PDA

View Full Version : UK Advertising Board Rules for Apple in Dispute over Thinnest Smartphone




MacRumors
Sep 14, 2011, 11:18 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/14/uk-advertising-board-rules-for-apple-in-dispute-over-thinnest-smartphone/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/09/galaxy_s_ii_iphone_4_side.png


As noted by TechCrunch (http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/14/u-k-ad-authority-apple-not-samsung-has-thinnest-smartphone/), the United Kingdom's Advertising Standards Authority has ruled in favor Apple in a dispute with Samsung over which manufacturer offers the world's thinnest smartphone. The dispute over which company could lay claim to the title for marketing purposes arose because of the Samsung Galaxy S II's form factor, which includes a sizable hump.Samsung's svelte new model is indeed thinner at certain points, measuring in at 8.71mm at its thinnest. It's a considerable enough difference from the iPhone 4?s 9.3mm depth that it would've been a clear victory were it not for the Galaxy S II's 9.91mm thick hump.

The ASA ruled that since the iPhone's thickest point is thinner than the Galaxy S II's thickest, Apple has the right to continue claiming the title.Apple and Samsung are of course also locked in a series of much more important legal disputes centered around claims of patent and design infringement.

Article Link: UK Advertising Board Rules for Apple in Dispute over Thinnest Smartphone (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/14/uk-advertising-board-rules-for-apple-in-dispute-over-thinnest-smartphone/)



slrandall
Sep 14, 2011, 11:24 AM
Seems a little arbitrary. Why not just average the thickness of the entire device, and use that?

dethmaShine
Sep 14, 2011, 11:28 AM
Seems a little arbitrary. Why not just average the thickness of the entire device, and use that?

Is that a joke?

AAPLDroid
Sep 14, 2011, 11:28 AM
Well the Board has a point. Still, it's amazing the amount of hardware and features they've managed to cram in that phone which debuted six months ago.

miknos
Sep 14, 2011, 11:29 AM
Apple could make a tiny chin and say the iPhone is 1mm thick.

mousouchop
Sep 14, 2011, 11:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_10 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E600 Safari/6533.18.5)

Seems silly that companies are fighting over this. I definitely wouldn't want a phone thinner than the iPhone 4 anyway... hopefully Apple doesn't get hung up on the "title" and castrate the next redesign. -_-

bigjnyc
Sep 14, 2011, 11:39 AM
It's getting pretty ugly between these 2 companies now.

elhungarian
Sep 14, 2011, 11:41 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)

Ha. If next iPhone is in the same shell as iPhone 4 it won't be long till someone will beat the thickness.

bmms8
Sep 14, 2011, 11:44 AM
i agree that it should be looked at the thickest points. those humps add thickness to the device. all measurements should be given that way.

DeeEss
Sep 14, 2011, 11:45 AM
Seriously, this long standing bitch fight between these two companies is tiresome and childish.

Please - STOP

Moonjumper
Sep 14, 2011, 11:52 AM
You measure the height of a car according to roof height, not bonnet height. It is the same with phones, measure to the thickest point.

SockRolid
Sep 14, 2011, 11:53 AM
"My humps, my humps, my ugly Samsung humps..."

bigcat318
Sep 14, 2011, 11:53 AM
Thank god, I can finally rest easy tonight knowing which giant corporation produced the thinnest cell phone.

AnthonyHarris
Sep 14, 2011, 11:55 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

The only way the iPhone could possibly become thinner would be to give it a larger footprint. Since the Android handset already has a larger footprint, they'd hardly be winning any design awards even if it WAS thinner. Apple are masters in compact design and have paved the way for other company's in reality. It's just a shame that many people scoff and say "Apple didn't create touch screen technology", or "hmm yeah, the phone was invented in 2007"... Because if it wasn't for Apple we would still have lagging interfaces like the Prada phone. They might not have invented the wheel, but they sure as hell perfected it.

cms2
Sep 14, 2011, 12:04 PM
Seriously, this long standing bitch fight between these two companies is tiresome and childish.

Please - STOP

Right? I mean, this is just silly.

You measure the height of a car according to roof height, not bonnet height. It is the same with phones, measure to the thickest point.

