
Lying Microsoft Advertising - xenophanes
http://www.curi.us/1571-lying-microsoft-advertising
======
guelo
Here's a proportional image of a VivoTab-shaped rectangle on top of an iPad-
shaped rectangle, <http://i.imgur.com/UvhNuTA.png>

I think the bigger dishonesty is the omission of screen resolution. The
VivoTab is 1366x768 vs iPad's 2048x1536. That's three times more pixels
crammed into an approximately similar area.

~~~
mtgx
They do the same with the ads against Google, too. They compare themselves in
some areas where they can win, and of course disregard all the other areas
where they lose. Or worse, they accuse Google of something themselves are
doing.

It was pretty much the whole strategy for the "Windows Phone 8 Challenges",
too, for which they picked tests where only WP8 can win, and even when they
lost they tried to work around acknowledging a win for the Android or iPhone
owner.

~~~
socillion
> They compare themselves in some areas where they can win, and of course
> disregard all the other areas where they lose.

Aren't you describing how marketing has worked since the dawn of time? I'm
genuinely curious why this is worthy of discussion except as an example of how
companies commonly market their product.

It seems preposterous to me to expect that companies would willfully enumerate
aspects of their product that are weaker than the competition.

~~~
gbog
Just if you don't know: comparative marketing is disallowed in certain @
countries, since dawn of times.

@ edit: maybe most?

~~~
jordo37
I would like to seem a fact supporting this, I have never been to a country
where comparing objects in ads was outlawed, but to be honest I have spent
most of my life in the US and travled only to Western Europe.

~~~
pfortuny
Spain is one of them. I cannot quote the law but simple experience shows it.

Edit: there is some EU law about it [1] (it was bound to be...).

In the end, as you can only compare 'objetively', you will never do it
(because your advert will become boring, mostly). So jokes like Microsoft does
about Google are outlawed.

[1]
[http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/consumers/consumer_in...](http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/consumers/consumer_information/l32010_en.htm)

~~~
vsl
So is Czech Republic. Comparisons are against "common XXX", not specific
brands.

------
thezilch
Hanlon's razor, or in Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774):
"...misunderstandings and neglect create more confusion in this world than
trickery and malice. At any rate, the last two are certainly much less
frequent."

The same box, in dimensions, was used for the ASUS VivoTab Smart [0], Dell XPS
10 [1], HP ENVY x2 [2], and Microsoft Surface RT [3]. WTF lies!?!? Nay, the
page designer was probably just neglectful -- eyeballed or baselined each
iteration from a single, different model. Also, every screen manufacturer or
advertising will speak towards the diagonal length, where the VivoTab has a
lengthier, "bigger" screen.

[0]
[http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/...](http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/274c5367-1fbb-43b6-aada-
fa24829ca97d_10.png)

[1]
[http://res1.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/...](http://res1.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/8180388a-dfce-4a93-8097-d0b25852ea70_10.png)

[2]
[http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/...](http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/3b34067b-7685-4fba-
abfc-d93ed7aefb20_10.png)

[3]
[http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/...](http://res2.windows.microsoft.com/resbox/en/6.2/2012-win8ga/4db5bb15-2b36-42f8-93d4-fd33e68323be_10.png)

~~~
redblacktree
However, they do flat-out lie in the text.

> At the bottom, Microsoft writes, "The ASUS VivoTab Smart is lighter than the
> iPad, has a bigger touchscreen...". False. It does not have a "bigger
> touchscreen".

~~~
recursive
It depends how you define "bigger". There is arguably some good-faith
definition of "bigger" for which it's true. (like diagonal measurement)

~~~
redblacktree
I'm sure that their lawyers would argue that. I think that a reasonable person
comparing screen sizes would be interested in area, not diagonal length.

~~~
jwoah12
I disagree. Screen sizes are always quoted in diagonal length.

edit: Not to say that it is _unreasonable_ to think of screen size as area,
but I think it is also reasonable to think in diagonal length, since that is
the way monitors and TVs are generally advertised.

~~~
milkshakes
The fact screen sizes are quoted in diagonal length does not contradict the
assertion that reasonable people are more concerned with screen area.

~~~
kenjackson
I disagree. I think people SHOULD be more concerned with screen area, but
generally aren't.

No one really reports screen area. I can tell you the diagonal off the top of
my head of most hero phones, but I couldn't tell you the screen area. In
general the same could be said for TVs and Monitors.

