UK's Advertising Standards Authority yanks iPhone ad for being misleading

Apple's iPhone 3G ads paint a pretty cheery picture of the device in action, but just as many of you have noted, the omission of Flash and Java means there's a big difference between what the "the real internet" and what's on the iPhone -- enough so that the UK's Advertising Standards Authority has pulled one of Apple's latest ads from the airwaves because it claims "all the parts of the internet are on the iPhone." At least two people complained to the ASA that the ad was misleading because sites that use Flash and Java don't work on the iPhone, and the board agreed, saying that "We concluded that the ad gave a misleading impression of the internet capabilities of the iPhone" because "viewers were likely to expect to be able to see all the content on a web site normally accessible through a PC rather than just having the ability to reach the website." If we had to guess, we'd say this decision is more likely to prompt Apple to be more careful with its ads in the future rather than ever bring Flash or Java to the iPhone, but you know Adobe is feeling pretty smug right about now. Check the ad after the break.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

[Tinu @ Aug 27th 2008 12:00PM]

No flash or java, but it's still a major improvement compared to what lot of mobiles phones had which showed a 'mobile' version of a website. I will take the Safari version :-).

[OneLove @ Aug 27th 2008 12:12PM]

Fanboy, how can you call no flash or java a major improvement? Are you still trying to justify your iphone purchase? Jeez!

How is it that cut and paste, java and flash are still a conundrum to a big innovative company like apple? (I suspect they have a real reason but are not telling)

[MoAK @ Aug 27th 2008 12:26PM]

FYI Skyfire Beta has Java Flash and can play youtube videos in the browser. Oh and its faster than Safari mobile, Opera mobile, IE mobile....

[required @ Aug 27th 2008 12:31PM]

The PSP from four years ago has flash http://www.psponme.com/list_psp.asp?cat=Arcade why the I-phone does not I do not understand.

[ian @ Aug 27th 2008 12:38PM]

well, the iPhone seems to show "iPhone formatted" web pages... The phone clearly cant handle the full web. I've had safari crash a lot when loading big pages.

[Andrew @ Aug 27th 2008 12:57PM]

@OneLove - the major improvement is how well you can browse full web pages on the iPhone vs on a Palm, Black Berry or WinMo cell. Go out and try each phone and then come back and tell us which one is the best for browsing. Yeah flash and java are missing from the iPhone but who cares - those pages suck on any smartphone.

@ian - yes some pages are formatted for the iPhone by the site creator to add iPhone specific features but you dont have to use those pages. You can go to their standard page and navigate it just fine on the iPhone.

[JMMGoalster @ Aug 27th 2008 1:03PM]

Are there any normal webpage you can go to that don't require flash or java? NoScript in Firefox makes it seem like almost every page has some sort of flash or java script...that would make it quite difficult to browse the internet on it then.

[Zak @ Aug 27th 2008 1:05PM]

ian: Christ, the stupidity still amazes me. Did you know web sites can detect which browser you're using and redirect to a specially formatted page for your browser? A lot of sites do that for the iPhone now. It does NOT mean that Safari on the iPhone can't handle normal web sites. I mean... the sheer idiocy of that statement is pretty going beyond normal stupid. It's megastupid.

[(01) @ Aug 27th 2008 1:30PM]

Hey OneLove, how about not having the performance hit/battery drain; annoying ads, and ability to fry an egg on my phone I'll get with the flash support. Quantity of content on flash doesn't equal quality/quality of content on flash.

[Mark Anderson @ Aug 27th 2008 1:38PM]

@cockboy

And you do know that other devices allow you to configure your browser so that it treats your device as a desktop not some piss poor purpose built compromise?

[Rich @ Aug 27th 2008 1:41PM]

S60's webkit browser has Flash/Java.

But this isn't about iPhone vs. Whatever. Apple lied by saying that the iPhone gives you the whole Internet. Whether you like Flash content or not, it's part of the Internet. Also, Internet != web. Where's my FTP client, Apple? ;)

[Zak @ Aug 27th 2008 1:42PM]

Mark: So a web browser (Safari) that scores 100/100 on the Acid3 test is a "piss poor compromise" in your opinion?

Wow, you're dumber than I thought. And that's really saying something.

