You can't sue Apple based on false advertising because they didn't guarantee you 39% faster. The web site says "up to 39% faster" and then goes on to specify that 39% faster is based on spec_int_base2000, comparing the top of the line 2.33 Ghz Core 2 Duo to the previously top of the line 2.16 Ghz Core Duo.
The MacWorld measure of 10% faster is based on their Speedmark measure, which is derived from a battery of tests... and they specifically compared the now low end 2.16 Ghz Core 2 Duo with the previously high end 2.16 Ghz Core Duo...
"Looking at individual tests, some results—specifically ones that taxed either the hard drive or the graphics card—showed smaller performance gains, while other more CPU-intensive tasks saw more substantial improvements, thanks to the Core 2 Duo’s improved processing efficiency. Compressor 2.3, for example, ran 30 percent faster on the new 2.33GHz system than on the older 2.16GHz model. The 2.33GHz MacBook Pro was 40 percent faster than the older 2.16GHz model at MP3-encoding using iTunes."
According to Macworld, they encountered tests such as Compressor and MP3 encoding in iTunes that were 30% and 40% faster than the previous top end MacBook Pro. So there you have it. No false advertising, just RTFA.
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.â€
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
You can't sue Apple based on false advertising because they didn't guarantee you 39% faster. The web site says "up to 39% faster" and then goes on to specify that 39% faster is based on spec_int_base2000, comparing the top of the line 2.33 Ghz Core 2 Duo to the previously top of the line 2.16 Ghz Core Duo.
The MacWorld measure of 10% faster is based on their Speedmark measure, which is derived from a battery of tests... and they specifically compared the now low end 2.16 Ghz Core 2 Duo with the previously high end 2.16 Ghz Core Duo...
"Looking at individual tests, some results—specifically ones that taxed either the hard drive or the graphics card—showed smaller performance gains, while other more CPU-intensive tasks saw more substantial improvements, thanks to the Core 2 Duo’s improved processing efficiency. Compressor 2.3, for example, ran 30 percent faster on the new 2.33GHz system than on the older 2.16GHz model. The 2.33GHz MacBook Pro was 40 percent faster than the older 2.16GHz model at MP3-encoding using iTunes."
According to Macworld, they encountered tests such as Compressor and MP3 encoding in iTunes that were 30% and 40% faster than the previous top end MacBook Pro. So there you have it. No false advertising, just RTFA.