Plaintiffs say that this kind of marketing deliberately conceals the display heels.
"The pixel summons is rooted in improperly deploying the products" Displays that do not use real-world screens "," Attorneys for Prosecutor Christian Sponchiado and Courtney Davis wrote in a filing with the U.S. District Court of Northern Districting of California, viewed by AppleInsider . "The plaintiff's nominal display pixel resolution counts misleading counter fake pixels as if they were real pixels. This contrasts with all other iPhone phones whose Shake Comparer directly compares with the iPhone X screen in an attempt to mislead consumers to believe that iPhone X has more pixels (and better screen resolution) than it actually does. "
Both size and resolution are misrepresented since Apple ignores the hack and rounded corners the phones have. Prosecutors. The company markets the products as if they were not different from devices like iPhone 8, which has a shameless rectangular display, but it tells app developers to design for "safe areas" on X Series iPhones that cater to physical limitations and iOS status bar.
The "fake pixels" referred to in the suit are those with two or fewer subpixels. Only those with red, green and blue sub pixels are allegedly counting as "real" pixels, but this also discounts many televisions containing extra white subpixels, which effectively provide counts up to four subpixels per pixel.
The cost further charges that Apple uses misleading marketing images, such as depicting iPhone XS and XS Max with wallpapers that surround their notches with black so that they blend in. By referring to text like "It's all happening but "and the use of misleading background, the clothes also intentionally ignore the other pictures on the sales page as prominently show hack.
In view of discussions about the notch since it was revealed, much less its presence in the store where it was purchased by the plaintiffs, it is practically impossible for them not to have known about existence.
At one point, Apple complains to be deceptive about the screen size of iPhone X, declared as 5.8 inches. According to archiving, the screen is actually "only about 5,66875 inches" and takes trouble with 5.8-inch measurement "explains that the screen has no rounded corners."
Shortly after this statement, the case claims an image that shows that "the phones themselves display their false diagonal screen sizes", with the Compare iPhone page on the Apple website that appears on the iPhone X screen. Also shown on the image next to the screen size is an asterisk, indicating further details is available down the page and explains how the measurement takes into account the corners.
The clothes call an assault against assault, plus claims paid to all who participate in the class action.
The complaint is unlikely to do so for the trial, as Apple will probably try to get it thrown or reach a settlement. The case still connects the company's legal issues, as it is a Chinese iPhone ban that has been won by Qualcomm, and a barrier of minor patent-related games, such as a FaceTime suit and auto-out voice messaging.