Apple G5 Commercials Banned (1 Viewer)

[Bob Graz]

I prefer Wendy's burgers to McDonalds Big Macs.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

Seth - but is Avid $999 or as easy to use??

 

[gregstaten]

Patrick, actually you can buy Avid Xpress DV for $695. Sure, a Media Composer costs more than a $999 piece of software, but it *isn't* just software. Media Composers have always included customized hardware as well.

As far as easy to use: have you ever used an Avid editing system? From a heavy-duty editing standpoint a Media Composer absolutely toasts FCP. An Avid can do things that FCP can only dream about.

BTW - reliable sources have it that Apple not only gave the Coen's complete systems, but also staffed them with assistants to keep the systems running.

-greg

 

[Patrick Larkin]

BTW - reliable sources have it that Apple not only gave the Coen's complete systems, but also staffed them with assistants to keep the systems running.

I guarantee this is true. Doesn't dispute the fact that the (1) the Coen Bros agreed to it and (2) they don't need Apple's free services and (3) they made the choice.

 

[John Thomas]

Yeah, um, so the commercial was banned because, er, it had to do with the fact that the claims were unsubstantiated.

Possible branches of discussion from the OT:

Banning commercials
Actual dialogue about G5 v P4 performance
UK v US standards and procedures
Wendys v Mcdonalds (oh, got that one covered)

I like Wendy's over Mcdonalds too.

 

[Garrett Lundy]

McDonalds isn't food!

 

[Chet_F]

I would have to say that any manufacturer of any hardware device tends to use software benchmarks that show favorable performance. It's part of the biz. But maybe that's my perception since I read about it happening about once a week. I gave up on those 'so called' benchmark tests a loooong time ago.

 

[Matt Gordon]

I am curious what the laws are in the U.S for outright lies in advertising?

I don't think so, because I drank a beer once and there weren't any totally hot women that wanted to jump into a hot tub with me or play topless volleyball.

 

[Greg*go]

You must've gotten a skunked bottle then Matt.

As for now, I need to go do the "horizontal dance" with the Twins.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

I would have to say that any manufacturer of any hardware device tends to use software benchmarks that show favorable performance. It's part of the biz. But maybe that's my perception since I read about it happening about once a week. I gave up on those 'so called' benchmark tests a loooong time ago.

Exactly Chet. This UK ban is ridiculous. Across all products, their marketing dept claims that it is the Best or the Best Tasting or the Most Advanced. Its common practice.

The larger UK group that looked at the complaint (from EIGHT people) found that Apple's commercial was fine. It was then turned over to this other group who in turn turned it over to their "in house IT guy" who made the decision. Give me a break.

The facts are well documented on apple's site and numerous others on how the benchmarks were established. Since its comparing Apples and Oranges, different compilers had to be used. Also, perfectly legal tweaks were used and its no different than IBM or Dell's tweaks to the base systems.

Even this respected UK IT website ridiculed the judgement:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/33909.html

 

[MikeSerrano]

Three comments and a quote:

1. "Viewers complained that the advertising was misleading because the main claim was based on the results of limited tests in which the specification of the computers used was configured to give Apple the best results." Otherwise known in the computer industry as "benchmarks". And for the record, the specific parameters that were "configured to give Apple the best results" were using the GCC compiler on both computers (to take platform specific software optimizations out of the equation), and only measuring floating point calculations (at which the G5 excels).

2. Apple is using a definition of a "personal" computer as one that a mere mortal would own. Cray supercomputers and Dual-Xeon servers were not on their comparison list of most powerful personal computers.

3. Advertising is about painting your product in the best possible light.

Shamelessly copied from slashdot:

Dear ITC, please ban ads from the following companies for over-the-top claims:


