or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung pokes fun at Apple lawsuits in Super Bowl teaser ad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung pokes fun at Apple lawsuits in Super Bowl teaser ad - Page 5

post #161 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX 
Perhaps I'm reading too much into it but I can't believe Apple would be so undignified and sexist as to use a blonde joke in an ad.

Well no, they'd just use a brunette. Some people will still say it's sexist but I don't think it would work having a guy using the pregnancy test.

You have to be allowed to portray scenarios. If you decide you can't have a stupid woman in an ad, then you have to also decide you can't have a stupid man in an ad otherwise that's sexist. So then Apple's Genius ads are sexist because they suggest middle-aged guys aren't smart enough to have basic computer skills. Nobody calls them sexist despite only portraying middle-aged men requiring Genius assistance.

Apple gets a pass to portray some of their customers as stupid in need of help but when Samsung portrays scenarios, all of a sudden their portrayals have to be applied to everyone. They should get the same treatment. I didn't like the Genius ads because I didn't think they were funny and they suggest some of their own customers are really stupid. Similarly Samsung in their 'line' ads suggest customers they hope to persuade to buy their own products are deluded and gullible, which isn't a good move.

There are limits to how much advertising should cause offense but the level of political correctness that goes on these days is a little tiring and I think Apple is becoming too politically correct. Back in 1984, they were small and trying to get some footing against Big Blue and having a disruptive advert made the impact. Although Samsung and RIM are big companies, they have to be more disruptive and risky in their advertising in order to get that mindshare instead of Apple.

By all means they should be criticised for poor execution but I think they should be allowed to have some creative freedom too and I'd say Samsung's marketing is better than Microsoft's and RIM's. Even if it offends people, it's better than bland marketing because people talk about it. This is an Apple forum and Samsung is being publicised unlike Microsoft and RIM and guess which ones are selling really well. It has a lot to do with the products I know but the brand awareness comes along with this publicity.
post #162 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Well no, they'd just use a brunette. Some people will still say it's sexist but I don't think it would work having a guy using the pregnancy test.

You have to be allowed to portray scenarios. If you decide you can't have a stupid woman in an ad, then you have to also decide you can't have a stupid man in an ad otherwise that's sexist. So then Apple's Genius ads are sexist because they suggest middle-aged guys aren't smart enough to have basic computer skills. Nobody calls them sexist despite only portraying middle-aged men requiring Genius assistance.

Apple gets a pass to portray some of their customers as stupid in need of help but when Samsung portrays scenarios, all of a sudden their portrayals have to be applied to everyone. They should get the same treatment. I didn't like the Genius ads because I didn't think they were funny and they suggest some of their own customers are really stupid. Similarly Samsung in their 'line' ads suggest customers they hope to persuade to buy their own products are deluded and gullible, which isn't a good move.

There are limits to how much advertising should cause offense but the level of political correctness that goes on these days is a little tiring and I think Apple is becoming too politically correct. Back in 1984, they were small and trying to get some footing against Big Blue and having a disruptive advert made the impact. Although Samsung and RIM are big companies, they have to be more disruptive and risky in their advertising in order to get that mindshare instead of Apple.

By all means they should be criticised for poor execution but I think they should be allowed to have some creative freedom too and I'd say Samsung's marketing is better than Microsoft's and RIM's. Even if it offends people, it's better than bland marketing because people talk about it. This is an Apple forum and Samsung is being publicised unlike Microsoft and RIM and guess which ones are selling really well. It has a lot to do with the products I know but the brand awareness comes along with this publicity.

My point is that it's piling on a recognized stereotype. If they made the ad with absolutely no intention of the dumb blonde stereotype it's means they are not guilty of that slander even if it can be perceived that way. For the example with a middle-aged male not being to use a computer that is the agist stereotype with technology. These can be offensive to people but I would bet it's less common. The "race" stereotype seems to be the most offensive, then gender, and the rest falling in place far below the top two.

I had just never seen Apple go that route with an ad. The closest might be the short lived Genius ads but that was just an Apple tech expert helping out the average person. In fact, in one ad the guy he was helping was able to help others after being shown how to do a task. I think that is pretty common when it come to Apple's products.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #163 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

I'll make the same suggestion to you although you can't save yourself from looking like an ass. The damage is already done. What I said was absolutely correct. With a sample size above 30 the chance that the sample mean differs from the population mean rapidly approaches zero. As sample size increases it is increasingly unlikely to pick a sample whose mean is some number of standard deviations away from the population mean (it's a bit more complicated than that but for the purpose of this argument it's all you need to know). That statement accounts for the fact that you could potentially choose a sample that does not reflect the population. What my statement also says is that your chances of selecting such a population are exceedingly low, especially when your sample is several thousand people. The chances of a skewed sample of that size is virtually zero.

