Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
If that's the case, then the reviewers at PCMag don't know what they're doing. In which case, that makes their entire review suspect.
|
I don't know if I would go that far, but I would say that they only had the device for a few hours and likely didn't do as detailed a review as they could have. In the rush to match or beat their competition it is quite common on the web. It would be interesting to know why they made that deduction. I would say the parts of the review that give performance and visual reaction are likely to be more accurate. I was saying in another forum that there are many users here far more literate with reading devices than any reviewer from a magazine. I wouldn't use PCMagazine or CNET as the canon for reading devices, that is just my opinion though.
