[H]ardOCP Trying to be too Hard?

[Sxotty]

Until now, you mean.

BFGTech has a track record of consistently building quality products that work.

Why do youguys get a hard on bashing [H]?

Having one card fail does not mean they do not have a record of building cards that work.

He specifically stated he has tested many xpress chipset based mobos and they did not work well.

The tech support suggested it was the mobo they did not just throw that in to be pains in the ass.
Is honesty such a bad thing now?

His reviewer and not him found problems with the system and told people. I am tired of reviewers that do not report such things. Then you buy a POS hardware that has constant issues b/c the reviewer did not want to make a company look bad.

I do not know their personal bias and I do not really care, if the information is accurate.

I want reviewers to expose problems in hardware so they can be fixed, and I can avoid them till they are. I wish the nforce reviews would have mentioned the data corruption issue when they first came out. It is annoying to find it out much later.

Lets give a nice example shall we

To make the long story short I refused to finish the review because I've had too many issues with this board. Vendor was fine with that and agreed with my comments.

That is exactly wrong, now poor slobs will go out and buy it thinking it will work b/c people cannot post negative reviews. I do not say volt is bad, if you are not a big player you cannot slam a product even justifiably, without having a big problem.

 

[PatrickL]

Well it depends. Do you want reviewers to post real problem they found in the hardware they are testing or imaginary ones ?
In that case they reported a problem that was not and totally failed to say clearly it was a faulty BFG card the problem. As i pointed out, their follow up article carefully avoid to name the brand. Do we have to think that all BFG cards are faulty? No of course but the way [H] handled that is the most unprofessionnal you can find.

 

[Sxotty]

Well maybe we should start whole new topic, but I much prefer reviews where they will say what is wrong with a product.

Everything has to get a 95% now or something.

Anyway there really is a problem the only honest reviews you can get of an nvidia product are probably at rage3d And the reverse is also true. Yes I do sometimes read blatantly biased sites to try and get the view from the negative (and btw rage3ds last review of gtx really wasn't biased). I wish that it was not necessary though, there are a number of problems with it. It is unlikely that ati will be sending samples out to Nvnews to review, and the reverse is most likely true so then you are forced to rely on sites that pay for their own hardware. Of course that has an advantage as well in that they are theoretically not as beholden to a particular interest.

 

[Deathlike2]

Well it depends. Do you want reviewers to post real problem they found in the hardware they are testing or imaginary ones ?
In that case they reported a problem that was not and totally failed to said clearly it was a faulty BFG card the problem. As i pointed out, their follow up article carefully avoid to name the brand. Do we have to think that all BFG cards are faulty? No of course but the way [H] handled that is the most unprofessionnal you can find.

If you don't even give a mention of BFG in the opinion article (most likely not to say anything negative to your own sponser), then there is something clearly wrong. You have to at least mention and acknowledge something at the very least (without offending your sponser).

The good part is Kyle is consistant in his opinions. Once he has his mind made up (whether he has a legitimate reason or not), it stands and it shows.

However, the bad part stems that whatever new information that changes the context of the issue/problem, he won't reconsider or backtrack. There is consistancy here. It's not always good though.

 

[FrgMstr]

If [H] thinks the Xpress 200 chipset is bad, then that’s fine. They can state their opinion as much as they want, and maybe it’s true.

I feel bad for the people making purchasing decisions on subjective information. Now I realize that not everyone out there understands (or cares) about the level of technical detail in Beyond3D’s articles, but having subjective opinions in an article with no fact in said article to back said opinions up is doing a disservice to the people who go to [H] to educate themselves on purchasing decisions.

Yes, the Xpress 200 has been a bad solution for high end and enthusiast machines for sure.

As for subjectivity, I guess all those people buying cars and other items that are most about experiences are wrong to listen to Car & Driver or Motortrend? What you find in their evaluations are page after page of what their experience with the automobile was like, with usually one page or sidebar saved for stats. Gaming is all about the experience and video cards provide that experience. We have found that most people want to know our opinion on what kind of overall experience to expect. Very few care about the nuts and bolts aspect of it, although I still personally find it interesting.

