How Tech Companies Lie to You
Tech marketing in 2026 is often less about helping you understand a product and more about making small changes sound huge. The video breaks down the most common "legal-but-misleading" tricks—like "up to" stats, imaginary specs, and made-up measurements—and shows how they distort comparisons. The main takeaway: ignore the hype numbers, look for real-world tests, and don't upgrade just because a keynote makes you feel behind.
1. "Peak deception" and the rise of "up to" 😵💫
The video opens with the claim that tech companies have reached "peak levels of deception," because headlines are packed with impressive-sounding numbers that fall apart once you remove the fine print.
"Never in history has such little change been sold to us as if it's so much."
A big reason this happens is the industry's favorite safety phrase: "up to". Instead of saying "this is 20% faster," they say "up to 20% faster," which can technically be true even if almost nobody sees that result.
"Any stat that starts with an 'up to' doesn't mean anything."
He uses a simple example: he could say a video will reach "up to a billion people," and if it reaches only a handful, he can still claim he didn't lie—because "up to" includes everything below the big number.
"It's to be able to stick a massive number on your web page and not be sued for it."
Practical advice: When you see "up to +X%", basically disregard it, and instead look up performance for your exact use (the app, game, workflow, etc.).
"If you see 'up to' followed by a percentage improvement, honestly just disregard it."
2. The "imaginary spec": mixing the best numbers that don't coexist 🧩
Marques Brownlee (MKBHD) jumps in with a concept he calls the imaginary spec: companies put multiple "best case" specs side-by-side in a way that implies you'll get them together, even when you can't.
"They combine a bunch of different specs… into one page, creating what I like to call the imaginary spec."
How it works (common pattern)
They'll advertise:
- the maximum performance version of a product, and
- the cheapest starting price version
…right next to each other, even though the cheap version doesn't have those performance numbers.
Marques uses a Rivian R1T example: a page might show 420 miles of range, 0–60 under 2.5 seconds, and starting under $74,000—but those numbers belong to different trims/configurations.
"You can't actually get the maximum performance for the minimum price."
So the customer walks away remembering the best numbers, not the reality.
"This here is an imaginary spec."
3. EV range claims: tiny details quietly change the "official" number 🚗🔋
Next, Marques points out that EV range is especially sensitive to small changes—tires, wheels, driving conditions, and more—so companies can present a high range number that only applies to a narrow configuration.
"The tiniest… things can make a pretty significant difference to your range."
In the Rivian example, clicking into the details reveals the advertised range may depend on specific wheels/tires, and switching options can drop the estimate significantly.
"Even this here was an imaginary spec."
And Rivian isn't unique:
"Rivian is far from the only offender."
4. Invented specs: when companies rename common things to block comparisons 🧠
Then the video shifts from exaggerating specs to inventing them—especially when brands want loyal customers to stop comparison-shopping.
The logic is simple: if comparing products becomes easy (especially with tools like ChatGPT), companies benefit by making comparisons confusing.
"Make it so confusing for customers to compare you that the easiest thing then becomes… to just take your word for it."
Example: "RAM" vs Apple's "Unified Memory"
All computers use RAM (short-term working memory). Apple often calls it unified memory because it's integrated into the chip package and shared between CPU and GPU.
That can be more efficient in some situations, but it also hides an important downside: many Windows laptops have extra VRAM (video memory) on dedicated graphics cards, while unified memory means CPU and GPU share one pool.
"Unified memory means that both the CPU and the GPU share from one small pool."
Apple has also implied that smaller amounts of unified memory can match bigger amounts of traditional RAM—but the video pushes back hard:
"It's not really true… 8 gigs is 8 gigs."
Why it helps Apple: it turns RAM into a "gray area," making it easier to sell less memory and charge more for upgrades.
"It makes something as simple as RAM feel like some sort of gray area."
5. The TV market: "Motion Rate," fake OLED-like names, and spec camouflage 📺
He calls TVs one of the worst areas for invented specs—brands try everything to make you feel like you're getting premium tech without actually giving it to you.
"TV makers will try absolutely everything… apart from actually giving it to you."
"Motion Rate" is not refresh rate
A TV might advertise a "Motion Rate 120," which many people assume means 120Hz. But it can just mean motion smoothing software (interpolation), not true panel refresh.
"Motion rate is another invented spec."
OLED confusion: ULED / QLED / QNED
He warns that non-technical buyers can easily confuse brand terms like Hisense ULED, Samsung QLED, or LG QNED with OLED, even though they're generally LCD-based technologies with marketing names.
