commenters on this thread:

      YES, there are other devices that can do THIS, or THAT. And YES, you can outfit an iPad with a whole bunch of different things to make it similar...but that is not the point. The point is that this is a very convenient device with the connectivity that I need/want. I can kludge together a super-duper tablet but that's not my aim. I much prefer the simplicity of buying something that's fully functional on day 1 and doesn't need anything else to be useful. (Insert comments about the keyboard not being included...)

      I can pick up my Surface, with the keyboard as the cover, and go out into the world knowing that I am fully equipped to deal with whatever comes at me. A laptop would serve the same purpose, but it would probably be bigger (My Dell XPS 15 is great...but too big!). Most tablets are missing out on half of the features I need.

      Also- I'm now a small** fan of Miracast, which is fully baked into Windows 8.1. There are still a lot of problems with it, but I've walked into a couple of situations with Miracast enabled monitors that I used and was happy with. It's nice that I don't need to add anything to make it work. And it's odd that my Surface is the 'it just works' machine, while iDevices need add-ons and software to make things happen.

      **I wish my wireless displays would automatically re-connect, but I can imagine a lot of security based reasons not to do this.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    64. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as the device is *cost effective* for whatever you want to do, anything goes.

    65. Re:football can cause brain damage by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      "And a Surface is nothing more than a crappy overpriced under performing laptop that wants to be a tablet."

      Lies. The top end Surface tablets are actually excellent tablets and nearly top marks in the 'being a laptop' department as well. I used to think like you do about them until one of the guys at the office took the plunge and bought one and I got to use it. It's very good and if I didn't have to use a corporate-imaged (and locked down) laptop for my portable device I'd buy one in a heartbeat. In fact I'm trying to think of a way to justify the company buying me one even though it's not on the "approved devices" list.

    66. Re:football can cause brain damage by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      But also to be fair, the Surface Pro has more than enough horsepower to run full Photoshop just fine. Unless of course people are now saying that a quad core i7 with 8GB of RAM is not sufficient to run Photoshop.....

    67. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last thing they want is "iPad" becoming so generic they lose the trademark, like hoover or cellophane or escalator or sellotape.

      ....or heroin.

    68. Re:football can cause brain damage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or romex instead of non metallic sheathed wiring.

    69. Re:football can cause brain damage by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Cables are going the way of the floppy. Wireless charging is so good you will never want to go back.

      I really don't want to live in an EMI bath! 8-P

    70. Re:football can cause brain damage by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Note: Cellophane was the common name for -any- transparent plastic. I think they actually lost the copyright. You are just not old enough to remember it.

      And get off of my lawn! ;-)

    71. Re:football can cause brain damage by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      I know the word 'cellophane' but I haven't heard anyone use it for years.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
  3. That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's nothing, I keep posting about the iPhone 6 on Facebook and people continually refer to it as the Nexus 5! Joke's on them.

    1. Re:That's nothing by slimshady76 · · Score: 2

      I see what you did there... Well played sir, well played...

    2. Re:That's nothing by Enfixed · · Score: 1

      Of all the days to not have mod points... Got a good morning chuckle out of this one. :)

      --
      Sigs are bad for you...
    3. Re:That's nothing by dysmal · · Score: 1

      You forgot about the blue screens!

      (we have 5 of the new Surface Pro's for testing and 4 of them have blue screened at some point)

    4. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Nexus4

    5. Re:That's nothing by madenglishbloke · · Score: 1

      I've even seen people refer to it as a Nexus 4!

    6. Re:That's nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep posting about the Nexus 5 on Facebook and......no one cares.:(

  4. To be fair... by robinsonne · · Score: 5, Funny

    To be fair, have you listened to some of what NFL announcers say these days? Most of it is pretty damn stupid, even when they're keeping their remarks to football. I consider it lucky if they can tell the difference between a run play and a pass play...telling the difference between 2 gadgets? Nope.

    1. Re:To be fair... by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Funny

      NFL: One of the few industries where smooth talking idiots can rake in millions spewing bullshit.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind that only the best and brightest players go on to become television personalities. Also, anybody who gives more money to those greedy NFL bastards... ugh... I haven't the words....

    3. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Producy placement is ONE part of a larger deal. Yeesh...

    4. Re:To be fair... by operagost · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the others is the cable news industry.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    5. Re:To be fair... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

      NFL: One of the many industries where smooth talking idiots can rake in millions spewing bullshit.

      Fixed that for you.

    6. Re:To be fair... by msauve · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't forget the US Congress.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    7. Re:To be fair... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you want to really be fair, if the announcer would have said "Brees isn't watching movies on his surface" about 98% of the audience would have said "WTF is a 'surface'? Did the announcer just have a stroke and use the wrong word?"

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    8. Re:To be fair... by gman003 · · Score: 2

      NFL: One of the few industries where smooth talking idiots can rake in millions spewing bullshit.

      Few?

    9. Re:To be fair... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      How about 'tablet'? Coming through Heathrow security, I get told to take laptops, iPads, and Kindles out of my bag. I guess any brand of laptop has to come out, but tablets and ebook readers only do if they're made by Apple or Amazon...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe me, it happens in the IT industry as well. Come to think of it, I'm not sure what industry it doesn't happen in.

      I should probably just say to hell with productivity and just start hacking charisma.

    11. Re:To be fair... by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      use your words! or an nfl player will come over and punch you unconscious in an elevator then drag you out by your hair.

    12. Re:To be fair... by Talderas · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They say you can't carry liquids on a plane..... try carrying on a bottle of ice.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    13. Re:To be fair... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The U.S. Congress is not an industry, it's organized crime. I'm surprised the mafia hasn't sued them for unfair competition yet.

    14. Re:To be fair... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I'm struggling to come up with a counter-example. Even medicine, where skill is of life or death importance, has professional quacks.

      I guess you can't talk your way through farming?

    15. Re:To be fair... by ranton · · Score: 3, Informative

      NFL: One of the few industries where smooth talking idiots can rake in millions spewing bullshit.

      I think the guy who moderated you Insightful instead of Funny has confused other posters into thinking you were being serious instead of making a joke.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    16. Re:To be fair... by nine-times · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Brees isn't watching movies on his surface" about 98% of the audience would have said "WTF is a 'surface'?

      That's not true.

      I'm sure lots of people would be like, "Of course he's not watching movies on his own surface. How on earth would he have a movie on his own skin? But maybe he's watching movies on his iPad. Duh!"

    17. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm struggling to come up with a counter-example. Even medicine, where skill is of life or death importance, has professional quacks.

      I guess you can't talk your way through farming?

      What about Monsanto and ConAgra?

    18. Re:To be fair... by Jade_Wayfarer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm surprised it's not the other way around.

      "Hey, it's a nice organised crime ring you have here. It would be a shame if someone... made some law equating it to the terrorist organisation. You know, we can't let the terrorists win, now, do we?"

      --
      Absence of proof != proof of absence.
    19. Re:To be fair... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      It would be a shame if the IRS Audited you.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    20. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      sure you can, just look at monsanto, convincing us that unnatural foods are natural, that using their poisons is good, that factory-farming is beneficial for all parties concerned, that seed genomes are owned by them, and that you have no right to the pollen that settles -unbidden- on your farm...
      i'd say they are leading practitioners, in fact...

    21. Re:To be fair... by neoritter · · Score: 1

      Not really farming. More like farming supplies.

    22. Re:To be fair... by Ranbot · · Score: 2

      This is an amusing story, but I'll cut the announcers some slack, because filling an audio void for ~4 hours (pre-game, game, post-game) mistake free is not easy. I used to be a college radio DJ and in just an hour show talking between songs I had plenty of screw ups.

      What I find more amusing is that Microsoft didn't seem to consider this hazard before dumping $400 mil into advertising with the NFL.

    23. Re:To be fair... by imikem · · Score: 1

      Why would they want to sue themselves?

      --
      Perscriptio in manibus tabellariorum est.
    24. Re:To be fair... by ShaunC · · Score: 4, Funny

      More like farming supplies

      So, bullshitting about bull shit?

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    25. Re:To be fair... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Well, Sony did it, so there's a precedent.

    26. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a lot of places, the requirements are that arbitrary.

      I've actually heard from TSA agents that iPads are allowed to stay in your carry on, but my equally thin MacBook Air has to come out "because it's a laptop." Double standard aside, it seems that they have no idea what types of devices actually exist (and how they might be a threat).

    27. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's organized crime at an industrial scale...

    28. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. That's why I only farm non-GMO, organic, fair trade crops.

    29. Re:To be fair... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nonsense. Football announcers always have clear and lucid insights into the game. Like these:

      "We've got two physical teams here." - insider information from Tommy Jackson

      "The Giants will have to play physical football to beat the Panthers." - Daryl Johnson pointing out that a psychological strategy will probably not work

      "You have to do well on third downs." - Joe Buck demonstrating his mastery of the nuances of the game

      "The team that plays the best defense is going to win this one." - Mike Ditka pointing out that the team which allows the fewest points will generally win

      If it wasn't for people like that, I wouldn't realize that the team that scores the most points wins (I've also heard an announcer helpfully point that out during a game).

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    30. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should be legal.
      1) It isn't liquid.
      2) If it was a binary explosive component, it wouldn't freeze at 0C, thus proving that it's "just water" and is safe.

      But logic isn't really in the TSA's wheelhouse.

    31. Re:To be fair... by drrck · · Score: 1

      They should allow it, given the fact they allowed us to bring frozen ice packs on the plane, but confiscated them when they were melted on the return trip.

