New [H] editorial...

[digitalwanderer]

meh. see above.

You need some coffee STAT then, I wanna know about what surprises are in these new drivers and I don't think I can allow you to sleep until you figure it all out for us and tell us.

Besides, sleep causes cancer...everyone knows that.

 

[WaltC]

...
Walt, I do agree with your latest post, but still believe that rampant speculation about Kyle should be kept to a minimum. AFAIK, his is the only major hardware website that has written an editorial about Nvidia's cheating. So, I guess it's a good sign. Unlike Anand and Tom who don't even post on there own forums or explain there positions, at least Kyle is somewhat accessible.

I know what you mean but it's hard to get around the fact that frgmstr's his own worst enemy in creating situations which invite rampant speculation, IMO... He can truthfully be said to be, if not the author, then the instigator of that speculation.

I find the notion that frgmstr might be considered "first" to state the obvious regarding this situation to be somewhat comical, actually... If anything, [H] is the very, very last to smell the coffee and board the train. As to Anand and Tom, recall that both sites have been entirely consistent in saying nothing about the situation (as it is no doubt too technical to be understood by the respective webmasters there) and so them saying nothing at the moment is only consistent with the nothing they've said since the start. [H], however, has had plenty to say from the start and only this week has arrived at the obvious conclusions. "First"...? Please...

Of course, B3d was one of the sites to originally break the 3dMk story, and ran it on the front page as I recall with screenshots and other assorted, irrefutable proofs in a multi-page article. Then there's the UT2K3 trilinear expose (which [H] evidently has only understood as of Kyle's last statement this week.) If anyone was "first" in opening this can of worms it would be ET, followed closely by B3d (and I think one other site I can't recall at the moment.) That was months ago.

Regarding "editorials" in general... Other than its placement on the front page, what is the difference between such a statement there and the same one in a forum? The main one I can think of is that in a forum people can respond to it and discuss it publicly, whereas such dialogue isn't possible when a topic is restricted to the editorial page only. Otherwise, I see no difference, especially when a forum discussion is linked on the front page (as the link suffices without need for putting the body of the text in the same place.)

I think before thinking [H] is "first" you might want to consider all of the other editorials [H] has published in the last several months, which this latest editorial directly contradicts. When you do that, it's easy to see [H] is absolutely dead last, right?

Again, I think it's great the Kyle finally gets it, and it's refreshing that he gets it, and I'm glad for him. But I got it a long time ago through the efforts of sites like B3d and ET, who themselves got it long before [H.]

Edit: typos

 

[StealthHawk]

At least Tom's mentioned the 3dmark03 issues. http://www17.tomshardware.com/column/20030624/index.html

I haven't seen anything regarding the multiple scandals from Anandtech.

 

[reever]

At least Tom's mentioned the 3dmark03 issues. http://www17.tomshardware.com/column/20030624/index.html

Mention? yes

Admit? No

He will never admit that what Nvidia was doing is wrong and/or the "bugs" are nothing more than accusations

 

[Fred da Roza]

At least Tom's mentioned the 3dmark03 issues. http://www17.tomshardware.com/column/20030624/index.html

Mention? yes

Admit? No

He will never admit that what Nvidia was doing is wrong and/or the "bugs" are nothing more than accusations

He may never state that nVidia is cheating but he didn't use the nVidia's Quack info to expose ATI, parrot nVidia's PR department, question everyone else’s motives or defend nVidia's recent antics. Personally I don't see him practicing a double standard.

Edit

Like WaltC said

 

[StealthHawk]

At least Tom's mentioned the 3dmark03 issues. http://www17.tomshardware.com/column/20030624/index.html

Mention? yes

Admit? No

He will never admit that what Nvidia was doing is wrong and/or the "bugs" are nothing more than accusations

Better than nothing- that's all I'm saying. Up till now Kyle has never said anything about 3dmark03 and NVIDIA except that "3dmark03 is useless." Not to mention the fact that Anand has mentioned nothing on any of the issues either.

