News We need your help to shape the future of Tom’s Hardware

[M0rtis]

FWIW, I do appreciate proper hardware reviews (I think mostly by Les Pounder) of Pi products, or similar. I also like reading about Jeff Geerling's projects, since he's one of those who's really pushing the envelope of what the hardware can do. He also took the time & trouble to create a forum account on here, in order to answer some of the questions we raised in a couple articles about his projects.

What I think @M0rtis is referring to are the articles rehashing some reddit thread about a random Pi-based project. A lot of those do seem like fluff, especially since they don't seem to add much beyond what's in the original thread cited as the source. Probably a lot of makers interested it that stuff are already reading those subreddits or similar.

Thats exactly right. Its the "reinventing the wheel using a Raspberry Pi" and ultra niche Pi projects that Im referring to. If the project is something that is genuinely cool or something more people than the maker can use then its fine obviously.

I do have a new request though. Please restore comments to their previous location rather than making it so that you need to click a button that scrolls you down to the bottom of the page. It adds an unnecessary extra step and makes scrolling back up to the article past an entire stack of other articles more tedious when you need to refer back to the original article in order to cross check a comment. I would actually prefer an extension of the previous system of 3 comments - click- 7 comments -click- forum popup and request that the enitire set of comments be readable after a single click. Commenting can still take place via the forums but sometimes you just want to read the entire conversation without adding anything and being taken away.
If you do make this change please dont use the tree system for replies like other websites and Reddit do, in my opinion its garbage UX.

 

[Jagar123]

I do have a new request though. Please restore comments to their previous location rather than making it so that you need to click a button that scrolls you down to the bottom of the page. It adds an unnecessary extra step and makes scrolling back up to the article past an entire stack of other articles more tedious when you need to refer back to the original article in order to cross check a comment.

This annoyed me too. Luckily, I used an ad blocker to zap those extra articles they are spamming out. Tom's is injecting their own articles as ads at this point.

At the end of the day if Tom's keeps making changes that are hostile to their user experience in an effort to try to force people to view more articles then people will simply stop coming to their site.

 

[philged]

The new monitor review article is another example of what was posted earlier in this thread.

It's clearly a reused article as you can't even post new comments.

The BEST gaming monitor is 1. unavailable from the Amazon link in the article, 2. a $229 curved monitor.

The best value gaming monitor is $299, $70 more than the best possible overall monitor.

The best curved gaming monitor is a $700 4k monitor, which 4k and curved seems like an odd main recommendation as it's overkill for most desk-to-eye distance use. It's also counterintuitive that the best curved monitor is somehow different from the best overall monitor, when that monitor is curved.

Same thing with Best OLED. The pick is a 4k Asus for $999. Where as the best 4k monitor is a 4k Acer OLED for $900. What's the criteria? Is it price, is it overall, is it OLED, is it 4k? It doesn't make sense. EVEN WORSE, all three links for the Best 4k choice Acer Predator X32 X3, all go back to a Gigabyte Aorus monitor, which assumingly is the previous pick that the updating writer didn't bother to verify for the "new" article.

Maybe my interpretation of BEST monitor as the best monitor you can get, is different from the writer's interpretation of the best combination of price and performance...but again when you have "best value" as another category (instead of the more sensical "best budget") what's the difference between best value and best overall when the best overall is less expensive?

 

[CelicaGT]

I missed the original posting of this article last month due to being in school. A few things:

-On politics.

If you post anything with a political tie in, there will be comments that are political. I understand there is a fine line, I understand some people don't like wherever that line lands (One of the major issues with community moderation vs staff moderation, the standards are fluid for any given moment). As it stands, I feel things are fine. I get to read e few interesting takes before it derails. See Ars Technica for the full show, if anyone is interested...

-On Premium Memberships.

For Ad free only. I do this on other sites as it allows me the choice of how I support the site. I DO NOT allow any ads on any of my machines. This is a long standing rule that is unlikely to change. I would love to directly support Tom's, but not at the expense of pay walling content for others. Ars Technica does this, with a few extra feature thrown in that wouldn't be missed by the general public (PDF downloads and stuff). Unfortunately there I still have to sift through the politically charged detritus in the comments..

-On Premium Memberships cont'd.

Revenue from neutral parties allows Tom's more editorial freedom, products can be reviewed honestly without fear of reprisal. Sponsored content will ALWAYS raise the suspicion of bias in reviews. Period.

On Tom's content in general.

Good. 7.5 out of 10. Reviews are good, punctual and the site has a decent focus on the PC industry, as well as some general industry news for those of us who like that stuff. I'd like to see some pinned articles (linked in each review) regarding testing standards and benchmark/testing tools. Also some community feedback articles, things we'd like to see. Surveys like the one here (minus the personal data fields) could be a very useful tool for the staff. Indeed, Tom's could feature the survey, feature the results, and go from there. Gamers Nexus et al do this stuff quite regularly to much effect.

