Slashdot Mirror
nVidia's Ethics Questioned
rawrats writes "Kyle at HardOCP has an editorial on the ethics of strongarming review sites." Its a wierd story and you'll have to read the links to get the full history, but essentailyl nVidia appears to be muscling sites out of posting reviews of competitors cards in exchange for demo cards. Its a bit odd and full of all sorts of he-said she-said so read it and sort it out for yourself. Similiar opinions can be read at Hypothermia, and Insane Hardware if you want a 2nd and 3rd opinion.
Sigh, i wish people would bother to read the whole article before posting nonsense. The issue isn't whether or not the sites get free cards, but whether or not a small site should have to bend towards a corporation's wishes when posting up a positive review of a competitor's product.
What a bunch of rat bastards. I am really impressed by how stupid the PR people in the graphics card industry have been acting this week. First ATI's stupidity- and yes, it is stupidity- haven't they dealt with Steve Jobs enough to know that if they break a product release announcement before The Man they're going to get bitchslapped?- and now word of nVidia's asshole behavior. Aren't there any smart people working in this sector? Oh wait- we're talking about PR people. I rest my case.
"It's OK, my sheet's got a hole in it!"
Let me a few things straight here, before I start. I am completely hardware-manufacturer agnostic. I don't care where my hardware comes from, so long as it works as advertised(of course, I don't count on it working as advertised - I've got to read through the PR stuff). In fact, I have a Diamon Viper V550 in my box right now(Yup, a TNT[original]). I'm very happy with it. I bought it the moment it was available. I'd read everything I could find on graphics accelerators, and I had decided the TNT was the best I could afford. And, I feel I was right.
But, things have changed. Back then, nVidia was the new kid on the block, and they were very careful about how they went about things. They needed to be a success. I think the company has fundamentally changed, but I will not judge.
If Mr. Bennett was indeed telling the truth about nVidia's words and actions, then I will make a decision. Everyone keep that in mind - he COULD be wrong. While nVidia doesn't really support Linux(bad drivers, trust me, I know from experience), they DO produce good hardware, and at reasonable prices.
We should all hold back our judgement until we have more information.
Dave
That said, if it does turn out to be true, I'll be as pissed as anyone - it's just not right. I was planning on buying a Matrox card next(better Linux driver support), and I was going to wait a while, to see if nVidia opened their drivers. If they did, I would have bought a new nVidia card. Now, if what Kyle says is true, it doesn't matter what they do. I'm going somewhere else.
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
If you place full belief into the statistics shown on review sites, you're an idiot. Is there anyone policing these sites, ensuring that accurate fps's are shown and such? There could be some slight "editing of performace statistics." Who really knows what some of these reviewers are actually posting? The only way to really know is to go buy it. You could also compare the review sites' stats, but who the hell has the time for that?
Everybody does it. At least they try. It is the other side that we expect to resist and maintain their integrity.
i didnt even know there was a faq. this site is way too complicated. but i guess it is my fault since it is the first thing on the menu bar.
Not necessarily, sometimes the owners do kidnap people and force them to work. You can believe it or not but it is documented.
Guess what, the prices here in the US are high because of socialism. Medicare / Medicaid / Insurance are willing to pay the ridiculous prices, so that's what's charged. It prevents the free market from working, and screws Joe Blow without insurance that has to pay cash for 'em.
Gotta be careful, or the US will turn into Canada, and then I'll have no place to go to escape the help-the-poor-before-you-buy-a-Mercedes-and-enjoy- the-success-you've-worked-hard-for Canadian attitude, political system and tax structure.
If nVidia uses strongarm tactics against reviewers, that's fine and dandy. Post on your website your story about nVidia, indicate that you won't review any of their products until their policies change, editorialize about how you feel nVidia may be feeling a little insecure in the face of [insert competitor's name here]'s product.
Sit back and let capitalism work. nVidia's tactics will soon change.
Above all, consult with your lawyer to see what you can and cannot say without incurring slander or libel suits.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
I don't think so. If you're likening this to the Microsoft scenario (preventing installation of other browsers etc.) on Windows platforms, then you must remember that this was anticompetitive and illegal only because they were a monopoly. Exclusionary agreements are signed ALL THE TIME, and are perfectly within the bounds of the law (depending of course on what country you're in - but this is the case in US, and even more liberal in Canada, afaik).
If, in your scenario, this were true, then Pepsi would have to prove that Coke is a monopoly (remember the first few months of the Microsoft fiasco which had DOJ trying to prove Windows is a monopoly, and Microsoft trying to refute it?)
This is very similar to both of the mentioned scenarios, and also the scenario with the Internet censorware companies trying to block websites from saying something damaging about their product.
All these issues are related. They all stem from large companies trying to strongarm smaller groups to control public perception.
Disclaimer - I have been using nVidia products since the Riva 128 (I'm currently using a GeForce 256 DDR). I think that they make great products and I even own some nVidia stock.
I recall reading about this whole mess as it actually happened. Yes, the "open letter" that Kyle alludes to did actually exist, and it would not shock me in the least to learn that it's true.
One issue I've not seen addressed is the question of how much support these hardware manufacturers actually provide. If they're just sending out evaluation units to the media (common practice in any industry), then they should expect fair reviews, but that's it. If they're buying advertising and / or making other monetary contributions to the web site, then the webmaster should feel comfortable being 0wn3d, because he/she is. I mean, anybody who reads a car magazine (or PC Magazine, for that matter), should more or less intuitively understand this.
I'm also wondering how many review sites are actually necessary in the online community, and how many the hardware / software manufacturers should feel they have to provide with evaluation product. There are probably at least 50 out there right now, which is about 40-45 more than we, as a user community, need. I mean, how many GeForce 2 vs. Radion vs. Voodoo 5/6 numbers does anyone want to see before they get a headache?
My bet would be that the mentality of some of the vendors out there has degenerated to "Well, as long as we're giving out 100 evaluation units to the online media (in addition to the stuff we give to friends, family, the managers and minions at CompUSA, Fry's, Electonics Botiuque, etc.) we expect some #$@! good reviews. I mean, we've given away so many free units, there are only 4 people left to actually sell them to." And let's face it - at least a few of those sites must exist for the sole purpose of getting the webmaster free stuff. If they don't get it, we get long open letter rants posted about how evil and unfair nVidia / 3Dfx / ATI / Intel / Microsoft / Electronic Arts / etc. is. No one should be shocked that things have degenerated to a quid-pro-quo arrangement. A shakeout of the online media is definitely needed.
This being said, vendors do need to go back to expecting nothing more than a fair, honest, and factually-based review of their product in exchange for making evaluation copies available. If this has to go with the understanding that only the "major" sites will be getting the eval units for free, than so be it. A possibly workable compromise would be to let the smaller sites purchase eval units at cost (treatment currently given to the minions at most retail outlets)
Just my $.02.
-Erik The Red
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
>People are allowed one bathroom break in a 12 hour work week.
That would be nice. I'm kinda getting sick of my 12 hour work days here in the liberated USA. I should move to the third world and start putting in 2.20 hour days in a sweatshop.
See that "Preview" button?
OK, several posters have pointed out that this might be illegal in some way.
Is there a lawyer in the house? Say someone wanted to complain about this and make it stop, who would they write to? I mean instead of just bitching and hoping that nVidia PR will stop pulling this kind of stunt, how do we really do something about it? I don't trust the honour system to do the trick on this one.
Car and driver issues the smackdown regularly. While the score is usually above five (Shouldn't half the cars be below five point five? Whatever happened to the curve?) it's not always eight. When a car sucks, they let you know.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Sorry man most of the pharmaceutical companies are based in europe... Brittain to be exact. However i have seen at least three of the best hopes for Cancer coming out of Canada. One is a virus that specifically targets cancer cells. And that little rant about France was hillarious.
