6 ms·

I think the part that was really upsetting is they crushed real good objects. After all of that talks about climate friendly. They could have crushed 3D renderi

I think the part that was really upsetting is they crushed real good objects. After all of that talks about climate friendly. They could have crushed 3D renderings and up the clip with “rendered on iPad. No harm was done on real objects.” And that would have been a good ad.

FpUser 2y ago
>"And that would have been a good ad." No it would not. It would still be as disgusting as it is now.
- alt227 2y ago
  > No it would not. It would still be as disgusting as it is now. For me the disgust was purely in waste of perfectly good items. Those instruments could have provided a whole music department for a struggling school or youth center. The paint could have even been used to brighten the place up. But No, Apple just squashed it all to show off.
  - FpUser 2y ago
    >"For me the disgust was purely in waste of perfectly good items." For me it is in your face ruthless "fuck you and what you do, submit to us" nature of the ad. We are different people.
  - SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
    How do you feel about the thousands of hours hydraulic press youtube videos each with millions of views?
    - alt227 2y ago
      They are not created by a trillion dollar company as advertising to sell more product.
      - labcomputer 2y ago
        So it's ok merely because the creator makes less money by doing it? Because, make no mistake, the hydraulic press channel does it for the money.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
        I feel like the reactions here are selective outrage. Real objects and sometimes living organisms are created and destroyed in the name of science every minute of every day. An ad that was likely done in a single take, let’s be real, doesn’t matter at all in the big picture.
    - Hackbraten 2y ago
      Luckily, I haven't bumped into anything like that yet. Watching one of these would probably make me feel physically sick. I've turned away from favorite bands in the past whenever I'd find out they habitually destroyed musical instruments on stage.
  - lxgr 2y ago
    Do you have the same reaction to musicians destroying their instruments after a performance? If not, why not?
    - least 2y ago
      I find this to be in poor taste too, and I used to go to a lot of punk shows. ...but really, it's not punk rockers slamming their guitars on the stage and destroying them; they can't afford to. I suppose that it's destruction of the material to advance the immaterial (the performance itself) but it's still self indulgent and wasteful.
- yokoprime 2y ago
  Why? I don’t understand how this ad triggers emotions beyond the waste of physical objects
  - pja 2y ago
    Because it destroys the tools of art by crushing them into a featureless grey rectangle. Which is a little on the nose for the way artists are feeling right now...
    - williamcotton 2y ago
      I’m an artist and I feel great. As a singer-songwriter I’ve already come to terms with Swedish mega-producers, drum machines, Live Nation, and whatever drives people to consume corporate music. What exactly makes things any harder for artists than it has ever been? Was there some glorious moment in the past when people didn’t look down at the average poets for being lazy and useless? Sure, laud the best of the best, but you know for a fact that you’ve thought it a bad decision for someone you know who isn’t gifted with genius level talent to pursue a career in the arts. It has never been easy. Frankly, if AI makes a pop song or if Lana Del Ray’s producers make a pop song, it really is no different to me. No one is going to replace the folk singer because the audience is already selecting for the poet, not the product. Who cares what frat bros are chugging beer to? Is part of the response to this ad the subconscious realization that one doesn’t make or actively appreciate organic art to begin with? When was the last time most of us went to an open mic? Or bought a painting from a local artist?
    - matwood 2y ago
      Many tools can be used for art, even the featureless grey rectangle. Your attitude feels a lot like gatekeeping to me similar to when cameras replaced paintings, then digital replaced film, then phones replaced big bodies, etc…
    - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
      For whatever reason I feel compelled to share my initial reaction to this comment: Just because you managed to use "tool of art" as a literal phrase doesn't make your point more clear. Why should I care if a couple of these pieces are destroyed. Presumably they didn't destroy anything of historical, cultural, personal, or scarce significance. Are you sure you're not making an argument based only in emotions?
Rinzler89 2y ago
>I think the part that was really upsetting is they crushed real good objects. After all of that talks about climate friendly. Considering how much global e-waste and environmental damage, companies like Apple(and others of their size) are responsible for with their products, destroying a few objects for an ad is like spitting in the ocean in the scheme of things. People complaining about the waste generated from this ad, are really missing the big picture, and is one of the reason companies like Apple mostly focus on posturing the image of climate friendliness and environmental sustainability, rather than actually enforcing it across their entire supply chain where it actually makes the big difference. "Sure, the minerals in our devices are mined by kids in Congo with chemicals dangerous for the environment, and assembled by workers in sweatshop factories with suicide nets, but our posh donut-shaped HQ in Cupertino runs on 100% renewables and serves only vegan food with soy lattes, that's how environmentally conscious we are here at Hooli." </gavin_belson.jpg> ^Because this greenwashing is what people buy into from advertising. Reminds me when Formula 1 switched form V10 engines to hybrid V6 to be more "environmentally friendly", when actually, the gas burned by those V10 engines during races only accounted for <0,2% of the total emissions, being far offset by the massive emissions of transporting that entire circus around the planet bouncing across continents all year round, yet nobody addressed that, just the engines for some cheap greenwashing.
- typeofhuman 2y ago
  For real, if Apple actually cared about the environment they'd release new models every several years instead of several times yearly. They'd allow you to upgrade the RAM in your MacBook instead having to replace the ENTIRE machine!
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    Devil's advocate: RAM on SOCs is not upgradable due to technical limitations on frequency and latency needing the RAM chips to be as close as possible to the CPU. You can't beat physics. I do hold them accountable for the non-upgradable SSDs, which are not needed to be soldered to achieve their full speed, and slim PCB connectors for PCI-E speed connections do exist.
rossant 2y ago
Honest question: how do we know for sure it's not CG?
- IshKebab 2y ago
  I wondered that, but go and watch it. Absolutely no way anyone is modelling all that in CG. It's 100% not CG. Also if it was CG Apple would have immediately said that.
  - millzlane 2y ago
    How many pianos do you think they had to crush to get that ball to roll just right up to the edge of the press?
    - abenga 2y ago
      It doesn't have to be 100% one or the other.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - Izkata 2y ago
      The shots towards the end have nothing around the items being focused on, such as remnants of the larger items. Doesn't need to be CGI, just multiple takes stitched together.
    - IshKebab 2y ago
      Erm, none? There are tons of cuts. I didn't say they did it one take. You can actually see that they repositioned the ball between the side shot of it rolling and the front shot of it getting squashed, which you wouldn't need to do it if was CG.
  - jayd16 2y ago
    It is certainly not "100% not CG" You think they got a real ball to roll out to the edge and filmed that live? Ridiculous. I would be surprised if any of it was real.
pard68 2y ago
You do know what it takes to make lithium ion batteries right?
jayd16 2y ago
It's almost certainly mostly CGI but even if it was done with practical props, they are still not "real good objects." They are props. No one crashes real Ferraris in an action movie. You use fakes and empty chassis.
- Hamuko 2y ago
  They do crash real cars in movies though. The Wolf of Wall Street saw an actual Lamborghini Countach with a VIN get crashed quite a lot, John Carpenter's Christine went through like twenty Plymouths and The Dukes of Hazzard TV series destroyed hundreds of cars ("an estimated 309 Chargers were used").
  - runeb 2y ago
    John Landis film The Blues Brothers crashed a reported 104 cars
- decafninja 2y ago
  If it is CGI, then this outrage is stupid. There are a lot more important things to be outraged over than some virtual objects being crushed.