It's a hard explanation to give to most people: "Yes, our diagonal is larger,
but due to the aspect ratio, the total area available for the screen is
actually smaller." We get this on HN, but I guarantee that this would not make
things substantially less complex for most people.

That said, they should have asterisk'ed it.

~~~
pessimizer
You didn't disagree with the comment that you replied to, which said that the
fact screen sizes are quoted in diagonal length does not contradict the
assertion that reasonable people are more concerned with screen area. You're
just making a different assertion.

~~~
thezilch
Well, no one has asserted facts, only that "reasonable people" care about
area, despite no screens being marketed that way. Nonetheless, MS has changed
their imagery and copy, and reasonable people will buy these products no more
or less than the previous revision -- probably more.

------
anxx
It's only in the US that I have seen advertisements for a product include
direct bashing of a competitor's product. I am not talking about a list of
features where you show in which way yours is superior; that is still
acceptable (although also deceiving much of the time). I am talking about ads
like the Nimoy-Quinto Audi commercial where Nimoy had stupid problems fitting
stuff into the Mercedes.

This is such a jarring way to advertise, it's like watching a bully beat a
defenseless kid - does anybody feel more sympathy towards the product this
way?

~~~
Lewton
Advertising like that is illegal here in denmark. it's one of the biggest
'culture shocks' I had when visiting the USA. Turning on the tv and seeing an
ad openly trashing another product (Along side with seeing a movie edited for
tv and broken up with ads every 10 minutes. Also illegal in denmark)

The ad in question was for some kind of medicine for upset stomachs.. A guy is
sitting at a bar complaining about his stomach going "I tried this medicine"
_holds competitors product up to the camera_ "But it didn't work AT ALL" and
then his friend saying "oh there's your problem, this will fix it"..

Very bizarre and shockingly disgusting way to advertise (for someone who grew
up in a culture without it)

~~~
HelloMcFly
> Very bizarre and shockingly disgusting way to advertise (for someone who
> grew up in a culture without it)

Can you explain why you think this way? Sure, it's not polite, but I don't see
how competing for market share would or should be a gentleman's game.

~~~
Lewton
It's disgusting for someone who's not used to it, the same way that offensive
and overtly graphical language can be disgusting to someone who grew up in a
puritanical household.

It was just a culture shock from being exposed to something that seemed vulgar
compared to what I'm used to.

.... and then there was the political ads... jeez :p

~~~
HelloMcFly
Right, but I'm asking you go a little deeper than just seemingly using the
word "disgusting" again. I get that you find it disgusting, but can you
introspect a little bit about why? I'm genuinely curious.

What is it about your puritanical household that makes an ad meant to
positions oneself in a superior light vs. their competitors "disgusting"?

~~~
HelloMcFly
If it was down to me and another candidate for a job then I'd have no problem
saying "Look, you want to do X and Y(e.g., multitask); the other candidate
doesn't have experience with X and his scores on Y weren't great ( _let's just
say I know this_ ). My experience and test scores are superior for what you
want to do, and what you want me to."

Now, that's more civil than the world of advertising, but it's the same
general principle. Commercial tend to make it a little bit more humorous.
Comparisons aren't always polite, but they're often appropriate.

~~~
takluyver
That's interesting. Personally, if I knew something like that, I think I'd
make sure to highlight points where I'd compare favourably to the other
candidate, but I'd leave it to the interviewers to actually make the
comparison, rather than telling them his weaknesses.

------
NiekvdMaas
I remember a keynote a Steve Jobs where he did something very similar: he
presented a 3D pie chart, where the Apple part was highly distorted.

Picture:
[http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/Jobs_08_keynote_dsc_0...](http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/Jobs_08_keynote_dsc_0143x.jpg)

Source:
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2008/jan/21/liesda...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2008/jan/21/liesdamnliesandstevejobs)

~~~
kemiller
A trick of perspective is a lesser lie than specifically claiming a smaller
screen is bigger.

~~~
aninhumer
Especially when combined with an accurate numerical reference.

