Second, Anandtech and Dailytech mentioned that we blamed Core Duo. This is plain false and damaging in my personal view. We simply stated that the bug surfaces only in the Core Duo notebook we had available at the time, but that there is credible indication that all notebooks supporting USB 2.0 and including XP SP2 are affected.
Which was
barely made clear in the first article. Heck, it's not made much clearer in the second article. The overall
feel of the articles both very much
imply that Intel is as equally at fault as Microsoft,
and that Core Duo is much more of a factor than it really is. (Which, in fact, Core Duo is in no way a factor to this bug at all. It is just impacted more by it, likely because with two cores it's using that much more electricity when it can't enter the proper sleep states.) But you have to pick out tiny statements amongst
huge amounts of text just to figure that out. And even then, there's a definate overall
feel that just doesn't support those tiny statements. It leaves them feeling more like legal taglines in fine print than the major decisive points that they
should be.
From what I've read from AT (which I admit isn't much at this point in time, so I may be missing something), I've got to
fully agree with them setting these records straight, because looking at TG's articles you really only get this opinion if you read
very carefully and go through with a fine toothed comb. Where as AT takes the effort to make these
important points quite clear.
Is it damaging? Sure. Is it false though? Not in my opinion. From what
I've read so far, it's quite deserved.
However, we do question Intel's approach to not force Microsoft to release a bugfix earlier.
So tell me, what exactly do you think Intel could have done differently that
wouldn't have resulted in costing them dearly? How do you think it could have been handled
better? It's easy to question something and put someone down when you don't have to give any answers. I'm not saying that you don't have the right to question. Heck, what would be the point of life if we couldn't question? But from a professional, to weigh so heavily and yet
not suggest something better? It's pretty pathetic IMHO. Us unimportant little readers can get away with that kind of stuff because we're not the professionals. We're not supposed to have those kinds of answers. But from the 'professional' TG editors? Sad.
In our opinion, such an article can only be released, if there is a solution for every reader. Simply saying that there is a problem, does not help very much.
Thank you for just proving one of my points so well. So instead of providing a solution that will help a large number of people to minimize their problems, even if it isn't a
complete or
perfect solution, you'd rather just leave
everyone to suffer without helping
at all? That's like
not feeding hundreds of starving people, even though you have a pantry full of food to give them, just because a handful of them
might have food allergies. God forbid you just help people as much as you can as quickly as possible to minimize the overall suffering while making any dangers clear and obvious so that those suffering can make their own educated choice on whether or not to take a risk instead of you making that choice for them.
Sorry for using some harsh words here, but I am just getting a bit tired of TG editors
pretending to care about the end consumers when all that they
really seem to care about is their own image.
It is beyond my comprehension that you would complain and interpret our defence as whining.
Perhaps your ability to comprehend is a part of the problem that
I see then? I'd love for you to prove me wrong on that. I'd love for TG to put its money where its mouth is for a change. So far though, I'm just not seeing it. I used to love THG dearly, but it has
really changed, and
not for the better. TG has gotten whiney, untechnical, money/hit-oriented, and image-proud. It's a far cry from the investigative, helpful, technical place that it used to be. And so far all that you've done is reinforce that.
Did Anandtech and Dailytech take undeserved pot shots at TG? I don't know. I don't read blogs. And as I said, because I'm so much of a TG fan, I only have the one AT article to go by. I haven't kept up with AT's articles. So maybe I'm missing some well deserved reason to bitch. Even still, what I
have seen from TG is
not impressive, and most certainly
not rising above all that to be
professional. Hell, TG removed an op-ed rant because they so clearly jumped right into the mud. Instead of proving that you're human, leaving the op-ed piece up, and editing it with an appology for it, you just take it down and pretend that it never happened. Because the gods forbid you be human, or worse, be
humble.
You really deserve a pat on the back for finding the bug, for working hard at
trying to find answers (even if you haven't really provided any of those answers, nor answered any of the other questions that were raised), and for forcing M$ to get off it's fat arse and
do something for a change.
But you also deserve such a kick in the arse for everything else that it really more than washes at this point IMHO.
Where as AT
may deserve a kick for sniping TG more than necessary and for
not having the 'complete' answer that you don't have yet either, but the pat on the back that
they deserve for answering some of the more basic questions, helping sooner, and just in general doing better writing on it IMHO puts them in a better position than TG is at this point in time. Which is sad, because I'd really like to see TG on top.
And yes, I'm probably being overly harsh at this point. But if someone
doesn't say it, if someone
doesn't take you to task for it, then you're just going to be all Microsoft about it. :lol:
How's
that for fair play?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram