Samsung caught presenting actors as Galaxy Tab "consumers," fudging thinnest tablet claims



  • Reply 161 of 188
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post

    I've heard they don't either but I noticed at the end of House during the credits "promotional consideration was provided by the following... Apple (and others). Guess I'll have to read the links you provided, maybe they will explain it.

    Presumably because Apple donates the computers that are used in the show, but doesn't pay for placement.
  • Reply 162 of 188
    sevenfeetsevenfeet Posts: 461member
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

    The stories are real. The actors are representative of the real story.

    The real life players probably refused to do the interview but gave the story to Samsung. Samsung used it with hired actors to portray them.

    Whats so "news worthy" about this? Another lame attempt by Apple fans to pick on something as frivolous as actors.

    This just goes to show you how much Apple fans are taking Samsung seriously if they have to stoop down this low just to win bragging rights.

    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

    I just love to stir the pot.

    And yes, there are some extremely hot exceptions.
  • Reply 163 of 188
    sevenfeetsevenfeet Posts: 461member
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post

    Re: product placement. How sure are we that Apple is paying anybody to show their computers on TV and in the movies? I think prop guys just use them because they're more photogenic than the other brands. Most of the time when they turn them around so you can only see the screen, you see they're running Windows—I don't know if Apple would pay for that.

    Then of course, for the last 3 years, every Apple computer on TV has had to have a sticker over the Apple logo so they don't get inundated with hate mail from right-wingers still infuriated about Apple's contribution to the "No on 8" campaign. (Of course, Google contributed as much or more, but that's OK.) Would Apple pay for that?

    I remember trying to sign up for the free limited service on one ISP, just as a backup, only to discover that you couldn't use a Mac on their service at all. Subsequently, I got a flyer in the mail from them, depicting dozens of happy people using their service, half of whom were using MacBooks. I know damn well Apple didn't pay for that!

    As we all know, product placement is a big deal in Hollywood. And yes, there have been Macs seen in TV shows ever since the Seinfeld days. I have an old friend of mine who's an programming executive at ABC/Disney and we talked about this once. In most cases, Apple hasn't gotten into the product placement business regarding shows. What is happening in most cases is that the art directors and set designers for these shows are frequently looking for trendy attractive ways to dress their sets. Macs always look prettier on camera than a typical PC. And it doesn't hurt that many of these art directors are Mac users themselves.

    There are exceptions. When the iPad was first introduced, Apple made a special effort to work it into a popular show round about the same time it was introduced but before it was available to the general public.
  • Reply 164 of 188
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Originally Posted by Sevenfeet View Post

    And yes, there are some extremely hot exceptions.

    Marissa Mayer is hardly some "IT person." She's an alpha geek. Stereotypes notwithstanding, alpha anythings, taken as a group, tend to be better looking than the general population because looks contribute to success.
  • Reply 165 of 188
    Maybe Samsung was hoping the "Buyers" at Best Buy, WalMart, Target, Radio Shack, Verizon, etc would not check on the validity of their claims and just place orders. It appears that Samsung doesn't really care if consumers buy their products, as long as they can convince retailers to stock them on their shelves. Thats how they count sales.
  • Reply 166 of 188
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

    I just saw a few minutes of that Samsung video.

    Samsung needs to execute whoever was responsible for the sound on that video. At the very least they should fire them and publicly humiliate them. Unfortunately for Samsung, the piss poor sound quality is the very least of their problems. As for the painful and embarrassing fingerprints fiasco, that could have been avoided if they weren't showing a tablet that couldn't even be turned on, too bad for them. Samsung should pull that video because it does more damage to them than good. And where was the audience? Were they speaking to a bunch of corpses? They could have at least added a laugh track to the video to liven it up a bit, because it has potential as a comedy sitcom. A 10 year old using iMovie could make a better and more professional video than Samsung did.

    Nobody has a chance against Apple, but reading about all of these incapable morons, amateurs and copycats releasing their subpar products is quite interesting and amusing.

