| > Flaws are subjective depending on how a product doesn't match your needs. What would a company consider a flaw? That's one part of the issue. A company's product might be the best product for some people's needs, but there might be another product that fits the needs of some market segment better. But the company doesn't care if their product is the best for that segment: a sale is a sale. They'll advertise the strong points of the product, ignoring the properties of the product which might make it unsuitable for some consumers. This doesn't benefit consumers. This might all seem obvious, but there are people on this thread who think advertising benefits consumers. > What would a company consider a flaw? The product is released as designed, with no obvious issues. This is really, really not true, and I am not entirely sure you are making a good faith argument here. I work hard at my job, but I've never released a product that didn't have bugs and tradeoffs. > Again, the knowledge is them telling you about the product. They don't make you do anything other than provide information. You're entirely in control of your decisions. Your decisions are only as good as the information you have, and advertising deliberately gives you wrong or incomplete information. |
Bugs are not known flaws, otherwise you should fix them. What's the warning, that nothing is guaranteed to be perfect?
> "advertising deliberately gives you wrong or incomplete information."
Incorrect. False advertising is illegal. Trade-offs are subjective to you. What's considered complete information is subjective to you.
Consumers benefit from the knowledge of that product existing and its features. Whether that product works for you is your choice. If you need more info then go research it. Nobody is going to magically tell you what's best for your life, that's your responsibility.