[roach @ Aug 27th 2008 1:45PM]

Yeah, not being able to play flash was a major issue I had iTouch (iPhone)...that and a lot of other thigs are the major reasons I returned it!

[Mark Anderson @ Aug 27th 2008 1:47PM]

@cockboy

So what? It scores 100% on *gasp* pages it's directed to! Whoopee!

Meanwhile, in other news, Opera 9.5 scores 100% and doesn't need redirected.

Hey, ever wonder why all your posts are low ranked? I'll not keep you in suspense - it's because you're a fuckmuppet.

[waiownsyou @ Aug 27th 2008 1:48PM]

@ JMMGoalster

For future reference, Java and JavaScript are two different things. iPhone supports JavaScript.

[monkfishbandana @ Aug 27th 2008 1:50PM]

@ OneLove

"How is it that cut and paste, java and flash are still a conundrum to a big innovative company like apple?"

They aren't, you're just not thinking straight. In case no-one noticed, Apple are incredibly smart at marketing. The features you mentioned will come in the iPhone 3G Flash whereby, like the iPhone 3G, several-year old technologies that should have been on the phone in the first place are put on there, with El Jobso standing on stage with essentially the same phone as the last two, announcing that these commonplace technologies are now present on the iPhone. When questioned on why cut and paste, java and flash were not present on the preceeding phones, Apple will create some story about reduced battery life, reduced performance or some crap and all the fanboys will say "OMG LEIK THAT IS SOOO TRUE LOL!!!1!11!!"; all the while N95 users sitting there comfortably playing Newgrounds games and viewing videos on websites other than YouTube.

Of course when those technologies emerge on the iPhone, Apple will no doubt incorporate code that helps 'user security'. Features such as requiring Apple to approve all videos on any website just in case the iPhone is left vulnerable, and only being able to copy and paste less than 100 characters in case of virus replication.

P.S. For all the iPhone fanboys that become enraged at my statement, I'll leave you alone as I maybe use my 2-year-old Samsung D900 to transfer some files to my friends with Bluetooth, install some Java applications - and maybe if it crashes I'll just take the battery out and put it back in again, and then maybe check an MS Office document or a PDF - just to make sure it's okay. Don't worry, I'll take some pictures with my 3MP camera too.

[Zak @ Aug 27th 2008 1:59PM]

Mark - More name calling? Really? That's pretty sad, but not unexpected. And why would Safari need to be redirected? It passed the exact same tests Opera did. What exactly is the part of that whole thing that you're having trouble with? Was it the 100% part? Was it the "doesn't need to be redirected" part?

What other excuses can you make up? I want to see how far you can go with the excuses and backpedaling. I'm laughing at the whole "redirected" thing too, where did that come from? I mean you have obviously never actually used Safari on the iPhone or we wouldn't be having this delightful conversation. Haha, needs to be redirected. That's hilarious.

[tpadekar @ Aug 27th 2008 2:02PM]

@monkfishbandana:

You forgot to tell them you'll have a video of your adventures too! :-D Maybe from a basic S40 device from Nokia (you know... the kinda ones you can get for $50) or any other phone that has a camera!

[CraigJ @ Aug 27th 2008 2:05PM]

I call no Flash and no Java a HUGE improvement. In the last few months I've simply been avoiding sites that render in Flash. There are plenty of alternative sites out there. If I Google something and I hit a site that uses flash for navigation I hit the back button, and not just on my iPhone. For the rest there is Adblock Plus.

Flash is the last refuge if the incompetent Web developer. Look at Apple's web site, for example. Lots of interactive stuff, looks really good, no flash.

[Rich @ Aug 27th 2008 2:08PM]

@Zak
Apple claimed that the iPhone has the "whole Internet".

The Acid3 test does not indicate whether a device or browser can show the whole Internet. It only provides compliance testing for SOME web technologies.

Mobile OSX's Safari obviously scores 0% on the Flash compliance test. Whether you like it or not, Flash is used through-out the Internet.

[konshuss @ Aug 27th 2008 3:57PM]

@CraigJ

you're not fooling anyone.

hey i just bought the iCar. the iLighter doesn't work and it only hs 3 iWheels but i'm told i can use the in-car system(an iPhone) to get the 4th from the online store in a few months. oh but by the way, they're redesigning the shape of the wheels so you'll have to buy all 4. and also a new iCar to fit them on.

this getting through?

