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.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Adjusts Pro Display XDR Marketing in UK Following Complaints of Misleading Claims
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not delivering what you promise to deliver is the same as stealing.
Well I am sure you know what's wrong with your comment, and the disclaimer is Little Britain. It's a miserable little place.
Apple in the UK: OK, we might not have been totally on the mark with our claims.
Apple in the US: Mehh.
Apple in the US: Mehh.
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.
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.
That the manufacturers of the super-expensive monitors now choose this pathetic way to maintain their numerically low sales is embarrassing.
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.
There are some people that seem to equate "freedom of speech" with "freedom to lie without consequences".
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 have always enjoyed the British ads.
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:
Where did Apple say 100%? I missed that in the original.
? Same here. Maybe we can start a lawsuit together.
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%.
They didn’t make those trillions by not including disclaimers.
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.
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.
Plenty of UK companies get called out - there's a list of recent ones here ...and if you find one, here's the form to get it investigated.
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.
$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.