I also want to emphasize the fact that the population is all viewers of the video, not all people in the US, all people in the world, all smartphone users, or any other group.

You're still wrong.

First, you said that the claim about the 'likes' was correct because the sample size was several thousand. That is wrong. If the sample is not representative, then it won't ge you the right result no matter how large a sample.

It is also incorrect that a larger sample will exponentially get closer to the correct answer as the number increases. Take my example. You want to know the world population who speaks Japanese. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but let's say it's 5%. Now, you take your sample in Tokyo. Of the first 1,000 people you choose, 99.5% speak Japanese. So you take another 1000 - and still have 99.5% speaking Japanese. Now you ask a million Tokyo residents and 99.5% of them speak Japanese. No matter how large your sample, you're not going to get close to the correct number - because your sample is not representative. It has absolutely nothing to do with sample size - and certainly this argument does nothing to establish that the self-selected sample you cited has any relevance to the population as a whole.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #164 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

 

So he's damned for making the apology just he would have been for not making it and folks ripping the company to shreds over 'pretending the problem doesn't exist'


Worked for Jobs. "Just avoid holding it in that way."

 

Apologies just perpetuate the "myth" that a problem actually exists (or are all the people on here saying that Maps is fine just a myth as well). Forever till the end of time people can use the "Cook apologized for Maps" argument to show how shitty it is. Thank you, Tim Cook, for pointing to a problem that might have been questionable before you apologized and therefore told us that Maps really is crap.

 

I'd rather hear Cook say that Apple is always improving its products than hear him say, "Sorry, we made a shitty product."

 

Companies are always damned if they do, damned if they don't. I just feel that Cook handled it wrong by apologizing.

 

When hasn't Apple been ripped to shreds...


Edited by island hermit - 2/2/13 at 3:08pm
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #165 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're still wrong.

First, you said that the claim about the 'likes' was correct because the sample size was several thousand. That is wrong. If the sample is not representative, then it won't ge you the right result no matter how large a sample.

It is also incorrect that a larger sample will exponentially get closer to the correct answer as the number increases. Take my example. You want to know the world population who speaks Japanese. I'm not sure what the percentage is, but let's say it's 5%. Now, you take your sample in Tokyo. Of the first 1,000 people you choose, 99.5% speak Japanese. So you take another 1000 - and still have 99.5% speaking Japanese. Now you ask a million Tokyo residents and 99.5% of them speak Japanese. No matter how large your sample, you're not going to get close to the correct number - because your sample is not representative. It has absolutely nothing to do with sample size - and certainly this argument does nothing to establish that the self-selected sample you cited has any relevance to the population as a whole.

You're not disproving my point. What you're saying is that someone could take a horrible sample and get data that doesn't represent a population. In your example the survey taker is trying to determine the worldwide population of Japanese speakers while only sampling in a single country. There is an obvious error in the sampling. In the case of this video the sample is of people who came to watch the video. The population is also people who came to watch the video. There is no obvious error in the sampling. YouTube didn't only take reviews from women, men, 18 year olds, disabled veterans, or any other particular group. The sample is likely fair and unbiased.
post #166 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

You're not disproving my point. What you're saying is that someone could take a horrible sample and get data that doesn't represent a population. In your example the survey taker is trying to determine the worldwide population of Japanese speakers while only sampling in a single country. There is an obvious error in the sampling. In the case of this video the sample is of people who came to watch the video. The population is also people who came to watch the video. There is no obvious error in the sampling. YouTube didn't only take reviews from women, men, 18 year olds, disabled veterans, or any other particular group. The sample is likely fair and unbiased.

Of course there's an obvious error. Several, actually:

1. People who come to see a particular video may have a particular mind set.
2. People who bother to respond may be (and probably are) different than the population as a whole.

What you have is a self-selecting sample - and self-selecting samples are almost NEVER representative of the population as a whole.

Once again, you really need to get at least a basic understanding of statistics before commenting.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #167 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Of course there's an obvious error. Several, actually:

1. People who come to see a particular video may have a particular mind set.
2. People who bother to respond may be (and probably are) different than the population as a whole.

What you have is a self-selecting sample - and self-selecting samples are almost NEVER representative of the population as a whole.

