Why Do People Not Like Tom's Hardware?

[jasonsRX7]

Originally posted by: Novgrod
they're explaining how one company is either Triumphant over its Enemies or it is a Catastropic Failure, each and every product, and it can change from review to review. Tom used to hump AMD's leg when he broke the whole Rambus deal, then with the overclocked P3 scenario. Now he wants to make sweet love to intel.

That's because the products the companies produce can change from review to review. He isn't reviewing a companies past history and rating them on what they've done, he's reviewing what is in his hands right now, and bases his conclusion on that. And I think that is the right thing to do.

If he was humping AMD's leg when he thought they deserved it, then fine. If he currently favors Intel, well then maybe that's because he *currently* believes they have a better product. The fact that it can change from review to review simply means that he's not basing his opinions on corporate favoritism, but rather the results of his own testing.

 

[BoberFett]

A lot of the conclusions drawn on his site (Card X is the best! CPU Y just can't compete.) don't jive with the graphs that they themselves put together.

 

[chizow]

Tom's Hardware was a pioneer in the sense that it was one of the earliest computer enthusiast/hardware sites on the internet, but its gone downhill from there. I don't visit Tom's on a regular basis, but if I'm researching an obscure part, a google or product review link often ends up there, which I do appreciate. Even though their reviews often lack meaningful benchmarks or evidence, any input (even if it is purely subjective, which is often the case) is better than no input when it comes to rare/specialty parts. I guess that is a testament to Tom's reputation (deservedly or not) in the computer hardware industry .

I don't bother with Tom's reviews when it comes to mainstream parts that everyone is going to get their hands on, b/c as others have said, I find them to be biased. Sometimes I think they have pre-drawn conclusions that often contradict what their benchmarks show. I don't doubt the credibility of their numbers, I just find it amusing how the conclusions they draw simply don't match what their bar graphs show. Not sure if it is a bastardized use of hyperbole in the translation from German to English, but when a bar graph shows a .001 fps or % difference between parts and the caption underneath says "Clearly product X annihilates product Y!!!", it leaves me 😕

Interestingly, Tom himself has taken his name off the bylines of the more "flammable" reviews/topics like CPU and video card reviews, but the end results still have a distinct Pabst-style to them. People can defend his credibility over his employee's all they want, but last I checked, he is still the Editor-In-Chief. His influence is plain as day in every article published on his site, so saying he's innocent of all the garbage that is published on his site is foolish.

Chiz

 

[BoberFett]

chizow

For crying out loud, must you always follow up my posts by stating the same thing more succinctly and eloquently. 😛

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
chizow

For crying out loud, must you always follow up my posts by stating the same thing more succinctly and eloquently. 😛

I will try...........harder 😛

/runs advanced search on BoberFett

😉

 

[syberscott]

Originally posted by: Smilin

(who the fuk is gonna run a liquid nitrogen based pc on a day to day basis...but gee, that's real special that you pulled it off tom)

What's wrong with that? People drive cars everyday, so does that mean that an alcohol burning dragster is a waste??? There are enthusiasts in every hobby and you have to respect them for pushing the limits.

 

[dkozloski]

Tom is, and has always been, a horse's ass that's in love with the sound of his own voice. What really aggravates me is that he is usually right.

 

[sandorski]

He does have an ego, but I don't hold that against him. His sites reviews always has a very good variety of tests and what not, which I like. However, what I don't like about his sites reviews is the inconsistent use of hyperbole when comparing products. For eg.: Product A comparison to Product B where A is new and B is older. Product A gets beaten by B(by a little--few %) = A fails to match B, but comes close. A beats B(by a little---few%) = A ownz B! Stuff like that just irks me.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: chizow

Interestingly, Tom himself has taken his name off the bylines of the more "flammable" reviews/topics like CPU and video card
Chiz

Interesting, since he has a habit of taking credit for articles he didn't write. A number of articles written by former employees had their bylines mysteriously changed to Pabst. He's slime, the site is a joke, and the lackeys he has writing for him now aren't fit to write for TweakTown. The only people who take it seriously are those too ignorant to know any better.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
A lot of the conclusions drawn on his site (Card X is the best! CPU Y just can't compete.) don't jive with the graphs that they themselves put together.

I especially like it when they put the graph upside-down, and then draw conclusions from it. Morons.

 

[RickH]

Sorry Kids, Tom's has the best reviews. R

 

[jasonsRX7]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

The only people who take it seriously are those too ignorant to know any better.

I take a lot of his articles seriously, in fact, I could easily give you a list of several articles that have been of a lot of value to me for a range of purchases. Of course, if all you're interested in is who gives you the most FPS in Quake Tournament Doom World 2005, then you'd be better served by reading whoever writes what you want to hear.

What I am hearing from a lot of people is that Tom should just pick one company he likes the best, and stick to it! Pick a favorite and keep giving them good reviews, and quit flip flopping after a company releases a different product. That's just crazy...

Of course, I'm sure it's just because I'm ignorant that I think this... right? I have to wonder how people can be so closed minded...

 

[sash1]

Right, lets all bash the person who "discovered" overclocking...

