Reynod :
Avram wrote the piece based on his own opinion ... and he is entitled to have one ... just like the other guy.
Yes, he most definitely is. That said - if the editor-in-chief of a tech review site publishes an opinion that is so badly argued, in parts incoherent and self-defeating, and ultimately anti-consumer in nature. then it shouldn't come as a surprise when that article reflects badly on the site. Imho.
Reynod :
NVidia don't pay any of us at Purch / Anantech / Toms Guide / Laptop mags / Toms Harware / etc etc ...
I consider myself a fairly rational person who isn't very susceptible to conspiracy theories. As such, I have dismissed the many "nVidia paid for this" accusations in this thread - until I read Mr. Piltch's reply yesterday. That really got me thinking.
Despite the fact that this article has many flaws, is causing damage to the site's reputation, and should be easy to remove due to just being an op-ed, the site's editor-in-chief (whose job it would be to protect the site from damage caused by poorly written articles) seems determined to keep it up. I can only see two possible reasons for that: Either Mr. Piltch's pride is getting in the way of protecting the site, or he is indeed under _some_ form of pressure and therefore cannot retract the article. (If the article does not reflect Mr. Piltch's actual opinion, but rather one that he felt forced to present, then this would also explain the woefully bad argumention in the article.) Again - I'm not saying that this is the case, but Mr. Pitch's incomprehensible arguments and reactions make this seem increasingly likely to me. I have two questions, if you don't mind:
1. Does nVidia supply Tom's Hardware (or the related sites that you mentioned) with review products at no (or reduced) cost?
2. Is Tom's Hardware (or the related sites that you mentioned) receiving advertising money from nVidia, or has been earlier this year?