Tell reviewers not to benchmark the Operating System in slow machines/play down slow machine stats (because of Linux's strong numbers there), or not to test on 386s
Show me a reviewer that tests on 386's, and I'll show you a person that's been out of a job since 1992.
For more information, click here.
Eh.. I was just giving you a bit of a hard time. Don't take it personal.
Weapons of Mass Analysis
Look at the second link: Hypothermia.
There's your direct evidence blow by blow.
Sharky the Shill loves their free Intel(TM) products...
blessings,
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
I'm not saying you can get 100% proof of which card is best by reading newsgroups. But you can get a pretty good idea. At least there, anyone can post, and there is less of this kind of influence from companies.
On hardware websites, you're only reading what is spoon-fed to you, so take it with a grain of salt.
SEAL
Geez, people seem to think that they can expect any ethics when dealing with Microsoft. In the past Microsoft has been known to:
And now we know they do something nasty with reviewers and other operating systems. Big suprise.
That may be true, however if they wanted to they would be well within their rights. If the site name or content involves use of trademarked materials then they can license that site to use them, or pursue them for infringement, at their discretion.
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
That's a good start, but you missed the proper analogy with the 3dfx comparison - it'd be like Microsoft comparing MS Office on Windows, Mac, and Linux, and claiming that Windows is the best - but neglecting the fact that Linux put in a 0 because there is no Office on Linux!
The non-cyber world has had this sort of thing going on since forever. I personally have witnessed a television station threatened with advertising cancellation by Coca Cola over a story on how much sugar is in soft drinks like Coke. Most magazines and newspapers keep at least a partial eye on their editorial content for fear of offending an advertiser. While it's not pretty or the way I would structure the world if I were God, it's not surprising that a company would exercise whatever power it has to gain an advantage. The nice thing about the web is that now we have forums like SlashDot and others to call them on it. If they catch enough flack for heavyhanded tactics, we may see much less of this sort of thing in the future.
Yup, read the evidence. He signed an exclusive sponsorship deal with NVidia, and complained when they asked for that to be recognised. Want to be independent? Don't sign "promotional agreements" to get free hardware.
"You know you want me baby!" - Crow T Robot
What ticks me off more than that is these sites that tend to have fair reviews, but every once in a while you get the "i analyzed seventeen different X's and chose to buy Y. Now that I got it in the mail, I'll tell you why it's so great." There's no quantitative analysis of it, just stuff you can read off the box. These reviewers that want to feel good about purchasing a CD-R made by Joe Schmoe or a monitor by PC-People and tell us how great it is, but don't put it side by side against anything else.
(There was a review on FiringSquad about a CD-R or something a few months ago that was one of these -- and it was the last time I visited the site.)
I miss the old Tom's HW. That had good comparisons with lots of info. The last great article they did was the second roundup of BX motherboards. Everything since has been advertising-supported *shit*.
-Chris
Sigh, i wish people would bother to read the whole article before posting nonsense.
I wish people would think for a second before making comments like these.
The issue isn't whether or not the sites get free cards
That's certainly an issue.
but whether or not a small site should have to bend towards a corporation's wishes when posting up a positive review of a competitor's product.
You're having a really hard time grasping what I was saying, aren't you?
If nVidia gives you free cards, good for you. If you do something they don't like, they can stop giving you free cards. They can do whatever they damn well please. If you don't care if you get the cards or not, you can tell nVidia to piss off. If you do care, you dance to their tune.
And, if you need me to explicitly generalize this for you, both the small site and nVidia are perfectly free to do what they damn well please; they just need to keep the consequences in mind.
Simple enough?
Is that journalistic integrity or just being stupid?
People have been saying that Tom is biased for a long time now, but I haven't seen any evidence.
Nvidia cards have been getting the good reviews because nvidia cards have been the best. We'll see what happens in the future.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Murder and marketing...interesting analogy. I'll have to use this line of reasoning on our sales guy sometime.
The thing about murder is, you know it happened. There is a person who was alive before and is now dead. There's not really any getting around the fact that a wrong was done.
With coerced-marketing stuff like this, it's a lot harder to point a finger. Can we prove, 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt, that any particular reviewer was not influenced by any outside entities during the review of a particular product? If the company says, "we didn't do it", how are we to know? Maybe the reviewer just has an axe to grind and is spouting accusations at a convenient target.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
So what you're saying here is that you would like to have the minimum number of sites available to do reviews.
To put it another way, if you say that the 3dfx card is better than the nvidia card, it seems likely that nvidia will stop giving you cards to review, and if you don't happen to have much cash, that means you just lost the ability to do reviews. What good is that?
The more reviews you have to choose from and interpret, the more useful data you can get.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You have been brainwashed by your goverment too. "Instead, they are relying on the United States for everything, as usual." You watch way too much american TV. "This is incompatible with common sense, morality, and Scripture." I get it now you're religious!
Here's a copy of the open letter that was taken down from Riva3D...
"An Open Letter to Our Readers
This letter is written to address the issues surrounding the recent removal of the 3DFX Voodoo 5 review. I have gotten a great deal of email regarding this, and have also noted the discussion spreading around various other websites. I have very strong feelings in regard to this whole situation, and want to set the record straight regarding this issue and the whole idea of what an enthusiast website is and isn't (or rather what it should and shouldn't be). In addition, I hope this will give you a good deal of insight into the current state of affairs in the 3D industry in general.
Let's start with a little bit of the history of RIVA 3D. I started the site shortly after the RIVA 128 came out, mainly on a whim, because I thought it would be fun to do. The site was called the RIVA 128 Homepage, and was stuffed into my 5 MB of personal web space on Prodigy. As time went on, and the popularity of NVIDIA products grew, I was invited to move the site to a server run by Harold Riley, Jr. Harold gave me the opportunity to expand the site with more web space, the freedom to run it as I saw fit, and never charged me a dime. In addition, after we came up with the RIVA 3D name, he registered the domain for me, and transferred it over to me without ever asking for a dime. I'll always be in his debt for giving me the opportunity.
In other words, I've been with NVIDIA since the beginning. When the RIVA 128, ZX, and even the TNT were ridiculed on the major hardware sites, I was there fighting for the card, providing tech support, fixes, and in general, trying my best to help a product line and a company that I truly believed had tremendous potential to impact the 3D gaming world and give 3DFX a run for the money. At the same time, I made up my mind to be fair and honest in my reviews of products. I've always wanted RIVA 3D to be a website that people would see as being above reproach. Truth, honesty and integrity have been important to me both personally and professionally.
One of the first companies to take RIVA 3D seriously in the beginning was STB. When no one else would send me their products, Brian Burke at STB sent me review products without hesitation. Brian and I have also been friends ever since. Brian came to know me and trust me to be honest, as have many other reps from other companies. I have been told many things in confidence that I could have used to bolster the website, but have never done so because I've always felt that the relationships we have in this life are more valuable than anything.
Consequently, when STB was purchased by 3DFX, Brian and I have continued our friendship, and it was his trust in me that allowed RIVA 3D to be one of only 11 sites worldwide to preview the V3 line, despite the fact that RIVA 3D was undoubtedly an NVIDIA fansite. Brian knew that I would be fair and objective in my review, and I received a great deal of email commenting on the honesty of the review. Many said that it was refreshing to see a site give a good review to a competing product. I was very pleased with the response, because I want everyone to know that when they read a review or commentary here at RIVA 3D, they can trust what they read.
No one at NVIDIA gave me any grief about that article, although they may have preferred that I'd rather not have done it.
But everything changes, and as NVIDIA has grown, it seems as if they've been more than willing to flex their muscles when it comes to things they don't like. I never even considered that it would be a major deal for them when I did the V5 5500 review, but shortly after the article was posted, I received a conference call with two of the PR reps, and they made it very clear that they were not happy with an NVIDIA affiliated site doing a review of a competitor's product. There were no complaints about the accuracy or methodology used in the tests. There were no complaints about inaccuracies or with the content in general. There was never any spoken threat of them pulling support from RIVA 3D if I chose to leave the article up, but I think anybody in my position would sense what wasn't being said.
