Most people think computers are magic
...it's true. I know so many people that thought the first wireless laptops could get tube happy in the middle of a baseball stadium....wanna know why? Cuz the other tube (tv) told 'em they could. I had tons of orders for "those laptops that can go on the Internet from anywhere"...and do you also wanna know how many of them I had to disappoint? All of 'em.
Joe Sixpack has no idea how computers work. He gets his ideas about how new stuff works from TV. Yep. It's true. Joe Sixpack is clueless to the lies. He simply cannot know how reality operates in all fields. If you are a techie and can't grasp the idea, you aren't worth the crumbly food-infested keyboard with which you type.
SO. If Apple demonstrates "how easy (and fast) it is" to surf said tubes on their phone, most people will believe it. It's not the consumer's fault. (well, actually, I believe it is. I spend the time to investigate and research every purchase I make...cars/car repairs, computers/electronics, furniture, travel/trips...and I'm skeptical...that helps, too. That's not to say that everyone else can, or should have to do the same...it just means that I don't suffer from "Awww man, I can't believe this doesn't work like on TV!?" like everyone else I know.)
Tangent: I find it even MORE pitiful when companies like LG and Samsung show "simulated" screens on THEIR TVs/monitors in commercials. How pathetic do their marketing guys have to be to overlay a super-crisp image on their shit, just to write "screen image simulated" in a 3pt illegible font at the bottom of a white screen in sliiiiightly off-white typeface?
Oh, and the bullshit shoveled into everyone's house from the cell phone companies about how ZOMG VIDEO works via cell phones...I didn't believe it...they showed "simulated" video that you could download and watch on your cell...in the commercials it was apparently hi-res full motion video.
AS IF! In reality 3 fps doesn't constitute video. That's a slide show, and the sound was terrible... OH, and the best part...it was edited "clips" of SELECTED news casts. Not anything near what any REASONABLE person would have expected from their ads.
Yeah, sign me up....how long did that last? However long it was, it was too long. And I hope whoever came up with that idea had to pay those companies back the money they lost on that.
Back to what some dude said above me --> If a company advertises something, and if it isn't close to reality, it should be CLEARLY disclaimed...otherwise, they deserve to get robbed of their profits, and prevented from continuing the misinformation/misrepresentation.
And by the way, to the other dude that has no idea why class-action lawsuits exist: They exist for the aforementioned reason....namely to prevent companies from profiting from perpetuating misinformation/misrepresentation. False/misleading advertising has to stop, but I doubt it ever will until everyone sues them into submission. Corporate America gets the picture when their bottom line is hit, and can't pay themselves multimillion dollar bonuses whenever they want.