Hah hah... I'm sorry... "bonnet" :D Anyway, yes, I think that what the companies are arguing when they talk thickness is how easily the device will slip in and out of a pocket. The thickest point - not the thinnest - determines this.

"My humps, my humps, my ugly Samsung humps..."

Hah hah... so obvious, yet still funny. And yeah, I much prefer the iPhone 4's monolithic styling to Samsung's humps. That's entirely just a personal preference, of course. If someone prefers Samsung's approach, then more power to them!

danpass
Sep 14, 2011, 12:09 PM
In this day and age of instant info across the whole world things can gain traction very quickly and, if untrue, create distortion.

Its not so far fetched any more to sue over these types of things.

tzeshan
Sep 14, 2011, 12:13 PM
I agree. This is the same measure used to judge the tallest building in the world.

Rocketman
Sep 14, 2011, 12:27 PM
To me the takeaway of this and the other Samsung and Apple disputes is that Samsung is trying and actually doing, copycat products, form factors, marketing pitches, etc. Given their history of making copycat products without much blast-back, this whole Apple response on a variety of fronts must have them "flummoxed".

My preference is more battery not more thinnness, to the degree I keep begging for a BTO option on iOS devices.

Rocketman

Anonymous Freak
Sep 14, 2011, 12:37 PM
Apple could make a tiny chin and say the iPhone is 1mm thick.

You mean like they do with the MacBook Air?

EmbraceTheOne
Sep 14, 2011, 12:42 PM
It might by thinner, but then you have that ugly lump at the top of the phone. It should be taken into consideration when measuring.

whooleytoo
Sep 14, 2011, 12:43 PM
Did Samsung complain to the ASA about this? The article doesn't say.

Reminds me of a similar case where Apple claimed the PowerMac G5 was the fastest PC in the world, and in that case they lost as it was the fastest in all but one test. That seems a bit petty, by comparison.

mrpither
Sep 14, 2011, 01:00 PM
I really could give a flying flip about a few millimeters of thin. You know what would be really really great? Make it a few millimeters thicker and make the battery bigger! How nice would it be to have an iPhone that you could REALLY USE ALL DAY???

----------

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)

Ha. If next iPhone is in the same shell as iPhone 4 it won't be long till someone will beat the thickness.
Done:
The Samsung Focus S strips much of the bulk of the original Focus as it comes with a thin 0.34-inch (8.55mm) body. Under the hood, a 1.4GHz processor runs the Mango goodness. An 8-megapixel camera on the back will add appeal to the Focus S, while up front it comes with a 1.3-megapixel snapper for video conferencing.

accessoriesguy
Sep 14, 2011, 01:01 PM
They should go by surface area and volume and math...or maybe that should be just for greece :cool:

bushido
Sep 14, 2011, 01:06 PM
the galaxy s 2 is thinner than the iphone 4 tho :confused:

highdough
Sep 14, 2011, 01:17 PM
Seriously, this long standing bitch fight between these two companies is tiresome and childish.

Please - STOP

Yet it keeps them in the news and people talking about them. Perhaps it's not as much childish as good marketing.

iPad 3
Sep 14, 2011, 01:21 PM
Seems crazy whats happening between them when you remember Apples is Samsungs biggest customer.

Porco
Sep 14, 2011, 01:22 PM
Think of it this way. You have a slot or hole of adjustable size (like a small letter box). At 9.4mm the entire iPhone would have fitted through it, the Galaxy S II would not have - therefore the iPhone is quite clearly thinner.

A comparision of the devices' thickest points is obviously the fairest way to decide a claim of being the thinnest, I think ASA got this one exactly right.

SalsaShark
Sep 14, 2011, 01:28 PM
Done:

The Galaxy S II thickness is listed as 8.49mm, which they're obviously measuring at the thin point, so the Focus S could have the same flawed measurement logic. Don't believe everything you read.

wovel
Sep 14, 2011, 01:31 PM
You mean like they do with the MacBook Air?

If they only give one number on the air, it is the thick point. Usually they give both.

