Tweet
Hey, I thought we were the good guys!
This is a communal slap on the wrist for us MURC-o-philes:
The misleading tom's hardware article regarding Overclocked FSB's sparked a heated thread on the Matrox Hardware forum. This was fine, as I think we all knew it was erroneous.
What I didn't like, was that when the author, Silvino, posted to the group, we all degenerated into a bunch of flame-throwing meanies! Heck, I thought I was over at the 3dfxgamers forum
.
IMHumbleO, what should have happened is that all of us with P3B-F's and G400's should have helped Silvino diagnose his problem, and when Tom's published an update, which they often do, the corrected info could have been posted, and maybe even a nice little thanks to all the MURCer's who helped get things straightened out.
Rather, I think, we chased Silvino off, and probably with a bad taste in his mouth. This is weird, since usually I've found this group to be one of the most informative, and most polite places I visit
. I've actually posted words to that effect on this very forum!
A few caveats:
I actually don't read Tom's much anymore, but only because their new material is sort of few and far between. It seems, however, that his site has fallen out of disfavor of late. Three years ago, that was the defacto hardware site on the net. And IMO, the very thing that made it popular in the first place is the thing that has turned people against it. They take sides. Most sites take an appropriate Uber-Journalist abroach, and are "only the facts, Ma'am". Tom's is quite blatantly anti and pro. They especially seem to hate when marketing overrides technology decisions. We all ate it up when it was "intel = evil, AMD = good", or why AGP or Busmastering were not godsends. But when they criticized certain video manufacturers, (and we all know that vid card loyalties are varied and deep) people wrinkled their noses. In almost no case, though, have I detected false data. Only data used to support an opinion. Not inherently wrong, as long as the reader is made aware that the writer is doing just that. I for one have never been confused on that issue.
So, am I defending Tom's and Silvino? A little. Do I think in this issue they published misleading information? Definitely!!! And, I am a little disapointed that in the weeks following that article, there has been no attempt to clarify the issue on Tom's main site. Silvino's posts here and elsewhere, and in emails that he sent me (I contacted him directly regarding the test, and he was quite friendly) indicated that there would be a retest of some sort, but it has yet to appear. That is too bad, since I feel it would have been a small correction.
At any rate, you can never have too many friends. And one who writes for a major online site would be nice to have. Not that we would have used any acquaintance to bias their reviews of matrox's cards. But, we certainly should make ourselves available to people who don't use Matrox products exclusivley to help them see the strengths, and iron out any possible problems.
Well, that was a rant, and a long post. I apologize for both. But, a good user forum like this is rare, and I was disappointed that we would treat a user the way we did.
Charles
The misleading tom's hardware article regarding Overclocked FSB's sparked a heated thread on the Matrox Hardware forum. This was fine, as I think we all knew it was erroneous.
What I didn't like, was that when the author, Silvino, posted to the group, we all degenerated into a bunch of flame-throwing meanies! Heck, I thought I was over at the 3dfxgamers forum
.IMHumbleO, what should have happened is that all of us with P3B-F's and G400's should have helped Silvino diagnose his problem, and when Tom's published an update, which they often do, the corrected info could have been posted, and maybe even a nice little thanks to all the MURCer's who helped get things straightened out.
Rather, I think, we chased Silvino off, and probably with a bad taste in his mouth. This is weird, since usually I've found this group to be one of the most informative, and most polite places I visit
. I've actually posted words to that effect on this very forum!A few caveats:
I actually don't read Tom's much anymore, but only because their new material is sort of few and far between. It seems, however, that his site has fallen out of disfavor of late. Three years ago, that was the defacto hardware site on the net. And IMO, the very thing that made it popular in the first place is the thing that has turned people against it. They take sides. Most sites take an appropriate Uber-Journalist abroach, and are "only the facts, Ma'am". Tom's is quite blatantly anti and pro. They especially seem to hate when marketing overrides technology decisions. We all ate it up when it was "intel = evil, AMD = good", or why AGP or Busmastering were not godsends. But when they criticized certain video manufacturers, (and we all know that vid card loyalties are varied and deep) people wrinkled their noses. In almost no case, though, have I detected false data. Only data used to support an opinion. Not inherently wrong, as long as the reader is made aware that the writer is doing just that. I for one have never been confused on that issue.
So, am I defending Tom's and Silvino? A little. Do I think in this issue they published misleading information? Definitely!!! And, I am a little disapointed that in the weeks following that article, there has been no attempt to clarify the issue on Tom's main site. Silvino's posts here and elsewhere, and in emails that he sent me (I contacted him directly regarding the test, and he was quite friendly) indicated that there would be a retest of some sort, but it has yet to appear. That is too bad, since I feel it would have been a small correction.
At any rate, you can never have too many friends. And one who writes for a major online site would be nice to have. Not that we would have used any acquaintance to bias their reviews of matrox's cards. But, we certainly should make ourselves available to people who don't use Matrox products exclusivley to help them see the strengths, and iron out any possible problems.
Well, that was a rant, and a long post. I apologize for both. But, a good user forum like this is rare, and I was disappointed that we would treat a user the way we did.
Charles
Jord = Bloomers
Comment