 

[MasterBaiter]

Hmmm... silence speaks volumes. Sometimes websites don't want to get involved because it might jeopardize their relationship with a company... Don't know if that's true in this case, but I wouldn't be surpised to hear that Nvidia asked Anand and Tom's to not cover this.

I remember hearing murmerings about the 3DMark fiasco a few days before (I think it was either MuFu or Uttar) it hit the fan. If I remember correctly Beyond3D didn't want to break the story, but rather follow up on it. Good move IMO considering the flak that ExtremeTech took. B3D just reinforced what was being said by them.

 

[Seiko]

Hmmm... silence speaks volumes. Sometimes websites don't want to get involved because it might jeopardize their relationship with a company... Don't know if that's true in this case, but I wouldn't be surpised to hear that Nvidia asked Anand and Tom's to not cover this.

This is exactly what I'd be very worried about. When sites start to pull punches because they fear their relationships may suffer I'd have to question what are those sites goals? Are they trying to keep potential customers informed or are they leaning towards looking after their own interests? I appreciate it's probably a delicate balance with most but I'm sure sites that can post the truth irrespective of outcome and IHV wishes based on solid testing, data and results will see a large increase in hits thus opening genuine marketing opportunities. At the moment and I've said it a dozen times sites are so wrapped up in thinking they're in the loop and hoping for a little scrap of information or card sample they're selling themselves and thier readers woefully short. Its silly to think any IHV turning over 100s of millions a year will listen to a so called web master Alas most of these webmasters now suffer from a mild case of ego mania and actually think they can direct the path of the IHVs? I only hope they wake up and smell the coffee soon and post some hard hitting, accurate and unbiased reviews. Then the customers can make educated purchase decisions and thus ultimately guide the IHVs into what THEY want! The web sites should be nothing more than a portal to the information required to help make that purchase!

my 2 pennies!

 

[CorwinB]

There seems to be a common misconception that the vast majority of the public wants objective and informed advice. The truth is, sadly, that people really wanting objective advice are in a minority. Most people (and not only extremely vocal fanboys) only want validation of their consumer choices, and will select their "information" (ie merchandising) sources accordingly.

Of course (doublethought at work), those people want to believe they are objective, which is why they will prefer sources that somewhat hide their bias.[/i]

 

[Seiko]

There seems to be a common misconception that the vast majority of the public wants objective and informed advice. The truth is, sadly, that people really wanting objective advice are in a minority. Most people (and not only extremely vocal fanboys) only want validation of their consumer choices, and will select their "information" (ie merchandising) sources accordingly.

Of course (doublethought at work), those people want to believe they are objective, which is why they will prefer sources that somewhat hide their bias.[/i]

I'm not sure I agree that the majority only want to be assured they purchased the correct card. At some point we'll all find ourselves looking for a new one and then I'd like to turn to the reviews or previews of the cards. I certainly acknowledge having purchased that card you'll often try to side with the reviews that praise your purchase decision but as I said, at some point you'll need a review in order to make an educated purchase decision. It's at that time I'd expect to be able to get a general concenous of a cards performance, pros and cons etc.

 

[nyt]

Does anyone have actual figures of what volume of the market the online community represents? I have a feeling that it's being overestimated, and that whatever is published on the web has a much smaller impact on sales that what we'd want to believe. Proof being NVidia considers all the 'issues' a non-event, and the FX5200 sells extremely well.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Does anyone have actual figures of what volume of the market the online community represents? I have a feeling that it's being overestimated, and that whatever is published on the web has a much smaller impact on sales that what we'd want to believe. Proof being NVidia considers all the 'issues' a non-event, and the FX5200 sells extremely well.

I disagree and I think the actual size of the community doesn't represent it's influence.

The people who go to websites to talk about their gear are at one of the extreme ends of the newb/geek scale, and as such people at the other end of that scale tend to ask them for advice on PCs.