ANDI54
Sep 14, 2011, 01:34 PM
When case designs were supposedly leaked from china and those mock-ups were put out,I was really excited and looked forward to buying this ipad2/ipod touch looking aluminium backed beauty as 64gig model in white with 4" screen. However, it looks more and more likely that the next incarnation of the iphone is really just an update of iphone 4. The design is *****...period...If all they can come up with after 15months between models is a iphone 4s with a work around for the antenna and slighty better camera, then I'm not joining you iSheep..The antenna issue should have been fixed with the white iphone 4 not the new model 15 months later. It was time for Apple to up their game a year ago with Android catching them up with hard and software. I'd hoped at least they would come with a game changer this time, but alas we're just gonna be drip-fed more outta date tech.
Samsung should just change their ads to "Thinnest smart phone that actually ********* works!":p

Surely
Sep 14, 2011, 01:34 PM
Was this measured before or after arousal?

Shrink
Sep 14, 2011, 01:37 PM
I realize I'm not the first one to notice this, but I thought that I, too, would make the observation that this is really RIDICULOUS and not a little bit dumb. :D

I realize that this is supposed to be a marketing issue, but come on, isn't there something more important to used as marketing point? :rolleyes:

Porco
Sep 14, 2011, 01:40 PM
I don't actually agree with those saying this is ridiculous or a waste of time - if someone is looking for a smartphone to fit in their inside jacket pocket or something and want it as thin as possible then it's important companies are held to account over inaccurate marketing claims.

Also, I think people view legal spats between huge companies on a much more personal level than they are in reality - it's usually just part of business, it's about making money and doing deals and protecting their profits to the best of their ability. Sure it's silly, but so is the whole world of selling magical lumps of plastic and metal from a certain point of view...


When case designs were supposedly leaked from china and those mock-ups were put out,I was really excited and looked forward to buying this ipad2/ipod touch looking aluminium backed beauty as 64gig model in white with 4" screen. However, it looks more and more likely that the next incarnation of the iphone is really just an update of iphone 4. The design is *****...period...If all they can come up with after 15months between models is a iphone 4s with a work around for the antenna and slighty better camera, then I'm not joining you iSheep..The antenna issue should have been fixed with the white iphone 4 not the new model 15 months later. It was time for Apple to up their game a year ago with Android catching them up with hard and software. I'd hoped at least they would come with a game changer this time, but alas we're just gonna be drip-fed more outta date tech.
Samsung should just change their ads to "Thinnest smart phone that actually ********* works!":p

My iPhone 4 is the best phone I've ever owned. If people prefer an Android device fair enough, but it's not as if the iPhone is bad per se. The impact of the antenna issue in real-world usage is highly exaggerated, in my experience (though I'd have my iPhone in its case regardless I guess...).

Ciclismo
Sep 14, 2011, 01:59 PM
It's getting pretty ugly between these 2 companies now.

"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

JTToft
Sep 14, 2011, 02:03 PM
Why not just average the thickness of the entire device, and use that?

- How do you propose to do that?

sclawis300
Sep 14, 2011, 02:28 PM
Apple should have just played their game and measured the thickness of the aluminum band, since that is technically the thinnest part of the phone.

wrinkster22
Sep 14, 2011, 02:43 PM
thank god, i can finally rest easy tonight knowing which giant corporation produced the thinnest cell phone.

ikr :)

bigjnyc
Sep 14, 2011, 03:19 PM
I wish they would have a good old price war and lower prices in order to sell more instead of paying lawyers billions of dollars a year to fight these cases.

flottenheimer
Sep 14, 2011, 03:35 PM
Seems silly that companies are fighting over this. I definitely wouldn't want a phone thinner than the iPhone 4 anyway... hopefully Apple doesn't get hung up on the "title" and castrate the next redesign. -_-

I, on the other hand, would love an iPhone as thin and light as my iPod Touch.

Trudy
Sep 14, 2011, 03:44 PM
Can I put the device into a case that's as thin as they say the phone is? No? Then it's not that thin, period.

I am pleasantly surprised with Apple's honest advertising lately, especially the battery life. I don't before ever remember lots of reviewers consistently saying "[Product X] provided more battery life than advertised in our tests."

danpass
Sep 14, 2011, 03:54 PM
Was this measured before or after arousal?

yes






:D

slrandall
Sep 14, 2011, 03:56 PM
Is that a joke?