    And AI, don't listen to the fools who are complaining about this article. I don't come here just to read Apple news. I also come here for entertainment purposes and to laugh at pathetic

    people and their pathetic products. I want to see fandroids suffer and commit suicide.

    I'm with you. I love to read the brain dead comments of the fandroids as it's so bloody funny.

    The only bad thing is that their are no micros hit fan girlies here to poke fun at. Hang on there are; they have morphed in to that wonderful sub-species called the fandroid.

    Keep up the goo work AI, the more the da sings of this world ca be caught with their pants down the better.
  • Reply 167 of 188
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

    The stories are real. The actors are representative of the real story.

    The real life players probably refused to do the interview but gave the story to Samsung. Samsung used it with hired actors to portray them.

    And you would know this ... how?

    The real story here, imho, is how the rest of the industry, other than Apple, was so caught off guard, (again, I might add) .... that they all seem to be in "panic mode". They see a market that hardly even existed .... that sold a million units per month and, in all likelyhood, will do something in excess of 2 million per month in year 2 ..... and they aren't even in the marketplace in any meaningful way .... and that scares the s**t out of them. They not only can't keep up to Apple .... they can't catch up to where "Apple has already been" ..... so what do they do? Well, if you watch the video, you'll notice that the 2 most often used phrases in the "demo" (and I use that term lightly) were: "in the future" and "stay tuned".

    It's so funny, it's almost sad that while Apple is actually eating their lunch with today's product being put in the hands of consumers .... they are "stretching the truth" about products that aren't even in the marketplace yet. What a great "strategy." Pathetic! \
  • Reply 168 of 188
    Samsung, please... you're over reacting again! Now put down the film editing equipment before you poke yourself in the eye, again.

    An attempt at a joke is all I can really say on this. I'm at a loss for words. Are you telling me that Apple, a company constantly being pointed at for being evil and manipulative and full of lies, is the only one telling the truth!?
  • Reply 169 of 188
    mrstepmrstep Posts: 498member
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

    The stories are real. The actors are representative of the real story.

    The real life players probably refused to do the interview but gave the story to Samsung. Samsung used it with hired actors to portray them.

    Whats so "news worthy" about this? Another lame attempt by Apple fans to pick on something as frivolous as actors.

    This just goes to show you how much Apple fans are taking Samsung seriously if they have to stoop down this low just to win bragging rights.

    I think the joke is that they're talking about how much non-existent products have made them more productive. In the past tense. Really, I get it... if Samsung even had a working prototype to show. It's a joke. But of course a true fandroid can turn that into something that Apple did wrong. Lol.
  • Reply 170 of 188
    Originally Posted by TC93 View Post

    Yeah right. Also are you blind, and can't see the photo here of the two posted side by side?

    And how is it you were so lucky to get a working version of it? According to Samsung its non working.

    It's fun to see people argue with trollers.
  • Reply 171 of 188
    firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,502member
    Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

    If you want more thoughtful stuff, Anandtech though not only about Apple gives very good analytical articles when any Apple product is reviewed. Jon Gruber also is another who is very receptive to Apple, but also do not mind praising the advances in other devices, even Android. Both the AnandTech and the Jon Gruber revues for the iPad2, are most insightful and thorough and the two show the strengths in their own way. There's another guy, ihnatko who writes very insightful reviews about Apple.

    Thanks. I follow Anandtech but I wasnt following Gruber and I hadn't heard of ihnatko.

    It's always good to find new sources of reliable information.
  • Reply 172 of 188
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

    Thanks. I follow Anandtech but I wasnt following Gruber and I hadn't heard of ihnatko.

    It's always good to find new sources of reliable information.

    AnandTech has the most in-depth Apple reviews and comparisons but I hate when they start throughing their opinions around. They are almost always focused on some archaic anti-Apple BYO PC mindset.