Once again, you really need to get at least a basic understanding of statistics before commenting.

Firstly, belittling me and my knowledge of statistics does not further your argument and in fact makes you less believable to anyone else reading your post. Intimidation tactics fill in the gap from missing knowledge. But don't worry about my opinion of you as I already know you're spouting off things that you know nothing about. You do it all the time. I, on the other hand, am currently taking my fourth statistics class so unless you have a degree in statistics please refrain from lecturing me.

Anyway, I'll rebut your self-selecting sample idea. It's true that in many cases a self-selecting sample is biased. When a surveyor calls a home a woman is statistically more likely to answer the phone. Bias. When a surveyor is in the mall asking for opinions an extrovert is more likely to respond. Bias. When a survey is long a person with a less demanding job is more likely to respond. Bias. In the case of this video respondents are anonymous, have no reason to be of a particular demographic (at least no more particular than the population of video watchers), and the “survey" takes less than a second to complete. The only way that bias could cause problems in this case is if I tried to apply my knowledge of the sample to a different population, such as the entire US.
post #168 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

Firstly, belittling me and my knowledge of statistics does not further your argument and in fact makes you less believable to anyone else reading your post. Intimidation tactics fill in the gap from missing knowledge. But don't worry about my opinion of you as I already know you're spouting off things that you know nothing about. You do it all the time. I, on the other hand, am currently taking my fourth statistics class so unless you have a degree in statistics please refrain from lecturing me.

Anyway, I'll rebut your self-selecting sample idea. It's true that in many cases a self-selecting sample is biased. When a surveyor calls a home a woman is statistically more likely to answer the phone. Bias. When a surveyor is in the mall asking for opinions an extrovert is more likely to respond. Bias. When a survey is long a person with a less demanding job is more likely to respond. Bias. In the case of this video respondents are anonymous, have no reason to be of a particular demographic (at least no more particular than the population of video watchers), and the “survey" takes less than a second to complete. The only way that bias could cause problems in this case is if I tried to apply my knowledge of the sample to a different population, such as the entire US.

No one intimidated you or belittled you. I simply pointed out that you were wrong - and that you continued to be wrong when you kept repeating the same nonsense.

You're STILL wrong. A self-selected sample (the people who choose to click on 'like') is not representative of the population as a whole. Period.

And I noticed that you still haven't responded to the evidence of inherent bias in your method. Look at videos at random on YouTube. Likes outnumber dislikes by at least 10 to one in most videos. That's the sign of a self-selection bias.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #169 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

No one intimidated you or belittled you. I simply pointed out that you were wrong - and that you continued to be wrong when you kept repeating the same nonsense.

You're STILL wrong. A self-selected sample (the people who choose to click on 'like') is not representative of the population as a whole. Period.

And I noticed that you still haven't responded to the evidence of inherent bias in your method. Look at videos at random on YouTube. Likes outnumber dislikes by at least 10 to one in most videos. That's the sign of a self-selection bias.

You're correct. Most people that dislike a video probably just close it than click the dislike button. Now it'd be a different story if one had to click like/dislike.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #170 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

You're correct. Most people that dislike a video probably just close it than click the dislike button. Now it'd be a different story if one had to click like/dislike.

That's one source of bias. Another source of bias is that people who are Samsung fans are probably more likely to go to the video than people who don't care about Samsung.

In addition, considering that it was presented on a couple of sites as an Apple bashing video, all the iHaters would be more likely to go to that video than the average citizen.

As a general rule, self-selected examples are almost never statistically valid.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #171 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

No one intimidated you or belittled you. I simply pointed out that you were wrong - and that you continued to be wrong when you kept repeating the same nonsense.

You're STILL wrong. A self-selected sample (the people who choose to click on 'like') is not representative of the population as a whole. Period.

And I noticed that you still haven't responded to the evidence of inherent bias in your method. Look at videos at random on YouTube. Likes outnumber dislikes by at least 10 to one in most videos. That's the sign of a self-selection bias.

That videos often have more likes than dislikes doesn't prove I'm wrong. It just means that the population of viewers on a given a video are likely to like that video because they chose to watch it in the first place. Once again I'm not saying that the sample is representative of any population other than the one that watched the video.
post #172 of 186

Shamesung is at it again. 

post #173 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakefinance View Post

That videos often have more likes than dislikes doesn't prove I'm wrong. It just means that the population of viewers on a given a video are likely to like that video because they chose to watch it in the first place. Once again I'm not saying that the sample is representative of any population other than the one that watched the video.