[UnixSystemsEngineer @ Aug 27th 2008 4:32PM]

This is not the first time the brit advertising standards agency has come down on Apple. They got trashed for the G5 Power Mac "world's most powerful PC" ads because, as the agency claimed, it was not the fastest computer available at all tasks under all circumstances.

As for this one? Seems like they're being awfully nitpicky. I think the iPhone browser fits the description, relative to other mobile browsers, even if you can't see flash and javascript.

[Mark Anderson @ Aug 27th 2008 7:07PM]

@cockboy

Rich has pointed out why you're a clueless clown.

In fact, judging by your low rankings, it seems about 100% of Engadget thinks you're a total cock. Still never mind, there's always that photo of Steve for you to pleasure yourself over.

[monkfishbandana @ Aug 27th 2008 7:07PM]

@ tpadekar

I hadn't thought of that; mind you, with all of those other really, really, really battery draining tasks going on - well, I'd better get my Nokia 6230 from 2003 to video instead.

Even my V220 had video. That's a relief! We all thought that the iPhone not having video was bad! Can you imagine if people like Motorola or Nokia started putting it on their entry-level phones? Can you imagine?

When that day comes, Apple should really start feeling embarrassed...

[loosely_coupled @ Aug 27th 2008 11:17PM]

To the guys above me, who the hell uses Java applets in a web browser anymore? This is NOT 1996 for god sakes.
While Flash is nice, Adobe's OSX port is incredibly inefficient! It literally will cause a new macbook pro's fans to go to max RPM, while the CPU utilization will be pegged at 100%. I can only imagine if they used the desktop version on the iPhone without extensive optimization work.

Regardless, every other "smartphone" besides the iPhone that I've used to browse the web has been so deplorable, that it wouldn't matter if you had Flash or Java support! The iPhone is WAY AHEAD of every other device on the market.

[Colossuss @ Aug 29th 2008 6:52AM]

Top-end Nokias have been able to view Flash for a long time, thanks to Adobe.

[OneLove @ Aug 30th 2008 4:07PM]

who the hell is "cockboy"?

[Blayed @ Aug 27th 2008 12:01PM]

Breaking news!

The bodies of the entire UK Advertising Standards Authority have been found dead in their offices. The only evidence of foul play is a note left at the scene with the words "Advertize this -SJ"

[Carpet @ Aug 27th 2008 1:32PM]

Finally this is on Engadget. I sent this in eight hours before it was finally added to the blog.

No rush for the authors of engadget to put out bad news for apple.

[OneLove @ Aug 27th 2008 12:14PM]

cry more?

[Adrian Williams @ Aug 27th 2008 12:19PM]

You can send Engadget news links

[Carpet @ Aug 27th 2008 1:34PM]

Adrian, that's what I was getting it.

I don't usually post comments onhere but I rely on engadget for up to the minute news. Heaven forbid I spend an hour or so "working" without knowing about the latest mouse/mp3/camera thingy.

Of course Engadget has to validate a news story before they publish it but I thought the response time would be a bit snappier.

[PynkFloydd @ Aug 27th 2008 7:03PM]

Even though OneLove has a point, you're right... You don't see many articles holding Apple to their word (or reporting on flaws). Actually, in a lot of articles...there's been anti-Microsoft slams when the story didn't even involve Microsoft. When that happens, I usually take a break from reading Engadget for a month+. ...I'm hoping that the new editor promotes more unbiased investigative journalism.

[Tinu @ Aug 27th 2008 12:02PM]

Oh yah, will they also take down those "PC Vs. Mac" ads? They could be considered misleading from at least some angle :-P.

[Ike Turner @ Aug 27th 2008 12:13PM]

There are no Mac vs PC ads outside of the US AFAIK. In some countires (France for exemple) a company can't mention a competitor's name or product in their ad etc.)

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Aug 27th 2008 12:26PM]

Mitchell and webb did the pc v mac in the uk but were criticised for it and the adverts were pulled but I don't know why.