1. BMW - "The Ultimate Driving Machine". Yeah, says who? I happen to like the Lexus better. I haven't seen evidence from any independent rating agencies to prove this.
2. UPS - "Moving at the speed of bussiness". I have a copy of my physics text in front of me, and the speed of business is not a well-known constant. I haven't seen any independent ratings studying the speed of business and whether UPS can actually keep up.
3. Guiness - "Guiness is good for you". Right then, next.
4. Coca Cola - "Coke is it" What is it and how do we really know that Coke is it? Again, independent review is needed to see what 'it' really is, and whether, in fact, Coke is it or not it.
5. Burger King - "We do it your way". No they don't. My way is devoid of entrails, non-wilted lettuce, and with a proper roll that is very much not like a sponge, so Burger King is misrepresenting 'my way'. They do it one of their ways, but not at all my way.
6. British Airways - "The worlds favorite airline". Right, everyone in the world just loves British Air, especially for the cuisine. That's why Lufthansa gets such a bad rap.
7. Acura - "The True Definition of Luxury. Yours." I've never once spoken with anybody at Acura, and I don't much know that I've ever reflected on the true definition of luxury, so malarky.
8. Sun Microsystems - "We're the . in .com". They're not, really. Noone is. It's a bloody ASCII character, not a company. How pretentious.
9. Qwest - "Ride the light". Light has no mass. It cannot be ridden.
10. Budweiser - "The king of beers". Right. In fact, please ban the sale of Budweiser itself, not just the ads.
11. Panasonic - "Just slightly ahead of our time" A company bloody claiming to engage in time travel! Einstein would have a coronary.

-Mike

 

[Seth--L]

No one pays MSRP for these programs. I picked up the educaitonal version of Avid for $399 (full program, only they just mail you the CDs, so no books but you still get the interactive tutorial and their complete help manual on CD which is very well written). I believe the educational version of FCP is $299.

As for ease of use, the general interface is the same, but Avid has done a much better job reducing many effects/functions down to a single command and boasts many more features. FCP is a good program, but Avid is quite simply better. How can you really comment on Avid if you've never used it?

 

[Ken Chan]

I was going to refrain, but what the heck...

There's nothing that FCP can do that Avid can't do.

That's a bold statement. Given the hundreds, if not thousands, of individual features that each program has, I am skeptical that one program is a perfect superset of the other. I suppose the only way to be able to make such a claim -- to the degree that it would not be banned in the UK -- would be to list each and every feature of FCP and its counterpart in Avid.

//Ken

 

[Seth--L]

When deciding between which one to buy, it's never an issue of "Well Avid can do this and FCP can't" and vise versa. Yes there differences and there are a few very minor features that one has which the other doesn't, but nothing substantial like only in Avid can you pan and zoom a still photograph like they love to do on PBS documentaries (IMO Avid actually does a much better job at this) or only in FCP is there color correction.

Going back to my originally point, you won't be at any disadvantage if you decided to do digital video editing on your PC instead of a Mac. It's now a myth that Macs are better for this.

 

[John Thomas]

"I am curious what the laws are in the U.S for outright lies in advertising?"

"I don't think so"

First off, whaa?

"...because I drank a beer once and there weren't any totally hot women that wanted to jump into a hot tub with me or play topless volleyball. "


Pretty funny (even including the slashdot stuff) but I think we're all adults here and can differentiate between the ludicrous "claims" by some commercials and those that are actually made to be taken seriously. For Apple to run ads that the G5 is the "world's fastest, most powerful personal computer" is not one of those that is meant in jest I wouldn't think.

I suppose had they thrown in "fastest at floating point calculations" there wouldn't have been such a stink made over it.

 

[Joseph S]

If my Mac ever crashes for the second time in 3+ years at the same time as my HTPC goes down, I'm just going to have to use the PB which hasn't ever crashed.

Then again, by the time I got to the other room it wouldn't be an issue anymore.

I think I'll get a Frosty at Wendy's tomorrow, just in case.

 

[David Lawson]

Patrick, I'm on your side, but I don't think anyone would consider The Register a "respected" UK IT website.

 

[Eric_L]

I am curious what the laws are in the U.S for outright lies in advertising?

They would fall under civil juristiction. Anyone who wanted to pursue a suit would be able to. IIt is part of the reason why the courts are log-jammed. Anyone can file a suit for anything.

The burden of proof is on the accuser and the defences are quite liberal. 'It depends on what 'is' is' being a classic example. It assures maximum freedon and still limits abuses.

Of course on political advertising the rules are substantially looser.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

David - theresgister always appears to be non-partisan when it comes to reporting. and respected by real IT people not InfoWorld drones.

Going back to my originally point, you won't be at any disadvantage if you decided to do digital video editing on your PC instead of a Mac. It's now a myth that Macs are better for this.

"You won't be at any disadvantage" UNLESS you want to use the best reasonably priced package on the market. By the way, even the FREE iMovie can pan photographs.

 

[John Thomas]

Fortunately, PCs are just as good at this -and- much better at everything else.