Tom's Blurb

Hmm, I looked again and found the paragraph in the Athloin XP2600+ review:

That's just pure nonsense!



<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i>

Odd article, but then again, it's kinda true, Kyle ain't the most credible guy since he made that website called www.wefryathlons.com and linked it to Hard OCP.
Then there's Van who hates Intel.

What I don't get is his last phrase, is he stating he is a nazi or not? It seems to be inclined as a positive phrasing towards that, but I could be wrong, I hope!

--
And now, an advice from your friendly Nike shoes slogan: JUST DO HER!

I dunno, that article was somewhat disturbing. To me it just felt like he ws bashing a couple reviewers?

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

I dont know either TOM, Kyle, or VAN. But i gotta say, out of all those 3 guys, Toms seems the most reliable, truthful and honest... I mean, VAN is just clueless....(AMD HYPER FANBOYS MUST ADORE HIM) he just says sh|t out of nowhere, look at his unprofessional, cheap looking site. all they talk about is AMD. Kyle seems that he often sells himself for fame and "image". tom, (unless every statement he has mentioned were false) seems to be real truthful about what he says. Also, out of all 3 wbsites, this is the best one IMO. it has more articles, more information. this is all my opinion, so dont get aggressive

real philosophy of life: "do onto others what you dont want them do onto you"

Yep, THG is the best in my own opinion too.

thanks Nike, "JUST DONE HER"

Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?

Ok, you're thinking pretty deeply, but when I first look at it, I see he thinks Intel's been beaten by AMD, which is definitely not the case, as the benches and whatever show. I kinda doubt he means Intel failed to put AMD out of contention, and if he did, that must be one of the most vague statements I've heard in a while.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

Yeah, a Dell versus a EPoX 8K3A system, probably one of the worst tweakability system vs the most tweakable system . I'd say that's fair, and with the PC800, which is probably slower than DDR333 CL2 in real world situations.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>

its a dell

<b>Due to Customer Complaints, this sig has been witdrawn from public use. Thankyou. </b>

Tom's commentaries are almost always pro-AMD, even though the benchmark results now-a-days completly contradict his "advice". I find his BENCHMARKS accurate though, I trust them more than anyone else.
I read the Athlon XP 2600+ review and the 2.53 GHtz P4 not only stayed on par with it, but it also beat it in a few benchmarks.
I also read the review on the 2.8 GHtz P4. In that one, the XP seemed rather busy eating Intel's dust.

Knowledge is the key to understanding

"
What I don't get is his last phrase, is he stating he is a nazi or not? It seems to be inclined as a positive phrasing towards that, but I could be wrong, I hope!"

You wouldn't recognize irony or sarcasm if it hit you @ 100 KM/u in the face, would you???

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by rookiewan on 08/26/02 02:52 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

Ye I know that. It's fairly obvious.

Seeing as how touchy the server can be lately, I'm going to try to reply to everyone in one post. So I'll try to make it clear who each reply is to.

<b>Copenhagen</b>

I couldn't agree more. Some of the articles just come off as biased. (Like the 2600+ review when clearly, the P4 2.53 won more benchmarks and yet 'lost'.) The worst though are those hard drive articles. Ugh. And most of this stuff could be picked up quickly and easily by an editor. (Or at least <i>should</i> be if that editor is actually worth their pay.) It seems like the only articles that are truely good are the ones Tom writes himself. Maybe he should do the actual editing for everyone else. Heh heh. That or write again...

<b>RaPTuRe</b>

Being 'opinionated' has <i>nothing</i> to do with being a <i>journalist</i>. Journalists should be contravertial, yes. However they should <i>never</i> be opinionated unless it is an editorial piece or a column. Opinions and bias are for marketting, not for professional journalists.

Further, with the vast majority of THG's articles, the pendulum <i>doesn't</i> swing both ways <i>equally</i>. AMD, whether they win or lose, get great praise. Intel, even when they clearly win, hardly gets any praise. It gives a very overall feeling of bias to read the articles. Especially when in the AXP 2600+ review, the P4 2.53GHz <i>won the majority of benchmarks</i> and was still declaired as losing.

<b>IRPopeye</b>

Inte; hasn't been trying to leapfrog anyone. They had a roadmap planned out a year in advance. They're sticking to it pretty darn well. It isn't Intel's fault that AMD was having problems, nor was it Intel's goal to leapfrog AMD. If AMD had done as well as their roadmaps had claimed a year ago we shouldn't have seen much, if <i>any</i>, leapfrogging.

<b>Chuck232</b>

I couldn't agree with you more. It's rather sad, really.

I know! I brought up that exact same point in another thread or two. As if using PC800 wasn't bad enough, to use a <b>Dell</b>. That was just plain unprofessional. It was a feat worthy of Apple.

<b>noko</b>

I agree. I do find his site at the very top end of all review sites. However, it still could use a lot of improvement in my opinion. The whole site still has a very biased feel to it, and you really have to just look at the benchmarks only sometimes and ignore every bit of text in the review if you want to see the truth for yourself.

