Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 16th Nov 2012 07:43 UTC
Permalink for comment 542885
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Errrr, yes it does. Leaving someone with 50% of their advertised storage has become false advertising. It's not an absolute, as anything is with advertising, but it's got to the point where it is beyond being reasonable.
I think you need to read the article. Microsoft are marketing this on the basis of storage space and that it's better than an iPad. They're charging a premium for these devices, just to make things worse.
You're on a slippery slope when you make those claims and fall well, well short. No other device comes even close to leaving you with 50% of your storage left.
Doesn't work that way I'm afraid and you can't rephrase this as 'free space available'. If you are advertising 32GB of storage then you need to reasonably have most of that 32GB available. That's the way it's happened in other industries with misrepresentation.
If Office is taking up most of that space then you advertise that it has Office and cut down the advertised storage space.
Something has to give here. Splitting hairs and trying to redefine the argument won't wash.