"Invented specs designed… to camouflage as OLED, even though they're actually much cheaper LCDs."
6. "Technically true" numbers that are still misleading (and sometimes just false) 📏
The video then goes a step further: some specs aren't just confusing—they can be numerically misleading.
"1-inch" camera sensors aren't 1 inch
Many compact cameras advertise a "1-inch sensor", but that doesn't mean the sensor measures one inch in any direction.
"1-inch camera sensors are not 1 inch in any dimension."
He explains the historical reason: it comes from old vacuum tube measurement conventions. A "1-inch type" sensor is named after a theoretical tube size that would produce a similar image area—not the sensor's literal dimension.
"It's 2026, but we're calling this a 1-inch sensor because that is the size of the theoretical vacuum tube…"
And the blunt conclusion:
"Turns out '1-inch sensor' is a marketing name more than it is an actual measurement."
"1.5K" displays aren't 1500 pixels
Similarly, smartphones may advertise "1.5K," but that doesn't mean 1500 pixels across or tall. It's often used as a vague midpoint label between 1080p and 1440p, based on inconsistent naming conventions (like "2K" being used loosely).
"It just means somewhere in between 1K and 2K."
He calls it annoying, but also "how we talk now."
7. Vague software features used as "new phone" selling points 🤖
Now the focus shifts: sometimes the deception isn't about the numbers—it's about presenting software as if it's exclusive hardware innovation.
He gives an example of a real feature that required hardware changes (a privacy display on a Galaxy Ultra model). But he says most launch events heavily market features that aren't unique at all.
"Circle to Search" as a Samsung feature (when it isn't)
Samsung spent a lot of time marketing Google's Circle to Search like it was a Samsung breakthrough.
"They talked about it like it's this revolutionary new feature…"
But it's also on Google phones and other Android brands.
"It's not really got anything to do with Samsung apart from just them being the first to show it."
The sneakier part: features coming to older phones
Even more confusing is when companies market features as a reason to buy the new model, while avoiding mentioning that those same features are coming to older phones via updates.
"Spending 60% of the next phone's launch event… but then never mentioning that those features are also coming to the phone that you're watching the event on."
He uses "new Bixby" positioning as an example of something presented as a new-series perk even though it can run on older devices.
"This new Bixby is being positioned as one of the perks… but actually it can run on even a Galaxy S23."
8. Cheating comparisons: "8x faster"… versus a product from 5–6 years ago 🕰️
Next: brands comparing a new product to something ancient to inflate the improvement.
Apple is called out as a major offender. The example: new MacBook Pros with M5 chips (released in 2026) claiming:
"Up to eight times faster AI performance."
But the fine print: it's compared against the M1 generation (2020–2021), which makes the "8x" feel much less meaningful.
"They're comparing them to the M1s released across 2020 and 2021."
He argues that real buyers often want to know the difference between this year's model and last year's model, because that's the real purchasing choice (e.g., buy M5 vs buy discounted M4).
"How much difference is there between those two choices? I don't know. Apple won't tell me."
And he estimates the real-world year-to-year bump is often much smaller:
"Like 5 to 10% of real world improvement…"
He sums it up with a memorable analogy:
"It's a bit like… proving you're a world-class runner by comparing your speed to when you were 8 years old."
9. Smartphone glass claims: "twice as tough" (but they're trading one weakness for another) 🪟
He then breaks down a trick used in glass marketing: one year it's "more shatter resistant," next year it's "more scratch resistant," making it sound like glass is rapidly improving.
But there's a trade-off: scratch resistance and shatter resistance are often inversely related.
"The more of one you have, the less of the other you have."
He explains it simply:
- Harder glass → resists scratches better → can become more brittle (shatters easier)
- Softer glass → shatters less → scratches more easily
So brands can alternate which metric they highlight, and it looks like constant breakthroughs.
"It's not as crazy as it sounds."
He reinforces the "glass is glass" reality with the classic scratch test idea:
"Every single one scratches at level six, deeper grooves at a level seven… because it's still glass."
10. The "we doubled storage!" trick (but you're just paying more) 💾
He jokes that at least companies "upgrade storage" sometimes—then points out the manipulation: they remove the cheaper base model and claim they "doubled storage," while the price jumps.
"They position it to you like they're doing you some kind of massive favor…"
In other words: you didn't get a gift—you lost the cheaper option.
