Alright, you got me there. Then again, so did the ad. I didn't bother reading the fine print at the bottom.
----------
Cause it's a good name?
Microsoft Inaccurately Depicts Windows Tablet as Larger than iPad in New Comparison Ad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Alright, you got me there. Then again, so did the ad. I didn't bother reading the fine print at the bottom.
----------
Cause it's a good name?
Yeah, it's really stupid. Why can't regular printer sharing work?
----------
Well, providing TRUE information against a competitor is mud-slinging, so I'd say it's worse than that. This ad actually does say that the images are not to scale in small print underneath the specs, but come on. That's like those TV ads that tell you to text a number for a free joke or something and show in fine print on the bottom (yes I paused to check) that you get charged $10/month afterwards.
CQd44
macrumors 6502a
Deliberately misleading ads are another thing I hate.
I'm just never happy with today's advertising.
The image still looks the same, but I haven't done any verification. Currently, it definitely looks spoofed:
----------
How do you know it was modified and not the way it was photographed?
Taking a photograph from far away to make it smaller is still modification by optical means, if you want to dissect this.
There was one ad that claimed MS was investing all their money into advertising vista and none to fix the problems it had, yet there were two service packs and multiple other updates after the fact. But please, don't let something as trivial as facts and proof stop you from worshiping Apple as the God of Gods.
Yeah, it takes tons of financial resources to produce service packs.
Oh and how funny it was that MS quickly got rid of Vista and turned it into Windows 7. The ad wasn't lying, it was true that MS was putting all their money into advertising Vista rather than sending out a solid product from jump street. Don't let something trivial as facts stop you from worshiping the Microsoft and their sorry a$$ CEO Emballmer.
Amazing, so many Microsoft supporters and apologists on a Mac forum. Oh the irony here.
Rogifan
macrumors Penryn
Oh please.
Of course not. Just like they never stated that the entire computer was 5mm. In fact when Schiller announced it he turned the whole thing around so everyone saw the "bulge" in the back.
Dude, calm down, they show the iMac on the website complete with the power cord attached and they state that it comes with the iMac. You're late to the party.
Yeah, it takes tons of financial resources to produce service packs.
Don't let something trivial as facts stop you from worshiping the Microsoft and their sorry a$$ CEO Emballmer.
Amazing, so many Microsoft supporters and apologists on a Mac forum. Oh the irony here.
When I first visited this forum. I was confused, i thought this is an android site. The Apple hate comments are present in all threads. Some are amusingly rabid. I had to check the homepage if this indeed an Apple site. Lol.
callmezippy
macrumors newbie
Better not knowing basic geometry than not having basic reading skills. For the second time now, they don't have the same diagonal measurements. One has a longer diagonal measurement than the other. You keep giving the same example and its still wrong.
Difference between you and I is I actually fully understand the geometry behind it, I also recognize the little loophole that Microsoft decided to exploit, and don't have a blind allegiance to Apple to take it personally, no matter how "inaccurate" the ad may be.
You on the other hand keep thinking both have the same diagonal measurement. Get a calculator, type 10.1 - 9.7 and see what you come up with. If you don't get 0, your analogies are inaccurate and maybe that'll finally get the concept through your head.
Wrong.
You can only use a single measure, like diagonal, to compare sizes of two dimensional objects if they are Similar Objects. Similar Objects are mathematically defined as objects where the ratios of corresponding parts are all equal. In this case, the corresponding sides of the objects are not in equal proportion: 16/4 is not equal to 9/3. Because of this, you can not choose any one measurement and use that to compare size - you will have to compute the areas to make an accurate comparison.
If the objects were mathematically similar, then you could compare just the diagonal, or just the height, or just the width... and that would be an accurate comparison of overall size. In this case, you absolutely cannot. It's just like the house example another poster was using - you can't just compare the lengths or heights of two homes to compare size unless the homes are in equal proportion across all dimension and the same basic shape.
The reason it is OK to compare TV sizes diagonally is that they are all the same proportion. But remember when they weren't? When the 16:9 sets were fist coming out, they were always advertised as Diagonal XX "WIDESCREEN" - that word was put there for two reasons: 1. cool factor, and 2. proper comparison.
Last edited:
Renzatic
Suspended
Clearly MEN are to blame. Only MEN would try and make things look BIGGER than they actually are. While WOMEN would show things the right size or even smaller.
Never met a woman who wore a push up bra, have you?
----------
Friends! Family! I am here to shine upon you the light of TRUTH. To remove the wool that has been cast over your eyes, and expose the LIE that most evil of empires of foisted upon you.
They wish you to believe their tablets are larger than they are. They wish to besmirch the good name of Apple. THIS CANNOT STAND. Such FALSEHOODS shall not be tolerated within these most hallowed of halls! We must stand up and fight for what is right! We will not go gently into that dark night!
The documents I have authored below expose the LIES of Microsoft in all their twisted glory! BEHOLD THE TRUTH, FRIENDS!
THE LIE MOST FOUL
THE TRUTH SO SWEET
...wow. Is this what everyone is getting so worked up about? Man. You people need to take up some hobbies. I mean really. This is pathetic.
