PopScience Best of Whats new winner for 2006

Nightwing · 11-08-2006, 12:52 AM

One of the Popular Science Best of Whats New Grand Award Winner for 2006.

Won in Gadgets.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...roduct_50.html

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-09-2006, 10:06 PM

"Goodbye, Paper," huh? Well, that's Popular Science for ya... they like to be a "Gee Whiz" mag these days. Still, it's a good write up, and they've covered e-ink and e-readers before.

I cringed when I read "each of the 10,000 available titles costs about 25 percent less than the hardcover"... Oh, that'll see those e-books...

Cthulhu · 11-10-2006, 10:19 AM

This points up something I wonder about frequently:

How can these tech reviewers afford to purchase all the products they test?

If they don't buy them, but are given them, how is that not a paid advertisement?

If the devices are instead loaned to the reviewer, how is the public going to get a non-biased, long term assessment of the tech?....

By which I mean that if I didn't have to fork over $386.79 (Chicago/IL tax is around 10%), I could afford to buy a pretty big library from CONNECT.

Nightwing · 11-10-2006, 10:23 AM

There are one or two that will purchase but the rest are given review copies. Or timed copies. Etc.

tcv · 11-10-2006, 11:36 AM

The public is never assured they get a non-biased review, except perhaps through Consumer Reports. Many developers and manufacturers hold advertising in ransom for getting good reviews, too. I don't know if Sony does this. It's a shame, but money does make the world go around.

NatCh · 11-10-2006, 11:57 AM

I've found that Consumer Reports tends to be a bit biased toward certain makes of cars -- Honda and Toyota for instance don't get dinged for things that they ding GM cars for when I've seen for myself that the points are pretty much the same. Perhaps they were isolated incidents.

But anyway, my point is that everyone has a bias of some sort. The good reviewers admit that, at least to themselves, and do their best to compensate for it. Folks who make unqualified claims of objectivity get a ... more skeptical viewing from me.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-10-2006, 12:04 PM

Companies aren't dumb... they'll often take their product first to the magazines and web sites that their target market already peruses, and that they expect will give a write-up positive enough to drive that market segment into the stores.

Reviewers, knowing this, may blanche on giving bad reviews, knowing it may take them off of the toy list. They compensate by giving very straightforward (but rarely criticizing) reviews on products they don't like...

That's why all review readers should, as the saying goes, take the review "with a grain of salt."

Leaping Gnome · 11-10-2006, 01:31 PM

Not to mention at least some of the Reader "reviews" out there seem to be based on no hands-on time at all, or maybe 5 minutes with it in a store looking at a demo unit.

NatCh · 11-10-2006, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leaping Gnome

...or maybe 5 minutes with it in a store looking at a demo unit.

And wondering when the store will get working units.

Cthulhu · 11-10-2006, 04:17 PM

Regarding Consumer Reports, I'm not so sure they're as unbiased as they may once have been. Rather, as unbiased as they could claim to be with plausable deniability.
I heard somewhere....I think in a wikipedia entry that they lost a lawsuit that attempted to prevent an automaker from using their review in an ad. Thus, their idea of "we never allow our reviews in ads, so you know that ours is a critical critique and not tit for tat" is shattered.

Secondly, in a "How To" buy article regarding big TV's, they advocated exploiting physical stores. "Check out the toy at Mediocre Purchase or Circus Village to see if you like it, then buy it online from a cheaper supplier." I consider that quite disingenuous. I can hear people complaining when the stores they refused to patronise are defunct...
Back to topic, I hope that for all the awards & rave reviews, the Reader stays around. The greatest thing at CES 2005, and winner of many industry awards, splashpower, http://www.splashpower.com/, has yet to become a reality. Now if they can get it together like the e-ink boys & girls did, that'll be something.