    32. Re:To be fair... by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Let's not forget my personal favorite:

      "The Bears are what we thought they were. They're what we thought they were." - Dennis Green's treatise on epistemology.

      Or, if you prefer, Da Bearss.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    33. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't call that farming. Agriculture, sure. But I think i kan reed was limiting to just the people who plant the crops and raise the animals. You cannot bullshit that because, what does a plant or cow care about what you are saying?

    34. Re:To be fair... by Tumbarumba · · Score: 1

      That sounds like pretty much every sportsing description ever!

      --
      My business: Farstrider Studios.
    35. Re:To be fair... by schlachter · · Score: 1

      and they don't make that much...about similar to a doctor's salary.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    36. Re: To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putting the advertising into scripted shows seems a safer bet since the writers can ensure correct references.

      (Still might not work, however. )

    37. Re:To be fair... by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Or "Sure, he's not watching movies on his surface but deep down, where it counts, he is"

    38. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually all sports reporting/commentating.

      Are you old? Are you white? Can you wear a suit?

      Then you've got the job buddy. If you're generically southern or better yet, Texan, shit, you're rich.

    39. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If 98% of the audience is that incredibly stupid and living under a rock to not be familiar with the term Surface, after THREE iterations, DOZENS of commercials slathered all over prime time TV including Sports Center, then they really aren't a prime sample for judging whether or not society gets technology.

    40. Re:To be fair... by Zynder · · Score: 1

      Oh, a bullshit artist!
      Did you bullshit last week? NO
      Did you try to bullshit last week? YES!

    41. Re: To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMO, product placement in scripted shows does very little (at least for me). Apple has put their products all over shows for years.

      Now if I were to notice that a lot of coaches and people in the NFL all seem to use Surface it might make me think "Hey, people in the NFL use it. Maybe I should take a closer look." That is until I see the announcements that Surface is the Official Tablet of the NFL at which point I'll realize it's just paid sponsorship.

      What works even better than that is user testament. A few users here have claimed to actually use a Surface Pro and give it good marks for the purposes they use it for. They could be shills, but I doubt it. It certainly raises my awareness of it and I'll consider it next time I buy a tablet although I'm still more likely to buy an Android device.

      The more conspiratorial part of my brain is telling me the mistake of calling them iPads twice in the first week was planned so we could have this discussion and drive home the point that they are Surfaces and not iPads and next week the announcers will all point out how they fucked up and that they are Surfaces not that other tablet because Surfaces are so much better.

    42. Re:To be fair... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just the point, and the reason why MS is paying them millions to use those things in the first place.
      It's confusing at first for the public, but hopefully (for MS) over time they'd start to understand it and recognize the brand.

      MS doesn't care that you're confused by the new name, and they're certainly not paying millions for people to hear "iPod" and get that it's at best a generic tablet, or at worse the competitor's product.

  5. How much! by MrL0G1C · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Am I the only person here who thinks MS are nuts for having paid so much for a product placement. Surely $400,000,000 could have been better spent through other advertising methods. $400m seems like at least 10x too much.

    They expected that product placement would lead to millions of extra sales of an expensive item!!!

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:How much! by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, I'd be suspicious that Microsoft could buy $400 million worth of Surface tablets from themselves and hand them out on the street, and it would increase adoption more than this deal will.

    2. Re:How much! by Flavianoep · · Score: 1

      I've been wondering, how much of that figure accounts for the cost of the tablets themselves?

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    3. Re:How much! by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Well Microsoft did write off 900 million dollars I tablets last year. Maybe they tried to get some of that back.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    4. Re:How much! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      28 teams, 60 players + 40 coaches per team, 2800 tablets at the most. Round it up to 3000. Cost to microsoft per tablet around 300$, 900K max.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    5. Re:How much! by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed, if they randomly distributed 2M surfaces for free throughout the population it would probably cost them about the same, and it would immediately create a demand for applications, it would get their product in front of consumers, etc. That would seem like a far better investment if you really wanted to blow this kind of cash.

    6. Re:How much! by jbolden · · Score: 2

      I agree with you it seems like way too much. I'd want to know about the duration. Is this something like a 1 year or 10 year contract? Does it include things like free promotions from players: winning quarterback on why he did so well, "I always carry my Microsoft Surface with me in my car so I can study new plays to use against next week's team".

      I do get the idea. We know from Mac vs. PC studies ( example http://cdn.redmondpie.com/wp-c... ) Windows users are: less liberal, older, more conventional in their tastes, late adopters. Which I suspect correlates fairly strongly with people who would be influenced by football and don't own an iPad but could afford one. "The NFL can afford any tablet it wants and they pick Microsoft. Sure Apple is good for artists and college students but the safe / conventional / practical choice is Microsoft"....

      I don't think it is likely to be successful because people aren't that stupid. The reality is that Windows 8 is more innovative than iOS, less practical, less conventional and quite iconoclastic in terms of the userbase. The advertising and the product conflict.

      Microsoft has the problem of trying to be all things to all people. Not an easy place to be.

    7. Re:How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it was too much actually. Even last season, the analysts on the halftime show each had a surface in front of them. This year, they have put stickers on them the back of them that clearly label them as a Microsoft Surface (before, when they were Surface Pro 2 machines, they seemed to be an anonymous black slate). Since the placement isn't just on the sidelines and is right there in your face on the halftime show, it is probably a pretty good deal for MS. Now, they need to have those analysts do more than simply have it sit in front of them. They are probably just using them as teleprompters now. They should have them at least pretend to control something with them - for example when expounding on some play, they could say, "here, let's take a look at that" and manipulate the Surface (and the producer would show the play). But as it stands they just sit there. Just like they did last year when nobody who didn't already have one noticed.

    8. Re:How much! by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, but by then, the coaches will be using them primarily as butt warmers.

    9. Re:How much! by Talderas · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not $400,000,000 to advertise the Surface. That's only a part of the deal and I'm not sure why it's called the "big part". From another article discussing the deal....

      When the regular season starts, Microsoft's Xbox Live network will offer services that include video feeds of game highlights and fantasy football data. Xbox owners will also gain access to NFL Sunday Ticket, the league's package of out-of-market game telecasts that was previously available only to DirecTV satellite service subscribers.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    10. Re:How much! by halfEvilTech · · Score: 3, Informative

      actually it is -
      32 teams
      53 players per active roster
      10 players per practice squad (not active for game days so doesn't count)
      22 coaches per team

      so that would come out to 2720 personnel - but even then during the preseason I believe they announced each side would get something like 13 Surface Tablets on the sidelines and 12 to use in the coaches box.

      so that is 25 per side per game - with at max 16 games (weeks 1-3 and 12-17 I believe) that would be at most 800 tablets in use any given week.

    11. Re:How much! by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      As I watch the NFL games this past weekend, I saw plenty of Surface tabs all around the studio as props. Most of them unused and sitting pretty on the desktop, one in front of every commentator, announcer or personality. They were UNUSED. The guys(and gals) were using paper notes, behind the props.

      The real issue with Technology, is that unless you USE it to do your job all the time (constantly), as part of doing your job, you don't and won't use it. And surface has a steep learning curve, being Windows 8 and Metro. There is little or no need for using Surface in a Broadcast of a football game. Microsoft would have had better luck striking a deal with Fox and MSNBC news operations, where they might actually get used.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    12. Re:How much! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Except when announcers refer to Surfaces as "iPads". Then Apple is getting a hell of a deal. :-)

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    13. Re:How much! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      A large segment of NFL fans will mindlessly buy what the NFL uses because they believe it makes them part of the NFL by proxy.
      It's a good investment for MS.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    14. Re:How much! by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 1

      Is that legal though? Can you really just give your product away for free? Can't that be construed as anti-competitive? It's called "predatory pricing" I believe, isn't it? Sincere question here.

    15. Re:How much! by guises · · Score: 1

      In some countries this wouldn't fly, but the US has pretty weak anti-trust laws and Microsoft is not in a dominant position in the tablet market anyway.

      There's no blanket prohibition against giving away your product to achieve marketshare (in the US) - this is the Gillette model, after all.

    16. Re:How much! by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Indeed. If I had $400 million to blow on marketing, just giving away the product is not the worst way to go. Just make sure your walled garden has high enough walls and developers will be paying to get in.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    17. Re:How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if no one knows what the gizmo is.

    18. Re:How much! by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I've seen iPads being used by the commentators for the pre-match of British soccer matches.

    19. Re:How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is psychology. If you're giving them out for free, people assume they're trash and the freebie'll get used for a couple of hours at most before being discarded. second hand market gets flooded with them, reducing the perceived value & creating competition for your product - itself!

      The problem is getting them in front of people without reducing the perceived value. If you can pull that one off, you've got job security forever in marketing.

    20. Re:How much! by default+luser · · Score: 1

      This only carries for simple stuff like clothing, furniture, dishware and other branded crap. Anything with a visible tie to the team (prominent logo), not too gaudy, and some basic functionality understandable by the average idiot is a guaranteed sale.

      Most people won't buy anything as complicated as a Surface just because they see the NFL players using them. There's no SIMPLE need that the Surface satisfies, and the then it's also rather expensive, and thanks to poor naming and late to market, it's lost in a sea of tablets/convertibles. There's also no actual NFL branding on the device, just product placement; so as soon as they see it, most people just automatically think it's an iPad anyway.

      Anything complex to use is best not sold directly to the NFL audience. I mean, nobody went out to buy Motorola radio headsets (or even their cell phones) just because they saw them them every week for 13 years on the NFL sidelines, but they sure as hell buy the team-branded warmups that everyone is wearing. Electronics sponsorship for the NFL is more about letting everyone know your company still exists, not about pushing specific products - much like putting your name on a stadium.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    21. Re:How much! by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      They just need to slap a team logo on it.

