Does it mean that Apple's screen images are NOT simulated, or that Apple doesn't trouble to say that (I assume that the reason they ARE simulated is that direct screen shots would look terrible due to aliasing problems).
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
I shoot video of iOS devices in action all the time with no "aliasing" or moire problems at all.
Bad assumption on your part, at least where Apple devices are concerned… I can't vouch for the others.
I did NOT say that iOS is unstable, merely that it is not bulletproof. As for the updater, again, you don't think I have tried? And no, there is no way to turn this behavior off in the settings, even if I do have a 20GB LTE data plan, and really don't care about the data usage.
Excuse me? I quote you: "My experience is that iOS has its share of stability problems…"
OK, let's split semantic hairs… it's true you didn't use the word "unstable". But "has its share of stability problems" sure sounds like you are saying it is NOT stable (aka "unstable")...
Because you qualify that with this (emphasis mine): "...the updater FREQUENTLY hangs, and is IMPOSSIBLE to unhang (the only way seems to be to delete the hung updates, and to reload the apps from scratch) -- really annoying, since I have several a lot of apps, and doing this by hand is a nightmare (and a frequent one)."
"A frequent nightmare". It's interesting that you don't mention the SPECIFIC caveat that this happens "when leaving a WiFi network in mid-download". You make it sound like a consistent and major flaw in the OS, then back pedal like crazy when called on it. (And you wonder why people are labeling you a "troll" here?)
Honestly? When you say, "delete hung updates and reload apps from scratch", I need to ask, seriously… what on EARTH are you doing?? How are you going about this? And "doing this by hand with a large number of apps is a nightmare"… I'm dumbfounded by the level of … I don't know what to call it… but trust me, something is not right in your world. Believe me when I tell you, based on everything you write here, I can only assume two things: either you are a) Making this stuff up or b) One of those people who really REALLY needs to take a class in iOS basics...
And you STILL haven't answered my three-times-asked question: What is this "THE UPDATER" you keep referring to? The way you SPEAK ABOUT the process indicates to me you have never actually EXPERIENCED it, at least, not as it is intended...
Finally, dude, if you actually have a 20GB LTE plan, then why are you starting your downloads using WiFi if there's ANY chance you will leave the network in mid-download? Also, WHY are you doing this "frequently" as implied by your description of the problem?
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
Good info. And all this time I thought it was only to cover their butts in case of a lawsuit. Where can I find this law? Is it a Federal one?
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
Lol noo r u out of you mind all of thoses videos are of my devices, I have 5 apple devices and out the 5 I have problems with 4 thats my MacBook pro retina my with image Bunin, iPad with retina (((i cant play fruit ninja)))and that's the iPad I bought last week!!! That has the mail problem
You ID "weird glitches" and "problems"…? I watched your videos, and they really are comical.
Here's one you should try on your iPad. Be sure and record it.
Hit it with a hammer a few times. When the display shatters, call it the "hammered display glitch"… it' make about as much sense as your "diagonal scrolling glitch" and your "undeleted account" glitch….
You say you have 5 apple devices and 4 of them have these problems, and that's YOUR macbook pro with the image "Bunin", but the video is shot in a Apple Store! Yours. Really. Since ALL of those are being shot in Apple Stores, I wonder… why not at home?
So you're in the habit of trolling Apple Stores with a video camera, showing ghosting on a static display demo, and calling it a 'major problem'?
I'm sorry, but you just haven't earned the self-declared "Apple Genius" title that you promote yourself under.
Good info. And all this time I thought it was only to cover their butts in case of a lawsuit. Where can I find this law? Is it a Federal one?
Ultimately, it IS to cover their butts from being sued for misrepresentation. Because rules against "false or misleading advertising" are written into law, and so these "legal disclaimers" are used to sidestep any problems. If a screen is simulated (because it might not be possible to exactly duplicate what you see on camera), the manufacturer declares it in a disclaimer because not to do so could result in a violation of those advertising laws.
I'm not 100% certain that the laws specify 'screen simulation', or even say specifically "thou shalt disclaim when simulating", but these things certainly fall within their scope.
It's a funny thing, the law. It can be quite inclusive, without being line-item specific.
Oh, and I'm not sure what the 'jurisdiction' is. I assume our "truth in advertising" laws are federal?
Does it mean that Apple's screen images are NOT simulated, or that Apple doesn't trouble to say that (I assume that the reason they ARE simulated is that direct screen shots would look terrible due to aliasing problems).
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.....Bad assumption on your part....
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
Cite?
Does the article say Apple does that sort of thing often?
Ultimately, it IS to cover their butts from being sued for misrepresentation. . .