Not at all. For phones of that profile, it makes sense. Although, like someone else said, if the companies are going for a "ease-of-fitting-in-pocket" meaning of thinness, then they should just use the thickest point.

- How do you propose to do that?

Use the design schematics of the phone. Calculate the weighted average of its thickness. Really not that hard ...

Ivan P
Sep 14, 2011, 04:02 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

It might by thinner, but then you have that ugly lump at the top of the phone. It should be taken into consideration when measuring.

The hump is actually at the bottom of the phone, and houses the antenna and a rear-facing speaker (unlike the speaker on the bottom edge of the iPhone 4), which obviously would have made it necessary to make the phone thicker in points. I know I'll get voted down for this, but people constantly blast Samsung for copying Apple and now that they make a design choice that is actually different they're still "doing it wrong". People, honestly.

Moonlight
Sep 14, 2011, 04:34 PM
If we were going buy the thinest part. I am pretty sure the iPhone's Metal band around the outside is thinner than the Samsung, so either way Apple is thinnest. I know it is only thin for like a 1/10 of an inch, but still!!

WhiteShadow
Sep 14, 2011, 04:48 PM
The thickness of the iPhone, all smart phones, is dictated by the depth of the camera sensor. The iPhone in it's current footprint could be thinner if the either Apple sacrifices camera quality or camera sensor technology advances.



Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

The only way the iPhone could possibly become thinner would be to give it a larger footprint. Since the Android handset already has a larger footprint, they'd hardly be winning any design awards even if it WAS thinner. Apple are masters in compact design and have paved the way for other company's in reality. It's just a shame that many people scoff and say "Apple didn't create touch screen technology", or "hmm yeah, the phone was invented in 2007"... Because if it wasn't for Apple we would still have lagging interfaces like the Prada phone. They might not have invented the wheel, but they sure as hell perfected it.

*LTD*
Sep 14, 2011, 05:01 PM
Another Apple win.

Samsung needs to change out their legal team.

Or . . . stop messing with others' IP.

Shrink
Sep 14, 2011, 06:07 PM
Another Apple win.

Samsung needs to change out their legal team.

Or . . . stop messing with others' IP.


And a highly significant and important win it is. :rolleyes: :D

Made your day, did it? ;)

JTToft
Sep 14, 2011, 06:26 PM
Use the design schematics of the phone. Calculate the weighted average of its thickness. Really not that hard ...

- Alright. Show me the mathematics. Do you intend to measure its thickness at a certain number of places? With how far between them? What about the rounded part in the lower section of the back? Would you include the height of the buttons on the sides?

You can measure at, for instance, 5 places and calculate an average of those numbers. Then you can measure at 5 different places and get a completely different average. But this will only get you the average of those numbers, not the average thickness.

My point is that "average thickness", at least in this case and for this purpose, is nonsense, because you don't have a certain number of figures to calculate from.

JohnPatrickRyan
Sep 14, 2011, 06:28 PM
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

Enjoy that, didn't Neil Stephenson write about the geo-political future being corporate nation-states with their own defense departments? Was that Snow Crash or Cryptonomicon?

Avalontor
Sep 14, 2011, 06:43 PM
Think of it this way. You have a slot or hole of adjustable size (like a small letter box). At 9.4mm the entire iPhone would have fitted through it, the Galaxy S II would not have - therefore the iPhone is quite clearly thinner.

A comparision of the devices' thickest points is obviously the fairest way to decide a claim of being the thinnest, I think ASA got this one exactly right.

I'm thinking that the millions of bumper-covered iPhones won't fit thru your slot either.

slrandall
Sep 14, 2011, 06:57 PM
- Alright. Show me the mathematics. Do you intend to measure its thickness at a certain number of places? With how far between them? What about the rounded part in the lower section of the back? Would you include the height of the buttons on the sides?

You can measure at, for instance, 5 places and calculate an average of those numbers. Then you can measure at 5 different places and get a completely different average. But this will only get you the average of those numbers, not the average thickness.