I think there really is a trickle-down effect, or a "and they tell two friends, and so on, and so on" type of effect going.

The boards hold the truth, we KNOW that....it's just finding it and sorting it from the BS that is the tricky bit.

I don't know if nVidia ignoring us is really the best proof that the community doesn't matter nor do I think the sales figures for the POS 5200 do. Look at ATi who has been listening and responding to the community and compare their numbers with nVidia over the last few months to see what I mean.

It's damned hard to fight the truth with BS, no matter how much money the BS has to back it up. nVidia is kind of proving that.

I really think this is a case where someone should tell nV, "It's the internet stupid!"; because they just don't seem to get it. They think they can put out info and we'll just swallow it since they said it, but those days are long past since we have alternate venues for much more accurate and un-biased info.

 

[Seiko]

Does anyone have actual figures of what volume of the market the online community represents? I have a feeling that it's being overestimated, and that whatever is published on the web has a much smaller impact on sales that what we'd want to believe. Proof being NVidia considers all the 'issues' a non-event, and the FX5200 sells extremely well.

I should let others in here really but without trying to take over the thread, I touched on this in antoher thread. Only when ALL sites start publishing their findings in a united voice will the IHVs start to listen. Until then they're simply being used as PR exstensions! Although I'd expect final remarks of a cards performance to differ somewhat dependant on site, certain issues would be mauled (unethical optimisations for example).
Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines

 

[digitalwanderer]

Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines

Yet. It should read, "Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines yet."

This has been going on for how long now, at least 5-6 months? And it wasn't until just recently that any major sites besides B3D ran with it on their front page? (Oh, and ExtremeTech too...can't forget them.)

It's gonna take time to spread the word, but on the brightside the longer sites go without mentioning it now the worse they're going to look.

I really do owe Kyle & [H] thanks for that, it ups the stakes on remaining quiet considerably for the other big hardware sites out there.

This isn't something sites can stay neutral on, though a lot are trying. You can remain silent, but that in turn is a silent endorsement of nVidia's current policies and practices...which people are starting to realize.

Give it time, keep the pressure up on all fronts, and it'll have a happy ending....it's just a matter of when.

EDITED BITS: "they're" for "their"

 

[WaltC]

I should let others in here really but without trying to take over the thread, I touched on this in antoher thread. Only when ALL sites start publishing their findings in a united voice will the IHVs start to listen. Until then they're simply being used as PR exstensions! Although I'd expect final remarks of a cards performance to differ somewhat dependant on site, certain issues would be mauled (unethical optimisations for example).
Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines

Some websites are often used as PR extensions, just like their paper magazine counterparts are often used that way. But, how do you propose to force a website to print something it does not want to print?

Improper/biased/technically sloppy hardware reviews have occurred with regularity since the dawn of computerdom... They are nothing new at all. IMO, the only way for all websites to "speak with a common voice" is for all of them to be run and published by the same people.

If you feel a website is running an improper/biased/sloppy show, email them and let them know. Make a statement on their forums and engage them in dialogue on the subject. And if nothing changes, simply quit visiting the site and stop worrying over everything they miss. Instead, frequent the sites you trust for the information they dispense.

It's that way in paper magazines--not everybody likes the same mags and so people pick and choose among them. The important thing to realize is that if we don't run a particular site there's nothing we can do to change their minds about what stories they cover and what stories they ignore, apart from telling them what we think. If a site isn't your cup of tea--move on. Otherwise you may find yourself engaged in a discussion with a telephone pole...

IE, you have a far better chance of changing your own behavior than you do someone else's. Do not needlessly agonize about that which is beyond your power to control.

Heh... I've run into that situation before and can tell you that in some website forums arguing with a telephone pole is more productive than arguing with some website prinicpals. My posts might as well have been written in hieroglyphics for all the good they did. I solved it by leaving the forums. You may find that when it comes to some web sites this is simply your best course.

 

[Pete]

Damn, why must the cross I bear is to be misunderstood? Why, God, why???