      Heck, it worked for Apple.

    22. Re:How much! by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      Indeed, if they randomly distributed 2M surfaces for free throughout the population it would probably cost them about the same, and it would immediately create a demand for applications, it would get their product in front of consumers, etc.

      Except "Surface tablets are the official tablets of the NFL" sounds a bit better in the press for Microsoft than "Microsoft has to give away Surface tablets to get people to use them".

    23. Re:How much! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      iOS was designed for ease of use on a touch screen. Microsoft may have honestly tried, but they missed. Apple is better at designing things for ordinary humans to use.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    24. Re:How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd be surprise at how utterly stupid marketing groups are.

      I used to work at Hewlett-Packard in the 1990s. My job involved the web in the early days and since our web presence was umbrella'ed under the generic hp.com domain, all business units had to meet and agree on some marketing and design ground rules for obviously sanity and uniformity sake - it didn't make business sense to have individual business units go out on their own with a completely different look-and-feel that went against the corporate brand and identity (strictly some unit DID but we also had to swat them down or at least corral them back into the fold).

      Anyway, so I was rubbing shoulders with a LOT of computer/printer group marketing people. Back in the mid-to-late 1990s computer/printer was about 10x the revenue of the rest of HP plus their products really weren't (and still are not) "rocket science" like medical, chemical or electronic instruments were/are so their R&D costs were also smaller - net net they were probably 20x-100x more flush in cash than our engineering-oriented groups so they operated at a whole other level of marketing budget.

      So the time comes to select a "branding firm" to redo the corporate HP home pages and filter that design down to the business units. As a stakeholder I represented my business unit. Computer and printer groups also attended.

      We, on the side that later became Agilent, being STEM folks and selling to STEM people, wanted a design that "worked" with customers and assured that we met our business goals including driving revenues and profits - we wanted the design to be informed about both our customers' way of buying from us as well as our ways of selling to them. We were perfectly happy to change business processes if the accounting goals and customer satisfaction objectives we met. BUT we knew that the agency we hired had to pass the interview to demonstrate that "they got it" and were actually proposing something that addressed OUR (HP's) business needs FIRST.

      Well, that wasn't what the computer and printer marketing groups gave a shit about. Talking with my computer group counterpart, all he cared about was 1) was the agency a "really big" name on Madison Avenue and did it had the cachet of the "right" people, and 2) would he be able to brag about how much he dropped on the deal. He wouldn't shut-up about how he'd dropped $200M on a recent ad campaign for the computer group. Honestly it was all he cared about - how much money he could blow with his say-so. Was the campaign effective? Did their sales rise as a result of it? He. Did. Not. Give. A. Single. Shit. So he pushed the firms he "liked".

      This didn't sit well with us - we wanted business result and were happy to take a 2nd tier firm because they are usually hungrier than the top firms. And the interviews we did with a number of "Big Name" branding/advertising firms didn't create any confidence. It was very clear that these firms and their people were FAR more interested in "feathering their portfolios on our dime" than giving a shit about our business, our messages or our effectiveness and profits. The computer and printer group marketing groups were completely entranced by their airy-fairy bullshit. Buzzword bingo but with advertising lingo and they fallated these clowns all the way. Under considerable protest and duress we were forced to go along with their "choice".

      I should also point out, that A LOT of these same computer/printer people left HP in 2000-2001 when HP split and went to... wait for it... Microsoft. Much of the bureaucratic ossification of Microsoft during the noughts was definitely due to the worst of HP bureaucratic middle-management ex-pats becoming Microsofties. Not all though. Balmer did a pretty good number on the company as well.

    25. Re:How much! by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Am I the only person here who thinks MS are nuts for having paid so much for a product placement. Surely $400,000,000 could have been better spent through other advertising methods.

      Yes, they could have just payed less to have the announcers call whatever the teams were using "Microsoft Surface Pro tablets" and avoided all this mess.

  6. generic® by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do they wipe the screens of their ipads with kleenexes and q-tips, which they keep with the band-aids and aspirin next to a refrigerator full of cokes, in the room where they make xeroxes, next to the escalator?

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:generic® by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 2

      Some of your generics are American based, and I ended up having to stop my Hoovering to Google what they are.

    2. Re:generic® by gunner_von_diamond · · Score: 1

      which they keep with the band-aids and aspirin

      *which they keep wth the band-aids and aleve©

    3. Re:generic® by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      No, but I did build an ipad out of legos.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    4. Re:generic® by jbolden · · Score: 1

      I wrote the same comment below but your's is wittier.

    5. Re:generic® by tsqr · · Score: 2

      I don't know why this got modded "Troll". The mis-naming of those tablets is not necessarily a good thing for Apple. When your brand name becomes commonly used as a generic name for a class of products, it dilutes the value of the trademark; IP attorneys refer to it as "genericide". Kleenex, Q-Tips, Band-Aids and Aspirin are great examples of this. Now excuse me, I have to go google how to photoshop some pictures.

    6. Re:generic® by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      if he was the thread originator, and you wrote your comment below, then surely you read his comment before posting your own!

    7. Re:generic® by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Aspirin is a trademark or Bayer.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:generic® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad it was bricked by the manufacturer.

    9. Re:generic® by gunner_von_diamond · · Score: 1

      Fail.©

    10. Re:generic® by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      Aspirin is a trademark or Bayer.

      Heroin used to be also. They marketed it as a non-addictive substitute for morphine.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    11. Re: generic® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosh!

    12. Re:generic® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generally I need to refresh my browser window before new comments get displayed. :P

    13. Re:generic® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do all realize refrigerator was never actually a unique model name made by only one company.

    14. Re:generic® by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you google them on bing?

  7. Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Albanach · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad. For their laptops, you get the huge light up apple logo to make sure everyone looking at you knows just what you're using.

    The last thing Apple's marketing office will want is for anyone who sees a tablet to refer to it as an iPad. I don't see the name become generic at any point soon, but it's a big fear of many companies. With Apple so reliant on branding and recognition I'd expect them to be more concerned than most.

    1. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by dingen · · Score: 1

      The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad.

      Unless people will go to the store and ask for "an iPad" even when they don't specifically mean the tablet by Apple.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by pla · · Score: 1

      I don't see the name become generic at any point soon

      You should re-read TFS, then. This entire topic centers on exactly that - "iPad" has become a generic term for any tablet, just as iPod has become a generic for any portable music player.

      And I have just one thought on that: "Ha, ha!"


      / As long as they don't have ultra-high-tech proprietary rounded corners. That would just go too far.

    3. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anna+Merikin · · Score: 1

      I agree. What's more, Apple might have to press hard on the common use of the term "iPad" to refer to tablets in general. Bayer long ago lost the exclusive rights to the word aspirin by not enforcing its exclusivity. 3M took great pains in the 70s to make clear "Scotch" did not become another word for "transparent", as in tape; Coke, McDonal's, et al. have enforced such. Now it may be Apple's turn.
      Oh, and as for MS :"What goes around, comes around." Whatever that means....

    4. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by LoverOfJoy · · Score: 1

      Unless the store employee is equally oblivious and just leads them to the tablet section (perhaps to a rack of android tablets).

    5. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      You should re-read TFS, then. This entire topic centers on exactly that - "iPad" has become a generic term for any tablet, just as iPod has become a generic for any portable music player.

      No, the situation is different. The reporters didn't see that someone was using a Microsoft tablet and called it by a generic name "iPad". They saw someone using a Microsoft tablet aka Surface and mistakenly believed it was an Apple tablet aka iPad. If reporters start saying "NFL is using iPads made by Microsoft" or "NFL is using an iPad Surface" assuming there is a classic iPad, iPad Retina, iPad Air, and now an iPad Surface, you may have a point.

    6. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad.

      Such as when a live-mic'ed coach on the sideline picks up one of the Surface tablets, mutters an expletive, and says "why is this f*cking iPad so f*ckin' heavy?"

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad.

      Especially if they are blue-screening on the sidelines during a televised game.

    8. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by jbolden · · Score: 1

      In practice the tablet market has completely forked.

      Android owns the $75-150 market mostly in Asia where people use tablets as a form of personal television with some internet features
      Apples owns the $350+ market where people use tables to run tablet based software.

      There is (in terms of tens of millions of units) no middle of the market.

    9. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by GIL_Dude · · Score: 1

      That has actually already happened for a lot of people. My daughter has a Nexus 7 tablet that she uses with a keyboard case to take notes in her college classes. Many people will come up and say, "oh, I like your iPad setup". Or "Which iPad is that?". Similarly on radio shows such as Leo Laporte's "The Tech Guy" (which is generally for "normals" - the not so technical folks who need help with tech), callers will often tell Leo that they want advice on picking out an "iPad" when they clearly mean they would like some sort of tablet device. It isn't to the point of Kleenex or Q-Tip, but there are quite a few people out there to whom any tablet device is an "iPad".

    10. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      or if sammy/m$ are giving kickbacks to employees to steer people towards surfdroids instead of ipad

    11. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Oh, and as for MS :"What goes around, comes around." Whatever that means....

      Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One.

    12. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad.

      Yeah, because that turned out so poorly for Kleenex, Xerox, Coca Cola and a number of other product manufacturers that became the defacto name for any similar product thereafter. No one ever wants their product to become a "household name". That's just marketing disaster!

      What alternate universe did you and those that modded you up come from?!?!