My point is that "average thickness", at least in this case and for this purpose, is nonsense, because you don't have a certain number of figures to calculate from.

You would measure the vertical height at each point with different altitudes, and multiply it by the fraction of total length that height occurred at. Then sum all the products you get. Thus, you get a weighted average (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_mean#Mathematical_definition).

If you wanted to be even more precise, you could model the thickness of the phone as a function [obtained through successive approximations] and find the average through integration (http://archives.math.utk.edu/visual.calculus/5/average.1/index.html).

Or you could call a Samsung hardware engineer and just ask.

Again, really not that hard.

TheMacBookPro
Sep 14, 2011, 08:11 PM
Another Apple win.

Except Apple, in most peoples' eyes, lost the 'Galaxy S infringement' case. All they managed to do was convince the judges that the Gallery app (which, btw, is built into every Android phone, and is not specific to Samsung) infringes on Apple's swiping patents.

Their main case (the Galaxy S looks exactly the same as the iPhone) was thrown out.

Just fyi.

Samsung needs to change out their legal team.

See above... they evidently do not.

Or . . . stop messing with others' IP.

The UK advertising board says that Apple has the right to claim that they have the thinnest smartphone. How does that have anything to do with Samsung 'messing' with Apple's IP?

Read up on what IP means (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property), then post.

Either way, neither the iPhone 4 nor the GSII are the thinnest smartphone in the world. The NEC MEDIAS N-04C is, at 7.7mm thin (throughout the entire body). Even the waterproof N-06C is thinner than the iP4/GSII, at 7.9mm.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/02/medias-02242011.jpg

But then again neither are available in the UK so just ignore the above few lines :p

*LTD*
Sep 14, 2011, 09:03 PM
Except Apple, in most peoples' eyes, lost the 'Galaxy S infringement' case.

Apple lost, by getting an injunction against Samsung in that country. Quite a result for a "loss." I haven't heard any news that it's been lifted.

How come no one can successfully do this to Apple? I see no injunctions against them. These legal issues have been ongoing for a while now, and Apple gear is selling full-force everywhere. All I see are successful offensive moves by Apple left and right. Like Jobs and Cook said they would do.

kdarling
Sep 14, 2011, 09:29 PM
Apple lost, by getting an injunction against Samsung in that country. Quite a result for a "loss." I haven't heard any news that it's been lifted.

The Galaxy S ban will take effect on October 13, unless Samsung modifies the gallery app by then, as they've said they will.

*LTD*
Sep 14, 2011, 09:45 PM
The Galaxy S ban will take effect on October 13, unless Samsung modifies the gallery app by then, as they've said they will.

I'm sure they'll get right on it.

??

Battlefield Fan
Sep 14, 2011, 10:54 PM
ugh samsung

TheMacBookPro
Sep 14, 2011, 11:26 PM
Apple lost, by getting an injunction against Samsung in that country. Quite a result for a "loss." I haven't heard any news that it's been lifted.

Injunction takes effect on October 13th, unless they edit the Gallery app so it no longer infringes on the Apple patent (which they've already said they will do).

Apple won, by failing to get a permanent injunction via their main case (ie- the 'Galaxy S looks exactly the same as the iPhone')? Right. Quite a result for a "win".

How come no one can successfully do this to Apple? I see no injunctions against them. These legal issues have been ongoing for a while now, and Apple gear is selling full-force everywhere. All I see are successful offensive moves by Apple left and right. Like Jobs and Cook said they would do.

Maybe because other companies aren't as asshol-ish as Apple? Maybe because other companies don't feel the need to sue other companies to guarantee their success? Take a look through the original 'Apple-vs-Samsung' thread and see how even diehard Apple fans don't agree with Apple suing Samsung over 'identical design'.

xUKHCx
Sep 15, 2011, 02:12 AM
Did Samsung complain to the ASA about this? The article doesn't say.

Reminds me of a similar case where Apple claimed the PowerMac G5 was the fastest PC in the world, and in that case they lost as it was the fastest in all but one test. That seems a bit petty, by comparison.

There was only 1 complaint. While it doesn't mean it was Samsung it is certainly possible, of course it could've just been some one random.

