Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered
why Ben ?
Joe Kelly made me do it ! (its all his fault !)
after giving him the redas* for BSing w/o facts (or research, ahem)
I thought to test rads (and later wbs) in my garage no less
well, it was much much harder to do (well) than I had thought, MUCH harder
but I know a bit about testing so I persevered (over 2 years now, and thousands of $)
I had naively thought that the mfgrs would have an interest, and they do - in their profits
the link between factual product performance data and sales is unknown
-> because no mfgr uses any real data at all, and they sell their wbs just fine, thank you
one business plan bites the dust
and a website can only pay if its a cash cow, and we know which site that is
I won't play in a sand box that has turds in it, so that's out too
hi ho
|
I can respect your candor, but I also have to point out you are not all that and a bag of chips either. Everyone has ****ed up at some point. ( and yes Bill even you are fallible.. as much as that may on its own cause all of existence to disappear.. its true.) As time goes on methodologies evolve and accuracies change. Being a young geek and not an old fossil, I have the ability to think with an open mind and not assume that just because something isn’t to full NIST standards and to .001 accuracy that it’s "BS". I don’t have an engineering degree, or anything spiffy like that ( I also don’t have thousands to spend to test 50$ water blocks) What I do have is a true love for cooling, I learn more every day, and coming from the outside I have few preconceptions that limit what I will try.
There is value in data if many types not just one set or type of data. I understand that you wear your many years of NIST committee and college stuff on your shoulder with pride and use that to validate anything you say and I can respect that. But you gotta come to grips with the fact not everyone thinks like you do (Thank god, imagine all the shootings that would happen!), and everyone sees testing a slightly different way and has different goals for what data they want to get out of the tests.
Even while you may call the testing I did "BS" its still light years ahead of anything your favorite [S]ite (or its wizard of a reviewer)
has done. There is a big difference between testing where NO thought is put into it ( ie: the [H]ype zone) or where profits are the only motivation, and testing that while maybe primitive or not to what you would do, still was thought out with goals of making it the best test possible with the time/resources available. I think its more about having the drive and intent to do the best testing you can with what you have, than it is about setting goals that are unrealistic or unachievable with what you have.
I respect your work a lot Bill, back nearly a year ago I got over the fact that you were just an ass in the forums, and saw your testing was real well done. But I think your 16 year old hormonal teen type posts really do a discredit to your articles/testing, and overall devalue your talents as a technical reviewer/tester. Your flak to me is fine, I learn from my mistakes and grow ( yet another advantage of not being a fossil). Also I run a cooling website, I have no illusions that the stuff I post isn’t open for critique, and ridicule by the readers (that’s also how I learn more and grow).
One thing I do find interesting is the recent revelation that you have come appon about mfg's not wanting to pay to have their product "really" tested. I have understood that there was a separation coming for some time. Where the more radical and different testing methodologies would be cast aside no matter how exacting or accurate they are in favor of a "common" or [H]ype driven review that contains really no info or data . I mean you have to figure... for a company like CPUfx, do they want their products tested by a "real" testing setup that could put contrasting data up compared to what the other testing sites saw? Or see that their block really performs like ass?. It’s about like a fat person avoiding a scale, he knows he’s fat, but avoiding the scale at least leaves the possibility that he’s realty not fat but just has a “bad perspective” on things
.
And yes review sites cant make money… just doesn’t happen unless you are being paid off or have some big MFG’s hand up your ass (someone say [i]ntel?) But that doesn’t matter to me, I don’t run anything for a profit, I do it for fun. I just find it funny to see what [W]ebsites do for a quick buck. ( was that an 8 or a 3?)
I did like your write up, was a good read. I learned something from it, which is all I ask from anything I read on the web!
Your follow up was equally good to read.
Hey but on the lighter side, I was just given credit for helping improve the lil cooling niche, guess that counts for something… think I am going to go and buy me a hot fudge sundae to celebrate this