I personally think that if anyone purchases a video card now days and does not look at the overall picture, they are simply foolish. As we will show today, with an article that is to be published, benchmarks do not always show what your gaming experience will be.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

The good part is Kyle is consistant in his opinions. Once he has his mind made up (whether he has a legitimate reason or not), it stands and it shows.

However, the bad part stems that whatever new information that changes the context of the issue/problem, he won't reconsider or backtrack. There is consistancy here. It's not always good though.

Being stubborn in your opinion in the face of the facts is not a plus. Sticking to your opinion when you are factually incorrect does not give you brownie points. Should we laud Kyle for being consistent if he insists the moon is made of green cheese just because it is "his opinion"? Of course not. He was wrong, screamed like a petulant child at the wrong party, and now we know how wrong he was, he's not man enough to apologise and correct his mistake.

You know what? This is how it's always been from Kyle, we should not be surprised. He's always had his biases for his favourite companies and against all others, and that's why his opinion and his site has become worthless. It's no longer about the facts, it's about who he likes the best.

 

[Tahir2]

I wonder how the NVIDIA integrated solution will do with regards to stability.

Have been using a lot of Xpress 200 chipset motherboards and there are problems, but then again, there are also problems with the Nforce 4 chipset.

For price and features of the integrated Xpress 200 chipset GPU it cannot be beat (not even by the new NVIDIA chipset at the moment) in its market. Performance in general is excellent and can be a very stable chipset when used in the correct context. Not really a chipset for overclocking and tweaking IMHO or for using in an extremely high end PC.

However why it would be used in an extremely high-end machine I do not know. It was never really designed for that kind of market AFAIK.

As to this [H] fiasco type deal... no comment from me.

 

[Deathlike2]

Being stubborn in your opinion in the face of the facts is not a plus. Sticking to your opinion when you are factually incorrect does not give you brownie points. Should we laud Kyle for being consistent if he insists the moon is made of green cheese just because it is "his opinion"? Of course not. He was wrong, screamed like a petulant child at the wrong party, and now we know how wrong he was, he's not man enough to apologise and correct his mistake.

Well, I definately do not agree with how he does it. But whatever I guess.

If you wanted to comment on an article (as part of a conclusion), it would require the objective part and then the subjective part. I don't see much separation of the two (if any, most of it is subjective) in any of the comments Kyle provides in the reviews.

 

[FrgMstr]

Being stubborn in your opinion in the face of the facts is not a plus. Sticking to your opinion when you are factually incorrect does not give you brownie points. Should we laud Kyle for being consistent if he insists the moon is made of green cheese just because it is "his opinion"? Of course not. He was wrong, screamed like a petulant child at the wrong party, and now we know how wrong he was, he's not man enough to apologise and correct his mistake.

You know what? This is how it's always been from Kyle, we should not be surprised. He's always had his biases for his favourite companies and against all others, and that's why his opinion and his site has become worthless. It's no longer about the facts, it's about who he likes the best.

Yeah, stubborn old Kyle. Calling hardware crap that does not work right. Self proclaimed low-end chipset in a $3000 computer.....hmm, how many of the Xpress 200 do you own? What is in your expensive gaming box? Do you even have the hardware experience to have an opinion? How many Xpress 200 motherboards have you tested? How many did ATI send you before the reference design so that you could give them feedback? How many times did ATI ask you opinion on their product?

I am not asking these things simply to be an arrogant ass, I am asking these obviously rhetorical questions, because the fact of the matter is that I have a very deep experience with this chipset and have formed an opinion based on that experience. I am sorry if you cannot see that.

And it is not about WHO I like best, it is about WHAT we like best. I could care less who is making it. BTW, here is another terribly biased anti-ATI article for you to read.

You guys are funny.