FpUser 2y ago

>"And that would have been a good ad." No it would not. It would still be as disgusting as it is now.

alt227 2y ago
> No it would not. It would still be as disgusting as it is now. For me the disgust was purely in waste of perfectly good items. Those instruments could have provided a whole music department for a struggling school or youth center. The paint could have even been used to brighten the place up. But No, Apple just squashed it all to show off.
- FpUser 2y ago
  >"For me the disgust was purely in waste of perfectly good items." For me it is in your face ruthless "fuck you and what you do, submit to us" nature of the ad. We are different people.
- SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
  How do you feel about the thousands of hours hydraulic press youtube videos each with millions of views?
  - alt227 2y ago
    They are not created by a trillion dollar company as advertising to sell more product.
    - labcomputer 2y ago
      So it's ok merely because the creator makes less money by doing it? Because, make no mistake, the hydraulic press channel does it for the money.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
        I feel like the reactions here are selective outrage. Real objects and sometimes living organisms are created and destroyed in the name of science every minute of every day. An ad that was likely done in a single take, let’s be real, doesn’t matter at all in the big picture.
  - Hackbraten 2y ago
    Luckily, I haven't bumped into anything like that yet. Watching one of these would probably make me feel physically sick. I've turned away from favorite bands in the past whenever I'd find out they habitually destroyed musical instruments on stage.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Do you have the same reaction to musicians destroying their instruments after a performance? If not, why not?
  - least 2y ago
    I find this to be in poor taste too, and I used to go to a lot of punk shows. ...but really, it's not punk rockers slamming their guitars on the stage and destroying them; they can't afford to. I suppose that it's destruction of the material to advance the immaterial (the performance itself) but it's still self indulgent and wasteful.
yokoprime 2y ago
Why? I don’t understand how this ad triggers emotions beyond the waste of physical objects
- pja 2y ago
  Because it destroys the tools of art by crushing them into a featureless grey rectangle. Which is a little on the nose for the way artists are feeling right now...
  - williamcotton 2y ago
    I’m an artist and I feel great. As a singer-songwriter I’ve already come to terms with Swedish mega-producers, drum machines, Live Nation, and whatever drives people to consume corporate music. What exactly makes things any harder for artists than it has ever been? Was there some glorious moment in the past when people didn’t look down at the average poets for being lazy and useless? Sure, laud the best of the best, but you know for a fact that you’ve thought it a bad decision for someone you know who isn’t gifted with genius level talent to pursue a career in the arts. It has never been easy. Frankly, if AI makes a pop song or if Lana Del Ray’s producers make a pop song, it really is no different to me. No one is going to replace the folk singer because the audience is already selecting for the poet, not the product. Who cares what frat bros are chugging beer to? Is part of the response to this ad the subconscious realization that one doesn’t make or actively appreciate organic art to begin with? When was the last time most of us went to an open mic? Or bought a painting from a local artist?
  - matwood 2y ago
    Many tools can be used for art, even the featureless grey rectangle. Your attitude feels a lot like gatekeeping to me similar to when cameras replaced paintings, then digital replaced film, then phones replaced big bodies, etc…
  - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
    For whatever reason I feel compelled to share my initial reaction to this comment: Just because you managed to use "tool of art" as a literal phrase doesn't make your point more clear. Why should I care if a couple of these pieces are destroyed. Presumably they didn't destroy anything of historical, cultural, personal, or scarce significance. Are you sure you're not making an argument based only in emotions?