11. The efficiency-improvement trap: you don't get both battery life and speed ⚙️🔋
This is one of the most useful consumer lessons in the whole video.
Companies will claim something like:
- 23% faster performance
- 20% more efficient
And it sounds like you get faster gaming and longer battery life. But the key point:
"You don't get both."
If you spend the efficiency gains on more performance, battery life can stay the same. Or if you use it to extend battery life, performance might stay similar. It's a trade-off depending on how the device is tuned and how you use it.
So when you combine:
- "up to" performance
- "up to" efficiency …real-world average improvements might be much smaller.
"What we're really often talking about… is an average expected improvement of like 5%."
12. "Premium materials" marketing that's technically true—but meaningless 🧱
He calls out phrases like:
- surgical-grade stainless steel
- aircraft aluminum
- military toughness
They sound elite, but many are common materials used in everyday products.
For example:
- "Aerospace-grade aluminum" can be real, but it's also used in lots of mass-produced items.
- "316L stainless steel" is used in surgical tools and things like kitchen sinks.
"Technically, the kitchen sink is also surgical-grade stainless steel."
His point isn't that the materials are bad—it's that the marketing implies rarity and superiority that often isn't there.
"It's not lying technically, but now you know."
13. Specs chosen for marketing, not usefulness (thickness, brightness, camera numbers) 🎯
He lands on a broader theme:
"The specs of tech products are chosen around how those products are going to be marketed."
And the problem is that the most marketable spec is often not the most useful spec.
Thickness: measured at the thinnest point
Consumers care about maximum thickness (what fits in pockets/bags), but companies often quote the thinnest point.
"The spec that matters… is the maximum thickness."
He jokes about how absurd this could get if companies moved all components into one giant block and left a thin section to brag about.
"What's to stop Apple… shoving them into one massive block… but then calling the phone five times thinner…?"
He also mentions a foldable-phone example where a brand excluded parts you can't remove (like screen protectors) to claim "world's slimmest."
Brightness: "peak nits" arms race
He warns against peak brightness numbers because they may only apply in extreme, short-lived conditions (like a tiny area of the screen for a few seconds in HDR).
"Just get rid of peak brightness. Look at typical brightness."
Cameras: megapixels and "max zoom" are over-marketed
He says sensor size generally matters more than megapixels (bigger sensor = more light = better real detail).
And he absolutely tears into "140x zoom" marketing, because digital zoom is basically cropping + processing.
"How far your phone can digital zoom has literally zero correlation with how good of a camera it is."
His blunt (and pretty savage) line:
"What it actually does correlate with… is how low a company's standards are for what counts as a photo."
He jokes you could crop into a blurry smudge and call it "300x zoom" if you wanted.
"Best zoom camera in the world, everyone."
14. "Shot on smartphone" promos that quietly use tons of extra gear 🎥
Finally, he critiques the "Shot on smartphone" trope.
Some companies were caught outright lying (using DSLR/pro photos), but even when it's truly shot on a phone, the production may include:
- large stabilization rigs
- external lenses/filters
- huge lighting setups
- professional sets
That can be impressive filmmaking—but it can also undermine the message that you can achieve it with just the phone in your pocket.
"It kind of defeats the purpose a little bit."
He also notes that when you add pro gear, you may disable phone features (like built-in stabilization) to make the rig work properly.
"If the only thing from the original phone that you're still using… is just the sensor… is it still shot on a smartphone?"
His answer: technically yes, but emotionally… less impressive.
"I'm now actually way less impressed."
15. What to do as a buyer: skepticism + real-world testing 🧂
He closes with a clear mindset shift: treat marketing like it's biased (because it is), and don't let keynote math pressure you into upgrades.
"Treat everything that these tech companies tell you with a heavy dose of salt."
And the main reality check:
"You don't need to upgrade every other year."
Plus one last warning:
"Nothing's actually getting eight times better."
And if a company is bragging about extreme zoom:
"When you see a company bragging about their maximum zoom, run for the hills."
He ends with a final joke: if the zoom camera can spot you running away, at least you'll be low resolution. 😄
Conclusion
The video's core message is simple: marketing numbers are often designed to win attention, not to inform you—especially with phrases like "up to," invented specs, and cherry-picked comparisons. If you want the truth, focus on real-world reviews, typical performance, and side-by-side testing instead of headline claims. And most importantly: upgrade when your device no longer meets your needs, not when a keynote tells you to.
Need a summary like this?
Get instant summaries with Harvest