    13. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My macbook actually has a glowing BSD Daemon thanks to a handy decal company on the internet :)

    14. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by geekoid · · Score: 1

      350 Is the middle of the road.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    15. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reporters didn't see that someone was using a Microsoft tablet and called it by a generic name "iPad". They saw someone using a Microsoft tablet aka Surface and mistakenly believed it was an Apple tablet aka iPad.

      This isn't true. A widely promoted change to league rules this year is that NFL teams are allowed to use tablets on the sidelines. However, the tablets have to be specially locked down by the league rather than the teams. (It's against the rules to use video from the game currently going on on the sidelines, but starting this year, video from previous games is OK. I assume the league also doesn't want players tweeting while they're on the bench.) The league also made a branding deal with Microsoft that the tablets that would be used would be Microsoft Surfaces.

      If the tablet was an actual iPad, it would have been a violation of a highly promoted league rule, and the commentors wouldn't have reacted the way they did.

      Also, the tablets they use are in these giant cases (presumably waterproof, because the games are played in the elements.) that say MICROSOFT SURFACE on them in big letters.

      The commentors didn't think it was an actual iPad manufactured by Apple. They thought that iPad and tablet meant the same thing, and you could have an Apple iPad, a Samsung iPad, but the NFL picked Microsoft iPads.

      This is a serious concern. Apple had better watch themselves here.

    16. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by tapi0 · · Score: 1

      The other side of the commoditization is not just the name falling into general use (and trademarks being lost).
      if a coach on a football field is being mistaken for using an iPad when actually using a surface, then the viewers may get the impression that they're all interchangeable - i.e. a surface obviously isn't inferior, and there isn't some magical reason for needing to buy an iPad specifically.
      Microsoft has built their company around capturing the middle market from the established players. You don't need an IBM PC, you don't need a mainframe, you don't need a Playstation/Nintendo.... and now you don't need an iPad (and could become "or iPhone/Android"?)
      They don't need to 'crush the competition', just let them play in their own environments, whilst taking up the rest of the market.

    17. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then utters in surprise "But so darn fast! praise Apple!"

    18. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      I am sure people already do this, and in any event the employees of the store will steer the person to the thing that is the most profitable for them, even if the person really does want an iPad.

      Best Buy's Samsung store within a store are really annoying at this. (Though oddly enough I liked the Samsung Tab much better than the Nexus 7 I originally intended to buy. But I only got the tab because I told the Samsung guys to leave me alone while I inspected both products and made my own decision.)

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    19. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      Not in my experience. The 300-500 segment of the market is split around 50/50 in my peer group and extended family between iPads and Android 7"-10" tablets. I've even seen the fanboyism catch on such to the extent that my entire immediate family only buys Samsung tablets and phones. And I with my 2013 Nexus 7 are an outcast heathen....

    20. Re:Or, Apple could be fearful of comoditization by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Take a look at the statistics. Point data can be misleading.

  8. It's pretty impressive by blueshift_1 · · Score: 1

    Hate them or love them, apple has done an incredible job of making themselves the de facto device in several categories. Certainly most slashdotters know the broad categories of tech, but for most people they just know the most discussed one or two. Apple fanboys are still making themselves heard.

    1. Re:It's pretty impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similar to how most people still refer to a copier as a Xerox no matter the brand.

    2. Re:It's pretty impressive by Enfixed · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: Android Fanboy

      While they may have been the "de facto" device in 2011, it looks like they were overrun by all the various Android tables a while ago and are still in market share decline. For a single device compared against all others they may have the most share, but not by OS. With Apple just catching up to Samsung’s 2012 products this trend will probably continue.

      --
      Sigs are bad for you...
    3. Re:It's pretty impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh.. It's fun to see Android cheerleaders bring up OS market share statistics to prove Android is so "awesome". But the moment you criticize certain Android phones the cheerleaders bash you for not buying a 'flagship' phone.

      The average Android phone is a shitty $75 bargain-bin phone with low ram and a sluggish CPU running some ancient Android build that will never get any updates. Congratulations Team Android, on selling a shit-ton of these crappy phones.

    4. Re:It's pretty impressive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are both decent operating systems with pros and cons. I have an Android phone myself and will likely go to Apple the next time I upgrade. I would hardly call it "catching up" though. Manufacturers like Samsung just push out every device variation they can conceive of. Apple is much more selective about what they provide and they have far fewer offerings - intentionally. The market did show that Apple was wrong about screen size so they adjusted. Some of the functionality they opened to developers is also positive. Pointing to Android devices with NFC is nonsense though. I have never seen someone use NFC for a purpose other than playing around with the capabilities. That's not to say that people don't use it, but I don't think it is in widespread use. I am confident I will start seeing people use NFC functionality now that Apple is doing it. And as a result, Android NFC use will pick up as well. In that regard, Android is certainly a follower - despite already having devices capable. Apple is a trendsetter and its selective approach makes much more business sense and has provided them with a much higher margin of profit. Not only that, but the market they target spends much more money in the app store. I'm not an Apple Fanboy, but I am tired of people on Android pretend they are more advanced. For every flagship Android phone, there are 1000 crap devices. I shouldn't have to root my Android phone to get all the bloatware removed from it. I shouldn't have to install new launchers to make it look less ugly in exchange for a performance hit. I shouldn't have to wonder if an app will fail on my specific device and then never get an update for it. I shouldn't have to worry about malware in the app store. Maybe it is Android that needs to catch up?

  9. Trademark genericisation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if Apple do not challenge this or complain to the NFL, does that mean they risk losing their trademark protection for the term iPad under genericised trademark rules because, as demonstrated by these people using the term, it can be shown that it has come to mean "a tablet computing device"?

  10. $400 million by mwvdlee · · Score: 0

    $400 million.
    Just to have the NFL officially use your brand of tablet.
    No advertising seconds, no "official phone", "official supplier" or anything, just "official tablet".
    Tens of thousands of times more money than the vast majority of us will ever have at one point.
    For just one sports league.
    Take a moment to think about that.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:$400 million by OzPeter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Take a moment to think about that.

      If you think all that is bad, then consider that the NFL is a non-profit organization. Should the NFL continue to enjoy non-profit status?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    2. Re:$400 million by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Not this stupid thing again. Yes, 'The NFL' is non-profit. However, 'The NFL' does not keep any of the money, the money goes to the teams, which are NOT non-profit and do pay taxes.

    3. Re:$400 million by benjymouse · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just to have the NFL officially use your brand of tablet.

      What gave you that idea? Did you just pull it out of thin air?

      It covers more than that. Read the MS press release on the deal:

      The agreement provides Microsoft with the rights to create exclusive interactive experiences through products such as Xbox One and Surface, transforming the way fans will experience the NFL in the years to come. The NFL on Xbox will provide fans with an all-new viewing experience through innovations around Skype and Xbox SmartGlass; an all-new, innovative fantasy football solution allowing fans to view players and live competition side by side on a single TV screen; and a personalized NFL destination featuring information about the players, teams and games fans care about most. Xbox also retains the exclusive rights to extend these interactive experiences to tablets, enabling fans to use Xbox SmartGlass technology to enhance game day.

      So, basically also the license to use NFL content on XBox and tablets (I see no mention of live content - but it could be buried in the "xbox experience")

      No advertising seconds, no "official phone", "official supplier" or anything, just "official tablet".

      Wrong. From the press release (see above):

      As part of the partnership, Surface by Microsoft branding will appear on NFL sidelines in unique ways, including on the hoods of the official on-field NFL instant replay stations. As part of the relationship, Microsoft will be granted the following designations:

        Xbox remains “The Official Game Console of the NFL” and will also become “The Official Interactive Video Entertainment Console.”

        Microsoft is “The Official Sideline Technology Sponsor of the NFL.”

        Surface by Microsoft and Windows are “The Official Tablet and PC Operating System of the NFL.”

      --
      Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    4. Re:$400 million by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I noticed after posting the comment that the summary was completely wrong.
      But in my defence; how could I have known that a summary on Slashdot would be completely wrong?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:$400 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's Slashdot?

    6. Re:$400 million by benjymouse · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I noticed after posting the comment that the summary was completely wrong.
      But in my defence; how could I have known that a summary on Slashdot would be completely wrong?

      Yes. My bad. I am sorry.

      It wasn't you who pulled it out of thin air. I can see how it was implied by the submitter.

      Damn. One could get the impression that submitters/editors sensationalize just to get page-clicks.

      --
      Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    7. Re:$400 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But apparently, every employee of the NFL makes a multi-million dollar salary. That by itself precludes non-profit status. Now we just need to get the churches.

    8. Re:$400 million by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Incorrect.
      the NFL collect about a billion in licensing of product and the use of the three letters in this order 'NFL'.

      That doesn't even get into all the special tax breaks the teams, owners, and players get.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:$400 million by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Yes, they COLLECT about a billion dollars, but they don't KEEP it - it goes to the teams. What is so difficult to understand about that?

      Answer this question: if the money is not going directly to the teams, where is it going? Who do you suppose are the owners and/or investors in the NFL?

      Do you think the cashier at Walmart should be taxed on all the money he handles each day, just because it went through his hands?

    10. Re:$400 million by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Un, salary in no way precludes non-profit status, where did you get that idea? The people making the salaries have to declare that as income, same as everyone else.

  11. hard knocks (hbo) too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    living in Atlanta I've watched some of hbo's behind the scenes training camp series since it's about the Falcons this year & Mike Smith (head coach) told the players to review the material on their iPads in his post game locker room speech. they didn't really have a good angle/shot of them so it never donned on me that they might not actually be iPads...

    funny anecdote: I got the kids Touches for making straight As all yr & after fighting through the crown & waiting at the Apple store we were walking back through mall & passed the Microsoft store which was completely empty save for six uniformed employees so I took/posted a picture & commented: "I feel sorry for the Apple geniuses - they actually have to deal w/customers..."

