• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sander Sassen replies...

I havn't finished reading through this but its pretty funny anyway, its like little kids arguing, "you did it!" "No you did it!"
 
How is that really any different to what trhe ATi guy said?
He declided other offers, so ATi didn't bother to offer him a chance to get R520 information.
Seems fairly obvious why ATi did it, because they thought "Why bother with this guy?"
Sassen admits not taking up offers from ATi (I've only read page 1 so far).
 
Looks like ATi is more hostile to the press than once thought. Which is usually the attitude that companies in distress take. 🙁

It's sad to see ATi in this state having to invite press who are only favorable to ATi. I guess we found out what happens when the truth gets out and ATi is against the wall. 🙁
 
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Why should we care what this guy says anyway?
Click to expand...

Because it shows a company in distress when it comes to balanced coverage in the media. If ATi doesn't like the results it sees for benchmarks, it will not let those benchmarks get published/let the journalists get the ability to benchmark.

It's a good thing I sold all of my ATi stock in mid-march. 🙁
 
Originally posted by: g3pro
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Why should we care what this guy says anyway?
Click to expand...

Because it shows a company in distress when it comes to balanced coverage in the media. If ATi doesn't like the results it sees for benchmarks, it will not let those benchmarks get published/let the journalists get the ability to benchmark.

It's a good thing I sold all of my ATi stock in mid-march. 🙁
Click to expand...

Oh. Read up on the situation before posting.
 
In the emails Sander is obviously joking but I would think he would have more common sense then to say something to possibly offend a company which he had such a close relationship with. Also there are a couple things missing from his response, his emails for the most part he only has emails from ATI so he could be being very hostile but we're not seeing it. One final thing, some of his conclusions seem a bit sensationalized, he says "Conclusion: ATI only works with publications it can control and that it can trust to publish the information in proper form for them." this has no basis in what is in the emails, the emails are talking about how he turned down a possible interview where does controlling the information published come into that.
 
Originally posted by: g3pro
The hostility came from ATi when Sasser published an ATi IQ article which was critical of ATi.
Click to expand...

Oh please. There were no "hostilities", besides ATI not having room for him at their R520 launch party. It's only Sander that perceives it as hostility and tries to portray himself as a martyr. Anyway, the ATI guy has every right to dislike Sander after all the unprofessional and snide remarks he made in his emails. Let's see:

You sure know how to win the press over, excellent strategy! I guess I now know why NVIDIA is eating your lunch, or breakfast for that matter, at every level.

So you're telling me I'm not invited is that it? I feel an ATI column coming up, lets see if we can drop the stock price shall we?
Click to expand...

Edit: Not to mention his petty little tactic of CCing Nvidia reps on his emails. How lame is that?
 
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.

The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
Click to expand...

What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS. 😛
:roll:

:thumbsdown:
 
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.

The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
Click to expand...

What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS. 😛
:roll:

:thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Did he mention pre-production in his first article?
 
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.

The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
Click to expand...

What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS. 😛
:roll:

:thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Did he mention pre-production in his first article?
Click to expand...

no

uness it is well-hidden, he merely states
So without further ado, let?s take a look at what the R520 architecture is capable of.
Click to expand...
and his conclusion is worse:
The benchmarks were run on release candidate drivers for the Radeon X1800 Pro and XT, hence performance is not likely to change much before launch, but final clockspeeds have yet to be determined we've learned, hence it could go either way.
Click to expand...
NO mention of PREproduction.
 
Originally posted by: M0RPH
Originally posted by: g3pro
The hostility came from ATi when Sasser published an ATi IQ article which was critical of ATi.
Click to expand...

Oh please. There were no "hostilities", besides ATI not having room for him at their R520 launch party. It's only Sander that perceives it as hostility and tries to portray himself as a martyr.
Click to expand...

Sander was considered a highly reputable source for ATi when he was praising them. That's why he was the only journalist invited to talk to some people in Prague on behalf of ATi or something. Why did the tone change? Because Sander posted an article critical of ATi. ATi didn't like anything not sucking its dick, so it (Andrew) banned Sander from future ATi events.

How can you defend such tactics? You use your excuses and accusations to slander Sander, but what you're doing is railing against a free and balanced press. :thumbsdown:
 
Originally posted by: g3pro

How can you defend such tactics? You use your excuses and accusations to slander Sander, but what you're doing is railing against a free and balanced press. :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

There's no talking to you. You ignored the rest of my post where I described the real reasons he fell off the invite list. I give up, you're a hopeless case.
 
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: apoppin
Have I been in touch with a few of the AIBs prior to talking to him about the launch event? Well, yes. The condesending tone of his emails however are what motivated one of the AIBs to get me some early scores of the R520 architecture. The article wasn?t meant to smythe ATI, although the introduction outlines why I feel ATI has been rather difficult to work with, that is another story though.

The benchmarks provided are not knowingly false or meant to put ATI?s new architecture in a negative light, but provided AS-IS as they are run on a pre-production sample. In all honesty I?m glad that my article has attracted such massive attention, and that a lot of people, that includes me, are now eagerly awaiting the introduction of this new architecture and are curious as to how it performs. As mentioned the benchmarks we?ve posted were run on pre-production hardware and thus they could be far off from the actual performance of the R520 architecture.
Click to expand...

What a load of BS . . . the numbers are less than USELESS. 😛
:roll:

:thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Did he mention pre-production in his first article?
Click to expand...

no

uness it is well-hidden, he merely states
So without further ado, let?s take a look at what the R520 architecture is capable of.
Click to expand...
and his conclusion is worse:
The benchmarks were run on release candidate drivers for the Radeon X1800 Pro and XT, hence performance is not likely to change much before launch, but final clockspeeds have yet to be determined we've learned, hence it could go either way.
Click to expand...
NO mention of PREproduction.
Click to expand...
That is one crystal clear example of Sander's back tracking or should I say covering his bases. 😉

Read his new piece and it comes off even worse; provides nothing new to prove his argument, brings his girlfriend matters into it (for sympathy) and what not ..

If anyone still think Sander did the right thing by posting unverified benches (like he claims they were) then that is against his own ethics (see his letter to Tom). Now why would some one go against one's own ethics ... you get the point. 😉
 
lol this is good stuff......man if this was a TV show id watch it. maybes ATI and sander should appear on sally jesse raphael or something, or judge judy. it would be fvcking good television

all this bickering, is all bark. neither side has any bite. its just their word against his. but it is getting ATI alot of attention....which is maybe what they want?
 
Here's the latest from Bania, from here. Now maybe you can start to understand why he decided to exclude Sander from the R520 thing.

Edit: There are some smiley faces in his post that didn't come out here, so go read the original. I don't want to change his tone or meaning in any way.

snipped
Click to expand...

Actually, here's a little excerpt for you, G3Pro, since you seem to think that they didn't invite Sander because he's not 'ATI-friendly':

ATI Friendly Press: This is positiely laughable. We will have a massive cross-section of press at our Tech Day + loads more publications getting briefed before the launch itself. One of the largest nVidia fan sites in the world is being brought over to the briefing - all expenses paid - because that is how much confidence we have in the product.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: M0RPH
Here's the latest from Bania, from here. Now maybe you can start to understand why he decided to exclude Sander from the R520 thing.

Edit: There are some smiley faces in his post that didn't come out here, so go read the original. I don't want to change his tone or meaning in any way.

snipped
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Free publicity for R520 has reached epidemic proportions (courtesy of Sander's erroneous review - thanks !)...

thought so. this little arguement is simply getting ATI some free publicity, saves them some money, all eyes will be trained firmly on ATI until this card is released, which probably what they want
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top