Oh, and I'm not sure what the 'jurisdiction' is. I assume our "truth in advertising" laws are federal?
Thanks fro the reply and clarification. the way you originally wrote it made it sound like there was a law against using simulated images without a disclaimer. That would seem to make a whole lot of restaurant and other food ads illegal.
Does the article say Apple does that sort of thing often?
No, it didn't say it was a common occurrence, just a single example. I didn't bother with the link as the author clearly didn't care for Apple, but if you want it anyway no prob. Ignore the tone tho and look at the images posted as evidence.
EDIT: Apparently there are a couple of other instances. Some Apple "screen shots" showing Flash images on an iPad were plainly simulated tho not identified as such. There was also an Apple promo video that showed Flash content, which would obviously not be real.
An explanation from their advertising agency, Chiat/Day Media, said that "they make fake optimized web pages for all of Apple’s commercials — which load faster. In this case they made optimized images to take the place of Flash".
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
I shoot video of iOS devices in action all the time with no "aliasing" or moire problems at all.
Bad assumption on your part, at least where Apple devices are concerned… I can't vouch for the others.
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
I've seen that article too, and in that case I wonder if it could have ever been sued against as a "misleading or false advertisement"? I think probably not. And so that's where the line is drawn, and how it's applied in the law. If a display is being represented as photo-crisp in its details, but it's actually a low-res VGA screen, and no disclaimer is there, one might be able to declare 'false advertising' (the disclaimer IS the way to remain 'in line' with the law there).
I'm sure Apple uses altered or simulated screens at times (they sometimes say 'sequences shortened' or some such), but it's not designed to mislead about the capabilities of the device. If there's a chance of that, their legal department would advise them to disclaim, if only to prevent running afoul of those laws...
The way laws like these are applied, the requirement is typically in the 'spirit' rather than 'the letter' of the law. "Don't use deceptive advertising" is the premise, and if something could be construed as deceptive, if not further qualified, then apply a disclaimer. It isn't so much ethical as avoiding crossing legal limits… but that in itself sort of forces an 'ethical' self-moderating behavior.
Thanks fro the reply and clarification. the way you originally wrote it made it sound like there was a law against using simulated images without a disclaimer. That would seem to make a whole lot of restaurant and other food ads illegal.
Yeah, I tend to either oversimplify (as in this case) or else I flog it completely to death… >:D
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
Well there's that fine line… they create "optimized" web pages that will load faster. "Simulated web sites"?
That isn't the same as the "Simulated Screen" concept that this thread opened with. In those cases, the video is shot with a 'green screen' in place of the usual content display, and then very nicely presented photos and/or hi-def video is composited over it.
Those are the kinds of shots that completely simulate the entire display experience, and are pretty much required to include a disclaimer (in order to avoid a 'false advertising' suit).
I know that Apple uses those "snappier web pages" to appear snappier, and to accommodate the compressed time available in a 30 second ad spot… (thus their disclaimer of "shortened sequences").
I've worked with both TBWA Chiat Day and Wieden+Kennedy (on Nike and some Apple support work) in Tokyo, and have a fair sense of where the lines are drawn… it's a pretty grey area at times though. But in the case of creating optimized content, disclaimers are usually put aside. Now, if they had ALSO overlaid a hi-res photo image of that web page onto the screen area for a shot, that would have likely included a disclaimer…
I don't understand why any feature that a phone manufacturer adds to their devices is automatically written off as gimmicky. What's the criteria for a gimmicky feature? Any feature that an Android phone has that an iPhone doesn't?
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
Picture this ad...
A hand writing a letter, in the background an iPhone 4 and a Galaxy S4 sit connected to a computer by cables, the phones are blurred, out of focus, so you can't really see it's an S4 but just enough to know it is, there is blurred out KIES software on the computer syncing an iTunes library blurred, indistinct but you know what it is.
"Dear Son, I bought a 16GB phone you showed me at your graduation party because you said it was better, why can't I sync the 10GB of music I had on my 16GB iPhone 4?"
Fade out to Apple logo and a disclaimer like statement "Nothing simulated"
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
Does it mean that Apple's screen images are NOT simulated, or that Apple doesn't trouble to say that (I assume that the reason they ARE simulated is that direct screen shots would look terrible due to aliasing problems).
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
I shoot video of iOS devices in action all the time with no "aliasing" or moire problems at all.
Bad assumption on your part, at least where Apple devices are concerned… I can't vouch for the others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
I did NOT say that iOS is unstable, merely that it is not bulletproof. As for the updater, again, you don't think I have tried? And no, there is no way to turn this behavior off in the settings, even if I do have a 20GB LTE data plan, and really don't care about the data usage.