  12. The NFL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the NFL?

    1. Re:The NFL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The NFL is an american, tax-exempt organization that gathers for religious events every Sunday. Except for the summer which they take off. The events are held in temples larger than the Egyptian pyramids, and they are built and paid for by local governments using public money. In return for their service they are showered with large sums of money by nearly every segment of society, and their members are given special privileges that make them immune to some of the normal laws of society. The downside for the members, though, is that their activities are medically dangerous, and they usually are only allowed to take part in them for one to two years before their health degrades and are tossed to the side. In short, it is like any other large american corporation.

  13. Re:Unterminated quotation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you point out the mistakes of others but make them yourself, is that hypocrisy?

    Not really. If you add that only an idiot would make those mistakes it's only hypocrisy if you also claim that you yourself isn't an idiot.
    If you point out your own mistakes as often as you point out those of others that only makes you a critic, not a hypocrite.

  14. How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about the super bowl. If MS is already in place they don't have to spend 200 mil for a prime advertisement their product is all over the place already and all season.It's actually cheap from this perspective.

  15. Apple vs Microsoft by jeffclay · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting to read the article about Apple sueing Microsoft now because the users can't distinguish their products apart (having round corners, a touch screen, and all that).

  16. Don't worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They factored all the shitty articles like this into the price. Well worth it for brand recognition.

  17. Scotch tape by jbolden · · Score: 1

    iPad has reached that point that Kleenex (facial tissue) or Scotch tape (clear adhesive tape). People can say "I want an iPad but not one of those expensive Apple ones" and mean they want a tablet type device. I've never used "clear adhesive tape" in conversation even when I knew the brand wasn't Scotch. I'll still grab a box of Puff's brand Kleenex. Apple is so dominant in tablets that's the way this plays out.

    OTOH I suspect the announcers will just correct themselves on air and give Microsoft a good 20 second free commercial to make up for the mistake next week.

    1. Re:Scotch tape by gnasher719 · · Score: 2

      iPad has reached that point that Kleenex (facial tissue) or Scotch tape (clear adhesive tape). People can say "I want an iPad but not one of those expensive Apple ones" and mean they want a tablet type device.

      I'd say this is nowhere near. The generic name is "tablet" and not "iPad". And the generic name for a music player is "MP3 player", not iPod, even when a so-called MP3 player might be used to play mostly AAC or other non-MP3 formats.

    2. Re:Scotch tape by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      You must have been out sick the day the entire marketing class discussed the challenges associated with market leaders such as Kleenex and Xerox.

      Here's the cliff notes version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.... Even for the neck-beardiest android geek, deep in the logic center of the brains he knows that iPad has taken on a genericized condition in the mainstream.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    3. Re:Scotch tape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even for the neck-beardiest android geek, deep in the logic center of the brains he knows that iPad has taken on a genericized condition in the mainstream.

      Shhhhh! Don't tell them the realizatioin might fry their cereberal circuitry.

    4. Re:Scotch tape by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I've never heard anyone refer to a tablet as an iPad in a generic way.

      Doesn't mean it's becoming a generic term, but I don't think it's anything like Kleenex or Xerox.

      Interestingly, I have heard copying referred to Xeroxing in a long time.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Scotch tape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone needs to get out of the basement more and mingle with some fleshware. iPad is the defacto standard name to most people, not tablet.

    6. Re:Scotch tape by omnichad · · Score: 1

      It's their own fault for lowercasing the first letter.

  18. Message explained by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brees was not watching movies on his iPad as he watching them on his Surface.

  19. Bill Belichick by Squidlips · · Score: 2

    I saw him struggling with it...I suspect he will go back to a clipboard and paper soon and to heck with the NFL and the MS contract...

    1. Re:Bill Belichick by jonnythan · · Score: 1

      No such luck. The tablets have replaced the black and white printouts of player positioning and play development. Turns out those pictures were provided by the league itself to both teams - it's not something teams do on their own.

      So if Belichick doesn't want the tablets to view those photos, he won't have any photos to see.

    2. Re:Bill Belichick by Squidlips · · Score: 1

      You underestimate how stubborn Bill Belichick is. I suspect he will have someone printout the pictures and give them to him on a clipboard...

    3. Re:Bill Belichick by dysmal · · Score: 1

      He's still waiting for them to 3D print him a new sweatshirt.

    4. Re:Bill Belichick by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If the teams find having an iPad :) impeding decision making, they will have enough pressure to go back.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Bill Belichick by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1
      The reason Belichick was struggling with this is because of an NFL rules change this year. In the past, (like, say, in 2008), teams weren't allowed to use imagery from the game currently in progress, but were allowed to use still photos of previous games.

      The NFL has changed the rules so now you are allowed to use still images and video of previous games (by watching it on your Microsoft Surface, The Official Tablet of the NFL) but still not photographs or video from the game in progress. The league controls the game day tablets (rather than the teams) and imposes access controls to prevent teams from circumventing it.

      Belichick was struggling with the tablet last Sunday because he was trying to get the video of last Sunday's game, and he hasn't figured out how to get past the access controls yet.

  20. The NFL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bunch of millionaires that run with an oblong brown ball from one end of the field to the other.
    Also known for running dog fights and beating their wives on their off time, but if they are good enough at running with the ball that part is ignored.

  21. GoPro / iPad by Racerdude · · Score: 1

    Same thing with small action cameras; Everyone refers to them as "GoPro", regardless of what brand it is. I think people just like to simplify their world

  22. iPad, mPad, gPad, aPad by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    I'm already hearing people refer to these things as "Pads". The most important thing is that people understand what a Pad is. The individual device qualities and pricing will differentate themselves.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:iPad, mPad, gPad, aPad by N!k0N · · Score: 3, Insightful

      no no, they're talking about the PADD.

  23. Microsoft didn't pay the messengers by SethJohnson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most commenters here and elsewhere assume these references to a competing product were accidental. I believe they were likely intentional. The $400m paid to the NFL did not include any money paid to the broadcast corporations. They're sitting there wondering why they should help the NFL promote something while at the same time having to pay the NFL similarly-sized piles of cash.

    I think these carefully-executed comments were an intentional message to Microsoft that their promotional budget is better spent with them on commercials rather than trying to embed them in the content without paying the broadcasters.

    1. Re:Microsoft didn't pay the messengers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...message to Microsoft that their promotional budget is better spent with them on commercials ...

      Oh dear god, no.

    2. Re:Microsoft didn't pay the messengers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most commenters here and elsewhere assume these references to a competing product were accidental. I believe they were likely intentional. The $400m paid to the NFL did not include any money paid to the broadcast corporations. They're sitting there wondering why they should help the NFL promote something while at the same time having to pay the NFL similarly-sized piles of cash.

      I think these carefully-executed comments were an intentional message to Microsoft that their promotional budget is better spent with them on commercials rather than trying to embed them in the content without paying the broadcasters.

      Or, iPad has become a household name like Xerox ("I am going to go Xerox this.", even though the copy machine clearly reads Ricoh), Kleenex ("Hand me a Kleenex, I just sneezed.", Kleenex = facial tissue), Q-Tip ("I used a Q-Tip to clean out my ear." when the box reads the grocery store generic "cotton swabs"). It was still an intentional thing to say that, but we as species have a tendency to generalize things that look basically the same. It doesn't mean one is better or even more recognizable than the other. It just means that "iPad" has already been ingrained into people's minds that when they see a tablet-sized device they identify it with the word "iPad". People jumping to a money or political angle on this topic are way off base. The geek angle here is how we associate proper names with things as a way to generalize an entire set of things.

    3. Re:Microsoft didn't pay the messengers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i admire the craftiness of your speculation, and do not doubt it is definitely possible, given the bidness world as it is...
      *HOWEVER* i DO doubt both the intelligence and foresight of jock announcers to do such a thing on their own... *MAYBE* if they were handed a memo by their bosses to refer to it as such, but then, these guys are such dingleberries, they would probably talk about *that*, because they babble more than a house full of sorority chicks...

    4. Re:Microsoft didn't pay the messengers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like someone who has worked with broadcasters before. They do that kind of crap all the time. I'm not sure its all that intentional in this case but it definitely wouldn't be a surprise. I've worked for a live event for 10 years and it was always a battle when getting sponsors as signage and what shows up on TV is all carefully controlled and if a sponsor pays for a prominent position that is on the screen full time then they better have also paid the broadcaster of the event or they will play games with graphics and do whatever they can.

  24. omfg by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Stop hiring idiots to do smart people jobs like comment on things in front of 50 million people! These are the same idiots that call Firefox Foxfire, CCleaner CC Cleaner, and their router their modem, their tower their hard drive, and their iphone and ipod.

    1. Re:omfg by geekoid · · Score: 1

      That would all be relevant if they were announcers fro . some.. software competition*.

      Their job is to know football.

      *I would cut both my balls off with a spoon in exchange for living in a world where a billion+ people got excited about software competitions.
      Or and engineering, science.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  25. OMG! by wcrowe · · Score: 2

    Someone called something that wasn't an iPad, an iPad! In other news, one announcer was overheard to say that the trainer was placing a Band-aid on an injured player, when in fact the bandage was a Curad! Shocking!

     

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:OMG! by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Someone called something that wasn't an iPad, an iPad! In other news, one announcer was overheard to say that the trainer was placing a Band-aid on an injured player, when in fact the bandage was a Curad! Shocking!