------
glhaynes
I clicked the title expecting it to be hyperbolic outrage at an advertising
half-truth, but — yeah, that really is flat-out wrong. I can see how it could
perhaps happen unintentionally, but Microsoft should definitely change the ad
after they see this.

~~~
xenophanes
I'm pretty sure it got flagged off the front page by other people who expected
the same from the title.

It dropped from #12 to #40 while the age went from around 17 to 19min and
votes went up from 6 to 8. That can't be right without flags.

It's now #31 with 13 points and 27min, might get back on. It was also #31 less
than a minute ago with 11 points, but 2 quick votes didn't move it up. That
seems odd. Maybe I don't understand how this works, I don't know.

EDIT: and now it jumped to #7, still with 13 points. There must be some delay
before stories move around, but I really don't get it.

EDIT 2: #1 and Daring Fireball picked it up. I really don't get to complain
anymore :D [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/05/23/screen-size-
shen...](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/05/23/screen-size-shenanigans)

~~~
jmspring
Seems like a lot of energy wondering about the dynamics of what people think
about a posting.

~~~
xenophanes
Wondering about the HN algorithm, not about what people think. And I _like_ to
wonder about things.

EDIT: It's #10 now. The three directly above it are all older with at least
100 fewer upvotes. It's gotta be flags. Apparently flagging front page stories
lowers their ranking a _lot_. Interesting, IMO.

~~~
jlgreco
The HN algorithm is more than just a function of time, upvotes, and flags. At
the very least there is also a flamewar detection algorithm that shuffles
flamewar inciting posts down. This algorithm, or similar, is also used to hide
the 'reply' links during flamewars.

------
olegbl
Clearly, no other company ever tried to tweak sizing or dimension of products
in diagrams for their own benefit. Definitely not Apple.

[http://www.pcworld.com/article/238047/apple_offers_flawed_ev...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/238047/apple_offers_flawed_evidence_in_lawsuit_against_samsung.html)

[http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/195473/apple-
fi...](http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/195473/apple-files-
inaccurate-evidence-dutch-samsung-case)

~~~
itg
So that makes this deceitful ad by Microsoft okay?

~~~
olegbl
No, but this article was a bit of sensationalist hype (which, btw, I thought
was against hacker news conduct?) This kind of stuff should be taken in
context.

~~~
CognitiveLens
sensationalist hype? It presents calculations of area, and states that the
objective comparisons made by MS are objectively wrong.

It doesn't even say that the ASUS tablet is worse or that the iPad is better.
This is possibly the least sensationalist article I've ever seen that mentions
both Apple and Microsoft.

~~~
FireBeyond
How is a diagonal length a calculation of area? There is no way to
specifically determine area given a diagonal.

------
benawabe896
It seems to me as though most of Microsoft's advertising lately feels a tad
deceitful/disingenuous. Whether it's trying to convince that Bing really is
better than Google (really it is I promise), or that Windows 8 just blows
people away with it's ease of use, I feel as though the campaigns are trying
to convince me that I am the problem. Maybe I'm being unfair... not sure, it's
just how it hits me.

~~~
potatolicious
This is a big part of why I can't take Microsoft seriously these days. I don't
know if it's a function of their corporate culture, but they seem utterly
incapable of being honest - either in their advertising or even with
themselves.

Every major failure is couched as some kind of success. Windows 8 has been a
flop no matter which way you cut it, but if you listen to Microsoft's external
and internal messaging Win8 is a dramatic success that has sold like hotcakes.

I'm pretty sure if Microsoft was in charge of Chernobyl they'd find some way
to spin it into a successful advancement of nuclear safety.

At some point you just have to come out with a mea culpa. Sorry guys, this was
crappy, we will be better. Not every product is a smash hit, not every
decision the right one - your ability to own up to these and fix these are
_infinitely_ more important to me as a customer than your ability to look me
in the eye and call the sky purple with a perfect deadpan.

~~~
Tylerdt
How about things like Chromebooks failing utterly to sell even more than
Windows RT yet Google proclaiming BS stats like topping Amazon instead of
releasing real figures? [http://www.zdnet.com/first-real-world-usage-figures-
suggest-...](http://www.zdnet.com/first-real-world-usage-figures-suggest-
chromebooks-are-struggling-7000014102/)

Or like proclaiming that one Celeron Chromebook had a Core processor? That
story won't get upvoted on HN saying Google is lying(a much bigger lie than
this one) but it's open season on Microsoft. PR is everywhere but people color
it with their own biases.

~~~
rbanffy
So, one company making misleading statements makes it OK for every company to
do the same...