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2011/9/Apple-(UK)-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_161503.aspx

ASA Adjudication on Apple (UK) Ltd
Apple (UK) Ltd
2 Furzeground Way
Stockley Park
Uxbridge
Middlesex
UB11 1BB
Date: 14 September 2011
Media:Internet (on own site)
Sector:Computers and telecommunications
Number of complaints:1
Complaint Ref:A11-161503

Ad
A website ad for the iPhone 4 included the claim "And it's all contained in a beautiful enclosure a mere 9.3 millimetres thin, making iPhone 4 the world's thinnest smartphone".

Issue
The complainant challenged whether this claim was misleading because he believed that the Samsung Galaxy S II phone was thinner.

CAP Code (Edition 12)
3.1 3.7
Response
Apple (UK) Ltd (Apple) said that the iPhone4 had a uniform depth of 9.3 mm. They said, by contrast, the Galaxy S II had peaks and valleys to its design; the thickness ranged from 8.71 mm to 9.91 mm. Apple pointed out that the Galaxy S II had prominent bulges at the top of the device, where the cameras lens was, and at the bottom. They acknowledged that the Galaxy S II was thinner at points, but considered that they were still entitled to make their "thinnest" claim.

Apple defended their methodology of basing their thinness claims on the thickest part of the device. They said that consumers would not be interested in the thinnest part of the device, but in its overall measurements, as these would, for example, affect whether the device could fit into a pocket or a purse. They asserted that allowing thinnest claims to be made on the thinnest point of products would have a detrimental effect on consumers who could then purchase items that do not fit the space for which they had intended them.

Assessment
Not upheld

We noted that the iPhone 4 had a uniform depth of 9.3 mm. We noted that the complainant objected that this was misleading because he believed the Samsung Galaxy S II was thinner. Whilst we noted that the Samsung product had thinner points, we considered that Apple's methodology for making the thinnest claim was reasonable. We considered that consumers would be less interested in whether certain points of a product were thin, if bulges in the product made its overall thickness greater. Because the iPhone4's thickest point was thinner than the thickest point of the Samsung Galaxy S II we concluded that the claim "the world's thinnest smartphone" was not misleading.

We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation) but did not find it in breach.

Action
No further action necessary.


Where 3.1 (http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-Action/Adjudications/Display-Code.aspx?CodeId={08D304FD-1571-4B6A-B084-4E8EDD3CDB01}&ItemId={7C16199A-3B5A-4A25-9939-7AB745B8EB9B}) is

3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.

and 3.7 (http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-Action/Adjudications/Display-Code.aspx?CodeId={B9675748-B93D-4745-845D-EA60460051EE}&ItemId={7C16199A-3B5A-4A25-9939-7AB745B8EB9B}) is

3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.

GBrooks
Sep 15, 2011, 02:53 AM
Seriously, this long standing bitch fight between these two companies is tiresome and childish.

Please - STOP

Mummy! Samsung said a naughty!!

JTToft
Sep 15, 2011, 04:34 AM
You would measure the vertical height at each point with different altitudes, and multiply it by the fraction of total length that height occurred at. Then sum all the products you get. Thus, you get a weighted average (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_mean#Mathematical_definition).

- That would make perfect sense if the front and back of the phone were parallel to each other. They are not, so you can't "measure the vertical height at each point with different altitudes" (since there will be an infinite number of points with different altitudes in the curved areas of the phone), and you can't "multiply it by the fraction of total length that height occurred at" (again, since there will be an infinite number of points you could measure at, and since the total length each height occurred at will be infinitely small).

You could, of course, achieve a fairly good approximation using your method and then decide to measure at, for instance, 5 different points along the curved section, but you wouldn't achieve a correct average thickness, only an approximation.

eawmp1
Sep 15, 2011, 07:15 AM
It's not the thinness of your tool; it's how you use it.

slrandall
Sep 15, 2011, 07:24 AM
- That would make perfect sense if the front and back of the phone were parallel to each other. They are not, so you can't "measure the vertical height at each point with different altitudes" (since there will be an infinite number of points with different altitudes in the curved areas of the phone), and you can't "multiply it by the fraction of total length that height occurred at" (again, since there will be an infinite number of points you could measure at, and since the total length each height occurred at will be infinitely small).