      You're obviously not a nerd since you don't seem to understand why it is hilariously funny that a Microsoft tablet is consistently being called an 'iPad' by its users. Even nerds who were only a glint in their father's eye during the Microsoft v. Apple wars know why this is funny. Which brings us to the next question: What are you doing here?

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    2. Re:OMG! by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Not users, commentators. I don't see what is so hilarious about someone observing someone with a product and mis-identifying the product.

    3. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because those commentators were likely being paid (in part) to call them by their brand name.

      It's like this:
      https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5102/5569800910_29605a96c3.jpg

      Only instead, even the pitchman called it by the competitor's brand name.

    4. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He saw it was about Apple, so he had to go and make sure nothing bad was said about the company. history and facts never entered his mind.

    5. Re:OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because Microsoft drove Apple into obscurity more than a decade ago, they were THE gorilla. Look where we are now, not only is Apple not the obscure player but now Microsoft is. It is kind of humorous if even if you despise Apple for their business practices as you are also likely to despise Microsoft for there's. Gotta love the new CEO basically giving up too, he's clearly trying to pull an IBM on Microsoft, the only problem is that doesn't work and will work less and less in the future.

    6. Re:OMG! by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      Well, I am a nerd, and if you will look at my 5-digit id, you will realize that I've probably been one for much longer than you have. But I am not such a nerd that I am so out of touch with current vernacular that I don't realize that iPad is becoming the standard generic term for any brand of tablet, just as band-aid, kleenex, frisbee, etc. have. It's not hilariously funny.

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
  26. Yes it is a lot of money by benjymouse · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is not just for "product placement", though.

    From Microsofts press release on the deal:

    The agreement provides Microsoft with the rights to create exclusive interactive experiences through products such as Xbox One and Surface, transforming the way fans will experience the NFL in the years to come. The NFL on Xbox will provide fans with an all-new viewing experience through innovations around Skype and Xbox SmartGlass; an all-new, innovative fantasy football solution allowing fans to view players and live competition side by side on a single TV screen; and a personalized NFL destination featuring information about the players, teams and games fans care about most. Xbox also retains the exclusive rights to extend these interactive experiences to tablets, enabling fans to use Xbox SmartGlass technology to enhance game day.

    So MS has also licensed the rights to use the NFL brand, clips etc. (could be 3D instant replay on the xbox, streaming over Skype?).

    And exclusive rights for tablets. Could be a driver for Surface uptake.

    And also this:

    As part of the partnership, Surface by Microsoft branding will appear on NFL sidelines in unique ways, including on the hoods of the official on-field NFL instant replay stations. As part of the relationship, Microsoft will be granted the following designations:

    The instant review stations are in view during some of the most tense situations of a game, with a lot of attention. Surely, that is worth money.

    400.000.000 is a lot of money. I have no idea if it is too expensive or not. But it does cover more than the right to equip the sidelines with tablets.

    --
    Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
    1. Re:Yes it is a lot of money by GlennC · · Score: 1

      The instant review stations are in view during some of the most tense situations of a game, with a lot of attention.

      I don't know what channels you're watching the game on, but where I watch, the review station gets a couple of seconds of camera time at best. It's actually rather rare to see the booth at all.

      Most of the on-air view is the replays themselves, with the announcers giving their interpretation.

      --
      Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
    2. Re:Yes it is a lot of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. i watch football...
      2. see them tussle over instant replay stuff all the time, COULD NOT tell you what 'brand' 'stuff' they use to do an instant replay if my life depended on it... NEVER noticed IF there was some visible logo, etc, and probably wouldn't make note of it, even if there was...
      3. really ? someone is going to base their next tablet purchase based on what they saw the nfl using at a game ? ? ? well, maybe, i guess...

      reminds me of the quote from -as i recall- store magnate wannamaker who said, 'half my advertising budget is totally wasted, the problem is, i don't know which half...'
      i gots news for microsofties, in this case, it was BOTH halves...

    3. Re:Yes it is a lot of money by steelfood · · Score: 1

      I did notice the "powered by Microsoft Surface" hood over the review booth, but that explains why they keep panning to it whenever there's a challenge.

      I'm not sure how much that's going to change Surface sales though. I imagine few if any people really notice these things, and the ones who do probably use iPads or some Android tablet already.

      NFL "experiences" might be interesting, but as EA has a monopoly on NFL video games (and I'm sure other companies have monopolies in other areas), it's probably not as big of a promotion as you'd think. Unless Microsoft could live stream all games to an NFL app exclusive to the Surface, it'd be pointless. And I'm doubtful about that one since the NFL has tons of other agreements in place.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    4. Re:Yes it is a lot of money by Samhain138 · · Score: 1

      "Booth reviews" are actually being conducted in the NFL's HQ in New York starting this season...
      Since all scoring-drives are being reviewed, and the whole "booth review" method didn't scale so well across 16 games a week, the NFL figured out it's easier to lock a few football nerds in the same room with some fancy video equipment and have them review all the plays (i.e., scoring drives & coach challenges) across all the games.
      So the NFL's solution to this problem is great, but it makes Microsoft's deal a whole lot less appealing.

  27. Breach of contract, surely? by wyoung76 · · Score: 1

    If they don't have some breach of contract or revenue clawback due to all this silliness, then Microsoft have only themselves to blame for the lack of positive marketing and publicity.

  28. ROFL by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    Wow, that sucks but it's very funny! It would have been funny had the tables been turned as well. If it had been Apple paying the NFL and the NFL commentators calling the devices a Surface, it would be just as funny if not more so.

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

      You know that's totally going to happen, because as soon as the MS contract is up, then apple is going to swoop in there. Since everyone will be used to calling them surface tablets for a while.

  29. News that matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when did Slashdot start reporting on frivolous advertising in sports stories?

  30. If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by Snotnose · · Score: 2

    I'd be wanting to work at 110% of my ability 24/7, if I was forced to learn/use a device foreign to me I'd be pissed. I don't care if it's a surface, iPad, or chalkboard, let me work in a way that's most productive for me.

    1. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by dysmal · · Score: 1

      I'd be wanting to work at 110% of my ability 24/7, if I was forced to learn/use a device foreign to me I'd be pissed. I don't care if it's a surface, iPad, or chalkboard, let me work in a way that's most productive for me.

      I'm sure that same argument was used by coaches and teachers when they went from chalk boards to dry erase white boards.

      You sound like the VP's i have at work when they were forced to migrate from XP to Win7.

    2. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by geekoid · · Score: 1

      110%? Inability to learn new tools? Inability to realize the the tool you use were once new to you and helped you?
      How did you get here from the CNN forums?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by ShaunC · · Score: 1

      I'd be wanting to work at 110% of my ability 24/7, if I was forced to learn/use a device foreign to me I'd be pissed. I don't care if it's a surface, iPad, or chalkboard, let me work in a way that's most productive for me.

      Would you look at that differently if you were making an NFL player's salary? I'd happily toss my Android phone and my iPod Touch and replace them with whatever shitty Microsoft devices my boss wanted me to use, if he started paying me a million bucks a year.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    4. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      The New England Patriots make about $428M a year across 16 games, each of which takes an average of 192 minutes. That works out to about $139K per minute. If Bill Belichick thinks he can work more efficiently with papyrus and a scribe, there'd be a tiny replica of the Nile in the basement of Gillette Stadium by the end of the day.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    5. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're comparing a decision made based on the merits of the product to a decision made based on how much the NFL was paid. The NFL is selling out their own performance and making the show worse, but dry erase boards and Windows 7 improve the quality of the product.

    6. Re:If I was in the NFL I'd be pissed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-entitled little brat. theres plenty of people ready to take your place without being whiny bitches about irrelevant crap.

  31. Nope, "Pad" is the generic name. by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    Never heard anyone refer to one of those devices as a tablet.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  32. Brand that shit! by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    You see in the pics in the article how the headphones say BOSE in letters you could read literally from across a football field? Where does it say "Surface" on the tablet? That little foam handle? Slap "Surface" on every side of those protective frames. This is the NFL! They don't do subtle.

    Even better, go algorithmic. Whenever a Surface tablet appears on the screen, slap a "Surface, The Official Tablet of the NFL" graphic in the corner.

    And what, no one thinks to stick an "It's not an iPad, it's a Surface" Post-It somewhere in the damn booths?

    .

    1. Re:Brand that shit! by tibit · · Score: 2

      I think the biggest issue is that Microsoft doesn't really have a simple symbolic logo for itself as a corporation. There's a perhaps widely-recognized Windows logo, and that's about it. The people at the marketing helm at MS are really asleep, and have been for ages. They can't even keep from fucking with their Windows logo. Say what you will about Apple, but they essentially had only two logo designs, and both are instantly recognizable. They had the foresight to design them for the long run. MS seems to think quarter-to-quarter.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:Brand that shit! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      MS has the worse marketing people. Well, in charge. I would wager the actual staff is pretty good, and very frustrated.
      I could make better commercials for MS products.
      Seriously.
      That doesn't mean I'm great, it means if I can do it, then sure as shit there are better executive then what they got.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Brand that shit! by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      The Surface tablets that the NFL uses are in giant ass cases (necessary because games are played in the elements) that say MICROSOFT SURFACE on them in giant letters. It was clearly visible while Dilfer, at least, was talking.The commentators who screwed this up think iPad and "tablet" mean the same thing.

  33. Hey Microsoft!! by sabbede · · Score: 3, Funny
    I will let you equip my organization with Surfaces for only $20. Our brand has developed a strong customer following and the products we use have a great influence on the purchasing decisions of our clients.

    Granted, my organization may look like a household, but that's just a clever marketing tactic.