~~~
kenjackson
No, but it is funny how only MS makes #1 on HN when they do so. Whereas if
Google does so it is immediately flagged beyond recognition with everyone
saying, "Well they aren't as bad Microsoft probably sort of. Remember 15 years
ago when MS did this!"

~~~
rbanffy
This post is not about Google - it's about Microsoft.

------
manacit
This, among other things, is what happens when Microsoft hires a Political
Strategist to be their Vice President for Strategic and Special Projects[1]

Frankly between their "Scroogled" campaign and all of their other
advertisements, I'm starting to lose a lot of what respect I had for MSFT.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Penn>

------
danbruc
(Sadly) advertising is just about that - bending the truth until it looks
good; highlighting your strengths and not mentioning your weaknesses. If
showing two images that are not to scale is the only thing wrong with this
add, the headline is really exaggerated.

And the diagonal is larger, nowhere did they mention that larger display means
larger display area. So at best the used metric is unintuitive, meaningless
and/or underspecified, but that's far from lying. Welcome to the world of
advertising.

~~~
mikeash
Just because everyone does it doesn't mean it's not lying and doesn't mean the
headline is exaggerated.

~~~
danbruc
Admittedly the add is lying if you use the weaker interpretation (To convey a
false image or impression.) instead of the stronger and more common one (To
give false information intentionally.). Yes, the images do the former form of
lying but the numbers are still correct.

But if you start to use the weaker interpretation of lying to judge adds, than
all adds not mentioning the product's weaknesses are lying and I guess the
number of non-lying adds will settle very close to zero.

~~~
mikeash
How is showing two images not to scale not giving false information
intentionally? The whole point of having the graphical representation is so
that you can compare them visually, otherwise they could just list the
dimension as a number. They intend for the reader to compare them visually,
and the result of that comparison is an incorrect understanding of the
relative size. The only way this isn't giving false information intentionally
is if they made their diagram not to scale by accident somehow, which strikes
me as unlikely.

~~~
danbruc
It does not give false information intentionally because they nowhere claim
that the images are to scale - it is just your assumption that they should be
to scale. Therefore it is (almost surly intentionally) deceiving by exploiting
a reasonable assumption. But for me this is as much lying as a price of $9.99
is lying because it is trying to trick the customer into the impression that
the price is way below $10.00.

(Almost) every add uses beautiful images, good looking people, nice music and
so on just to manipulate you. I don't say that this is a necessarily a good
thing, but it is definitely a wrong thing to bash a single add for doing this
and behaving as if nobody else does it.

\---

Because the text 10.1" is wider than 9.7" they could have ended up with
similar images by just making them the same height and using the same padding
on the left and the right (but they did not - the 10.1" image has more padding
than the 9.7" image).

~~~
mikeash
If people are going to interpret the diagram as being to scale, and they know
people are going to interpret the diagram as being to scale, and they
deliberately make it not to scale in order to mislead, then they are lying. I
don't really care about some nebulous "it doesn't _say_ they're to scale" that
neither side of this ever considered.

~~~
danbruc
As someone else pointed out, they used the same image for all models, the
11.6" has the same image (actually they removed the images a few minutes ago
and now there are only numbers). Admittedly the images are not to scale even
for the largest model but I think they just created an image larger than that
of the iPad and did not really think about scale.

If you insist that showing the images not to scale is a really bad thing, what
about the add photos of say a Big Mac? Mine never looks that beautiful, fresh
and large. Bad thing? No, advertising. No one seriously expects that the
product exactly matches the one shown in an add. That's what they do,
highlight things, hide other things, make their product look good.

I am with you, they could have avoided the images but the result is not much
different - most consumers will see 10.1" vs 9.7" and conclude the 10.1"
display is the larger one.

~~~
mikeash
If they showed a Big Mac next to a Whopper where the Big Mac was clearly
bigger, but the real-life Whopper was actually bigger (no clue if this is
true, just an example), in an explicit size comparison, I would have no
compunction at all calling it a lie.

------
jere
It's like the Megahertz Myth. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth>

Their claim is technically true, if the way you agree to measure size is
diagonally (this is how TVs are advertised after all), and also pretty
meaningless and disingenuous. What I find interesting is that Apple on the
other hand rarely seems to focus the message on numbers, even when they have a
real numerical advantage.

~~~
frogpelt
Technically, their claim is completely false.

Could I also claim that a 12" by 1" touchscreen is bigger than a 10.1" since
it has a 12.04" diagonal?

~~~
michael_h
Sure. The operative part of that sentence is: _if the way you agree to measure
size is diagonally_

~~~
glhaynes
But the way we measure the size of things is ... by their size. We could just
as well say their statement is true if we agree to define "bigger" as
"smaller" and vice-versa.