<b>cooj</b>

I think Tom's point is that his devotion is to the <i>truth</i>. So when nVidia or AMD pressured him to report things that were unsupportable, he refused. Yet others not only didn't refuse, but jumped at the opportunity to earn 'fame' for themselves <i>and</i> claimed that the whole idea was theirs instead of admitting that the whole story had practically been handed to them on a silver platter from a very involved source.

And now he's taking the time to shine a little light of truth on the situation. I think mostly he's doing it to 1) warn us about their lies and misdirections and 2) point out the fact hat he <i>wasn't</i> scooped on these stories like I've heard suggested here and there. He knew of them, he just refused to print unsupportable drivel that only served marketting campaigns and not customers.

It really helps give us a look deeper into the dark mass that AMD is becoming. AMD used to stand for idealism. Now look at the games they play.

I couldn't agree more. I think the point to note though is that Tom is not the <i>author</i> of these biased articles. His articles are, in fact, pretty darn good. It's his colleagues that need a little slapping around and/or editorial correction. The site has Tom's name on it, but I'm really starting to wonder if he actually has any say over these things... All that I do really know is that this constant taint of bias is one of the major roadblocks keeps THG from being as professional as they should be.

Trust me when I say that not all Americans even share the same stance on 9/11. There are a lot of us who feel very differently from the media sh_t that people see/hear/read and that the US government tries to push on us.

Granted, I don't <i>agree</i> with the ideals of Taliban in any way, shape, or form. However, personally, the US retaliated with extreme stupidity and ignorance. I can't imagine a much worse way to have waged that 'war'. And as for declairing a war on terrorism itself... UGH! What a load of crock. And as for the billions of dollars raised for the families who lost someone in the disaster, all I ask is where is the money for the families of people who died in a car wreck or train wreck or even general city crime? What made those families loss <b>that</b> much more important? The morality and idealism of America is so f_cked up these days...

<pre><A HREF="http://www.nuklearpower.com/comic/186.htm" target="_new"><font color=red>It's all relative...</font color=red></A></pre><p>

Would you care to expound on this one comment a little further? I care not to go into the Van's vs Tom's Vs [H] aspect of the whole silly affair. Truth of the matter is none of us will ever know the whole story in that regard. Bear in mind Tom never rebuffed the AMD statement, merely choose to call it inconclusive. At the heart of the matter is sysmark 2002. The question is "Was it implemented in such a way to slant results in favor of the P4". The rest of the whole sad affair in merely heresay, innuendo, and speculation. As is most always the case, the real truth most likely lies somewhere in between with no-one left totaly blameless.

It's not what they tell you, its what they don't tell you!

Certainly an interesting article, so I feel the need to share some thoughts.

First of all, this is a very much needed piece from Tom, and will surely help his reputation, while hopefully clearing the air somewhat. Tom has always been opinionated, but has become more neutral in recent times, which has helped and harmed him at the same time. The most obvious example of which is the many complaints of THG losing it's "edge", and becoming too politically correct, so to speak.

Whether Kyle, Tom and Van are in the right or wrong is not for me to say. As I do not have first-hand knowledge of the events, I do not feel I can pass judgement. It is obvious, however, that Tom is changing personally. Starting the US version of the Register, bleaching his hair, and quitting smoking are all signs of that. Which, by the way, congratulations on apparently successfully quitting smoking, I hope I never have to face that.

There is one issue he talked about that I disagree with, and that is HardOCP's reporting of events on September 11th. I don't think it was Tom's business to criticize Kyle for doing that, even though he made the attempt to thinly veil it. He does not deserve to be called a Nazi or any other things he mentioned, however.

So now the root of the matter, should Tom have aired Kyle's and Van's dirty laundry, so to speak? Well, that becomes an issue of reporting the news, presenting an opinion, or simply getting a chance to take your enemies down a notch. This falls into all three categories.

As for Tom's Hardware in general, I don't think it has gotten so terrible as many people seem to think. Processor reviews particularly are horrendous, but I have to tip my hat to David Stellmack in particular, who has single-handedly kept me from ceasing to check for new articles altogether. THG certainly has it's place on the internet, most people simply don't realize where exactly that is.


Well, I've rambled on for long enough. Hopefully I didn't put too many of you to sleep, though a nap does sound nice right about now...

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>

I've been wondering why Tom hasn't shown up on the radar, period.

I can see his position. Business warz suck major @$$.

At least this is all a "hobby" for him. He's a physician. These other poor bastards have to live and die by this stuff. I hope he finds a little time to do some of his magic now that things are out in the open. When he used to do some testing, the reviews and articles were top notch.

These other people can all eat a d*ck...

C@lling it like I c it...

About the only thing I look at anymore are the game benchmarks. And I just completely skip past the quake 3 stuff. If they're using medal of honor, that one thing; but alice and quake 3 are entirely too damn old.

I also take a look at the mp3 and divx benches. P4 pretty much 0wNz that area, so I rarely ever look at *that* any more.

But, if you're running a server, I could see where those synthethic benches could come in handy.

C@lling it like I c it...

Toms have very good becnhmark and when they give information you know it true but there text dont fellow there score.

At the end i have speak with a horny lady