[Rich UK @ Aug 27th 2008 12:35PM]

There are actually mac vs pc adverts in the uk... presented by the very funny mitchell and webb

[fanman @ Aug 27th 2008 12:35PM]

I know why. They contained nothing but slander, lies and half truths.

[phanbouy @ Aug 27th 2008 12:41PM]

@fanman

why do you guys take those ads so seriously? it's called competition and advertising. here's a hint, neither MS nor Apple represent _any_ of us, so quit crying.

[Dorf @ Aug 27th 2008 12:49PM]

It's like a hot chick telling me I can have access to her entire body, then just find out I can only touch some side boob.

[MadMike @ Aug 27th 2008 12:57PM]

ALL Adverting are Lies and Half-Truths. That's the way of the game. "Twice as Fast Half the price***"

***: Speed only represents controlled lab results only, price does not include service charges

At least the UK HAS Advertising standards. In the US, we just sue people. "OMG, Eating McDonalds 4x a day MADE ME FAT!!!" "OMG,. Cigarettes are BAD FOR YOU!!! I Thought they had Vitamin C and stuff!"


Christ....

[sockatume @ Aug 27th 2008 2:55PM]

The UK Mac & PC ads were probably pulled because of Mitchell and Webb's other TV shows at the time. You had Mac being portrayed by an actor whose other roles were about immature, self-obsessed idiocy, and PC portrayed by an actor whose characters are connected with flawed, lovable nerdishness. Probably not the message Apple wanted to send.

[absinthe party @ Aug 27th 2008 3:09PM]

Is fanman the father of phanbouy?

But, you know.. phanbouy is hip, so he spells his name different and rebels against his father who is living in the past with a narrow mind.

[konshuss @ Aug 27th 2008 4:23PM]

what i find interesting about those ads is that justin long, at least how i see it portrays one of those 'pretend' tech savvy guys who might toss out a buzzword here and there but when it comes to specs and real technical knowledge, he knows nothing. the PC guy on the other hand looks like he was writing in Assembly in 1984 and could probably reroute the voltage from a mac's cpu to heat his coffee...

aren't older people supposed to know nothing while young people have all the tech knowledge? apparently apple wants things to be the other way around.

[PynkFloydd @ Aug 27th 2008 7:16PM]

@phanbouy and MadMike: The big problem here is that Apple never includes stipulations or footnotes to hedge against their false advertising. They depict themselves as perfect. Go ahead and check their ads. There are truth-in-advertising laws that prevent blatant lies and protect the consumer. Apple has gotten away with it for a while now (for whatever reason). These tactics are anti-consumer and anti-competitive business practices. Any other company pulls this, they pay up. Apple deserves heavy fines and lawsuits for this...

[fanman @ Aug 28th 2008 4:12AM]

@phanboy

What makes you think that I'm taking the adverts seriously? Saying "AHAHA sOrry guYs, it waS a JoKEs!!11!! HHUH HUH" doesn't detract from the fact that it's not based on any real world facts or occurrences. Apple is the only company I know that makes their adverts this way (that is, by making up bullshit about their competitor) and is allowed to continue.

[Jagster @ Aug 27th 2008 12:03PM]

About time someone put their foot down about Apple's misleading marketing.

[helixtimestwo @ Aug 27th 2008 12:45PM]

It's not just apple...imagine if the US had an advertising standards authority. It would have to be as big as the IRS with the DoD's budget.

GO JAGUARS!

[farfisa @ Aug 27th 2008 12:56PM]

I believe they also made them pull the "world's fastest computer" ads for the PowerMac G5 a few years ago, also for being misleading.
They're sticklers over there--we can say anything in North America, and it's true because we said it! ;)

[PynkFloydd @ Aug 27th 2008 6:44PM]

If Apple were held to full-disclosure on all of their US ads (like other companies -- check Apple's commercials, not even any fine print), I'm betting that they'd lose at least 25% of their sales per quarter. I'm actually shocked that it's taken this long before anyone has sued or they've been warned for their business practices.

I guess when an ex-Vice President (Al Gore*) is sitting on your board, the FCC tends to look the other way.



*doesn't it make Al an even bigger hypocrit to sit on the board of one of the least environmentally friendly companies in the US?