~~~
jmcqk6
I'm definitely not defending microsoft here, because it's not something I
understand the reasoning of. For some reason, we decide to measure
monitors/tvs/displays by their diagonal. I don't get it, but that's what
happens. When someone says '15 in screen' they mean 'a screen with a 15 in
diagonal'.

When microsoft says 'it has a bigger screen' it is a shortcut to saying 'the
ipad has a 9.7 in screen, and we have a 10.1 in screen. therefore ours is
bigger.' Given the context of talking about screens, this does make sense.

You can point out that 'oh, but the ipad has a bigger screen by area' and you
are correct. But that doesn't change the fact that the number associated with
screensize for every fricken screen on sale today is bigger on their product
than it is for the ipad. That's not a lie.

~~~
glhaynes
I wouldn't be surprised if they can legally say "The Asus tablet has a 10.1"
screen and the iPad has a 9.7" screen", but I'd strongly expect they need a "*
based on diagonal measurement" footnote to get away with calling that display
"bigger". But I'm not a lawyer.

------
josefresco
In defense of a wider/more horizontal form factor, it sure helps when
displaying more than one app at-a-time. Which _coincidentally_ is one of the
main selling points of Win8.

I know that sounds a bit snarky, but it sure sounds and feels better than
fuzzy math.

~~~
ajross
It's also better for most video content; an iPad watching a 16:9 TV stream is
only using 75% of the screen. Apple itself has moved to a widescreen format
for the iPhone 5, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a future iPad do that
too. I think there's lots of value to squarer aspect ratios for desktop/text
usage (c.f. the Chromebook Pixel moving slightly in the opposite direction),
but for a media device like a phone or tablet I'd expect them all to converge
on the aspect used by content.

Obviously none of that has to do with the bad math in the MS ad. The iPad
screen is, in fact, larger than the Asus one.

------
Bill_Dimm
There are other, more subtle, sleazy things in that ad. Microsoft seems to
choose how many places to display after decimal points in a "convenient" way.

Large batter life is good, so Microsoft displays "9.5" for its product, but
"10" (not "10.0") for the iPad, making it less visually obvious (same number
of digits) that the iPad is better.

Small weight is good, so Microsoft displays "1.3" for its product (not
"1.30"), but "1.44" for the iPad, making the Microsoft number seem more
favorable (one less digit) than it really is.

Of course, numbers are numbers and anyone that is even half-way thinking
realizes that 9.5 and 10 are virtually the same (within 5%), and 1.3 and 1.44
are virtually the same (within 10%), but altering the number of digits
probably does have some psychological impact on people that aren't really
thinking.

~~~
jwoah12
You do realize that in both cases they are eliminating a trailing 0, right? It
is a _major_ stretch to try to say this is sleazy.

~~~
Bill_Dimm
A) Actually, I don't _know_ that it is a zero that is being dropped, even
though that may be likely. If numbers were being reported by a scientist,
dropped digits would be an indication that the measurement wasn't accurate to
any more digits than those displayed, so 1.3 might really be 1.3476 but their
measuring device just couldn't measure it that accurately.

B) I think it's pretty unusual to offer up a side-by-side comparison of
numbers that aren't showing the same number of digits after the decimal point
(hence, not a _major_ stretch to call it sleazy). Do you ever see prices
quoted as "$12.3" instead of "$12.30"?

~~~
jwoah12
A) I was just assuming that your numbers were correct. Regardless, though, the
numbers aren't being reported by a scientist. They are being reported to
consumers in an advertisement. I wouldn't call leaving off sig figs, or even
rounding, sleazy in this case. But we probably just disagree on that.

B) $12.3 isn't a very good comparison because in the context of currency, the
numbers after the decimal really signify number of cents, not a fraction of a
dollar (although they are equivalent).

~~~
Bill_Dimm
_I was just assuming that your numbers were correct._

Just to be clear, these are not _my_ numbers, they are Microsoft's numbers. If
the weight is really 1.3476 lbs and Microsoft reports it as 1.3, the number is
"correct" and they've told no lie, but it is certainly unfair to print the
competing number to an extra digit (1.44). On the other hand, if the weight is
really 1.3476 and they reported it as 1.30 that would be a flat-out lie (as in
"class action lawsuit for false advertising"). So, did they print it as "1.3"
instead of "1.30" because zeros aren't first-class numbers, or because the
zero would be a lie? As I said earlier, I'm willing to believe that it is
_probably_ really 1.30, but none of us know that for sure -- Microsoft has
made no statement about what comes after the 3.