Other things had changed as well, even before I posted the article. When the GeForce 2 was unveiled, we were all invited out to NVIDIA's HQ for a presentation. I was unable to go, but sent Ben Whitney instead with the stipulation that the preview board be shipped to me. Not that I lacked confidence in Ben, but because I had a wealth of experience and all the necessary hardware to do a proper review consistent with all the previous product reviews. Ben had no problem with this, and NVIDIA had no problem with this. Despite all this, the card was sent home with Ben, who badly wanted to prove himself by doing the review. It wasn't until the day of the NDA expiration that Ben realized exactly how demanding, difficult, and time-consuming a review can be. Consequently, we wound up missing the "golden window" that would ensure maximum coverage, and the review was out well after the debut date. But in the midst of all this, I was lied to by one of the PR people who promised me that I, too would receive a review board in order to make the GF2 release date. This person then denied having ever made any such promise, or even so much as implying anything of the sort, no doubt due to the fact that he was in the same room as his boss. What really set me off however was the fact that it took them THREE DAYS to finally admit that there was no way I was getting a board to review, and that they just plain screwed up by giving the board to Ben in the first place. Being strung along like that for three days takes a bit of a toll on you, especially when it ends with you finding out that there was never any intention of them correcting the situation.
There's one other thing that's really bothered me in addition. The same major hardware sites that blew off the NVIDIA line previously now get the green light to post their reviews before the fan sites that have been there all along. Seeing Anandtech post a review of the MX (that covers virtually every aspect of the new chip, leaving no room for anything new for anybody else) before the time given to the dedicated fan sites tends to take the wind out of your sails. And this without even a heads up from NVIDIA. The same thing happened with the GeForce debut when Firing Squad and Sharkey Extreme were allowed to post before any of us were, again, without any sort of heads up until after the fact.
How are sites like RIVA 3D supposed to grow when you're given no chance to be the first with breaking news? How do you think it feels when you've busted your ass for three + years, ALWAYS being there for the company, even when those major sites weren't, and then see those same sites get preferential treatment?
And now to be made to feel like you have to bow to the potential threat of being cut off for posting a review which nobody disputes for its accuracy and integrity. Well, I think I've had enough, thank you. The V5 5500 review is back up, and it's STAYING UP. If NVIDIA punishes me for being honest about a competitor's product, then so be it. I would prefer that that not happen, but at a certain point you just have to go out on a limb for what you believe in.
RIVA 3D will not die, however. I still plan on being a primarily NVIDIA enthusiast site because I've always believed in the company and the product. If I'm forced to change the content of the site, then so be it, but with the lack of support shown by NVIDIA over the last 6 months, maybe that's exactly what needs to happen in order for the site to grow and become better.
Yours,
Ross Voorhees - Webmaster/Founder - RIVA3D.com"
yes, it should be brought to the consumer's attention, but we shouldnt go nuts over it. Almost every successful company out there does something similar... they just dont get caught right away.
maybe slightly offtopic, but there was an article recently (or something), which said the purpose of a board of directors is to come as close as possible to breaking the law as they can.
the goal of business is to maximize profits while minimizing expenses. for a company to make maximum profits, it may have to cheat a little. the trick is to come as close to that line as possible, without doing something blatently illegal or unethical. if they dont, they arent maximizing resourses, if they go too far, they cross that invisible line, and when they get caught we see it. or something like that. :)
.sigs are dumb!
Actually, I'm a developer for one of the 'big boys'. I left my previous employer, also one of your big boys, because they deliberately ignored a major security hole in the name of marketing deadlines.
Weapons of Mass Analysis
A week later my editors get a call from the game company saying unless the review is redone in a more favorable format:
a.) They will stop advertising on the site
b.) They will stop sending product samples (like full-version games) and
c.) They will begin to advertise on other, competitor sites
Needless to say my editors (and the executive editors) said "we're not going to take this bullshit" and told the company in no uncertain terms not to threaten us.
But this was my first real-live experience with politics in reviewing and the gaming industry (I was only 17 at the time). (I also heard that EGM once had advertising from Capcom pulled out from under them by giving Super Street Fighter Ex 2 Turbo etc. a bad review. Imagine that?)
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
You may have seen FSAA, but have you seen 3dfx's FSAA? It use an entirely different algorithm from Nvidia's, and also functions in all 3D-accelerated games automatically, be they Direct 3D, Glide, or OpenGL.
I beg your pardon? You don't know where I'm getting the Diablo II nonsense? The cutscenes are full-motion video, not 3D accelerated; the game itself is 3D accelerated (if you turn that feature on).
You have been poorly informed. These facts are true.
I knew it anyone remember the fiasco Sharkeys went through a while ago?
No sig here...
Well put, most people probably won't get what you said, and they'll probably try to take offense. but for what it's worth, I agree.
"Arrogance and Stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you." - Londo Mollari, Babylon 5.
Even if I checked the "No Score +1 Bonus" I still would have lost karma since TWO moderators decided to blast my post down to ZERO.
... yeah, that makes sense.
Odd thing is, I've seen similar posts moderated up to 4 or higher as "Funny".
So now that this one is +1 (I checked the box) I'll still probably lose another karma point for even replying
I still don't know what that freaking word is.
This really isn't an ethical dilemma for nVidia. Come to think of it, it's their JOB to ensure a favorable press image. They have a duty to their shareholders.
The ethical dilemma comes in for the reviewers and trade press. If a reviewee refuses to support the reviewer, then the reviewer should make a mention of that in the review: "Well, here's a review, a shootout between the ATI Radeon, and Voodoo 5, but unfortunately, ATI didn't supply us with product, so I guess they're going to lose. Too bad ATI doesn't understand the concept of Time To Market."
If the trade rag wants a scoop, and is willing to kiss-up to the vendor for said scoop, or advertising revenue for that matter, then they have to confront a little thing that seems to no longer exist: Journalistic Integrity.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
What you don't realize is the different value system and civil rights afforded in different societies. Try travelling a little. Visit the middle east sometime. Go to China, take a look around. Kick around in India for a few weeks. The world is a little broader than you seem to understand.
Bitch at the countries that allow this to occur, don't go after Nike - they're just making smart business decisions (ie. cheap labor).
I don't think it's right, either. And I'm not especially interested in buying Nike sneakers, but not for this reason.
Ask yourself this: why haven't the people of these countries fought off their governments and uprisen against the trampling of their civil rights? Is it my fault that they're not capable of doing this?
Now, sit back, think about your American citizenship, everything your forefathers fought the Revolutionary War for, and be grateful that for you, this part of history happened over 200 years ago.
Fire and Meat. Yummy.
Horsepucky. Nothing sours people on products / communities / whatever more quickly than stuff not operating as reviewed. If they want exaggerated claims they can read the box or the press release. Saplings grow into great oaks if and only if they are fit. Encouraging bad saplings with a pretense of objectivity just lets bad genes into the pool. Honest reviews will encourage natural selection.
My opinion? The small websites that don't have the budget to buy their own products should not do reviews. Or they should cheerfully admit they are becoming small tools of the manufacturers, allowing readers to weight the results accordingly. Thanks for asking.
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
I am quite civilized, and I should be brought a beer immediately. -- Bruce Sterling
And now we know they do something nasty with reviewers and other cards. Big suprise.
Sounds a bit like payola to me.
Didn't we decide that that was illegal for record companies. Shouldn't those laws carry over?
I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!
O.K., so there's a little out-and-out fixing. However, reviews often skim over negative points. Again, there are two common justifications. The first reason -- and one that affects "community" publications, such as those in the Mac and Linux worlds -- is that readers really *want* to hear good things about their community, rather than serious evaluations. That's understandable, but not (IMHO) good: Saplings may need protection, but they also need a chance to grow into storm-weathered oaks.
--
You are a fucking moron.