More thoughts.

Consider pushing YouTube a little more, or short form video. I'm oldish and even I have pivoted sharply to those mediums and I only discovered today that there is a channel. Put a more prominent link on the Tom's landing page for crying out loud, my brain is trained to completely ignore that little social media ribbon on every web page.

 

[logainofhades]

I write that article and I appreciate your feedback. The problem is that we are trying to hit a very low and specific price point. We have to cut corners on a build to get the parts list that low. On a system that underpowered, I don't think you need a Gold or even Bronze class PSU. Would it help? yes. Would it blow the budget? Also true.

Efficiency does not equal quality. Gigabyte's exploding gold rated PSU's being a perfect example. PSU is the one place you do not want to cut corners.

That cheap system is no longer a cheap one, when the PSU dies and takes the rest of the system with it.

 

[Aeacus]

Gigabyte's exploding gold rated PSU's being a perfect example.

Another good example would be Silverstone Strider Titanium (1100W, 1300W and 1500W). Sure, it has the highest efficiency but otherwise is such a poor unit.
Review: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/silverstone-strider-titanium-st1500-ti-psu,5324.html

 

[Aeacus]

I'd like to add that the quality of reviews has gone down lately as well.

E.g PSU reviews, latest example: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...easonic-core-atx-3-gx-850-power-supply-review
2nd one too: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...uiet-pure-power-12-m-650w-power-supply-review

Entire review is in 1 long page. A bit different from earlier version (but i guess easier to read on mobile). But data in it is very slimmed down, while some of it is even missing.

New review format starts with introduction, pics of cables, external view, internal view with component identification buried in the text, cold testing, hot testing and ends with combined PSU quality and bottom line section.


For comparison, earlier, more in-depth PSU review: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/seasonic-focus-sgx-500w-sfx-l-power-supply,6095.html

Review spans several pages and starts with introduction and then, in-depth specs of PSU, in a nice readable graph format. Listing all the protections it has, dimensions, weight etc. It continues on with in-depth info about cables and connectors + wire gauge and if there are in-cable caps or not. Then comes the component analysis. A nice graph listing all the PSU's internal components. In a easy to read format. Followed by internal pics. And that was just the 1st page.

2nd page contains the core of the matter: load regulation, hold-up time, inrush current, efficiency testing on varying loads and noise testing. All that in a nice and readable format, with graphs for in-depth info (e.g fan noise levels on different loads).

3rd page contains protection features, DC power sequencing, cross-load tests and infrared images. All in a nice readable format with graphs to go alongside it.

4th page has transient response tests, ripple measurements and EMC pre-compliance testing. Everything in-depth. Even pointing out in which test the transient response failed.

5th page has a nice performance, noise and efficiency comparison to other, similar PSUs.

And 6th page has the bottom line.


Newer PSU reviews have a lot of missing info;
* no hold-up testing
* no inrush current testing
* no noise testing on different loads
* no DC power sequencing testing
* no infrared images
* no transient response testing
* no turn-on transient testing
* no ripple comparison against other similar PSUs
* no EMC pre-compliance (EMI) testing
* no overall comparison with similar PSUs

In today's time and date, does this kind of info about PSUs doesn't matter anymore???

Newer PSU reviews also have a lot of slimmed down info;
* specs
* cable info
* component analysis is buried in the text
* little info about ripple
* protection testing is buried in the text, IF there is any testing, other than saying protections work
* little info about noise


With latest PSU reviews, finding important info about PSU is difficult, IF it is even listed.
With missing info in the review, that brings the review quality down as a whole. Since when one needs to learn more about PSU, one has to look up another, proper, PSU review.

 

[M0rtis]

Thanks for restoring the comments under articles to their rightful position !

 

[Darkbreeze]

Thanks for restoring the comments under articles to their rightful position !

Yeah, right. Not.

 

[American2021]

tom's HARDWARE has always done an incredible job at a wide range of topics. The reviews, news, and guides with best picks are all very much appreciated; as is the forum where we can ask questions. I'd say when computer information resources went from publishing to the Internet at the end of the 1990s; tom's HARDWARE was positioned to be a star. And a star they have remained. Long gone are the days of the Computer Shopper and famous retail chains like Fry's Electronics. But tom's HARDWARE endures.

As for an improvement suggestion: find a strategist with a successful track record of obtaining results for organizations and do real work employing the relevant tools associated with the strategic process. If done right, the picture of how to proceed will come into focus.

That's the best suggestion, the best advice for tom's HARDWARE moving forward in my humble opinion.

 

[M0rtis]

Yeah, right. Not.

Arent they though ? Its back to the way they were before for me atleast

EDIT : Oh they screwed it up again..... Nice