Regarding (B), we have "cents" because we consider two digits after the
decimal point to be significant in most contexts (not on your U.S. federal tax
forms, if my memory is correct, since you are instructed to supply only whole
dollar amounts, and not for stock prices that may have many more significant
digits than 2 after the decimal). If you put an item on a digital scale it
displays either 1.3 or 1.30 or 1.300 depending on how many digits are
considered significant. To do a side-by-side comparison where you are treating
the 2nd digit after the decimal as significant in one case but not in another
is odd.

------
melling
I don't have the book handy but I think Edward Tufte discussed this sort of
lying in his classic book.

[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17744.The_Visual_Display_...](http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17744.The_Visual_Display_of_Quantitative_Information)

------
runjake
If you hate this, be sure to politely register your displeasure with @fxshaw
on Twitter. Frank is the head PR guy for Microsoft.

Whether you like Microsoft or not, they have some promising new products, but
I feel like they are sabotaging their efforts with lies like this.

------
codegeek
reminds of the ad Microsoft is running that they call "Scroogled". They claim
that Bing is better than google and even have ppl on TV test it out. I tried
taking that challenge and bing fails 95% of the time compared to google
results.

~~~
HelloMcFly
Bing has won that test for my, my girlfriend, and 3/5 of my office mates. I
still use Google most of the time out of habit, but I was still surprised by
the results.

I'm not saying I'm representative of any particular group, but I don't think
the fact that it didn't work for you makes the whole campaign a farce.

~~~
thedufer
IIRC, they won by suggesting single-word search strings. For very easy
searches, Bing slightly edges out Google, but no one cares, because both of
them have the thing you're looking for on the first page. For those awful
long-tail searches, Bing completely flames out, while Google often does a
decent job. For a more interesting test, try describing things as if you know
what you're looking for but can't remember the name (movies, products, etc.).

~~~
HelloMcFly
I can only speak for myself and say I was definitely not using single-word
search strings. That would be awful uncritical of me.

------
xenophanes
LilValleyBigEgo, looks like you are hellbanned. All your comments are dead.
<https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=LilValleyBigEgo>

You need to make a new account.

~~~
lawnchair_larry
Wow, looks like he was hellbanned for a year and a half, still contributing,
and I don't see anything wrong with the few posts prior to the ban. Account
hasn't submitted spam. What an abuse of the hellban feature.

~~~
jamesaguilar
To say that, don't you need to know that no other reason was in play? For
example, he made a lot of unpopular comments before he was banned. Perhaps he
made some other accounts to upvote himself to counteract this. My point is,
you don't actually know that any abuse occurred unless you know why he was
banned, and you don't.

~~~
Dylan16807
That doesn't sound like an offense that should be hellbanned.

I can put it another way: if your comments contribute then your account
shouldn't be banned. External factors don't matter at all. Even if you're
hitler.

So it doesn't matter if there was something behind the scenes, it should have
been dealt with _there_.

~~~
DanBC
Are your really saying that accounts who sockpuppet and vote-ring shouldn't be
banned? (not saying this is what happened to the account being discussed)

~~~
Dylan16807
Regular-banned maybe. Good potential for them to reregister and stop the bad
behavior. Best method is blocking them from getting upvotes but if their
comments are _productive_ then they should not be _hidden_. Hellban is the
worst option, even below ignoring the situation. Who cares if someone gets
fake points, especially when points are hidden. (Fake votes on submissions are
a potential issue but that's not what we're discussing)

~~~
DanBC
Points on comments are hidden but have an effect - that post is raised and
that commenter's posts are raised.

------
ywang0414
This is not much of a surprise at all. Corps have been doing this sort of
lying right in our face strategy for years. Same as when T-Mobile started
calling their HSPA network 4G and claiming they have the largest "4G" network
in the nation. All complete BS but the masses are buying into it. It's just
marketing after all.

I really think there needs to be a mainstream service perhaps run by the
government to regulate all these commercials. After all, information is the
most valuable commodity. And shoveling mis-information down people's throats
might as well be poisoning people directly.

------
piyush_soni
Well, I don't see where are they lying. There might have scaled the images
differently for various reasons. Of course, they could have done it the proper
way, but it can't be called outright 'lying'.

------
kostya-kow
Advertisement always bends facts to one side or the other. Usually ads put
extra emphasis on a positive thing, while omitting the negative.

Even more often ads don't use facts -- they just play on people's feelings.

In any case, the goal of advertising is to deceive the buyer, not not inform
them. So I don't think anything should be expected from any company that needs
to satisfy shareholders. I don't see how Apple's ads with a man asking stupid
questions from kids, or Droid's ads with cool robots is morally better then
what M$ is doing. But in this case, MS is just being stupid and ruins their
image. They don't even _pretend_ to be a company that tries to be morally
good. If this becomes more popular with mainstream media, the ad will hurt MS
much more then it benefits them, same as this piece of FUD that got to the
frontpage of /r/linux:

[https://www.microsoft.com/hk/windowsserver/compare/windows-s...](https://www.microsoft.com/hk/windowsserver/compare/windows-
server-vs-red-hat-linux.mspx)

In my opinion, all ads should be banned. It's a huge useless industry of
liers. Corporations that are good with ads are not necessarily good at making
products, but they get unfair advantage. It also distracts the main effort of
from making a good product.

------
chollida1
In chrome(Version 26.0.1410.64 m) the linked page just show up as blank.

Is this some sort of odd way of saying that Microsoft isn't lying in their
advertising?