No, but I looked it up (sorry, if this is common knowledge, I had never heard the quote:
He was Prime Minister of Great Britain from 1874-1880.
I like it. (-:
The fact is that every review site gets their boards for free, so everyone tends to be biased to the product they are reviewing at the time.
Ok how the hell did this get a moderation of +2?
sites dont buy the cards because the companies are happy to send their hardware to the sites to review, the more exposure the better for the card manufacturer , especially when their hardware is tops in the field (nvidia)
I went ahead and read the message board there. None of the posters actually had any information about Nvidia's hijinx - they were just reacting to an ideology they found distasteful. People like to react - hence, the popularity of trolls.
I sometimes wonder if I could get Slashdotted by putting up a web page about how Microsoft sued me for claiming that all MCSEs were weenies. I don't think it would be unlikely. Slashdot, like the National Enquirer, doesn't exactly do extensive checking-up on its sources.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
They Lie.
They dont reply to my email.
The hardware specs are NOT open.
And these latest tactics are ridiculous!.
Someone at nVidia has gone to Bill's School of Business.
Chris Williams
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
This guy's phone number is not even valid. I just called to flame him/them/whoever like an animal. I don't know if in the USA the number is valid, but here in Canada is does not work... Maybe it's a good thing after all, I might have gotten into trouble with the things I felt like saying ;-)
The fraggin' government does enough of that already! Sheesh
========================
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
We speak with every dollar we spend. If we buy Shell Gasoline in spite of their killing peaceful protestors then the next time they have to make the decision, they may go "It didn't hurt us last time, let's try it again".
If, on the other hand, we disuade our school from accepting money to put a Nike logo on the basketball court because of what they're doing to their workers, Nike may actually look at making sure that workers are treated fairly.
Part of the cost of living in a Capital driven society is that we have the opportunity to be responsible for how our money speaks.
The helplesness theorum is an invitation to let companies ride roughshod over us. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy. If we don't act until it's too late to help, that's one definition of helpless. Apathy on the part of the population is what the greedy and evil hope for.
If you don't think that the little guy's money and actions can shape a society, then take a look at the history of open source. It's all about speaking with your keyboard and your wallet
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Thats the point, Bill's school of business doesnt work. If it dosent work for the consumer, it dosent work. And what does a private citizens back account have to do with anything? You should have asked me "Why dont you open any code that you've written or anything that you have made?" I gladly will, I wouldn't dream of making something and not sharing it with the rest of the world for free. As for my email, It was about asking for more technical info on the card. Info that would have helped me make an informed decision. Oh, but wait, nVnidia dosent want an informed consumer, they want mindless drones, such as yourself. I'm sorry, but using greed as an excuse for rude business tactics is not acceptable. I suggest that you go find instructions that tell you how to properly remove your head from your ass.
Speaking from experience, I do, in fact, know that not all problems are caused on a whole by the company. A lot of times it is simply a classic case of an overzealous marketing/PR team. I know at my peticular place of business I have been subjected to numerous tongue lashings from customers due to something a certain moron might have mentioned in marketing. While I do think nVidia is way out of it's depth on this issue, maybe we should not be so quick to slam the entire company.
and to those who wonder why I simply say...
That's exactly where kyle's stuff comes from these days. Anyway, on to the subject matter. Who the hell really CARES what nVidia does as long as they make great video cards. It's their business to do what they see fit. I understand Riva3d's plight as he is a fan site but he apparantly knows the reprecussions of posting a review of a competitor's product knowing fully well where he gets his vid cards from. He publicly started whining because he might not get any more cool cards to play with. Why bite the hands that feed you?
Quote from peanut gallery:
I totally understand that they want to support sites that support nVidia. That only makes sense.
Well then, 90% of your 'editorial' is out the window. Let me ask you this, if someone in your forum posted info on a better maxipadz what would you do? Right.. here comes your strong arm tactics. More unheralded (and anticipated)professionalism from kyle. yay.
Kyle puts up this controversial crap hoping he can make a big stink and be in the middle of it. He wonders why he didn't get a free Geforce2 MX card so he went out and bought one; now he is pissing and moaning about it. After your first editorial you should've just stopped, now you sound like a big fat baby.
Go back to selling industrial strength hose.
When death looks you in the eye, smile. Someone needs to cheer him up.
Basically these hardware sites are bitching about having their free stuff cut off. If they want to appear impartial they should purchase gear retail, without even telling nVidia. This works for consumer reports and ensures editorial credibility.
Hey.. just a quick notice, but how do you report spelling errors in news posts to the appropriate people? Last I heard, "essentailyl" was only used in European butter.. :) Sorry, but I'm new here, don't know the in's and out's of reporting spelling issues to the admins..
That's right, like my post from yesterday said;
My company has a whole department of people whose job it is to "manage trade magazine relationships".
The thirst for a scoop drives the trade rags to contact the vendor for an early copy of a product, and the trade rag gets babysitting throughout the review process, that a normal user would not, and so does not encounter any bugs. How would a review look if the guy who reviewed (for example) Quicken and MS Money, went through all the features in detail of MS Money, but for the Quicken section just said - "I couldn't get it installed, because the installer kept crashing on me halfway through"? I'm sure Intuit wouldn't like that very much and would bitch.
If this was the standard by which magazine reviews were done, you'd see some very quick action on the part of the software companies to make DAMN sure their products worked for everyone out of the box with no special handholding.
Again, I blame the trade press. And by extension, Reagan's deregulation of the industry back in the 80's.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
CR is reviewing Corvettes as part of the general class called automobiles, in which case making a comparison to a Honda Accord is a fair comparison, groceries and all. In addition, they're reviewing it for middle-class people who are shopping for transportation. Even highly successful people (think 50 year old exec who gets a huge bonus) who might consider replacing the Lexus with a Corvette might be annoyed by the fact that they can't fit a golf bag (~2 grocery bags) into the trunk.
If you want a leadfoot's look at the Corvette, which won't tell you any more than how fast it goes, buy Road and Track/Autoweek/etc.
(Besides, I think the Honda Accord V6 is a superior car -- I drive one!)
I've had a handful of dealings with NVIDIA in the past. After a few people started reading my saga (including some folks at VA Linux -- which has a partnership with the company), a product manager contacted me.
He offered to let me in on beta testing their new Linux drivers, and offered to send me a shiny new GeForce for testing. A couple of days later, the beta drivers went fairly public. There are still internal betas to which I, in theory, have access... but I haven't heard from the fellow since.
I haven't seen the card, either, and it's been a few months.
Was it a bribe for me to take down the pages on my site critical of NVIDIA? I don't know. It certainly wasn't specified in the e-mails -- the card was coming so I could "publish updated benchmarks".
Don't get me wrong, giving the company the benefit of the doubt is kinda painful. Just remember that there are people working there who are tremendously helpful (Terrence Ripperda and the other official folks in #nvidia on irc.openprojects.net) and sympathetic to our concerns. Heck, they even got rid of the GPL violations in three days (instead of the weeks they said when the story originally broke).
Still... I can't immediately dismiss these reports.
--
how to invest, a novice's guide
Nothing new.
Ok guys...time to stop freaking out over every last little thing like this.
I am profoundly weary of what appears to have become a kneejerk response in some quarters to any article (on slashdot or elsewhere) which attempts to raise public consciousness about unethical behavior going on which affects all of us.
That response generally goes something like this: "X is nothing new, don't get your panties all in a bunch over it" with the implication that the poster is therefor in some sense more worldly and less niave than those who are so "outraged."
Bullshit.
Murder is nothing new, it has been around since humanity came down from the trees, if not longer. Does this mean we should not be outraged when someone innocent is killed? Hell no it doesn't -- the fact that a crime or reprehensible act is "nothing new" is no reason whatsoever not be upset by it and respond accordingly.
No, unethical behavior on the part of industry is nothing new, whether that industry is making software, manufacturing 3d video cards, or reviewing such cards.
