FormatC :
I explained it in a few posts - compare my orginal and the translation, it sounds totally different. The translation is not from me.
And about MX-4 - I gave this thermal compound so often a try and I was never really satsified with this product. Please accept, that other people have other experiences and different meanings. In a lot of dicussions with SI and bigger vendors I also learned in the industry, that industrial standards are things like Dow Cornings TC-5026, solvent-free and safe for any pump-out, dry-out separation or migration and not such end-user products. The quality of this pastes differs too much from charge to charge to be something like a standard.
And please read all my other answers here in this thread. And: I'm not your dude.
Okay, fine. If you've got nothing to do with the translation of this article, why are you defending it instead of pointing me towards somebody that I can point out the mistake to?
You can go ahead and not be satisfied with MX-4, I don't care. However, what you're doing is not being dissatisfied. What you're doing (either yourself or your translator, or considering what you've said in the comments, both) is spreading false information. That's not cool.
To clarify what I mean by, "industry standard," I'm not referring to large PC manufacturers who purchase thermal paste by the gallon. I'm not referring to server farms, who, again, wouldn't think of touching any commercial product. I'm referring to the pastes used by reviewers and media companies, and recommended to their audience. After all, if you consider industrial standards to be that significantly better than commercial products, why did this article feature
none of them? You didn't even mention them as a better alternative if one could somehow get their hands on some.
As for not being my dude, what should I call you instead? Churlish? You're coming across as condescending and stubborn, while being rude to the people that you supposedly wrote the article for.
Please note that I directly quoted no fewer than your three most relevant posts in this thread, all of which were snotty and none of which in any way claimed that the error was your fault. The only thing that you said was a translation error was the word "cheap," which isn't a part of our discussion about claims that were or were not factual.
I'm pissing you off, I get that. However, you're insisting that everything in the English-translated article is correct and continuing to claim that Arctic MX-4 has certain issues, that you specifically called out in the article, when every piece of evidence is stacked against you.
Unless you want to claim that the translators inserted wild claims in a paragraph that you didn't write, then all you're doing right now is deflecting - you're refusing to actually address the issue. Again, it's pretty clear to me that you mistook Arctic Silver and Arctic (formally Arctic Cooling) for the same company. That's easy to do, and really, it's not that big of a deal, except that you're refusing to own up to your mistake and fix the article. (Or direct the translators to do so.)