~~~
xenophanes
Refresh the page.

Server problems, sorry. I added page caching a little while ago and also moved
the image to dropbox instead of my own server (I hope that is OK to do).

------
nhebb
Big picture wise, I don't think Microsoft's advertising group is very good. In
this case Hanlon's Razor probably applies. I don't know what target market
would find the Surface Pro dancing commercials compelling. (My guess is:
none.) The new Office ads focus on silly things like deleting large numbers of
emails, which is underwhelming from a sales-worthy feature standpoint. And
then there were the early Windows 8 ads with the little girl creating art in
the new Paint app. Anyone who has purchased color ink would look at that wall
of art and see huge dollar signs (at least I did).

I don't know if I would blame the ad group though. When the ads focus of the
fluffy stuff, I take it as a sign that they struggled to find real features
and benefits to push.

------
alipang
Reminds of the old download page for Internet Explorer 10, which had some nice
quotes like: "Chrome users ... try IE10!"

Of course the ... hid something like "Yeah, if you're bored with Chrome, try
IE10".

Another nugget from the same page was the qoute "Incredibly fast!" with the
source set as " - Tweet".

------
Ihmahr
Remember the camera incident with their new phone?

~~~
Spearchucker
I remember it well. It was indeed a PR gaff, _not_ Microsoft's ad (Nokia shot
that ad), but not misleading - the camera delivers. I know this because I use
that camera daily, and it really is as stable (if not more) than that ad
suggested it was.

------
geuis
And no one has mentioned the second, more obvious "lie" that jumped right out.

It says the iPad doesn't have Office. Well, that's because Microsoft hasn't
released a version of Office for iOS.

I don't know the right word for it, but that's not honest either.

~~~
Negitivefrags
Lets say you have two TVs. One TV says "We have Smart Screen 5.0 technology
unlike that TV"

Would you say. "Thats a lie. The only reason that other TV doesn't have Smart
Screen 5.0 technology is because you didn't offer to sell it to your
competitor."

I don't think you should be under any obligation, legal or moral to be forced
to licence your competitive advantage to your competitor.

~~~
jlgreco
> _"We have Smart Screen 5.0 technology unlike that TV"_

Slightly offtopic: What drives me crazy is when Company A will say _"TV A has
FizzBuzz(tm) Technology, TV B does not!"_ and Company B says _"TV B has
BuzzFizz(tm) Technology, TV A does not!"_ When FizzBuzz(tm) and BuzzFizz(tm)
are really just the same shit with different trademarks.

It is probably "different" technology enough of the time, in that it does the
same thing but in a different way with a different set of patents... but
still.

------
kunai
This is not only a problem that exists with Microsoft. Many PC makers push
crap "widescreen" 16:9 displays with far less viewable area than a 4:3 screen,
and obscenely little vertical res/height, and push it as a "feature."

I'm sick of Apple being the only one with decent displays. Why do the PC
makers insist on using 16:9 displays when they HAVE the money and the power to
afford 16:10, 4:3, or even 3:2, a la Chromebook Pixel?

If it's just to cut costs, then, Lenovo, Toshiba, HP, Dell, Acer, -- fuck you.

<http://xkcd.com/732/>

~~~
jlgreco
I used to assume it was about cutting costs, but I'm not so sure anymore.
Samsung apparently has a 3200x1800 (16:9) at 13.3" laptop coming out. That
beats the chromebook pixel by a decent amount and certainly cannot be cheap...
I think they must have some market research that suggests people actually do
want 16:9 for whatever reason.