So what? If these people and their respective companies are behaving in an unethical manner we have a civic duty to ourselves and our communities (however you wish to define the latter) to express our outrage, both to the public and to the wrongdoers.
If we scream foul when this kind of thing happens, regardless of how old, or new, the behavior may be, there is a decent chance the perpetrators will change their offensive behavior.
On the other hand, if we are silent, or dismiss such behavior by succumbing to the kind of impotent cyicism some here seem to espouse, you can rest assured that not only will such behavior remain unchanged, it will probably grow in both frequency and magnitude.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I have seen fsaa. And if it didn't take my fps from 100 down to 40 i would use it. If it does this to current games immagine how it would work in future games. By this christmas you will have to play games at 500x300 just to even be able to use it. I have seen the difference, it's hardly niticeable and if you put a geforce 2 and a v5500 you wouldnt be able to tell the difference. Oh and i don't know where you are getting all the diablo 2 nonsense the only time fsaa, or even direct 3d for than matter, helps is during the cutscenses. Mybe you should go and take a good hard look yourself instead of relying on all those review sites
Why the hell did you get 2 and my lovely indepth post get a score of one. HOW DOES THIS SCORING WORK???
Yes they make money reviewing cards.
But not enough money to pay for every new card that comes down the pike, especially cards that might go for $200-400. Let's say that they have an advertising network that gives them $5 cpm (I'm being generous here). That means that after paying for site overhead, 40 to 80 THOUSAND page views have to happen before the card is paid for.
And that's just for one card. Nobody will take them seriously unless they have several reviews. Let's say the average cost per card is $300, and they need 5 reviews to be considered a "worthwhile net destination". That means they need to come up with 300,000 page views.
It's hard enough designing a site and coming up with content without having to deal with the ongoing hassle of Ebaying your old inventory.
As if any of us should be surprised?
Has anyone bought a magazine that does hardware reviews lately? 3dfx always gets great reviews, or the highest reviews, but they don't always have the best picture quality.
Its the same story with other major hardware companies. They pay big bucks as well as demos to get a complete waste of money a good review. Thus, leaving us with no idea about true performances (us here is used as the consumer in general, not individuals who know better).
<RANT>
Sidenote: I have nothing against 3dfx. I rather like them, and I like what they are doing for the linux community. nVidia, on the other hand, has a great product but has no clue of how to please the people who will make a difference (lets face it: more technology inclined people will be willing to buy hardware than the everyday 'I just check email and that's it' user).
</RANT>
MunITioN
MunITioN
"A mind is a terrible thing to lose"
Reviewers are dependent on getting new products in advance of their official release. Magazine leadtime is around 2-3 months, and if they had to wait to buy the product, conduct their tests and review, and then finally publish, the manufacturer would be shipping the next version. Plus, if some other mag kisses up to the manufacturers and gets the products early while yours has to buy it, you will be consistently scooped. Pretty soon, your readers are going to realize that they can get more up-to-date info elsewhere and you lose them. I suspect the review sites are under the same pressures. Even though they don't have the same publishing leadtimes, if their competitors always have the reviews first, who's going to visit their site to get old news?
Two things that can cause textures to shimmer are bad mipmapping and a lack of sub-pixel (and texel) precision. Don't blame the hardware because the game programmer may have been lazy.
"A word of warning to those trying to FSAA Diablo II - you can't. The 3D is only used for spell effects, so any FSAA abilities your graphics card has do not apply to this primarily 2D game." -firingsquad "but the game's 2D graphics are generally disappointing and look pixelated and lack sharpness on larger monitors." -gamespot diablo 2 is a 2d game. It does not use a 3d accelerator accept during the cut scenes, therefore, the fsaa is not in use. Granted 3dfx did add some support for gameplay, it doesnt help that much and one of those options is not fsaa. I may have been poorly informed but every web site on the net is too.
That's certainly a better system, but it's hard to implement because being first is so much more important in the computer hardware/games review business. These magazines and sites know that if they can publish a review before anyone else, they'll get a lot more readers and therefore, they have to acquire the merchandise from manufacturers before it hits the market.
On a totally different track, anyone notice that CR tends to benchmark every automobile against the Honda Accord? When the most recent major change was made to the Corvette, I remember reading in CR that the car lost points because it could hardly hold two bags of groceries. Oh well.
which said the purpose of a board of directors is to come as close as possible to breaking the law as they can.
There was a time when busines ethics were considered of some importance, even by many in top management/ceo positions. Not that there weren't plenty of abuses, but at one time such abuses were not considered acceptable business behavior.
Obviously, given the tone of your post (and many others) this has changed, IMHO for the worse.
Perhaps if, when boards of directors actually did step over the line, they did hard time in a real prison (and no, Club Fed doesn't count), their behavior might become a little more acceptable.
Hell, if half the victims (read: the people) weren't constantly apologizing and playing down their despicable acts as "just business as usual" things might improve. As it is, they hardly need PR departments to do spin control -- we ourselves are spewing their platitudes before they even write their press releases.
I find this trend absolutely despicable, and I think we need to wake up and reevaluate just what sort of behavior we are taking for granted in the business/corporate world.
Furthermore, I think we should react to this sort of unethical behavior vehemently and loudly. It is unacceptable, and we should communicate that fact in no uncertain terms to businesses who engage in this behavior. Obviously, the law isn't a sufficient check on these entities anymore (not surprising when they can routinely purchase legislation wholesale from our congress), so it is incumbent on us as consumers to step up and be counted.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I better say NO if talk of the present.
Because thats the way most businesses are run in the world.
Thats the way many television programs are sponsered.
Thats the way your retail shopkeeper tells you "Buy this product Sir. This one is better." when all he really wants to say "Mister. This company pays me to display their advertisements on my boards. And I'll make sure you earn me repute with them."
Recognised the familiar examples? Reminded of some other in your vicinity?
Will making fuss about a Video Card company's ethics do? Perhaps it will.
But who will see if your favourite Sound Card company is doing the same?
Maybe your buying decision of a new Motherboard was influenced by such reviews?
Maybe your dealer misguided you into buying an inferior gadget that he gets more commission for?
Most of the people who appreciate and drop a few words about the accountability of the author of editorial or the company, will soon forget the fierceness of the issue and will find no harm in buying a product that will again most probably be influenced by such reviews. period.
Because perhaps there is no other way the small(??) review sites can be run.
No site posts Open Letters thanking for the unbiased nature of a Company in giving out free products for reviews. Because then it doesn't pain them.
I don't know. It may be the case that a competitor paid this guy (??) for writing this editorial. You can never say what.
I agree we need more solid proof for making a decision about the fate of this Company in our future buying needs. But who will care for all other companies that are doing it right under your nose while you are just aiming at a single Video Card making company?
Its true that if "One site can be influenced by them, then there must be others too", and it is also true that "If one company is trying to influence them, then there must be others too".
"And Thats The Way It Is" - Celine Dion, Titanic.
Please for the love of god explain this to me. Oh ya and i dont get this karma business as well. Could someone, anyone, shed just a little light on all this for me? PLEASE
Isn't the Weekly World that actually uses real news stories from other sources, publishes doctored photos, and incites rumormongering, all without fact checking? I think that would be a better analogy, if only slapdash had a page 5 girl.
Fist Prost
"We're talking about a planet of helpdesks."
-Jaron Lanier
Comment removed based on user account deletion
John said: "Reviewers are dependent on getting new products in advance of their official release. "
Jafac said: "yeah, like Junkies are dependent on getting a new shot of heroin every day."
If some trade rag with ethical journalistic standards gets scooped by an unethical one, that's too bad - sooner or later, readers are going to realize that the other magazine has biased reviews, and more timely doesn't mean shit if it's WRONG INFORMATION.
Unless the readers are stupid.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
I am quite civilized, and I should be brought a beer immediately. -- Bruce Sterling
If I were in nVidia's PR department, I'd have my resume out now before the axe falls. The absolute first thing you learn in PR school is don't piss off the press.
