Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I object to the use of the term "United" in United Kingdom. This seems to imply that the citizens are 100% united and the real value falls far short of that. A disclaimer needs to be added.
Well I am sure you know what's wrong with your comment, and the disclaimer is Little Britain. It's a miserable little place.
 
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%
So true. How about a screen with “only” 1% dead pics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alfredo_Delgado
I believe this is an impressive monitor and one I would certainly like to own. But it's more "HiFi" and less Reference in terms of accuracy. Plus that blooming on a $5000 monitor minus the stand is unacceptable.
 
These might seem petty changes but I’m really glad we have a robust advertising standards in the UK. I’ve seen many US ads with charlatans trying to sell all sorts of very dodgy treatments for cancer and so on that are just not allowed here.
 
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.
Any corporation in the market for a $30,000 reference monitor should be smart enough to recognize marketing when said product is being compared to a $5000 monitor.
 
I'm sure none of the people here have such a monitor or even know the professionals opinion on it. Here is a schoolyard gathered again. Have an opinion but do not have professional knowledge. And then write and bitch about how mean the world and especially Apple is. That's poor.

That the manufacturers of the super-expensive monitors now choose this pathetic way to maintain their numerically low sales is embarrassing.
 
These might seem petty changes but I’m really glad we have a robust advertising standards in the UK. I’ve seen many US ads with charlatans trying to sell all sorts of very dodgy treatments for cancer and so on that are just not allowed here.
I couldn't agree more. Apple has been busted in the past for carbon-copying their US advertising over to the UK when this advertising doesn't meet the UK standard of being able to prove these claims. IIRC one of their late 90s ads for the PowerMac was aired in the UK and resulted in an immediate fine for claiming it was the "world's fastest personal computer" or something like that.

The medical advertisements you're talking about are among the very worst things about advertising in America. They tell us to ask our doctor about their product, as if we're the medical experts. It's gross.

I really wish the US had similar regulations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
I'll bet there a great deal of UK-based companies that do imperfect marketing that the UK doesn't call out. Interesting some of the self-righteousness here from people outside the U.S.
 
I couldn't agree more. Apple has been busted in the past for carbon-copying their US advertising over to the UK when this advertising doesn't meet the UK standard of being able to prove these claims. IIRC one of their late 90s ads for the PowerMac was aired in the UK and resulted in an immediate fine for claiming it was the "world's fastest personal computer" or something like that.

The medical advertisements you're talking about are among the very worst things about advertising in America. They tell us to ask our doctor about their product, as if we're the medical experts. It's gross.

I really wish the US had similar regulations.
I have always enjoyed the British ads.

Screenshot 2021-04-12 at 19.04.32.png


I don't know anyone who confuses advertising with a message of truth. Advertising is not an educational event, it always lies or embellishes because it has its mission.

Nevertheless ads can also be funny. And I like the British ones very much now and then.
But 'honest advertising', come on people 😂
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
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%

Not delivering what you promise to deliver is the same as stealing.

So true. How about a screen with “only” 1% dead pics.

These might seem petty changes but I’m really glad we have a robust advertising standards in the UK. I’ve seen many US ads with charlatans trying to sell all sorts of very dodgy treatments for cancer and so on that are just not allowed here.
Where did Apple say 100%? I missed that in the original.

I object to the use of the term "United" in United Kingdom. This seems to imply that the citizens are 100% united and the real value falls far short of that. A disclaimer needs to be added.
😂 Same here. Maybe we can start a lawsuit together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
There are some people that seem to equate "freedom of speech" with "freedom to lie without consequences".

True, but there is a lot of layaway to still deceive in between. I believe that if one is selling a $5000 monitor, the information provided from the start needs to be accurate.

Still not many 32” desktop monitor achieve a 99% DCI-P3, even though it is becoming common on smarphones to reach 100%.
 
Be
I have always enjoyed the British ads.

View attachment 1756828

Anyone who confuses advertising with a message of truth is still a child. Advertising is not an educational event, it always lies or embellishes because it has a mission. That this is now displeasing to so many in one percent is explained by the Macrumors community.

But advertising can also be fun. And I like the British one very much every now and then.
making excuses again I see.
 
I dont think people quite get it. Apple over hype and over marketed their Pro XDR. It is not a Reference Monitor in any shape or form. And uses a sort of consumer marketing for things that professional cares about to on tenth of decimal place.

It was just bad. $5000 for a Reference Monitor would have been a steal. Except it was a $5000 Professional monitor that is comparable to others at $2-4K range.

Without a Stand.

I could give some benefits of doubt to any companies if it was a consumer or even a prosumer devices. But for Professional this just isn't good enough.
 
I have always enjoyed the British ads.

View attachment 1756828

Anyone who confuses advertising with a message of truth is still a child. Advertising is not an educational event, it always lies or embellishes because it has a mission. That this is now displeasing to so many in one percent is explained by the Macrumors community.

But advertising can also be fun. And I like the British one very much every now and then.
That was very portable at the time though.
 
I'll bet there a great deal of UK-based companies that do imperfect marketing that the UK doesn't call out. Interesting some of the self-righteousness here from people outside the U.S.
Actually no, if people have an issue, they can complain to the ASA and the advertising is looked it. If proven to be false or in anyway incorrect, it is changed or removed completely.
 
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.
$5000 will still seem a lot when trying to explain it to the accounts department, but in many companies they will push hard for spending $5000 per screen instead of $50,000. Saying we require 100% P3 monitors, but the cheaper option doesn't have that, makes the discussion much easier.

If 100% P3 is commonly (or just often enough to be known to be a possibility) required for contracts with external companies (it wouldn't surprise me if this is the case in some video industries), lacking it should be in the marketing for possible monitors.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.