11-08-2006, 12:52 AM	#1
Nightwing Addict Posts: 303 Karma: 541 Join Date: Oct 2006 Device: Cowon A2 Dell x3i, Sony Reader & Eee PC!	PopScience Best of Whats new winner for 2006 One of the Popular Science Best of Whats New Grand Award Winner for 2006. Won in Gadgets. http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bo...roduct_50.html

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Whats that you have? An E-reader??	troykm	News	103	05-20-2011 08:13 AM
iLiad whats the difference?	SneakySnake	iRex	5	03-23-2010 07:17 PM
MOBILEREAD WHATS UP!!	dirtylc	Introduce Yourself	10	02-09-2009 02:09 PM
Whats stopping you	alehel	News	7	12-02-2008 12:52 AM
Ok, Whats the first thing to do?	DeathtoToasters	iRex	7	11-29-2007 10:08 AM

11-09-2006, 10:06 PM	#2
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	"Goodbye, Paper," huh? Well, that's Popular Science for ya... they like to be a "Gee Whiz" mag these days. Still, it's a good write up, and they've covered e-ink and e-readers before. I cringed when I read "each of the 10,000 available titles costs about 25 percent less than the hardcover"... Oh, that'll see those e-books...

11-10-2006, 10:19 AM	#3
Cthulhu Technologist Posts: 488 Karma: 585237 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: I'm between Cities Device: SONY Reader PRS-500	This points up something I wonder about frequently: How can these tech reviewers afford to purchase all the products they test? If they don't buy them, but are given them, how is that not a paid advertisement? If the devices are instead loaned to the reviewer, how is the public going to get a non-biased, long term assessment of the tech?.... By which I mean that if I didn't have to fork over $386.79 (Chicago/IL tax is around 10%), I could afford to buy a pretty big library from CONNECT.

11-10-2006, 10:23 AM	#4
Nightwing Addict Posts: 303 Karma: 541 Join Date: Oct 2006 Device: Cowon A2 Dell x3i, Sony Reader & Eee PC!	There are one or two that will purchase but the rest are given review copies. Or timed copies. Etc.

11-10-2006, 11:36 AM	#5
tcv Addict Posts: 330 Karma: 596 Join Date: Oct 2006	The public is never assured they get a non-biased review, except perhaps through Consumer Reports. Many developers and manufacturers hold advertising in ransom for getting good reviews, too. I don't know if Sony does this. It's a shame, but money does make the world go around.

11-10-2006, 11:57 AM	#6
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	I've found that Consumer Reports tends to be a bit biased toward certain makes of cars -- Honda and Toyota for instance don't get dinged for things that they ding GM cars for when I've seen for myself that the points are pretty much the same. Perhaps they were isolated incidents. But anyway, my point is that everyone has a bias of some sort. The good reviewers admit that, at least to themselves, and do their best to compensate for it. Folks who make unqualified claims of objectivity get a ... more skeptical viewing from me.

11-10-2006, 12:04 PM	#7
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	Companies aren't dumb... they'll often take their product first to the magazines and web sites that their target market already peruses, and that they expect will give a write-up positive enough to drive that market segment into the stores. Reviewers, knowing this, may blanche on giving bad reviews, knowing it may take them off of the toy list. They compensate by giving very straightforward (but rarely criticizing) reviews on products they don't like... That's why all review readers should, as the saying goes, take the review "with a grain of salt."

11-10-2006, 01:31 PM	#8
Leaping Gnome Evangelist Posts: 490 Karma: 1641 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Louisville Device: Sony Reader PRS-500	Not to mention at least some of the Reader "reviews" out there seem to be based on no hands-on time at all, or maybe 5 minutes with it in a store looking at a demo unit.

11-10-2006, 04:17 PM	#10
Cthulhu Technologist Posts: 488 Karma: 585237 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: I'm between Cities Device: SONY Reader PRS-500	Regarding Consumer Reports, I'm not so sure they're as unbiased as they may once have been. Rather, as unbiased as they could claim to be with plausable deniability. I heard somewhere....I think in a wikipedia entry that they lost a lawsuit that attempted to prevent an automaker from using their review in an ad. Thus, their idea of "we never allow our reviews in ads, so you know that ours is a critical critique and not tit for tat" is shattered. Secondly, in a "How To" buy article regarding big TV's, they advocated exploiting physical stores. "Check out the toy at Mediocre Purchase or Circus Village to see if you like it, then buy it online from a cheaper supplier." I consider that quite disingenuous. I can hear people complaining when the stores they refused to patronise are defunct... Back to topic, I hope that for all the awards & rave reviews, the Reader stays around. The greatest thing at CES 2005, and winner of many industry awards, splashpower, http://www.splashpower.com/, has yet to become a reality. Now if they can get it together like the e-ink boys & girls did, that'll be something.

Advert

Advert