    Inhatko does good, thorough reviews for the less technical crowd, but I can easily get sick of his use of quips and mawkishly corny writing style.
  • Reply 173 of 188
    h2ph2p Posts: 325member
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

    The stories are real. The actors are representative of the real story.

    The real life players probably refused to do the interview but gave the story to Samsung. Samsung used it with hired actors to portray them.

    Whats so "news worthy" about this? Another lame attempt by Apple fans to pick on something as frivolous as actors.

    This just goes to show you how much Apple fans are taking Samsung seriously if they have to stoop down this low just to win bragging rights.

    Galbi -- you completely invented the motivations of Samsung... completely made it up from whole cloth. I'll say it again, this is an egregious example of bad PR strategy... called an outright lie. I don't give them a pass -- you shouldn't either.
  • Reply 174 of 188
    mlayermlayer Posts: 23member
    The UK's The Guardian has a great feature on how the iPad has changed things.


    A friend recently went to a business meeting. He prepared by pulling his laptop out of his bag. All of the clients responded by taking their iPads out of their briefcases.

    These were not gadget freaks or latte-quaffing Hoxton-based web designers, as some imagine iPad users to be. They were a large group of senior civil servants and bankers, in a country well beyond Europe and the US. To them, the iPad wasn't a status symbol; it was a device they had chosen to use because it enhanced their ability to do their job.

    After those introductory paragraphs there are a series of great testimonials. Samsung would kill to have that kind of press coverage, and it's something that only Apple and a few other companies can pull off. Samsung's great at manufacturing innovations, but they don't create experiences. I write that as I watch a Blu-Ray on my Samsung player attached to a Samsung TV. No shame in not being great at everything.
  • Reply 175 of 188
    chanochano Posts: 51member
    It's not Apple's lunch they're eating. They are failing to grab Apple's lunch - that's the point and that's where their desperation arises. they want some lunch but they don't know how to cook up their own meal(ticket)s.
  • Reply 176 of 188
    Originally Posted by 0yvind View Post

    Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?

    Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.

    Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post

    Bill Gates showed a tablet with stylus ca 2005? and believed it was to become the future of personal computing. But Bill Gates dreams did not resonate with the consumers, primarily because he was thinking of it mainly as a computer (for techies); computers that many average consumers are afraid to use-- because they do not want to feel stupid with such a foreign machine, the computer.

    Remember what Gates said, after he saw the iPad? "It does not even have a stylus." The implied but unsaid was that to Bill Gates, the iPad would fail.

    Many consumers use their computer in a much simpler way than what techies used their computers. They do like their computers to help them do stuff that matter to them -- connecting with family and relatives, creating and sharing memories photoalbums (that is what made Kodak and all camera makers), except now it is digital. And perhaps do some creative stuff also.

    Apple/Steve Jobs understood the needs of the consumers, but did even more... Maybe you may want to "use the iPad also for this. or that"... He integrated music to make the iPad even more integral to their lives. And more:

    "...there's an App for that.... Only at Apple!"

    All those years, it took a Steve Jobs to remember what matters to consumers. Now everyone is scrambling to follow his lead, even better him, if they can.

    The Newton was a personal digital assistant. Thus, although it had some roles similar to the tablets of the mid 2000s, the Newton was never considered a portable computer in the same vein as the iPad.

    Originally Posted by Mac.World View Post

    While there were tablets prior to the iPad, it was Apple that made the tablets popular, thus "creating" a viable category. Before Apple, only a few thousand tablets had been sold and therefore not a category.

    Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post

    Well, let's be clear then. Yes, tablets absolutely existed before the iPad. But I am talking about dominating a 'product category' - not creating a wholly 'new' product, per se.

    Before the iPod, MP3 players absolutely existed. But they were a tiny niche, at best, compared to other music-playing devices. Since the iPod, the MP3 player is probably the sales leader of all products in the music-playing device category.

