While Apple is currently boasting that its Mac computers aren't susceptible to viruses - it's running a commercial effectively saying there were 114,000 known viruses on Windows PC's last year and none on Macs - some security experts reckon that viruses do present an increasing threat especially now that most new Macs are based on Intel hardware.
More in this HEXUS.headline.
Anyone able to tell us the real score with Macs and viruses?
Macs are susceptible to viruses, just different ones to the PC, usually, so I'd say the ad is cheeky, but not go as far as say misleading.
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
As usual Apple takes something they are better at and exagerates it so everybody calls them on it instead of just sticking to the facts which are in their favor. Clearly Macs are more secure, but they're not perfect. Thee do the samething with their processors. They allways claim these outrageous benifits over the cometition, or their previous model and noone believes them though they could give a more accurate value that would still make their products look good which they are.
Have to say I disagree.Originally Posted by Steve
I think it is misleading and am pretty sure that a complaint against the commercial being aired as is on UK TV would be upheld.
Mind you, there is, quite possibly, dirty business afoot in the Anti-Apple camp judging by the timing of the "Not so" news stuff.
I think Apple will get away with it - they don't say Macs aren't susceptible:
PC: Actually there are 114 000 known viruses for PCs
Mac: PCs, but not Macs
So, there aren't 114 000 known viruses for Macs, but any claim beyond that is implied or construed by the viewer, rather than stated by Apple.
True, most people will probably just take it as "Macs don't get viruses", which infuriates me as much as any other Apple advert, but I they've been vague enough to get away with it.
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
Believe me Steve, by the standards on which things are judged, it is misleading.
Here's the relevant stuff from the ASA and it's very hard to see how, under those terms, the Apple commercial - if aired on UK TV - wouldn't be judged misleading.
What I don't know is whether the commercial has or will be aired over here. Apple may well be smart enough (or cautious enough after having been bitten in the arse a number of times) not to put it on UK TV.
SECTION 5: MISLEADING ADVERTISING
Background:
Television advertising can be a powerful medium for communicating advertising messages but is unsuited to providing consumers with detailed, permanent information about products and services. The rules in this Section are therefore designed (amongst other things) to ensure that advertising does not misrepresent the nature, benefits and limitations of advertised offers.
5.1 DEFINITION OF MISLEADING ADVERTISING
No advertisement may directly or by implication mislead about any material fact or characteristic of a product or service
Notes:
(1) See also 7.1 (Misleading advertising and children) for additional rules about advertising for products and services likely to be of interest to children.
(2) Advertising is likely to be considered misleading if, for example, it contains a false statement, description, illustration or claim about a material fact or characteristic. Material characteristics include price, availability and performance. Any ambiguity which might give a misleading impression must be avoided.
(3) Even if everything stated is literally true, an advertisement may still mislead if it conceals significant facts or creates a false impression of relevant aspects of the product or service.
(4) Scientific terms or jargon, statistics and other technical information should not be used to make claims appear to have a scientific basis that they do not possess. Equally, statistics of limited validity must not be presented in such a way as to mislead, for instance by implying that they are universally true.
(5) An advertisement may be misleading even if it does not directly lead to financial loss or a misguided purchasing decision. The ASA and BCAP may also regard an advertisement as misleading if, for example, it causes viewers to waste their time making enquiries, only to find that offers are unavailable or that there are important limitations. This could involve encouraging viewers to visit shops, or to make lengthy telephone calls (including freephone calls).
(6) When assessing whether an advertisement is misleading, the ASA and BCAP consider the overall impression likely to be conveyed to a reasonable viewer. They do not consider the intentions of the advertiser, nor simply whether the advertising meets legal or other regulatory requirements.
(7) In addition to its delegated powers under the Communications Act 2003, the ASA has a duty to enforce the Control of Misleading Advertisements Regulations 1988 (as amended).
An advertisement is misleading if:
(a) it is likely to deceive those who see it and
(b) as a result of that deception, is likely to affect consumers' economic behaviour or
(c) for the reasons given in (a) and (b), it injures or is likely to injure a competitor of the person whose interests the advertisement promotes.
I've always found Apple commercials poorly done. The ads seems to be aiming at IT illiterate people. Now I do think they have quality products, can't they just show it in a better light? Time to change their ad agency perhaps?
Whilst there maybe significantly fewer viruses for Macs, it probably has something, in part, to do with the fact that fewer people have them than PC's, so they aren't targeted as much.
Also I can imagine some virus writers taking this up as a challenge to make a Mac virus!
hi
apple have realy got there heads in the sand if they think there computers are safe from viruses
some sony psp users found out the hard way by turning there psp into a brick instead of being able to run homebrew software.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/07/psp_trojan/
Last edited by l33tpcgamer1984; 02-05-2006 at 09:43 PM. Reason: to make it clear its about virues and not about hacked firmware
Yeah, this isn't about flashing hacked firmware though.
I watched the ad, and i wouldn't say it is misleading.
It states that there were 114000 known viruses for PC, and all the mac says is that it 'they were for PC not mac'
Which is true; it doesn't say 'we don't get viruses'
Ian
i.e. i concurr what Steve says
they ads are strange and quirky but easy to pick up, however i am not 100% sure whether they are 'fair' or whether i like them that much but hey they get the message across in an effective way, so they work!
Last edited by muddyfox470; 02-05-2006 at 07:27 PM.
Mac fancier > white macbook base spec .................. CS: muddyfirebang
I've not come across it. Remember their Intel chip ad? They toned that one down for the UK, didn't they?
PHP Code:$s = new signature();
$s->sarcasm()->intellect()->font('Courier New')->display();
my point being being any computerised device can get infected with a virus including macs and other devices.
Check out section 2 which says this:I watched the ad, and i wouldn't say it is misleading.
It states that there were 114000 known viruses for PC, and all the mac says is that it 'they were for PC not mac'
Which is true; it doesn't say 'we don't get viruses'
Ian
i.e. i concurr what Steve says
they ads are strange and quirky but easy to pick up, however i am not 100% sure whether they are 'fair' or whether i like them that much but hey they get the message across in an effective way, so they work!
"Any ambiguity which might give a misleading impression must be avoided."
And, the viruses were for windows, not pcs, so with boot camp they could get themselves in even more bother.
"Apple - we have slightly less faults than Microsoft"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