A few years ago, Tom's Hardware was nearly shutdown by Intel because he gave them a poor review on a single product. Intel got such enormous bad press, they had to stop.
Nowadays, Tom Pabst still gives them good reviews when their products warrant it, but never gives them the benifit of the doubt (which is, IMHO, is prefectly understandable).
The CEO of nVidia will sooner or later figure out how crappy his PR department is and fire them. If these strong arm tactics get the attention they deserve, I'd guess sooner.
this is sort of like intel suing random companies because they pose a threat to their stronghold (amd, VIA, etc.) intel never wins, and if they did, they'd lose in that it'll just get more people to switch over to amd. if nvidia was confident in their products, which happen to be among the top video cards out today, they should have no problems having voodo5's reviewed alongside. in fact, they should want it, geforce's have been getting better reviews...
----- DevLibrary ( http://devlib.virtualave.net ) -----
The Open Letter, since taken down, dealt with nVidia threatening to pull the website's use of the nVidia brand name and stop sending samples for review. Why? BECAUSE THEY DARED REVIEW A 3DFX CARD FAVORABLY!!!
While it is perhaps not the best journalism practice to accept donations from th manufacturers, it can be the only way to cover expenses and/or the only way to get the card early. So, sites of all sizes do this, from Tom's Hardware to much smaller sites. The result is that nVidia can use these tactics to manipulate sites. It seems to me that the answer is for us, as concerned consumers, to write to nvidia and tell them we don't like their tactics. Even if you think these tactics are inevitable, I don't think anyone would say they are good. So, write to them here to tell them exactly what you think. My letter will go something like: As a technically savvy consumer who reads web sites for reviews of products, I am deeply disappointed with your tactics in dealing with these sites [yadda yadda talk about specifics some]. As a result, my next graphics card purchase will be heavily influenced [yadda yadda]. Not only will my purchase be affected, but, because of the fact that I pay attention to these things and reccomend hardware to friends, theirs will be too. I hope that you decide to change your PR tactics so as to promote good, sound journalism where your cards can shine solely on their merits and not on paid reviews. I know you are capable of producing great cards, lets see your ethics meet the same standards. [signature, etc].
DAMN you're good, grasshopper!
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Sounds great! Just post a good review of a competitor's card to your website and wait for your shiny new nVidia card to turn up in the mail ;)
He had a +1 karma boost (probably from having lots of moderated-up posts). When he posted the rather sleazy comment, he forgot to check the 'No score +1 bonus' box. Now he's paid for it by being moderated down (and taking the associated karma hit).
You can tell karma-boosted posts by the lack of a interesting/ insightful/ etc. explanation. (like on this one, presuming that I don't get moderated down for being offtopic).
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
I was agreeing with you until the part about MS.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
So why are drugs in the US more expensive than the ABSOLUTELY EQUIVALENT DRUG FROM THE SAME COMPANY in other countries?
Or, the same drug one marketed to humans one to animals have an extremely large price difference?
Yes, research costs money. But marketing costs more. I used to work for a pharmaceutical company. Marketing costs were 10X research costs.
No, we *should* be getting freaked - pissed actually - about every last little thing like this. If we do, maybe there is some hope that we could stop this type of nonsense. I am truly disappointed that anyone on this forum would suggest, as you have, that companies in this (and any industry) will do bad things to the consumers, so we should just expect, and accept it. And if all this is true, nVidia *has* been harming consumers by manipulating (and even attempting to manipulate) the sites that consumers go to for *independent* reviews.
... needs to be reported, as, quite frankly these sites are the only way to judge the hardware/software before we by it.
This type of stuff should be reported
You suggest we that we review these things ourselves? HOW?! After we have purchased them and run them with applications under out own control? "Boy this TNT2's frame rate is kind of low compared to the Voodoo3's, which I bought last week. Guess I'm out $150 bucks. Sucks to be me!"
Folks, it *is* time to get pissed about this stuff. If a business is unethical *tell the world*. Embarrass them. Keep them honest.
Every reviewer who says he is independent should review the card and send it back. By accepting it as a gift, you're bought by the manufacturer.
Time and time again, you will see an individual in court, for various crimes of one form or another. Auschwitz. Iran-Contra. Corporate espionage cases. In every instance, the individual will often use the excuse of 'I was only following orders.' Essentially, they are claiming the controlling organization for their actions, because of the influence they exert, directly or indirectly.
If a member of a corporation, acting on behalf of the corporation, acts in an unethical manner, as these PR reps have, it is the responsibility of the corporation to quickly get them under control. It is their duty to do this, not when they get caught by the press, but when they, themselves discover this. And if they can't get control of that employee, it is their duty to shake their hands, hand them their benefits, and have security escort them out the front door.
It may appear to be good business practice to be aggressive. To spread fear, and doubt, in the businessplace. But in actuality, it's like dropping a hand grenade in your market space. Sure, you're likely to hurt the other guy, but it's just as likely to bounce back in your face.
As consumers, it is our duty to do whatever we can to ensure that grenade /does/ bounce. Refuse to purchase the products of companies that strongarm. Send flames and derogatory emails to companies that refuse to publish specifications. Scream, kick, fuss and rant, so Joe Consumer knows something is wrong. So Jim Investor decides to put his money elsewhere. Don't put up with this nonsense.
In case you haven't noticed, I'm getting a little sick of these deceptions.
Weapons of Mass Analysis
Actually that is VERY false. The reason Tom seems biased is because NVIDIA kicks ass. If you read MaximumPC (maybe it was back around the boot issues though) Somebody responded saying that the nVIDIA approved logo was NOT that NVIDIA agreed with the reviews, but was program started by Tom to try to show readers that his testing methods were approved by major hardware companies. He was trying to show that this wasn't just some kid's website, but a real site with corporate approval. He tried to get "seals of approval" for his testing methods from companies like Matrox, ATI, NVIDIA, S3, etc, but NVIDIA was the one who did it first. Unfortuneatly the situation backfired because aften NVIDIA put their seal, ATI and the other refused to give their seals because of politics.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I like the CR approach, but I don't think that the situation is quite as grim as you suggest. You can have journalistic independence without purchasing product, but it's not easy. And it takes a strong position in the marketplace.
A couple of years ago, I worked in a very big IT publication's review department. At the time, we had enough clout that we had no concern whatsoever for what vendors thought. We could write whatever we thought, and vendors really had no pull with us because if they *didn't* give us product, it looked really bad. "We compared products W,X, and Y. Vendor Z declined to participate in the comparison" is pretty damning.
I never had a major vendor refuse to participate. I did have one pull their ads (a $1 million/year account) after I wrote negative things, but that created no pressure whatsoever, even from the salesperson who lost a big commission check.
My point is that, if you let yourself become beholden to a vendor (or vendors in general), what can you expect? The vendor's people would be remiss if they didn't try to use every bit of leverage they can. It's their *job* to promote their company, just like it's a journalists' job to get the straight facts out.
If you build your whole business on complete integrity (and if you've got clout in the marketplace [which I believe complete integrity will produce]), you've got nothing to fear. In Kyle's case, it may cost him some early review boards. No sweat. Just buy the boards when they appear, and be sure to mention "Due to previous unfavorable converage, nVidia declined to provide early product..." I, for one, will take those reviews with fewer salt grains than those from nVidia-approved publications.
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
It's still a censorship issue.
As merger-mania continues and the clout of companies sometimes exceeds that of small governments, their ability to 'do what they want' becomes more ominous. I have seen the the coverage of majour issues strongly warped in the dominant newspaper in the area by pressure from large businesses affected by the {,would be} news.
At some point people really do need to stand up and say something about such pressure. This is what hardocp did. They did it a lot sooner than many other people. I have to applaud them for that. I also applaud him for giving the background to his anger. It allows us to make a reasonable judgement on why he's saying what he is.