    You can make a similar comparison re the 'smartphone' niche in relation to the overall cell phone product category prior to the iPhone.

    And you can also make a similar comparison to the 'tablet' niche in relation to the overall 'personal computer' category prior to the iPad.

    Smartphones, MP3 players, and tablets barely existed as niches within larger product categories before Apple created products in those areas. After they did so, however, those niches grew quickly to dominate their respective categories. (This has, of course, not yet happened with the iPad and the 'personal computer' product category - but we can all see which way the wind is now blowing.)

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

    I've used Windows-based tablets going back before 2000 (yes, they existed), and the technology was available back then just couldn't cut it: battery, screen, processor speed, pen input. For years, Microsoft saw tablets as an "extension" of their desktop OS, with a pen replacing the mouse, and on-screen keyboard that you would have to peck at with the pen. Those Windows tablets were heavy--like holding a 15" MacBook Pro in one hand. And chunkier than a modern MBP.

    It shows that it's hard for companies that think in one direction to think in a completely opposite direction. That's the one thing Apple did right with the Newton... they were not thinking about replacing a mouse with a pen with a desktop OS, but creating an entirely new type of device, using the paradigm of a "digital notepad". It cost less than a PC, lighter than any Windows tablet, and the UI didn't suffer from being adapted from a desktop OS (no tablet should ever force users to have to "right click" with a pen, talk about getting it wrong).

    Wow, I've never really pay attention to Apple's Newton size until now. It's so obviously big when put side by side to the iPad, thanks for the picture 0yvind

    But what surprises me more is that you still own that "historical" device from Steve Job-less Apple era, are you a collector or something like that?

    Now let's talk about those many posts about tablet while we're at it..

    What was the first tablet device, and who was the first invented it or the moniker, those are questions to debate among tech historian experts (along with trolls LOL) in another thread or forum.

    Even though Apple did deserve a credit for breaking the most commonly known ways to interact with computer at that time (in 1993) with Newton, the company itself has described it as a MessagePad not a tablet, and widely accepted by consumers as PDA not a tablet.

    Not to add more arguments on why was it not called a tablet, IMO the most obvious is because people at that time weren't familiar with what a tablet is, even PDA was still a new thing back then. And like cgc0202, Mac.World, Mister Snitch, and Suddenly Newton have said up there; the tablet moniker along with the device itself have evolve, but slowly.

    Fast forward to present, 2011, where iPad 2 was launched and people are (still) lining up to grab one. With the introduction of iPad, Steve Jobs and Apple, have radically change the way we look at a tablet. All thanks to the revolutionary iOS.

    But even now Apple is not calling its famous iPad as a tablet, there is no mention of such moniker in the iPad website. Looks like Steve Jobs doesn't want the iPad to be connected to the PC era, where tablet is known to come with a stylus. He even goes as far as calling iPad as a "magical device". Apple just want its iPad to be known as: an iPad.

    So what is a tablet anyway? Trying to describe it, we can't help but to include most of the iPad's features such as all-touchscreen display, apps, app store, mobile web browser, fluid UI, etc. And I even haven't talk about its hardware.. Nowadays, if someone tries to call a device as a tablet without those features, mockery will be in order next. And iPad has always become the main reference, iPad is right now the leader of the pack. But who knows 2-3 years from now? Heck, the iPad is only less than a year old, and yet it has set such standard for a niche category that 'barely' alive before it.

    And that bring us to here, where mockery continues to be given at those who claim to have made a better device better than Apple's iPad, in this case is Samsung. <to be continued below...>

    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

    In the U.S., such ads (where there is an implication that the ad contains actual consumers) must say "actor portrayal" or something of the sort. It might be in tiny type and flash by faster than mere mortals can see it, but it has to be there. You see this in pharmaceutical advertising all the time. It also has to state if the claims are typical, which is why there's a disclaimer in virtually all weight loss advertising, even that which does contain actual consumers, that their weight loss claims are not typical. I used to produce web sites for an infomercial company, so I'm familiar with all the legal disclaimer stuff.

