Apple Adjusts Pro Display XDR Marketing in UK Following Complaints of Misleading Claims

[MacRumors]

Apple has adjusted the marketing of its high-end Pro Display XDR in the UK following complaints to the country's Advertising Standards Authority that it was misleading customers.

As reported by 9to5Mac, the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) had received complaints from customers about Apple's indirect claim that the Pro Display XDR features a 100% P3 wide color gamut. Apple previously marketed the Pro Display XDR as featuring P3 wide color gamut without any caveats, however following the complaint, the company has added a footnote to the product page in the UK to indicate it "supports 99% of the P3 wide color gamut."

9to5Mac (Change in Pro Display XDR website following complaint)​

Additionally, UK customers complained to the ASA regarding Apple's use of the term "Far beyond HDR." The complaints, alleging it to be misleading, caused Apple to remove it entirely from the product page in the UK. The Pro Display XDR marketing remains unchanged in the US.

Article Link: Apple Adjusts Pro Display XDR Marketing in UK Following Complaints of Misleading Claims

 

[cal6n]

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

 

[alexandr]

i was hoping for a

Apple Adjusts Pro Display XDR Pricing​

 

[LeeW]

Oh well, not a big deal, they change it for all the difference it really made.

 

[sflagel]

Well, wrong is wrong.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

Talk about attention to detail...

 

[iPrabhu]

And, what did the complainants achieve?
Much needed self gratification

 

[Mike_Trivisonno]

Ask anyone: 99% is not 100%. Imagine if the Apollo missions only made 99% of the way to the Moon. Apple should strive to be as accurate in their product descriptions as possible. There's no need to fudge that 1%.

 

[SirAnthonyHopkins]

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

This is definitely 100% true, but in this case we're talking about £5,000 professional device where these minor differences are actually fairly meaningful if you're seeking to make an accurate pre-purchase comparison with something else on the market. I don't think there's anything wrong with ensuring accuracy of marketing.

 

[gnipgnop]

FYI: Apple has been using P3 color gamut capable screens in all kinds of products for years...iMacs, laptops, iPads etc. Interesting that the complaint about the advertising of it suddenly appears with the Pro Display XDR.

 

[ignatius345]

Must be nice having consumer protections.

 

[sw1tcher]

Ask anyone: 99% is not 100%. Imagine if the Apollo missions only made 99% of the way to the Moon. Apple should strive to be as accurate in their product descriptions as possible. There's no need to fudge that 1%.

There will still be people here who will say this error was no big deal and people shouldn't have bothered complaining, that 99% is close enough to 100%

They would probably defend Apple if they started shipping iDevices where the battery maximum capacity was actually 99% but advertised as 100%

 

[dguisinger]

FYI: Apple has been using P3 color gamut capable screens in all kinds of products for years...iMacs, laptops, iPads etc. Interesting that the complaint about the advertising of it suddenly appears with the Pro Display XDR.

Because they are super expensive and actually being used in scenarios where people expect it to deliver?

 

[gnipgnop]

This is definitely 100% true, but in this case we're talking about £5,000 professional device where these minor differences are actually fairly meaningful if you're seeking to make an accurate pre-purchase comparison with something else on the market. I don't think there's anything wrong with ensuring accuracy of marketing.

How many pro monitors on the market support 100% of DCI-P3? From what I've seen, the majority of them fall short of 100%.

 

[Attirex]

Well, that change of two numerals = keeping bureaucrats employed. 😆

 

[gnipgnop]

Because they are super expensive and actually being used in scenarios where people expect it to deliver?

Then again, if you were a pro monitor user you would be familiar with DCI-P3 support commonly being in the 98%/99% range. I don't think you would assume that it was 100% just because the marketing copy didn't provide a number.

 

[whooleytoo]

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

I'm 100% in favour of keeping advertising honest, personally.

IIRC though, I remember back when the G5 was advertised as the fastest PC, and there were objections in the UK too because even though it was the fastest in the majority of benchmarks used, it wasn't the fastest in all of them. That just seems like pettiness for pettiness' sake.

 

[Td1970]

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

There are some trillion dollar business’s that will lie to you all day in the name of profits.

 

[gnipgnop]

I rest my case.

LOL...resting in peace.

 

[ikramerica]

I hope people realize that auto manufacturers can’t back up the HP Numbers they advertise either. Not only can it vary from engine to engine but also from tank to tank of gas and test rig to test rig. The numbers aren’t even 99% accurate, though usually they are under reported. Not always.

 

[Maconplasma]

This is definitely 100% true, but in this case we're talking about £5,000 professional device where these minor differences are actually fairly meaningful if you're seeking to make an accurate pre-purchase comparison with something else on the market. I don't think there's anything wrong with ensuring accuracy of marketing.

I agree with you on the part I highlighted but a $5000 USD or £5000 for a pro screen isn't really a ton of cash considering there are $40,000 USD screens from Sony. I would expect at that much money advertising accuracy would be "100%" but Apple's screens aren't that crazy expensive, especially based on their target market which are not average joes and tech enthusiasts. People tend to exaggerate just because it's Apple.

 

[GSWForever8]

Dang it! Wished it said sometthing about lowering the price. They should make something more appealing to us regular users. As in lower price.

 

[goborgh]

In Apple's keynotes this monitor has been compared as an alternative to the $30,000 Sony X310 for Post Production. And some post professionals failed for that trap. Eventually, Dolby never approved this monitor as a mastering monitor, which is what the X310 is about. That 99% P3 believe it or not is a big deal as the monitors it is comparing to can hit those values 100% and more, even go to REC2020.
Now, bear in mind, Apple now produces films and TV shows on their streaming platform Apple TV+, and they deliver in Dolby Vision, but they cannot use this monitor to master since it cannot hit the specs it claimed it can.

 

[Morgenland]

Well, wrong is wrong.

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

 

[Nuno Lopes]

There will still be people here who will say this error was no big deal and people shouldn't have bothered complaining, that 99% is close enough to 100%

They would probably defend Apple if they started shipping iDevices where the battery maximum capacity was actually 99% but advertised as 100%

There are some nasty little pedants in our country...

Some people even if it was 91% in a $5000 display the others would still be pendants. For these people what Apple says, its a fact, the rest who don’t agree are a bunch of loosers or pendants.