Excuse me? I quote you: "My experience is that iOS has its share of stability problems…"
OK, let's split semantic hairs… it's true you didn't use the word "unstable". But "has its share of stability problems" sure sounds like you are saying it is NOT stable (aka "unstable")...
Because you qualify that with this (emphasis mine): "...the updater FREQUENTLY hangs, and is IMPOSSIBLE to unhang (the only way seems to be to delete the hung updates, and to reload the apps from scratch) -- really annoying, since I have several a lot of apps, and doing this by hand is a nightmare (and a frequent one)."
"A frequent nightmare". It's interesting that you don't mention the SPECIFIC caveat that this happens "when leaving a WiFi network in mid-download". You make it sound like a consistent and major flaw in the OS, then back pedal like crazy when called on it. (And you wonder why people are labeling you a "troll" here?)
Honestly? When you say, "delete hung updates and reload apps from scratch", I need to ask, seriously… what on EARTH are you doing?? How are you going about this? And "doing this by hand with a large number of apps is a nightmare"… I'm dumbfounded by the level of … I don't know what to call it… but trust me, something is not right in your world. Believe me when I tell you, based on everything you write here, I can only assume two things: either you are a) Making this stuff up or b) One of those people who really REALLY needs to take a class in iOS basics...
And you STILL haven't answered my three-times-asked question: What is this "THE UPDATER" you keep referring to? The way you SPEAK ABOUT the process indicates to me you have never actually EXPERIENCED it, at least, not as it is intended...
Finally, dude, if you actually have a 20GB LTE plan, then why are you starting your downloads using WiFi if there's ANY chance you will leave the network in mid-download? Also, WHY are you doing this "frequently" as implied by your description of the problem?
Things really aren't adding up here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
Good info. And all this time I thought it was only to cover their butts in case of a lawsuit. Where can I find this law? Is it a Federal one?
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rajkumar
Lol noo r u out of you mind all of thoses videos are of my devices, I have 5 apple devices and out the 5 I have problems with 4 thats my MacBook pro retina my with image Bunin, iPad with retina (((i cant play fruit ninja)))and that's the iPad I bought last week!!! That has the mail problem
You ID "weird glitches" and "problems"…? I watched your videos, and they really are comical.
Here's one you should try on your iPad. Be sure and record it.
Hit it with a hammer a few times. When the display shatters, call it the "hammered display glitch"… it' make about as much sense as your "diagonal scrolling glitch" and your "undeleted account" glitch….
You say you have 5 apple devices and 4 of them have these problems, and that's YOUR macbook pro with the image "Bunin", but the video is shot in a Apple Store! Yours. Really. Since ALL of those are being shot in Apple Stores, I wonder… why not at home?
So you're in the habit of trolling Apple Stores with a video camera, showing ghosting on a static display demo, and calling it a 'major problem'?
I'm sorry, but you just haven't earned the self-declared "Apple Genius" title that you promote yourself under.
Move along now, nothing to see here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
This ad remind me of this:
Man, I sure do miss those ads… why do you suppose they ever stopped making them?
My guess is that Apple lacks the testicular fortitude under new management. Too much "Mr. Nice Guy." Hope that changes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Good info. And all this time I thought it was only to cover their butts in case of a lawsuit. Where can I find this law? Is it a Federal one?
Ultimately, it IS to cover their butts from being sued for misrepresentation. Because rules against "false or misleading advertising" are written into law, and so these "legal disclaimers" are used to sidestep any problems. If a screen is simulated (because it might not be possible to exactly duplicate what you see on camera), the manufacturer declares it in a disclaimer because not to do so could result in a violation of those advertising laws.
I'm not 100% certain that the laws specify 'screen simulation', or even say specifically "thou shalt disclaim when simulating", but these things certainly fall within their scope.
It's a funny thing, the law. It can be quite inclusive, without being line-item specific.
Oh, and I'm not sure what the 'jurisdiction' is. I assume our "truth in advertising" laws are federal?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Quote:
Originally Posted by igriv
Does it mean that Apple's screen images are NOT simulated, or that Apple doesn't trouble to say that (I assume that the reason they ARE simulated is that direct screen shots would look terrible due to aliasing problems).
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.....Bad assumption on your part....
This is typical of his posts. Don't feed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
Cite?
Does the article say Apple does that sort of thing often?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
Ultimately, it IS to cover their butts from being sued for misrepresentation. . .
Oh, and I'm not sure what the 'jurisdiction' is. I assume our "truth in advertising" laws are federal?
Thanks fro the reply and clarification. the way you originally wrote it made it sound like there was a law against using simulated images without a disclaimer. That would seem to make a whole lot of restaurant and other food ads illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
Cite?