    We will need three tablets at first to equip our executive staff (myself and my girlfriend) and our lead associate (her daughter), though our affiliates (extended family) may require them in the future.

  34. That's nothing by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

    For this upcoming Super Bowl, the big halftime event is going to be a heavily choreographed number with all of the participating players dancing around, clicking their Surface keyboards onto and off of the devices.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  35. Sheeple start young. by StrangeBrew · · Score: 1

    I had a kid in my son's daycare correct me when I referred to the owners device as a tablet.He screamed how it wasn't a tablet it was an iPad. So I screamed back that 'anyone who can't say their 'R's isn't allowed an opinion, so get your Barbera Wawa arse out of my sight!' Ok, so maybe I thought it instead of saying it... but that would have been sweet.

    1. Re:Sheeple start young. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So the best you can do is imagine yourself winning an argument with a kindergartener?

    2. Re:Sheeple start young. by StrangeBrew · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry. You must either be an Apple fanboy or have a similar speech impediment, and I've obviously upset you. The first part of my post was what actually occurred. The second part was added for a small amount of comic relief and did not actually occur.

    3. Re:Sheeple start young. by PPH · · Score: 1

      You missed a teaching opportunity. An iPad is a kind of tablet. A Surface is a kind of tablet. Just like Ford and Chevy are kinds of cars.

      Yet another child who won't make it as an OO developer.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  36. I still remember when... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 2

    All the phone manufacturers with the exception of Apple spent millions on Super Bowl Ads and at the end of the game all the players took out their iPhone and took pictures of each other with the trophy.

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  37. There is a positive side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it crashes, it's Apple's fault.

  38. Plenty of BS to go around by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    NFL: One of the few industries where smooth talking idiots can rake in millions spewing bullshit.

    You didn't forget about religion, politics, finance, auto sales, TV news, real estate, and insurance did you?

    The NFL is small potatoes in the making money through BS industry.

    1. Re:Plenty of BS to go around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot advertising.

  39. In a related news... by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

    ..Apple sued NFL for having called "Ipad" a Microsoft Surface tablet.

    1. Re:In a related news... by DukeofURL · · Score: 0

      ..Apple sued NFL for having called "Ipad" a Microsoft Surface tablet.

      I believe they are filling today

  40. Brands become generic names by sjbe · · Score: 2

    I'd say this is nowhere near. The generic name is "tablet" and not "iPad".

    Maybe to you but that's not the way the real world works. People absolutely do call all tablets "iPads" regardless of actual make. They refer to any MP3 player as an "iPod" whether it actually is or isn't. People don't search, they "Google".

    No it isn't accurate but it is what happens. If you correct them they will ignore you. Most people really, seriously DO NOT CARE that it isn't actually accurate. All adhesive bandages are Band-Aids. All nasal tissue is Kleenex. All transparent tape is Scotch tape. All photocopies are Xeroxes. It happens. Get over it.

    1. Re:Brands become generic names by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Maybe to you but that's not the way the real world works. People absolutely do call all tablets "iPads" regardless of actual make. They refer to any MP3 player as an "iPod" whether it actually is or isn't. People don't search, they "Google".

      It makes a difference whether the word is used as a generic term, or whether it is used by mistake. Let's say you see me holding a tablet from 10 meters distance. You might say "he is holding an iPad". As I come closer, you can see it is made by Samsung. Will you say "he is holding a Samsung iPad" or "he is holding a Samsung tablet" or "he is holding a "?

    2. Re:Brands become generic names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still makes me want to kill myself.. can you imagine in lets say 100 years, when every thing we use is called by some product name?
      Alli can say is thank god advertising doesnt work!

  41. I hate being a walking advertisement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I covered that dumb glowing apple with duct tape and a piece of cardboard I tore off a box of cookies

  42. Losing the "iPad" trademark by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    This is not bad for Microsoft, it is bad for Apple. If people start calling all tablets "iPads" then Apple may lose their trademark on the term iPad. That article was from 2012, so clearly this isn't a new issue. It already happened to aspirin, elevator, and zipper.

    1. Re:Losing the "iPad" trademark by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      This is not bad for Microsoft, it is bad for Apple. If people start calling all tablets "iPads" then Apple may lose their trademark on the term iPad.

      No, that's the iPhone 6 Plus.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  43. ewww... nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you're not one of us. please don't use that term.

    -- the rest of us

    1. Re:ewww... nerds... by Cito · · Score: 1

      One of us! One of us! Gooble Gobble!!!!

      http://youtu.be/bBXyB7niEc0

  44. Lynch was right on by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

    Lynch remarked that Brees was "not watching movies on his iPad."

    A true statement, apparently.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  45. What was Microsoft thinking? by userw014 · · Score: 1

    These are SPORTS ANNOUNCERS! People who hold down the left-hand side of the bell-curve for any "dim" metaphor you can try to apply.

    Some cautions here about "dim" metaphors:

    • Dimmest bulb in chandelier doesn't matter if it isn't lit.
    • Hiding your light under a basket doesn't matter if you used a rock.
    • "Lights are on but nobody's home" doesn't count out in the woods.
    1. Re:What was Microsoft thinking? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      These are SPORTS ANNOUNCERS! People who hold down the left-hand side of the bell-curve for any "dim" metaphor you can try to apply.

      Oh please. We have weather forecasters and politicians to deal with. A Sports Announcer is going to be like a 3V LED hooked up to house mains compared to those two.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:What was Microsoft thinking? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Nope, not really.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  46. So Apple lost its Trademark now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems that 'iPad' is now a synonym for Tablet-PC, which makes it a common, non-trademarkable word.

    So everyone may start to sell her own homemade iPad from now on! yeah!

  47. paying people to use? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Microsoft now has to pay organizations to use the Surface?

    Ha Ha!

  48. Re:Unterminated quotation by TWX · · Score: 2

    Unterminated quotations are by-definition terminated at the end of the paragraph. At least they are regularly and consistently in all of the novels that I read.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  49. Integration of customer premises equipment by tepples · · Score: 1

    These are the same idiots that call [...] their router their modem

    Not the best of examples. A lot of cable and DSL modems lately do include a built-in router.

    and their iphone and ipod

    The media player icon on iPhone is (or at least used to be) labeled "iPod".

  50. First sentence of TFS: 5-year deal by raymorris · · Score: 2

    > Is this something like a 1 year or 10 year contract?

    The first words of the summary are:
          Prior to the season, Microsoft and the NFL struck a 5-year, $400 million deal

    1. Re:First sentence of TFS: 5-year deal by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll learn to read one of these days :)

  51. You mistook causality for correlation ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Football causes brain damage whether you play it or watch it.

    Thus, being an ex-player confers 90 plus percentile probability of damage. Adding becoming a TV announcer confers even higher probability of cogntiive flaws. Therefore, there is near certitanty they could care less what the actual OS undrelying the device might be.

  52. Its a generic term by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like how every home video game console was a Nintendo

  53. you forgot Poland by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    trademark abuse like this makes me want to abuse heroin

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  54. How much! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember this is over 5 years too. 80M a year to lock in product placement, it actually saves them millions come super bowl time. Microsoft is likely saving money through this deal.

  55. Kleenex, Xerox, iPad.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    These names have what I call the "first adopter" advantage. When someone wants a tissue they ask for a Kleenex. Just like people ask for a "Xerox copy" of something. To a lot of people, "iPad" is synonymous with tablet.

    This is one of the reasons why it's going to be such an uphill battle for Microsoft when it comes to tablets and phones. They were late to the game. Even if the products are good (and I happen to think that the Surface is a really good tablet) it's a tough nut to crack.

    I have to think that the MS marketing department really dropped the ball (no pun intended) here though. If you're going to spend $400 million on promoting the Surface you would think they would remind the announcers that it's not an iPad? They should be encouraging them to use the name Surface often. It's not a "tablet", it's not an "iPad", it's a Surface. There should have been a big splashy introduction where everyone gets to see the thing and what it can do. You know, generate a little excitement?

    Then again, marketing has never been been Microsoft's strong point.

    1. Re:Kleenex, Xerox, iPad.... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      This is one of the reasons why it's going to be such an uphill battle for Microsoft when it comes to tablets and phones. They were late to the game.

      They really weren't. I remember using a Windows tablet/laptop convertable back in 199? And a Windows phone (with Office, etc. ) before the first iPhone dropped.

      I'm actually not sure why neither one took off. My assumption would be that both were too large, and that probably had most to do with either non-low-power chips or battery technology.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:Kleenex, Xerox, iPad.... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. What I should have said was "They were late to the game...with a viable product". Microsoft's first tablet was a brave experiment but terrible execution. And the original Windows Phone (running Windows Mobile as I recall) was awful. Crashed all the time, had that silly Start button, etc.

  56. good ad for apple by Cardoor · · Score: 1

    ESPN's Trent Dilfer joked about how long it took Cardinals assistant head coach Tom Moore to "learn how to use the iPad to scroll through the pictures."

    apple should issue a statement that Dilfer misspoke, and how it was actually a surface tablet. and add, that were it an actual easy to use ipad, Tom Moore would likely have not had any problems figuring it out.

  57. Oh no! by thevirtualcat · · Score: 1

    The Xerox machine broke and someone wrote "Out of Order" on a piece of paper with a Sharpie and Scotch-taped it to the machine.

    I found a picture of a Walkman that had been modified to connect to an iPod, but it turned out to be Photoshopped.

    I used my iPad to Google for a way to send a box of Kleenex to the Microsoft executives.

    Writing this post has given me a headache, but I can't decide if I want to take Tylenol or Aspirin.