I'd hafta agree with Rand, for the most part. I like Tom, got nothing against him,

~Aunix

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: jasonsRX7


What I am hearing from a lot of people is that Tom should just pick one company he likes the best, and stick to it! Pick a favorite and keep giving them good reviews, and quit flip flopping after a company releases a different product. That's just crazy...

Of course, I'm sure it's just because I'm ignorant that I think this... right? I have to wonder how people can be so closed minded...

Realizing a review is flawed and draws incorrect conclusions is not a matter of being open or closed minded. There have been plenty of threads about this where specific examples of such idiocy are cited. Do a search.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: AunixM3
Right, lets all bash the person who "discovered" overclocking...

I'd hafta agree with Rand, for the most part. I like Tom, got nothing against him,

~Aunix

I hope the rolling eyes means you're kidding when you say he "discovered" overclocking.

 

[jasonsRX7]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Realizing a review is flawed and draws incorrect conclusions is not a matter of being open or closed minded. There have been plenty of threads about this where specific examples of such idiocy are cited. Do a search.

If the testing methodology is flawed, which skews the test results, and thus draws an incorrect conclusion, then yes, the review itself is flawed and is not subject to being "open or closed minded". This can happen, and certainly does, and is a matter of the reviewer making a mistake.

But on a review that was carried out properly, just because you don't like the conclusion, or the review words it in a way you don't like, doesn't mean the test was flawed to begin with, or that the results are invalid. Yes, Tom's reviews tend to put a spin on their conclusions, but it wouldn't change the validity of the review.

 

[Ophir]

One glance at this article and you'll agree with the rest of us. Tom's reviewers/editors are a bunch of pompous morons.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Ophir
One glance at this article and you'll agree with the rest of us. Tom's reviewers/editors are a bunch of pompous morons.

Don't even get me started on Rahmat. Reading one of his "articles" is like voluntarily plunging your hand into boiling water, while using your other hand to gouge your eye with a salad fork.

 

[Novgrod]

I have nothing against a site supporting one product over another, but to bring that to the whole company (as Tom often does) is more than a bit inflammatory/yellow. "The p4 3.06 is better than the barton 3000" is one thing, but then to add "it's too bad that AMD sucks now, and that Intel is now and forever shall be a microprocessor-making God on Earth, whereas AMD, which used to have some hope, is now satan's spawn" is a little unncessary.

Look; now you made me look some of this poo up.

I believe, with all my heart, that the purpose of sites like THG is to challenge the establishment.
The establishment is the bloated, anachronistic PC industry that seems to think that a little more performance, or another Microsoft OS release, are all it takes to get an upgrade cycle going, and with it, double digit growth.
Forums where ideologues congregate and hijack communities are the establishment.

It's too easy to make a joke about this, so you can make your own.

Sure tom's benchmarks are fine, and sure he has some good articles, but i just can't read this. Who gave Tom or Tom's site a mandate from the Almighty to challenge the establishment? Why not, oh I don't know, review the product and let the end-user challenge the establishment with their dollars, which are based in part on your conclusions on the performance of products a through z?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: AunixM3
Right, lets all bash the person who "discovered" overclocking...

I'd hafta agree with Rand, for the most part. I like Tom, got nothing against him,

~Aunix

Riiiiiight, and Al Gore invented the Internet 😉

 

[grant2]

Don't forget that Tom STOLE by-lines for "his" articles.

 

[sash1]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: AunixM3
Right, lets all bash the person who "discovered" overclocking...

I'd hafta agree with Rand, for the most part. I like Tom, got nothing against him,

~Aunix

Riiiiiight, and Al Gore invented the Internet 😉

WHAT?! You mean Al Gore didn't invent the internet? :Q 😉

 

[Pariah]

Go to any message board on the web, and you will find people with nothing better to do than bash other sites.

I find that of the major sites, THG has much more varied article topics which make it a more interesting read than some of the other sites. THG was the site that brought us the slot Athlon goldfinger schematics, the site that figured out what the bridges on the Tbird did, the site that uncovered the PIII 1.13 GHz debacle among other things. How many sites can say they have come up with any discoveries of substance like these? Certainly not Anand. No, Tom did not discover OC'ing, but he was the first to bring a how-to to the masses. If you hate THG's "biased" opinions on CPU reviews and what not, so what? There are dozens of sites out there that can provide you with pages of benchmarks, go read them instead. But THG has provided the online community with far more useful information than just Quake III benchmarks, and to deny him that is simply not looking at the facts.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Ophir
One glance at this article and you'll agree with the rest of us. Tom's reviewers/editors are a bunch of pompous morons.

Don't even get me started on Rahmat. Reading one of his "articles" is like voluntarily plunging your hand into boiling water, while using your other hand to gouge your eye with a salad fork.

hehe

 

[BFG10K]

I think most people get all bent out of shape when he posts opinion articles which people try to take as attempted facts, hence they jump all over him. Also he's quite critical of flaws which is why a lot of people accuse him of being biased.

Personally I like the website just fine and it's one of the regulars I visit for news and reviews. In particular he has good articles about the things I don't tend to generally pay much attention to such as storage and extreme overclocking.