Last edited:
the8thark
macrumors 601
He is correct. 10.1 > 9.7 So it has a bigger diagonal length for smaller total surface area. Did MS actually say bigger surface area or are you all just assuming surface area. They probably just meant diagonal length. But they had to edit the ad cause it was becoming bad PR.
Reason077
macrumors 601
STOP! You're confusing me!
How can a 10.1" touchscreen be considered smaller than a 9.7" touchscreen?! I'm no math expert, but where I come from 9.7 is still less inches than 10.1.
This smells like FUD and propoganda designed to discredit a good, honest American company (Microsoft) by the nefarious Apple, who exploit Chinese children and don't pay any tax.
How can a 10.1" touchscreen be considered smaller than a 9.7" touchscreen?! I'm no math expert, but where I come from 9.7 is still less inches than 10.1.
This smells like FUD and propoganda designed to discredit a good, honest American company (Microsoft) by the nefarious Apple, who exploit Chinese children and don't pay any tax.
Yamcha
macrumors 68000
Not a good thing. But Apple has actually done this before. When Apple released the very first aluminum 20" iMac they were hit with a lawsuit.
Apple's marketing showed that the 20" iMac had millions of colours but rather in reality it had 262,144 colours, which means it was a TN-Panel and not a VA or IPS panel like the 24" iMac..
Apple's marketing showed that the 20" iMac had millions of colours but rather in reality it had 262,144 colours, which means it was a TN-Panel and not a VA or IPS panel like the 24" iMac..
Renzatic
Suspended
A square covers more surface area than a similarly sized rectangle. Therefore, a 9.7" 4:3 screen would be slightly larger than a 10.1" 16:9 screen.
Not that this little bit of math logic makes this thread any less dumb. Seriously...
It's. So. Freaking. Dumb.
Everyone does that.
Even me.
I keep a group of Chinese kids locked up in my basement for when I need some lawn work done. And I use them as a tax write off, which I used to have the nerds I kept locked up down there alongside the Chinese kids do for me until they got too expensive to keep around.
Last edited:
I assume Microsoft is promoting a 3rd party Windows tablet vs their own brand because of the lower price point on the Asus vs a similar spec Surface. This seems like a mistake because people's first impression of a Windows tablet won't be as good as it could be with the Surface and if people don't like it they will probably give up on the platform. I've never been impressed with any hardware Asus myself.
callmezippy
macrumors newbie
It has a bigger diagonal, but that doesn't mean it has a bigger screen. The screen is not a line, it is a two dimensional object.
Advertised size is commonly stated by the diagonal measurement, and that is useful for comparing between two devices if and only if the devices are Similar Objects (defined as having the ratios of corresponding parts equal). It only works with TVs because the are pretty much all 16 units by 9 units. Because these tablets are shaped differently, they are not considered Similar Objects, and therefore, you cannot compare them with only 1 dimension.
Hell, the only reason we use diagonal measurement to advertise TV size is because it's easier for people to only have to know 1 measurement. Plus, its a nice, small number so it makes the math easy. Advertising TVs by square inch would make some peoples head assplode. But if all TVs weren't the same proportion, I'm sure we'd see them spec'd differently.
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
I'm reading the Microsoft website.
----------
And the antenna issue was a bit more of an issue than an ad that was changed in a couple of hours.
They said bigger screen, which means surface area because that's how the size of two dimensional objects (like screens) are measured. That's a fact that's not debatable. If you cut one of the screens and rearranged to pieces to match the aspect ratio of the other tablet, the asus screen would fit inside the iPad screen. How can you argue that the screen that can fit inside the other one one is the larger of the two?
It was likely an honest mistake made by directly comparing the diagonal lengths without accounting for aspect ratio, but a mistake nonetheless.
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
And how did Microsoft lie in the video ad that this thread is about?
Renzatic
Suspended
No. That'd be dumb. As long as an advertiser doesn't resort to flat out blatant lies, there shouldn't be an issue with one company mentioning another's products.
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
Never met a woman who wore a push up bra, have you?
----------
Friends! Family! I am here to shine upon you the light of TRUTH. To remove the wool that has been cast over your eyes, and expose the [/b]LIE[/b] that most evil of empires of foisted upon you.
They wish you to believe their tablets are larger than they are. They wish to besmirch the good name of Apple. THIS CANNOT STAND. Such FALSEHOODS shall not be tolerated within these most hallowed of halls! We must stand up and fight for what is right! We will not go gently into that dark night!
The documents I have authored below expose the LIES of Microsoft in all their twisted glory! BEHOLD THE TRUTH, FRIENDS!
THE LIE MOST FOUL
Image
THE TRUTH SO SWEET
Image
...wow. Is this what everyone is getting so worked up about? Man. You people need to take up some hobbies. I mean really. This is pathetic.
Amen.
----------
Where is this stated as the industries standard interpretation?
alexkywalker
macrumors member
It's a brilliant move on Microsoft's side, and I guess this is MacRumors way of trying to deviate attention, by pointing out a petty flaw because the point of the commercial was not about screen size but functionality.
Face it folks, Steve is dead, and Apple is in need of another comeback or it will fall behind very quickly from mainstream to fanboys only.
Face it folks, Steve is dead, and Apple is in need of another comeback or it will fall behind very quickly from mainstream to fanboys only.
AppleScruff1
macrumors G4
I had hoped that MR would have updated the article by now.
- Status