 

[rashly]

I feel that review sites should hold themselves to a certain standard when people will be making purchasing decisions based on the reviews. [H] should especially uphold it's integrity being one of the top sites in the world. Among other things, reviews should contain the following to help the reader make the best buying decision:

1) The testing procedures should be able to be reproduced as close as possible by someone with the same hardware. This means stating every driver version, testing procedure, etc. Obviously some things will always be dynamic and can not be avoided.
2) A "review" should be objective throughout. The facts should be stated and expanded upon to the point of where the reader should be able to make up his/her own opinion on the product. A conclusion page could be included and subjective opinions should be noted as such which can stray from objectivity.
3) The subjective opinions by the reviewer should be backed up by the objective data in the article or from the data in a linked article. Readers should not ahve to blindly "trust" the reviewer's opinions because this can lead to problems.

For the most part, [H] has done a good job recently with the first point.

[H] fails in point 2 by being too subjective throughout the article. The reviews stop being reviews and start becoming editorials real fast. This is dangerous when people do research to purchase products and the reviewer has such a huge impact on the overall picture of the product. People are now making purchasing decisions based on editorials and not objective reviews.

Point 3 should never happen. It is entirely opinion based on no fact. Not making assumptions with no data prevents embarrassing situations like the current xpress 200 one. Like I said before, saying, "We know for sure that the motherboard is at fault because we swapped out all other components and the thing that was constant in the crashes was the motherboard," would have been fine. It would also have been fine not placing blame on a particular part if you were not willing to do the test and not willing to post how this conclusion was reached. The wrong thing about the article was saying that the motherboard was the issue without any facts in the article to back that up. Another wrong thing was not showing evidence that there are problems with the Xpress 200 chipset.

Will the [H] readers beleive the reviewer's opinion without fact? Probably. And that is the scary thing because this situation has shown that the reviewer's opinion can often be wrong as it is with the motherboard "issue" in this review. This is why [H] has lost a lot of credibility.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Having one card fail does not mean they do not have a record of building cards that work.

Who said it did?

The tech support suggested it was the mobo they did not just throw that in to be pains in the ass.
Is honesty such a bad thing now?

Don't know...ask Kyle. Tech support suggested mobo...they dod NOT suggest the chipset. (You do know there is more to a mobo than the chipset, right?)

His reviewer and not him found problems with the system and told people. I am tired of reviewers that do not report such things. Then you buy a POS hardware that has constant issues b/c the reviewer did not want to make a company look bad.

NO ONE IS ASKING that they do not report problems with the system!!

We are asking for a fair assesment of what is actually wrong with the system...rather than specualtion based on past experience. We are also asking that when it is brought to light what IS the actual problem, it is addressed.

Why is this so hard to understand?

I do not know their personal bias and I do not really care if the information is accurate.

Well, that explains it I guess...you don't care if the information is accurate?! I guess you're the audience H is trying to cater to?!

 

[John Reynolds]

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=ODc1

The Radeon X1800 XT, which was announced over a month ago, wasn’t slated to be in consumers’ hands until around November 15, 2005. In fact, at the time of this article, there are no retail video cards in sight. It is our hope that by the time you read this, there will actually be some cards out there for you to buy.

I think this part of the article needs a little editing.

 

[FrgMstr]

Will the [H] readers beleive the reviewer's opinion without fact? Probably. And that is the scary thing because this situation has shown that the reviewer's opinion can often be wrong as it is with the motherboard "issue" in this review. This is why [H] has lost a lot of credibility.

Stating that readers will beleive us and then saying we have lost our credibility are a bit contradictory aren't they?

I have learned one thing in the last few years running an Internet hardware site. People can go to many sites and find objective data, much of it being dry an unanalyzed. What we found is that our readers want us to be subjective and tell them our opinons.

What everyone is having a fit about here is me sharing my opinion. I did not even write the review, simply injected my opinion where I saw fit. I am sorry if you do not like my opinion, but it is hardly baseless. Chris Morley fully addressed the issue in the follow up article and apologized. Did I restate my opinion on the Xpress 200 chipset? Absolutely. The fact that BFG put in a bad video card did not impact that. BFG making a bad video card does not make the Xpress 200 chispet a solution worthy of a $3000 gaming computer.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

I am not asking these things simply to be an arrogant ass, I am asking these obviously rhetorical questions, because the fact of the matter is that I have a very deep experience with this chipset and have formed an opinion based on that experience. I am sorry if you cannot see that.