You could, of course, achieve a fairly good approximation using your method and then decide to measure at, for instance, 5 different points along the curved section, but you wouldn't achieve a correct average thickness, only an approximation.

Then model the thickness as a two-dimensional function [again, by successive approximations] and use an iterated integral to find the average. It is possible to find the average value of anything that can be modeled mathematically, I promise you.

Trudy
Sep 15, 2011, 08:08 AM
This isn't that hard. Throw it into a CAD program and have it tell you the average thickness.

But it's still not right. If I set my phone on a table, how high is it going to be? If I put it in my pocket, how much will it bulge out? If I put it in a case, how thick does that case have to be?

These are reasonable thickness questions for a consumer, and all of them are answered by thickest point, not average thickness. I can't see what possible use average thickness would have to the consumer. And the consumer is what this is about, not some academic exercise in dimensions.

kdarling
Sep 15, 2011, 09:02 AM
I'm sure they'll get right on it. ??

Correct, they'll have a modified gallery app ready before the injunction can go into effect.

Samsung has said Galaxy sales won't even be interrupted.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Apple_Scores_Meaningless_Dutch_Court_Victory_Against_Samsung

Sjhonny
Sep 15, 2011, 09:04 AM
I agree. This is the same measure used to judge the tallest building in the world.

Not completely true. The type of spire used also plays a very important role. the Petrona towers are considered taller then the willis tower' because the spires on top of the twin towers are considered structural. The highest floor of the Willis tower is located higher. Comparing building heights is all about semantics.

kd5jos
Sep 15, 2011, 09:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)



The hump is actually at the bottom of the phone, and houses the antenna and a rear-facing speaker (unlike the speaker on the bottom edge of the iPhone 4), which obviously would have made it necessary to make the phone thicker in points. I know I'll get voted down for this, but people constantly blast Samsung for copying Apple and now that they make a design choice that is actually different they're still "doing it wrong". People, honestly.

No. This is a discussion about Samsung making a claim that their phone is the thinnest. The opinion of design style/quality has NOTHING to do with which phone is the thinnest. Either you make the thinnest phone, or you don't. They didn't claim to make the "mostly" thinnest phone, or thinnest over most of the measured length. Samsung said thinnest, and they were found not to be.

JTToft
Sep 15, 2011, 10:12 AM
Then model the thickness as a two-dimensional function [again, by successive approximations] and use an iterated integral to find the average. It is possible to find the average value of anything that can be modeled mathematically, I promise you.

Hmm. I may be wrong, as neither my mathematical skills nor my technical English skills are good enough to fully comprehend what you are arguing.
At least, I cannot make an intelligent argument to refute your above suggestion, so we may as well consider you to be right about the mathematics.

If you have some time to waste, though, I'd be interested to see the calculation you are proposing.

Porco
Sep 15, 2011, 11:41 AM
I'm thinking that the millions of bumper-covered iPhones won't fit thru your slot either.

But that's irrelevant, the claim is to do with which phone is thinner, not which phone is thinner when one of the phones has an optional bumper or case.

Look, I'm not the thinnest of people, so I don't think it would be reasonable to claim to be really skinny by measuring how thick my ankle is... maybe it would be nice if that's how the world looked at it!

My point was, a solid object that fits through a tight gap must be considered thinner than a second solid object that does not fit through the same gap. Of course if you encase one of the objects in rubber or plastic it might add to the thickness, but that's not what is in question. If I wrap my ankle in layers of bandages, it doesn't mean my gut is thinner than my ankle!

ChazUK
Sep 15, 2011, 12:19 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; GT-I9100 Build/GINGERBREAD) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

The bump at the bottom does destroy the "thinnest" marketing gumpf.

For me the thickness didn't even come into the equation when considering the SGS II and I don't understand the obsession in slimming down handsets like they are. Such a silly marketing gimmick IMO.

slrandall
Sep 15, 2011, 01:49 PM
This isn't that hard. Throw it into a CAD program and have it tell you the average thickness.

