Personal computing discussed
Moderators: askfranklin, renee, emkubed, Captain Ned
derFunkenstein wrote:Some of this stuff is "this other website does this really well, and TR should get into it" and that's a recipe for dying a swift death. It's a lot of investment into a space where someone else already dominates. I think if coverage was expanded, it'd be better to expand it into something that nobody else does (or does well).
Vhalidictes wrote:That's a good thought, but it's kind of tangential to the issue of "not enough articles published of any type".
EDIT: Even I was surprised. Is this the latest article? The front page re-orders stuff upon refreshing so I can't be completely sure.
DancinJack wrote:I'm not sure where it was decided that the sheer number of articles was the issue? It may be for some, but honestly that's not really close to the top of the list for me. TR has always been about quality, and not necessarily quantity. The big items got covered, and covered super well. My biggest issue is that isn't happening anymore.
Vhalidictes wrote:DancinJack wrote:I'm not sure where it was decided that the sheer number of articles was the issue? It may be for some, but honestly that's not really close to the top of the list for me. TR has always been about quality, and not necessarily quantity. The big items got covered, and covered super well. My biggest issue is that isn't happening anymore.
High quality reviews are more important, sure. Where can I find the testing results for the new Kaby Lake i5 and i3 series? I'd like to see the i3 results in particular because it would make a good proxy for the new HT Pentium performance.
Mr Bill wrote:I see your view derFunkenstein. I just thought maybe TR could get review units more easily if a youtube presentation was offered. It seems like the last few releases of hot hardware, only those darned youtube reviewers got any units.
derFunkenstein wrote:Mr Bill wrote:I see your view derFunkenstein. I just thought maybe TR could get review units more easily if a youtube presentation was offered. It seems like the last few releases of hot hardware, only those darned youtube reviewers got any units.
Ah, that may be. It's kind of a gamble, but if it paid off it'd be great. Thing is, those Youtubers that got review units are also pulling down way more views than the average, too.
Flying Fox wrote:I suppose the idea would be to present the best aspects (per the manufacturer's desire) to the youtube audience and the written article can be more thorough and honest in its evaluation.derFunkenstein wrote:Mr Bill wrote:I see your view derFunkenstein. I just thought maybe TR could get review units more easily if a youtube presentation was offered. It seems like the last few releases of hot hardware, only those darned youtube reviewers got any units.
Ah, that may be. It's kind of a gamble, but if it paid off it'd be great. Thing is, those Youtubers that got review units are also pulling down way more views than the average, too.
And the price to pay there may be the review cannot badmouth the product/vendor. Do you really want editorial independence be compromised for the sake of more review units?
Mr Bill wrote:Flying Fox wrote:I suppose the idea would be to present the best aspects (per the manufacturer's desire) to the youtube audience and the written article can be more thorough and honest in its evaluation.derFunkenstein wrote:Ah, that may be. It's kind of a gamble, but if it paid off it'd be great. Thing is, those Youtubers that got review units are also pulling down way more views than the average, too.
And the price to pay there may be the review cannot badmouth the product/vendor. Do you really want editorial independence be compromised for the sake of more review units?
Flying Fox wrote:I pretty much agree and maybe Scotts presence at AMD will give us a little boost in that department. Just so we don't have to cross that Rubicon.I'm sorry, but IMO this is the line that should not be crossed.
Flying Fox wrote:Mr Bill wrote:Flying Fox wrote:And the price to pay there may be the review cannot badmouth the product/vendor. Do you really want editorial independence be compromised for the sake of more review units?
I suppose the idea would be to present the best aspects (per the manufacturer's desire) to the youtube audience and the written article can be more thorough and honest in its evaluation.
I'm sorry, but IMO this is the line that should not be crossed.
CScottG wrote:A video does NOT have to include any subjective commentary.
derFunkenstein wrote:Some of this stuff is "this other website does this really well, and TR should get into it" and that's a recipe for dying a swift death. It's a lot of investment into a space where someone else already dominates. I think if coverage was expanded, it'd be better to expand it into something that nobody else does (or does well).
Captain Ned wrote:CScottG wrote:A video does NOT have to include any subjective commentary.
A video going out over your byline implies editorial approval of any and all statements made in the video.
CScottG wrote:a video is just more accessible
CScottG wrote:a video is just more accessible.
DancinJack wrote:https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Dissecting-AMD-Zen-Architecture-Interview-David-Kanter
Exactly the stuff TR has done in the past, and should be doing now. :(