That's why I'll encourage people to read things like the Marxist-Lennist Journal. It's not that they are less biased than the Globe and Mail, but they don't pretend to be unbiased. They say "We're gonna give you the leftist spin on this", and then they do precisely that. Far easier to apply counter-spin that way.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Let's take a look at the title of the position: 'Public Relations Representative'. It is the duty of PR geeks to act as an interface with the public. It is not to lie, to slander, to throw mud, bluff, brag or intimidate. It is to get the information about your company, and what it has to offer, into the space of the consumer, and rest on the merits of your product.
And occasionally, to write a catchy jingle.Weapons of Mass Analysis
They don't even have to ask....I promise not to review any graphics cards at all on my site in exchange for a new GeForce board! :-)
Tom's Hardware was widely criticized for being influenced by nVidia. This was..in the past year or so. Anyway, what happened was, there was a symbol on Tom's page that said "official nvidia seal" signifying a "high quality site" As it turns out, all of Tom's reviews were pro-nvidia. I'm not saying he was getting in bed with nvidia, mind you...(general consensus is that 3Dfx dropped the ball) I swear...3Dfx could have been the MS of video cards...
Get some balls and start telling it like it is, even if it means buying the card.
Start your own site then. It's easy to spend other people's money.
Of course reviews come down to subjective thinking.. that's the whole point.
If you think you might like a board based on what you've heard AND what you can verify with your own experiences (friend's computer, PC store etc) then get it. If you don't like it, take it back. You don't have to take everyone's opinions as gospel. Some reservation SHOULD be given to the fact that reviews are going to be biased in some way. Either by 'the man' or more simply (and more often) that it's really *just* someone's point of view.
--
Delphis
And I don't mean screenshots. I mean, in a variety of games, compared with it vs. without it. Not only does it eliminate "jaggies," but the Rotated Grid Super-Sampling method that is unique to 3dfx's FSAA (among consumer-level boards, that is) also eliminates moire patterns and texture shimmering that is also very common. Ever seen the way the textures shimmer in Diablo II? It fixes that as well.
I think you should go and actually look at FSAA in action yourself before you call it a "bullshit" feature.
Who cares?! These are enthusiast run websites-sort out opinions yourself! Sheesh.
No one is holding a gun to their head forcing them to work. What did they do before the nike factory was built? As for the pay, $1 a day is alright when their currency is worth 1/10,000 of ours.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Upeo
Should we not question the ethics of a site that accepts such an offer?
I'm not saying nVidia is right either, or that they have an ethical past.. What I am saying is that it looks like nVidia is proposing partnerships with review sites. Now for a review site to accept that offer, and then claim to be impartial.. now that is not ethical.
wish
---
I'd agree with Kyle that strongarming reviews is not a very ethical practice.
However, while his site blasted Nvidia for doing just that, I didn't see any kind of proof, or even evidence, that it had been going on. All there were were links to what we were assured was formerly an open letter blasting Nvidia for the practice. When I visited those links, all I found was a new open letter essentially apologizing to Nvidia for making invalid claims.
As it stands right now, I don't think it's improbable that Nvidia found a bad review, emailed their stance (i.e. "There are some misleading things with this article; our product is actually good") and that their letter was misinterpreted by some nervous web-journalist as a "cease and desist" letter.
In conclusion, I'm going to have to see much more compelling proof to get angry.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
CR does the same thing with computers - A perfectly good Dell will lose out to an HP or something, because the HP comes with a free color printer and "$1000 worth of software". Their policy of not accepting ads or samples is good, but they do compare apples to oranges sometimes..
--
Like this should be a surprise to anyone. Theres a lot of sites out there, atleast the smaller ones, who probably can't afford to purchase a demo for themselves. I'm sure this offer is pretty appealing... I just hope sharky, ars, and anandtech don't sell out.
"Stop saying 'Don't quote me' because if no one quotes you, you probably haven't said a thing worth saying" -KMFDM
I would get a Voodoo 5
If I had the cash
Bah! I need a better job.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
And when allocating newsprint to newspapers, the government can do whatever they want, too.
I wasn't aware that the government produced newsprint. Could you provide me a link to the government newsprint department?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Ok guys...time to stop freaking out over every last little thing like this. The computer industry is not immune from the same faults that have been there since the first product review was etched into a stone tablet long ago. People who make products will play nicey-nice with people who say their products are good. They will become mean and angry with people who say their products are bad. Remember the "lies, damn lies, and statistics" quote? It's quite correct to replace statistics with product reviews. It is something to be expected.
There's only one review that you can possibly trust...the product in your setup running your applications under your direct control. Anything else should be held suspect.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Slashdot Frequently Asked Questions
See also Comments and Moderation.
And "FM-1101: Stupid Newbies who Refuse to Read Documentation." available at.. Well.. Hell, you ain't going to read it anyway.
Weapons of Mass Analysis
Kyle getting an email from nVidia
:clap: :clap:
/. (on second thought, we don't want to add to the noise here) and see who the hell is on your side and if you have your legion of pansy 12 year old wanna be 'overclockers' by your side here. Yes, that's right go post "what do you think" on your own forum.
Too bad they have been "attacked" with the truth. Too bad they will not "publicly respond." Too bad he spelled "unfortunately" wrong.
Too bad you are so lame that you run a spell checker on the email just so you can have something against them.
Too bad you are a whiny "webmonger" that started to piss and moan when you didn't get your GF2 MX card.
Post your crapatorial @
It sounds more like a crying baby because someone didn't get what they wanted for free.. poo baby..
When death looks you in the eye, smile. Someone needs to cheer him up.
The ISSUE is whether or not a small site should post a favorable review based on a corporation's strong arming tactics.
If you will note, the original poster implies that nVidia is not within their rights in doing this. My original reply was to him.
And if you want to know my opinion on this, I've already stated, but if you want it spelled out: it's a non-issue. The site admins decide what they want to do. "should" never enters the picture.
I guess it's not a question of whether or not you read the article, it's really a question of whether or not you used any braincells to think before you post.
Funny how your lack of comprehension turns into my not thinking.
A good friend of mine known online as Realityman was one of the two original authors of UltraHLE (the first working N64 emulator) was flowered with gifts andcards from quitea few manufactures who wanted to share the glory of his next version...(coming out sometime soon). and guess what... NV pretty much asked the same things, complete with logo placed inside the "Help" menu and on startup.... lots of fun :)
everybody does it. It's been this way for as long as I remember. Hardware vendors, software vendors, they all do it.
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
According to payola law, in instances like these, the site publisher is required to inform the consumers that this exchange (free stuff for the reviewer) has taken place. nVidia, for obvious reasons, does not want their 'strong-arm' tactics publicised. And this is where the problem lies. The underlyng idea here is consumer protection.
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
Why is eveyone faulting Nvida for the problem? Yeah, i see that they are a problem..but what about the reviewers? They are the ones the people trust to give them the skinny on the hardware, and they are as much if not more to blame that the hardware vendor. Nvida would not be able to screw with benchmarks if the reviewers werent so prone to be bribed.....
Awww, there is only one beer left and it's Barts.....
1. This is nVidia's card.
2. These are free cards that these review sites are lucky to have at all
so,
3. When it comes to giving free cards to review sites, nVidia can do whatever the hell they want.
And if they can't make that decision, then I'm putting up a Geocities page tomorrow and getting my own free cards.
And yes, I realise I'm as guilty of Australian bias here as the parent is of US.
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
JMHO
-jimi
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
(Smash amp, burn guitar, take home the groupies)
I may be reading it wrong, but I thought it was mainly about them not giving demo's to people who advertise for 3dfx. The reviews they don't mind, but one of the letters that was posted said they told a site to remove the ads for 3dfx or they wouldn't get anymore demos. Still not ethical but not as bad :)
Free hardware for reviewers is standard practice in the industry, and for the most part the system works and is not abused.