But it's still not right. If I set my phone on a table, how high is it going to be? If I put it in my pocket, how much will it bulge out? If I put it in a case, how thick does that case have to be?

These are reasonable thickness questions for a consumer, and all of them are answered by thickest point, not average thickness. I can't see what possible use average thickness would have to the consumer. And the consumer is what this is about, not some academic exercise in dimensions.

True. This is the point that I missed on my first read of the article. The only reason I kept going with that discussion was because I was asked.


Hmm. I may be wrong, as neither my mathematical skills nor my technical English skills are good enough to fully comprehend what you are arguing.
At least, I cannot make an intelligent argument to refute your above suggestion, so we may as well consider you to be right about the mathematics.

If you have some time to waste, though, I'd be interested to see the calculation you are proposing.

It's the same calculation as the average value one in one-dimension [(1/(b-a))∫f(x) from a to b], but for a function f(x, y). However, like Trudy said, it can be easily done with a CAD program. Although, this is the method that such programs use.

And this doesn't really matter. The thickest point is what matters; I was wrong to suggest otherwise. It makes a lot more sense if you really just think about what it's going to be like putting it into your pocket.

gnasher729
Sep 15, 2011, 01:57 PM
No. This is a discussion about Samsung making a claim that their phone is the thinnest. The opinion of design style/quality has NOTHING to do with which phone is the thinnest. Either you make the thinnest phone, or you don't. They didn't claim to make the "mostly" thinnest phone, or thinnest over most of the measured length. Samsung said thinnest, and they were found not to be.

Since this was a complaint about an advertisement, the question is not which phone is the thinnest, but whether Apple's advertisement was misleading. In theory it could happen that Samsung made an advert with the same claim, Apple complained, and Samsung would be allowed to advertise their phone as the thinnest because it is thinner in many places and therefore the ad is not misleading.

TheMacBookPro
Sep 16, 2011, 06:42 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_3; HTC_EVO3D_X515m; en-sg) AppleWebKit/533.16 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0 Safari/533.16)

I'm sure they'll get right on it. ??

Correct, they'll have a modified gallery app ready before the injunction can go into effect.

Samsung has said Galaxy sales won't even be interrupted.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25098/Apple_Scores_Meaningless_Dutch_Court_Victory_Against_Samsung

I wonder where he went.

JTToft
Sep 16, 2011, 01:01 PM
And this doesn't really matter. The thickest point is what matters; I was wrong to suggest otherwise. It makes a lot more sense if you really just think about what it's going to be like putting it into your pocket.

- Indeed. But even so: thanks for the completely irrelevant discussion! ;)

iRobby
Sep 16, 2011, 06:17 PM
You measure the height of a car according to roof height, not bonnet height. It is the same with phones, measure to the thickest point.

Right? I mean, this is just silly.



Hah hah... I'm sorry... "bonnet" :D Anyway, yes, I think that what the companies are arguing when they talk thickness is how easily the device will slip in and out of a pocket. The thickest point - not the thinnest - determines this. !

Thank God this thickness squabble isn't over anatomy

MacinDoc
Sep 17, 2011, 12:29 PM
True. This is the point that I missed on my first read of the article. The only reason I kept going with that discussion was because I was asked.




It's the same calculation as the average value one in one-dimension [(1/(b-a))∫f(x) from a to b], but for a function f(x, y). However, like Trudy said, it can be easily done with a CAD program. Although, this is the method that such programs use.

And this doesn't really matter. The thickest point is what matters; I was wrong to suggest otherwise. It makes a lot more sense if you really just think about what it's going to be like putting it into your pocket.
Certainly nothing wrong with your mathematics here. The only problem with this methodology is that it can be taken advantage of by simply increasing the height of the phone, making the tapered part a larger proportion of the phone. A phone that was 50 cm high and 1 mm thick for 40 of those cm but 20 mm thick for the other 10 cm would be, on average, thinner than a phone with a uniform thickness of 5 mm (I know the example is extreme and impractical; it is just to illustrate the point, since the same mathematics would apply to any 2 phones you were comparing that were not both the same height, if at least 1 phone was not of uniform thickness). Anyway, hopefully the whole argument will be irrelevant if Apple introduces the rumored redesign of the phone.