    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

    You're missing the point entirely.

    It's not a matter of using actors for ads it's a matter of using actors but telling us they are not actors. Almost all advertisements use actors, but it is technically illegal (in most western countries anyway), to lie in advertising or to directly mislead consumers about your product. They didn't even bother to use that old dodge of putting microscopic writing on the bottom of the screen that lets you know the situation is simulated.

    The laws against this sort of deception have never been taken off the books and those of us old enough to remember when the government and the truth in advertising agencies actually took people who made ads like this to court, and eventually to jail are a bit upset that nowadays this is just par for the course. In fact it's underhanded, immoral and still (technically) illegal.

    Advertising is quite literally an art that is based on deception. The whole idea is to fool people into using your product by presenting it in the best possibly light and to cover up your products flaws through creative wordplay and imagery. Out and out lying is still not allowed though, and in an industry that's "right on the edge" as it were between misdirection and outright lies, it's arguably even more important to notice when an advertiser crosses that line.

    If these laws aren't upheld then there is nothing to stop anyone from saying anything they want about any product. That's the whole point.

    Here Samsung is announcing a product that doesn't even exist. They are presenting "real people" who aren't actually real, who are then telling long detailed lies about using the non-existent product. They are also directly, themselves, and completely outside of the issue of the commercials, lying about the features the product has.

    Advertising is of course a shady business, but almost no company is willing to go this far even in today's market. Samsung has crossed a huge line here and should really be taken to task over it.

    This is literally no different than a car commercial that lies about the MPG the car gets, or how safe it is in an accident. If you can produce outright lies about your product and get away with it, the whole system will fall apart.

    <..continued from above> The Korean-based electronic giant's 'Galaxy Tab Interview Project' was described as "true life stories", but it was then revealed that the users interviewed in it are actors and an actress, not the real people who had the so claimed stories.

    It doesn't matter if the stories are real and being told by actors or actresses, but not to use the real people after claiming it as "true life stories" got to make you wonder the authenticity of those stories at all. Plus there's legal stuff that 'zoetmb' has said up there, that's spot on the money.

    And Prof. Peabody's also said it right, the 'Galaxy Tab Interview Project' presentation is misleading the consumers. Remember when Apple's iPhone 3G tv ad was banned for misleading consumers over the internet capabilities of the smartphone?

    Samsung might be able to get away from legal lawsuit by saying they need people with photogenic face to represent their device on camera, along with other BS the company's lawyers can think of, but they ought to be spanked for having the audacity to made that kind of presentation. And that's what we're here for, this is why we are so passionate to mock Samsung right now.. (the cue goes to those who still wonder why this particular thread is so long)

    But cheer up Samsung, maybe we'll root for you someday when you finally done it right, maybe..
  • Reply 177 of 188
    Originally Posted by Whozown View Post

    Cardboard cut outs

    My favorite comment in this thread so far..

    Perhaps the prototype behind the glass box was also made from cardboard cut outs..

    Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

    Are we sure that it's on a trade show? I would bet money on self-staged event.

    Maybe it's their own trade show made completely from cardboard cut outs, all of them..

    PS: yes, it's unfortunately a real trade show, CTIA.
  • Reply 178 of 188
    Originally Posted by jpellino View Post

    This must be the gig you get after staging the Microsoft iPhone funeral procession.

    LOL of the week.
  • Reply 179 of 188
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

    Presumably because Apple donates the computers that are used in the show, but doesn't pay for placement.

    I read somewhere, an interview with a woman at Apple in charge of product placement. She said that Apple only lets "good guys" use their products, i.e. you won't have a Bond villain using a Mac to blow up the world.
  • Reply 180 of 188
    sicmxsicmx Posts: 3member
    It's a close call. Very close

    Judging from these picture's i'd give the thinness crown to the iPad 2 though:
Sign In or Register to comment.