Rinzler89 2y ago

>I think the part that was really upsetting is they crushed real good objects. After all of that talks about climate friendly. Considering how much global e-waste and environmental damage, companies like Apple(and others of their size) are responsible for with their products, destroying a few objects for an ad is like spitting in the ocean in the scheme of things. People complaining about the waste generated from this ad, are really missing the big picture, and is one of the reason companies like Apple mostly focus on posturing the image of climate friendliness and environmental sustainability, rather than actually enforcing it across their entire supply chain where it actually makes the big difference. "Sure, the minerals in our devices are mined by kids in Congo with chemicals dangerous for the environment, and assembled by workers in sweatshop factories with suicide nets, but our posh donut-shaped HQ in Cupertino runs on 100% renewables and serves only vegan food with soy lattes, that's how environmentally conscious we are here at Hooli." </gavin_belson.jpg> ^Because this greenwashing is what people buy into from advertising. Reminds me when Formula 1 switched form V10 engines to hybrid V6 to be more "environmentally friendly", when actually, the gas burned by those V10 engines during races only accounted for <0,2% of the total emissions, being far offset by the massive emissions of transporting that entire circus around the planet bouncing across continents all year round, yet nobody addressed that, just the engines for some cheap greenwashing.

typeofhuman 2y ago
For real, if Apple actually cared about the environment they'd release new models every several years instead of several times yearly. They'd allow you to upgrade the RAM in your MacBook instead having to replace the ENTIRE machine!
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  Devil's advocate: RAM on SOCs is not upgradable due to technical limitations on frequency and latency needing the RAM chips to be as close as possible to the CPU. You can't beat physics. I do hold them accountable for the non-upgradable SSDs, which are not needed to be soldered to achieve their full speed, and slim PCB connectors for PCI-E speed connections do exist.

rossant 2y ago

Honest question: how do we know for sure it's not CG?

IshKebab 2y ago
I wondered that, but go and watch it. Absolutely no way anyone is modelling all that in CG. It's 100% not CG. Also if it was CG Apple would have immediately said that.
- millzlane 2y ago
  How many pianos do you think they had to crush to get that ball to roll just right up to the edge of the press?
  - abenga 2y ago
    It doesn't have to be 100% one or the other.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - Izkata 2y ago
    The shots towards the end have nothing around the items being focused on, such as remnants of the larger items. Doesn't need to be CGI, just multiple takes stitched together.
  - IshKebab 2y ago
    Erm, none? There are tons of cuts. I didn't say they did it one take. You can actually see that they repositioned the ball between the side shot of it rolling and the front shot of it getting squashed, which you wouldn't need to do it if was CG.
- jayd16 2y ago
  It is certainly not "100% not CG" You think they got a real ball to roll out to the edge and filmed that live? Ridiculous. I would be surprised if any of it was real.

pard68 2y ago

You do know what it takes to make lithium ion batteries right?

jayd16 2y ago

It's almost certainly mostly CGI but even if it was done with practical props, they are still not "real good objects." They are props. No one crashes real Ferraris in an action movie. You use fakes and empty chassis.

Hamuko 2y ago
They do crash real cars in movies though. The Wolf of Wall Street saw an actual Lamborghini Countach with a VIN get crashed quite a lot, John Carpenter's Christine went through like twenty Plymouths and The Dukes of Hazzard TV series destroyed hundreds of cars ("an estimated 309 Chargers were used").
- runeb 2y ago
  John Landis film The Blues Brothers crashed a reported 104 cars
decafninja 2y ago
If it is CGI, then this outrage is stupid. There are a lot more important things to be outraged over than some virtual objects being crushed.