------
alwaysdoit
Why have we let the standard measurement of screen area be done with units of
length?

Sometimes I wonder if the proliferation of widescreens is due to actual
demand, or just being more marketable.

~~~
takluyver
At a guess, when all screens had similar aspect ratio, a length measurement
was more convenient: you can measure it without a calculator, and people can
hold their fingers apart and think 'about this big'. We don't seem to have the
same kind of intuition with area measurements.

I suspect widescreens have a bit of both. For watching videos or having two
documents on screen, a widescreen does make more sense.

------
orangethirty
This really shows how they are playing catch-up to Apple.

~~~
nivla
Yes,

In the mobile world everyone is playing catch up with Apple.

In the desktop world everyone is playing catch up with Microsoft.

In the search world everyone is playing catch up with Google.

In business you play catch up with the industry leader till you become one.
Its part of being a business. Your Point?

~~~
orangethirty
The point that _you missed_ is that you can either play catch up, or you can
change the game. MS has the resources to change the game, but they lack the
ability to do it.

~~~
nivla
Similar to the desktop market, I think the tablet market is too saturated to
change the game. You can only play catchups now.

------
ianmcgowan
It also seems somewhat disingenuous to complain about the lack of office apps
on iPad, when MSFT is clearly to blame for that lack...

~~~
nivla
Well I would love an official Youtube app for my Windows Phone but Google
doesn't make one and has no intention of. Can I blame Google?

------
ebf
They removed the screen images and changed the copy so it says

>The ASUS VivoTab Smart is lighter than the iPad, has more ports, works with
more printers, lets you see two apps at once, and runs Microsoft Office and
other desktop programs.

Glad this 346 upvotes and 216 comments compared to the Xbox threads that were
flagged off the frontpage. Great discussion Hacker News!

------
patja
They should make more of the lack of multiple user accounts on the iPad. Most
families I know share an iPad among the whole household. The lack of separate
user accounts is a major pain point.

~~~
tmzt
I still remember when Steve praised Microsoft's fast user switching feature
during an Apple keynote before introducing the OS X version.

Maybe something like "App Profiles" that have access to only a subset of the
installed applications would work.

------
codereflection
Although it's just a legend, this article just made me think of the tuna
"Guaranteed not to turn pink in the can!" marketing spin.

------
danbruc
They just changed the images - now there are only numbers.

------
kenjackson
Looks like they changed the ad. Hardly seems malicious.

------
laureny
> I got the link from Daring Fireball.

Shocking.

------
Tylerdt
Video ad is here. Is there a size difference in the video too?

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=86JMcy5OqZA)

~~~
xenophanes
Video looks accurate to me. iPad taller and less wide.

------
jonas_maj
Apple's 4:3 screen for tablets are outdated and completely unusable. 16:9 is
the way to go for any modern computing device. 4:3 is terrible for watching HD
videos or browsing websites -- all of which are made with a 16:9 screen in
mind.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
That’s true if you think tablets should only be used in landscape orientation.
I like using the iPad in portrait mode, but on 16:9 screens portrait mode is
very awkward for everything but reading novels.

As for smartphones: the maximum width of those screens is dictated by the
average size of a human’s palm. If you make the screens wider than 2.5", for
most people it will be uncomfortable to operate the phone with one hand. Look
at the Galaxy Note[1] (which is 3.3" wide), it’s practically impossible to use
with one hand.

[1] [http://www.engadget.com/gallery/samsung-galaxy-note-ii-
hands...](http://www.engadget.com/gallery/samsung-galaxy-note-ii-hands-
on/5241440/)

~~~
jonas_maj
For something you need to hold with both hands(which I assume how you use your
iPad), I think the landscape orientation is more natural and comfortable.
That's how we hold a book while reading lying down.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
The vast majority of books are taller than they are high. It’s way more
natural to read books on the iPad in portrait orientation, and that’s also how
it’s shown in iPad commercials[1].

[1] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhC40QCZML0>

~~~
jonas_maj
When you open a book (which is the only way you can read it!), it is
definitely wider than it is tall. And hence I find it much more natural to
hold a tablet in the landscape mode.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Most books have pages that are taller than they are high, the text blocks on
those pages are definitely taller than they are wide. Paragraphs don’t run in
one line from the verso to the recto[1]. A ‘page’ is one side of a sheet, you
don’t read two pages at the same time.

[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recto_and_verso>