  58. Microsoft Paid NFL $400 Million To Use Surface... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds as though the NFL owes Microsoft a refund along with breach of contract penalties. This ought to be fun to watch how the NFL squirms on this faux pas in light of the Rice scandal. Bitches.

  59. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, that's what you get for always wanting to BUY everything and everyone...
    Greed, makes ya do stupid shit like this....

  60. If it were Madden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it would have been called iFarve.

  61. The same as with calling Windows a "PC" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Feel the pain, microfaggots. Fuck you. Die.

    1. Re:The same as with calling Windows a "PC" by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Fairly sure it was IBM that had PCs before.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  62. My mom says i've an iPad. by havana9 · · Score: 1

    Actually I have a Nexus 7.

  63. For get it by Anon-Admin · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Surface has less than 2% market share. Give up, Android (linux) has the market and there is no point in fighting it.

    How does feel when the linux people toss it in your face?

  64. hum by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this was all intentional... "Use the surface, just make sure they call it an iPad!"

  65. iPad as verb, Apple, mission accomplished by s1d3track3D · · Score: 1

    Let me Google that
    Hand me some Kleenex
    Clorox will take that out
    I need to make a Xerox copy
    My show's are TiVoed
    FedEx it
    Velcro will hold that together
    Stuck at my desk on my PC
    Walking around with my iPad

    1. Re:iPad as verb, Apple, mission accomplished by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      Let me Google that

      Hand me some Kleenex

      Clorox will take that out

      I need to make a Xerox copy

      My show's are TiVoed

      FedEx it

      Velcro will hold that together

      Stuck at my desk on my PC

      Walking around with my iPad

      I bought a pair of Dockers and a pair of Levis. Oh, and no one wears Polos any more...

      Can I have a Coke?

      Yes, there are many examples of brands that define a category of things and are used as a shortcut to get concepts across. However, somehow I don't think that the announcers were using iPad in the generic term. I might be in the minority, but my opinion is that they actually thought that the coaches were using Apple devices.

  66. Which CEO? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which CEO is responsible for this? If it's the new one, maybe more trouble for MS. This really has Ballmer written all over it, but maybe the new guy hasn't got a grip yet, or is too easily swayed by others on the board.

    I can't believe they couldn't see that "surface" wasn't going to just roll off the tongue. Also, how much influence could the NFL possibly have on technology choices? It's not like every year's crop of retiring players go on to become CIOs.

  67. MS would be pathetic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... were it for the fact that they still are the foul beast they have always been.

  68. If they had to pay that much... by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    I think that people finding out that MS had to pay $400 million for people to use that crap product just emphasizes how crappy they must be. But the people who should really be angry should be the share holders of MSFT. That is nearly half a billion dollars, and for what? What percentage of other football coaches dumped their laptop or iPad for a surface because of this? Even if it were all of them I doubt that it would end up making up for the $400,000,000.00 spent.

    This also emphasizes that the NFL is willing to not let the best man win when someone is willing to pay them off.

  69. Blackberry Missed Out.... by tapi0 · · Score: 1

    All things considered, Blackberry missed out on the action - relaunching their tab with sponsorship of the NFL would have made a sensible tie-in. "The coach is referring to his playbook" (but possibly could have got "Things are getting tough out there, He's going to have to throw away the playbook" - win some, lose some in Marketing I suppose)
    as an interesting aside, my mother refers to any tablet (ipad/android or other) as "that playbook"... shows it's all down to first contact.

  70. On the Surface, they look like iPads by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Oh, wait, there's the Blue Screen of Death, my mistake.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  71. Call me old-fashioned... by jcr · · Score: 1

    But it seems to me that if you have to pay someone to use your product, your product probably sucks.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  72. Re:Unterminated quotation by QilessQi · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure that's true. In my experience, an unterminated quotation is meant to span paragraphs until its termination (although, confusingly, subsequent paragraphs must begin with the quote to remind you that it is still open. Like this:

    http://english.stackexchange.c...

    “That seems like an odd way to use punctuation,” Tom said. “What harm would there be in using quotation marks at the end of every paragraph?”

    “Oh, that’s not all that complicated,” J.R. answered. “If you closed quotes at the end of every paragraph, then you would need to reidentify the speaker with every subsequent paragraph.

    “Say a narrative was describing two or three people engaged in a lengthy conversation. If you closed the quotation marks in the previous paragraph, then a reader wouldn’t be able to easily tell if the previous speaker was extending his point, or if someone else in the room had picked up the conversation. By leaving the previous paragraph’s quote unclosed, the reader knows that the previous speaker is still the one talking.”

    “Oh, that makes sense. Thanks!”

  73. Microsoft Paid NFL $400 Million To Use Surface, Bu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A while back there was a big stir when Brian Urlacher was fined $100k for drinking Vitamin Water and wearing Vitamin Water apparel at an official event because Gatorade is the 'official' drink of the NFL. I wonder if this will happen to these announcers.

  74. Re:Unterminated quotation by QilessQi · · Score: 1

    (Addendum) Apparently, this may be rooted in the archaic practise of:

    “Using a
    “quotation mark at the
    “beginning of every line
    “of the quoted text. This
    “practise was actually
    “pretty commonplace during
    “the Georgian and Victo-
    “ian Eras.”

    Curiously, this is:

    > Strongly reminiscent
    > of what a quoted
    > message looks like
    > in emails and newsgroups.
    > The cycle is now complete.

    Or, you could say that:

    /* modern quotes
    are like block
    comments */

    whereas...

    // Victorian
    // quotes
    // are like in-line
    // comments.

    I think that's neat. :-)

  75. RE:Microsoft Paid NFL $400 Million To Use Surface by o2bin813 · · Score: 1

    A local radio station always refers to its broadcast center as "The Carter Subaru studio"--because the eponymous sponsor paid them to do so. If the NFL was paid $400 million, all affiliated broadcasters carrying the games should have been trained to say things like "...and there he is using his 'Microsoft Surface' tablet, the official tablet of the NFL...". I hear stuff like this all the time in broadcasting. Yes, it would sound awkward, but it's a paid advertisement. Then again, I have no idea what the verbiage of the contract actually requires of the NFL. Maybe Microsoft has a case to get its money back. Or maybe Microsoft should write a better contract next time.

  76. Time to genericize the ipad trademark. by denzacar · · Score: 2

    Preferably from the orbit.

    It's the only way to be sure.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  77. Should have saved the money by flux · · Score: 1

    I bet they could've bought the announcers to say they are Surfaces for less money.

  78. things are bad enough... by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    whe you have to pay people to plug your product over a superior one...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  79. Their biggest blunder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd say their biggest blunder was signing the contract with Microsoft to use the Surface.

  80. Generic term by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    iPad, has become a generic term, similar to Xerox = copy machines Q-Tip = cotton swabs Charmin = toilet paper Coke = soda pop

  81. public domain by kizh · · Score: 1

    If I were apple I would be more concerned about protecting brand name so I-pad doesn't become the new 'band-aid' or 'kleenex' you lose a lot when you lose your trademark to a brand when it becomes so common as to become public domain. I think public domain is the word for things like this. Xerox had a problem with it when people would 'xerox' a document independent of what brand of copy machine but seems to not be the case now. When you search for anything you 'google' it. lots of examples and its a fine line between market. generic word for petroleum jelly is just 'vasoline' dominance and losing your brand name rights. The issue is when a generic can start using your trademark as its product description. I'm not sure how many products had gone this far.

  82. Brand contracts suck by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    I recently ran into a brand contract deal at a ridiculously low level, at the concession stand for our junior high. Apparently, we can't sell Gatorade because the district has a contract with Coca-Cola. We have to sell Powerade. Honestly, I don't know how one is supposed to keep track of all of the products sold or owned by the Coca-Cola franchise so you can make sure you don't accidentally sell a competing product. It is not like they actually are supplying the Powerade either. We have to buy it at retail prices from stores in the area. I figure if they are not selling it to you wholesale, they shouldn't be able to dictate what you can sell. But I suppose a legal contract is a legal contract, even if there is no benefit for one side of that contract. Technically, I guess maybe there is a benefit in that somewhere there is an administrator driving a new car furnished by the Coca-Cola company.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  83. Re:Unterminated quotation by TWX · · Score: 1

    Mind... Blown...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  84. Americans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This seems to be how americans name things. They take the first successful product and just use THAT name from there on.

  85. Not World Champion's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although nothing to do with the Surface, made I'd care if the NFL wasn't so pompous as to think the winner of a Super Bowl is a "world champion."

    * Full disclosure: I'm from Seattle and thrilled they won, but World Champions, no.. just no.

  86. Flag on the play by CFD339 · · Score: 1

    Flag on the play.
    Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago
    Flag on the play.
    Multiple mis-identification of a sponsors product.
    Defense.
    5 Yard Penalty.
    Automatic FIRST down.

    --
    The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
  87. funny by cornswaggle · · Score: 0

    funny

  88. For $400 million they could given tablets to ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus this is infuriating, both in terms of bad marketing and revolting business practices.

    For that amount of money they could have actually accomplished some positive AND created a deep user base by distributing the tablets to school systems.

  89. This is a (humorously ironic) problem for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If "iPad" does indeed become a generic term for "tablet," Apple would lose rights to its trademark in the 'iPad" name, logo, and perhaps even lose some of the scope of its "i" prefix protection. Apple should be right in there urging broadcasters to be sure not to use its registered "iPad" mark to describe tablets generically. This is funny to me primarily because ignorance of the NFL members is unwittingly advancing the legal rights of a third party by violating what are likely terms of its contract with that third party.