Prominent publications have too much to lose by compromising their editorial integrity, and hardware companies have too much to lose by being ommited from coverage. A nice balance of power prevents either side from taking advantage of the other.
But a hardware company has little to lose if "Joe's Nifty Keen Hardware Site" does not publish a review, so the balance is broken and apperantly nVidia has gone a little too far in "managing" their relationships with these smaller sites.
But even with larger publications - sometimes hardware companies play it less than honest.
I know of several instances of hardware companies trying to slip "overclocked" and rigged boards to reviewers, hoping to slip ahead in the benchmarks.
One good story:
I was the original tech editor of boot magazine, and reviewed dozens and dozens of graphics cards in my day. Once at a tradeshow (Comdex, I think), I was fiddling around with one of the demo machines showing off a new 3D graphics accelerator from one of the major graphics board companies - and noticed frame rates noticably slower than I was getting on my new test board at home.
I hid my press badge and found a booth peon to talk to, and managed to get him to admit that some press boards were the "pick of the litter" and had been seriously overclocked. Just as he was explaining this to me, the VP of Marketing recognized me, walked up, heard our conversation, and nearly had a heart attack. He tried to stammer an excuse, and scowled to the peon "why are you talking to the press!" - but it was too late. Caught red handed, he had to come clean.
Usually though companies are smarter than this. Cheating at benchmarks is caught, sooner or later - and can affect their reputation and credibility for an awfully long time.
chris
Come on people!!! Take to this statement as if the whole of humanity has fallen, wake up and smell the coffee people. This kind of practive has been running around for ages, not only in the 3D card business but from computer parts to your daily, perishable consumer goods.
Walk into your regular grocery store and take a look. Do you honestly think that these storekeepers want to stock on brand X? The only reason it is there is because they are receiving cutbacks & huge discounts from those manufacturers. Its such benefits which keep these store keepers afloat in our overpaced giant economy.
nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;A little close to home you'll find that certain computer manufacturers (I won't mention names here) actually favour one brand name over the other to be placed in the computer system. Why, you ask? Simple they get paid to use such products in their system.
So gentelmen (and ladies alike) is such things new to you? Give it a rest on this nVidia case the final call should be made by the reviewers, it is entirely up to them to decide if they should accept such "benefits" or be honest in what they do.
-----
I get so fucking pissed off. Every fucking hardware review is biased to the product they are reviewing. I personnally have never seen a bad review for any card. Even when that ati maxx card was pulling only half of what the original geforce was getting people were still saying it was a viable alternative. And look at the voodoo 5 5500, what is relatively a mediocre card (at best) because of the appearant lack of balls by any reviewers, has once again turned into an excellent alternative. This fsaa business is such bullshit. "You might loose 20 frames but hey you will get one less jaggie over the geforce 2. So go out and buy a voodoo board". What they forgot to say is "Ok 3dfx i did my part now you give me another FREE board to review." I have lost all respect for every review site. It was the same with the radeon boards on monday. "And the Radeon is the absolute king of the 32 bit color absolutely crushing all competition by 2 frames." Fuck all of you. Get some balls and start telling it like it is, even if it means buying the card.
It seems that the proof is in the pudding; A couple of sites HAVE come out against Nvidia on this (check the Hypothermia link). Didn't 3dfx do something similar when they were the 3d graphics king? You know i'm getting absolutely sick of corporations these days, whether in litigation or in press, they have way too much clout. Limited liability anyone?
That's the problem, right there. You can't get your funding, or review models, or whatever, in that way. Independence and integrity go hand in hand.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I've been reading all the [H]ard OCP stuff, my second favorite site besides slashdot and this whole thing is a big soap opera, they could sell the right to the story to a network channel and make it a prime time show.
To be honest, I can't blame NVIDIA on this particular problem. Riva IS an NVIDIA trademark, and they're basically letting riva3d use it. But riva3d putting up a review of their competitor's product equals to them advertising their competitor's product.
If had a product review site 'voodoo3d' and posted a review of GeForce, voodoo would be unhappy as well.
m
You will not make anything better unless there is company like Nike to give these people jobs. You might boycott Nike but if they pull out , that's it , you just made bunch of poor people even poorer. Without business community there will never be change for better , ever.
Why bother with all of these "card" thingies?
Why not just hand out cash and prewritten reviews? Certainly it's nVidia's right to hand out cash with stipulations. It's their free cash afterall.
...
I'm rather surprised that dolling out review boards based on anything besides the number of hits on a site is considered the right and privlidge of the manufacturer.
I'm rather surprised that anyone would think that anything like this was anywhere near acceptable behavior for either the websites or the manufacturer.
But shouldn't EVERYONE pay for that progress? Why are the prices set by the same company different in different countries, sometimes by many times?
Or even in the US when it is marketed differently? There are several examples of this. Human vs. animal drugs. Different purposes (Prozac has been renamed and is being distributed for PMS. Wanna bet the prices are different? There is an anti-smoking drug that is identical to an anti-depressent (Welbutrin), guess which is more expensive.)
As I mentioned above, the research of the drug isn't the major part of the expense. It's the marketing.
As far as I'm concerned the people with the ethics problem are sites that would give in to the pressure. I want to know who they are and avoid their sites like the plague.
People try to put pressure on the press all of the time. Is it right? Of course not. But when a newspaper automotive advertiser threatens to pull money from the paper if the car reviews aren't positive, the paper should tell them to take their money because they are printing what they want. The newspaper begin whining about how unfair the auto dealer is.
Dear Nvidia: Here is a copy of a letter I posted on the forums on www.hardocp.com. This letter is in response to several webmasters complaints of strong arm tactics being employed by your p.r. people toward the independant hardware review sites: "Wow. I read all the Nvidia hoopla as it was going on and as currently summarized. WOW. I personally buy my hardware based almost solely on reviews. I hope these reviews are unbiased but I always take them with a grain of salt and try to read as many of the reviews as I can stomach. If nvidia actually succeeds in strongarming the independent hardware reviews they will eventually become biased and completely worthless. At that point I will just have to wing it on which card to buy and I'll buy the one with the cooler packaging graphics. I think 3dfx has Nvidia beat easy with that guy on fire. Seriously though, if the next crop of boards run neck and neck (in my opinion) I will go for the 3dfx board. This whole fiasco HAS had an impact on my buying decisions if all other things are equal. Why should nvidia use my money to pay these moronic pr people ? I hope nvidia sees what their employees are doing and either changes it's practices or fires these rogue p.r. idiots. I would also hope that other readers of excellent sites like this and others would take this same stance and consider what Nvidia is doing with our hard earned money to Kyle and the rest of the hardware community. Fight the good fight Kyle. Keep it up (use viagra if you have to)." Gator aka (RantBait)
Thank God. For a second there, I thought Slashdot might go a whole seven minutes without off-topic Microsoft bashing.
This was over a year ago, when Tom was pro 3Dfx. Maybe even 2 years ago. I just remember when he had a report about sites that were allying with 3Dfx for hardware.
You're right, 3Dfx really did drop the ball but as long as they stay in business the battle isn't over. Just look at AMD, of course, AMD never started on top.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
I remember reading a year or so ago on Tomshardware.com about 3dFX doing something similar. I can't remember if it was in exchange for displaying only their logo on the box of a game or maybe a website. Does anyone else remember this?
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
--Ty
This is a lot like the accusations related to the tucows/mandrake [non-]situtation, only in reverse. The only way to even have a chance of getting true journalistic independence is to do what Consumer Reports does with automobiles and other products. You buy the product off the shelf with your own money. Don't let the dealer know who you represent either, although this doesn't really apply as much to products that are not tied to store brands / licensed dealerships. This way you don't get a "pick of the litter" sample. Also, you review what people are actually buying, not some prototype or enhanced card. Finally you gain true independence from the whims of the manufacturers, and you don't have to be their buddies, which will affect your reviews whether or not you believe it.
-- Any comments seen here are not mine, but a mixture of alchohol and lack of sleep.