Does the article say Apple does that sort of thing often?
No, it didn't say it was a common occurrence, just a single example. I didn't bother with the link as the author clearly didn't care for Apple, but if you want it anyway no prob. Ignore the tone tho and look at the images posted as evidence.
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2010/07/06/is-apple-cheating-in-ipad-commercials/
EDIT: Apparently there are a couple of other instances. Some Apple "screen shots" showing Flash images on an iPad were plainly simulated tho not identified as such. There was also an Apple promo video that showed Flash content, which would obviously not be real.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/ipad-flash/
An explanation from their advertising agency, Chiat/Day Media, said that "they make fake optimized web pages for all of Apple’s commercials — which load faster. In this case they made optimized images to take the place of Flash".
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
So you're in the habit of trolling Apple Stores with a video camera...
It's a phone using some crappy .3gp format.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
If they are simulated screens, they are required by law to declare that using a disclaimer.
I shoot video of iOS devices in action all the time with no "aliasing" or moire problems at all.
Bad assumption on your part, at least where Apple devices are concerned… I can't vouch for the others.
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
I bet most of the actors in the spot actually use iPhones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Edit: I did come across an article at the Next Web showing where Apple simulated a Star Trek movie image in an iPad ad but didn't identify it as such. I wonder if it's more an ethics thing rather than required by law.
I've seen that article too, and in that case I wonder if it could have ever been sued against as a "misleading or false advertisement"? I think probably not. And so that's where the line is drawn, and how it's applied in the law. If a display is being represented as photo-crisp in its details, but it's actually a low-res VGA screen, and no disclaimer is there, one might be able to declare 'false advertising' (the disclaimer IS the way to remain 'in line' with the law there).
I'm sure Apple uses altered or simulated screens at times (they sometimes say 'sequences shortened' or some such), but it's not designed to mislead about the capabilities of the device. If there's a chance of that, their legal department would advise them to disclaim, if only to prevent running afoul of those laws...
The way laws like these are applied, the requirement is typically in the 'spirit' rather than 'the letter' of the law. "Don't use deceptive advertising" is the premise, and if something could be construed as deceptive, if not further qualified, then apply a disclaimer. It isn't so much ethical as avoiding crossing legal limits… but that in itself sort of forces an 'ethical' self-moderating behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is typical of his posts. Don't feed.
I hang my head in shame...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Thanks fro the reply and clarification. the way you originally wrote it made it sound like there was a law against using simulated images without a disclaimer. That would seem to make a whole lot of restaurant and other food ads illegal.
Yeah, I tend to either oversimplify (as in this case) or else I flog it completely to death… >:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
It's a phone using some crappy .3gp format.
oooh, Which he needs, um, because he has 5 Apple "devices"…? :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
Well there's that fine line… they create "optimized" web pages that will load faster. "Simulated web sites"?
That isn't the same as the "Simulated Screen" concept that this thread opened with. In those cases, the video is shot with a 'green screen' in place of the usual content display, and then very nicely presented photos and/or hi-def video is composited over it.
Those are the kinds of shots that completely simulate the entire display experience, and are pretty much required to include a disclaimer (in order to avoid a 'false advertising' suit).
I know that Apple uses those "snappier web pages" to appear snappier, and to accommodate the compressed time available in a 30 second ad spot… (thus their disclaimer of "shortened sequences").
I've worked with both TBWA Chiat Day and Wieden+Kennedy (on Nike and some Apple support work) in Tokyo, and have a fair sense of where the lines are drawn… it's a pretty grey area at times though. But in the case of creating optimized content, disclaimers are usually put aside. Now, if they had ALSO overlaid a hi-res photo image of that web page onto the screen area for a shot, that would have likely included a disclaimer…
I don't understand why any feature that a phone manufacturer adds to their devices is automatically written off as gimmicky. What's the criteria for a gimmicky feature? Any feature that an Android phone has that an iPhone doesn't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
According to Apple's ad agency webpage images in Apple ads are always simulated since the faked pages will load faster. Makes sense and it's probably common to all the other tech ads from other companies.
Picture this ad...
A hand writing a letter, in the background an iPhone 4 and a Galaxy S4 sit connected to a computer by cables, the phones are blurred, out of focus, so you can't really see it's an S4 but just enough to know it is, there is blurred out KIES software on the computer syncing an iTunes library blurred, indistinct but you know what it is.
"Dear Son, I bought a 16GB phone you showed me at your graduation party because you said it was better, why can't I sync the 10GB of music I had on my 16GB iPhone 4?"
Fade out to Apple logo and a disclaimer like statement "Nothing simulated"