And it is not about WHO I like best, it is about WHAT we like best. I could care less who is making it. BTW, here is another terribly biased anti-ATI article for you to read.

You were wrong - be a man, issue a correction, apologise and move on. But you won't do that, you'll just keep insisting you were right no matter what the facts have turned out to be.

You guys are funny.

And you are hilarious - laughable in fact.

 

[FrgMstr]

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=ODc1



I think this part of the article needs a little editing.

Ooops, my bad, fixing now. We did address this on the last page. Skipped that one.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

What everyone is having a fit about here is me sharing my opinion.

No, that is exactly NOT it.

It's using that opinion as a justification for what went on with the factually incorrect article.

 

[FrgMstr]

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=ODc1



I think this part of the article needs a little editing.

Here you go, this is much more accurate. Sorry, that being wrong is 100% my fault, not Brent's. When the article was turned over for edit, his words were correct. Here is the change.

The Radeon X1800 XT, which was announced over a month ago, wasn’t slated to be in consumers’ hands until around November 15, 2005. In fact though, they started showing up on retail store shelves yesterday.

 

[Sxotty]

Who said it did?

You implied it.

NO ONE IS ASKING that they do not report problems with the system!!

We are asking for a fair assesment of what is actually wrong with the system...rather than specualtion based on past experience.

What is wrong with speclation if it is noted as such?

I do not know their personal bias and I do not really care if the information is accurate.

Well, that explains it I guess...you don't care if the information is accurate?! I guess you're the audience H is trying to cater to?!

I will add a little puncutation to help you comprehend what I meant.

I do not know their personal bias, and I do not really care, if the information is accurate.

And I would hope you do not either. However whether the information was accurate is what is apparently making you all upity, and I can understand that. However, I do not think it is evil to base your judgement on previous experience. That is how tech support works, you recognize a problem you have had before and your first assumption is that it is the same cause, though that may not be accurate. That is also how real life works, if you car won't start and your lights dim when you turn the key it is likely that your battery is dead. Sure it may not be the case, but I would rather someone said "Hey it looks like your battery is dead" Than "I cannot make an accurate diagnosis as I do not have the necessary information, for all I know your key is powering a blackhole that is sucking the light into it"

 

[PatrickL]

Your opinion is not the problem. Your opinion is just that, an opinion.
The facts are the problem and i am sure you perfectly know that despite you are trying hard to dodge that.

 

[FrgMstr]

No, that is exactly NOT it.

It's using that opinion as a justification for what went on with the factually incorrect article.

Well, outside of an email from Kelt after spending a week tweaking on their defective FragBox 2, I have no proof. Had the solution been provided through spending a week with their tech support, the article would have read differently. But here is the fact that you cannot grasp. We certainly respect Kelt's opinion, and that is why the follow-up was posted. Do keep in mind that Kelt and his tech support repeatedly pointed to problems they had in the past with the motherboard. Never was the video card looked at as being the problem.

So all in all, they do all sorts of things to the box, things I am unaware of, and then all of a sudden the video card is the problem? I just simply say there are too many variables involved there to be conclusive.

Had I had definitive proof that the video card was at fault, I would have handled the situation differently. But there were no sure answers and I am comfortable with the way we handled things. I think Falcon is too. Here is what the owner had to say:

Kyle & Chris,

I can't speak for ATI or MSI, but from my point of view this puts everything right. This means much more than just a statement from me and one from ATI disagreeing.

I know we locked horns hard over this one, but writing this took some serious guts and I salute you for it. You guys have proved in your reviews that if it's not right the first time, you'll make it right. There's not many reviewers out there that can say that, and you guys should be proud.

Sincerely,

Kelt Reeves
Falcon Northwest

PS- feel free to post this if you like.

Hmm, who do I go with here? My gut, my editor, and the owner of the company that was directly involved, or a group of guys at B3D forums that find fault in almost everything we do? If you ask me, you are the guys that have lost credibility and lack objectivity.

With that said, I have other things that require my attention. Good talking to you guys this morning, you certainly keep us on our toes.