The sample isn't even representative of the people who watch the video. As long as there's a propensity for people to be more likely to click 'like' than 'dislike' (or vice versa, for that matter), the results are not representative. And considering that the people who really hate it are likely to shut it off rather than clicking dislike, it's even less representative.

Once again, please stop embarrassing yourself. Pick up a book about statistics and see why self-selected samples are almost never valid. And it's certainly not meaningful among the population as a whole - which was what you were implying initially.

Oh, and in case anyone cares, here's the full superbowl commercial. Better than the teaser, but still not very impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ae7E8J7h7Y
Edited by jragosta - 2/3/13 at 9:15am
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #174 of 186

IMO it wasn't better than the teaser. This one is just rambling.

 

EDIT: The ratio of likes to dislikes compared to the teaser ad ratings proves it.

/s


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/3/13 at 10:13am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #175 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IMO it wasn't better than the teaser. This one is just rambling.

I thought the teaser was funnier overall, perhaps because of its brevity and focus, but this one had plenty of funny moments. Paul Rudd suggesting Seth Rogan is there to see a guy named Sam Sung, and LeBron James saying how he can do a cameo on a tablet while doing a cameo on a tablet were on the mark. And unlike the teaser they incorporated the product, its features and name often without making it feel forced. Finally, I think they hit a very wide demographic with the choice of celebrities without degrading the entertainment factor of the spot. I think they did a brilliant job.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #176 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IMO it wasn't better than the teaser. This one is just rambling.

True, but at least they showed some of the things you could do with their product. Of course, they skimmed over the only one that's unique to their product so fast that most people won't catch it, but at least the product was visible.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #177 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

True, but at least they showed some of the things you could do with their product. Of course, they skimmed over the only one that's unique to their product so fast that most people won't catch it, but at least the product was visible.

Yeah, the part with S-Beam was so brief that if you weren't aware of it before you aren't going to wonder about it after it watching that ad. It should have had another second of two to at least make people think "What is that?" or "I really like that?"

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #178 of 186

I would think that if you yourself recognize that what you're saying is a personal attack, you wouldn't say it. At least not on the forum proper. 

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #179 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I would think that if you yourself recognize that what you're saying is a personal attack, you wouldn't say it. At least not on the forum proper. 

There's a very small but active number of forum members here that must not consider what they write to be personal attacks, tho to an average reader it would be obvious many of their posts are just that.

 

Pompous is the new black.1hmm.gif

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #180 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

There's a very small but active number of forum members here that must not consider what they write to be personal attacks, tho to an average reader it would be obvious many of their posts are just that.

Pompous is the new black.1hmm.gif

Taking what is directed at your words personally is not the same as attacking the person who has made a stupid, unintelligent, vacuous, moronic, doltish, ignorant, foolish, asinine, racist, misogynistic, or otherwise bigoted or boneheaded remark.


PS: I take offense at your comment¡

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #181 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Taking what is directed at your words personally is not the same as attacking the person who has made a stupid, unintelligent, vacuous, moronic, doltish, ignorant, foolish, asinine, racist, misogynistic, or otherwise bigoted or boneheaded remark.


PS: I take offense at your comment¡

You and I could offer pretty good examples of the difference, and our lists of the most egregious offenders would likely match up pretty well too. It's really not all many commonly-guilty members IMO. 

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #182 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I would think that if you yourself recognize that what you're saying is a personal attack, you wouldn't say it. At least not on the forum proper. 

I realized it but I couldn't resist. Thank you for removing my reply as it was inappropriate. I hope you'll make the same decision for all other inappropriate posts going forward.
post #183 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

There's a very small but active number of forum members here that must not consider what they write to be personal attacks, tho to an average reader it would be obvious many of their posts are just that.

 

Pompous is the new black.1hmm.gif


There will be absolutely no mistaking my attacks.

na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #184 of 186

My dad: "Wow, they're a bitter company, aren't they? This ad makes me want to NOT get one of their products. It's like you when you used to whine about Billy Thomson beating you up all the time. Just suck it up, I used to tell you." 

post #185 of 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

My dad: "Wow, they're a bitter company, aren't they? This ad makes me want to NOT get one of their products. It's like you when you used to whine about Billy Thomson beating you up all the time. Just suck it up, I used to tell you." 

Love it! lol.gif

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #186 of 186

Samsung, please stop making ads. You're torturing the population at large. Only Apple haters and Samsung/ Android fan boys/girls/puppies find your ads funny.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung pokes fun at Apple lawsuits in Super Bowl teaser ad