Maybe because you mangle your grammar.

 

[WaltC]

Does anyone have actual figures of what volume of the market the online community represents? I have a feeling that it's being overestimated, and that whatever is published on the web has a much smaller impact on sales that what we'd want to believe. Proof being NVidia considers all the 'issues' a non-event, and the FX5200 sells extremely well.

Last statisics I looked at contained estimates of 10 million to 30 million people online at any given time in the US, 24-hours a day. World wide I'd say the figures are much higher. Every major coporation has its own website, and the number of small, localized companies who have geographically contained websites is staggering. Some of the major network news broadcasters would give their eye-teeth to get a fraction of that number to tune into their news shows nightly. I think the the mistake these days is made by people underestimating the influence and economic clout of the "online community." But no major corporation that I'm aware of has missed it--which is why they have their own websites....

BTW, a low-end product like the 5200 is being touted by nVidia at the moment because it's the only thing since nV2x that nVidia has been able to ship in quantity since last year, and this shouldn't be forgotten. But the fact is that of the 10M-15M people who worldwide constitute the "active 3D gaming community" (people who buy more than 1-2 games a year), a product like the 5200 isn't even in the running--just as is true for ATi's lower-end 9000-series products. In the "active gaming market" it's 5600/9600 products and up that count. And nVidia's had a pretty poor record there for most of the last year.

 

[micron]

In the "active gaming market" it's 5600/9600 products and up that count. And nVidia's had a pretty poor record there for most of the last year.

Walt,
From where I'm at, the market is still flooded with GeForce4's. From the lan parties I've attended in Ca., and Ok., the GeForce4 is by far the most popular and widely used video card. So even though the FX cards havent been readilly avaliable for the gamers market until recently, I think Nvidia's previous line up has helped to keep them afloat....I dunno.....

 

[Seiko]

Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines

Yet. It should read, "Unfortunately even that debacle didn't even make all hardware sites headlines yet."

Well yes I see your point but 5 - 6 months of biased and sloppy reviews has let a particular IHV off the hook. Although it's easy to start bashing NVidia I'd expect just the same treatment for ATI. When as a community do we say enough is enough? It's being going on since I can remember, looking at benches showing the V3 and TNT running UT. The V3 trounced the TNT using glide but every review showed the V3 using D3D or OpenGL? Then the reviewer would go on to say the TNT in glorious 32 bit colour was superb? Well a friend opted to get the TNT to test 32 bit colour in UT and was unfortunately greated with sub teen framerates whilst I could play happily in 22 bit colour double if not triple framerates using the API the game had been written for. From that moment on I realised that the review sites are somewhat biased but I did think by now we'd have some baseline ethics and review policies? Apologies for digressing but the whole web review site thing does wind me up at times. Its so obviously a group of people getting excited at receiving a sample card that their objectivity goes out the window! As a general publication I believe the reviewers should be accountable for their publishing to both the IHVs and readers a like. Unfortunately it's obvious that some sites are looking out for numero uno and will quite happily keep stum or lean towards their current favourite IHV?

And WaltC, yes you're right but I still think that when review sites start to syncronously unite we'll start to see IHVs realise they are only going to be able to use them as PR extensions with a good product!

Micron, Yes you're right which is why I think ATI should have been more aggressive with the 9700PRO and drop it right into GF4 ti 4400 territory. Only a 9700Pro and above will see these guys upgrade and until it drops to $200 that wont be any time soon As such ATI will still need to make massive inroads on teh Nvidia users but as Nvidia has the time to play catch up it may never happen.

 

[micron]

Micron, Yes you're right which is why I think ATI should have been more aggressive with the 9700PRO and drop it right into GF4 ti 4400 territory. Only a 9700Pro and above will see these guys upgrade and until it drops to $200 that wont be any time soon As such ATI will still need to make massive inroads on teh Nvidia users but as Nvidia has the time to play catch up it may never happen.

Lets hope it doesnt