Slashdot Mirror


Alienware Admit Trying to Fiddle Reviews

An anonymous reader writes "Alienware seem to have admitted threatening review sites with no future hardware unless positive reviews are written about their products. Hexus.net attempted to obtain a recent Alienware system and were rebuffed in an email claiming that their last review had scuppered the chances of them getting any hardware to review in the future. Follow-up emails confirmed this was part of Alienware's global marketing strategy. " I've read through the whole article and it would appear that the above is what the rep said. Now, granted, one would hope that's one person in that company, but still bad form.

208 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Surprising? by dpaluszek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think not. They have always had over-priced, flashy cases with mediocre hardware. And do you think most companies give out free hardware to get "C" grade reviews? No, of course not. This is just part of the marketing game.

    1. Re:Surprising? by joshetc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeh, but alienware should expect poor reviews. There is really nothing they can do about it as they overcharge and it is impossible to get better than top-of-the-line components. The way they price their machines puts it into enthusiast territory and the majority of enthusiasts are capable of building / finding much more powerful machines for the same cost or the same machine for far less. If alienware got rid of / reduced the cost of what amounts to $500 cases they may get better reviews....

    2. Re:Surprising? by ePhil_One · · Score: 5, Informative
      And do you think most companies give out free hardware to get "C" grade reviews?


      Which is why Consumer Reports has always bought their own hardware. Review sites get customized, tweaked hardware, versions not sold in stores, and are effectively on the the dole by accepting both advertisements and "review" hardware from advertisers. The only thing thats surprising here is the the Marketing Drone actually let the review know the reality, not done for precisely this reason. Obviously this reviewer is new to the scene, in that he's at all surprised by this.

      One of the car rags touched on this years ago, they described it as "damning with faint praise", when you get a bad product in you still give a positive review, but throw in lots of qualifiers. "Quality is what you expect at this price point", "Ample ashtrays are provided", etc.

      They have always had over-priced, flashy cases with mediocre hardware.

      And what is your gripe? Are you the reviewer? Overpriced, perhaps, but you are flat out lying with the statement "mediocre hardware". Premium hardware at premium prices is far more accurate, the one thing I don't recall them ever doing is skimping on the $5,000 desktops.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    3. Re:Surprising? by diersing · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Alienware isn't about selling the steak, its about selling the sizzle. If your review is going to quash my sizzle then you are no longer of use to me. By promoting 'good reviews' it furthers Alienware's ability to sell the sizzle and so on.

    4. Re:Surprising? by Fred_A · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Which is why Consumer Reports has always bought their own hardware.
      Not getting any free toys or invitations to events with free drinks and food kind of defeats the purpose of setting up a review site...

      At least that's what I gathered from the ones I've seen... ;)
      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    5. Re:Surprising? by UncleTogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...and thus begins Alienware's "Dell Era"....

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    6. Re:Surprising? by joshetc · · Score: 1

      I understand that. Their "sizzle" is $500 computer cases though. If they had a true no BS performance machine with a cheaper case thus reducing total cost I bet they would get better reviews without scamming their customers (by only letting good reviews out).

    7. Re:Surprising? by 0racle · · Score: 1

      They were shit long before Dell bought them.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    8. Re:Surprising? by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Um.. actually, for they price, yes they do use mediocre hardware. They have long been sub-par compared to other high-end manufacturers such as Falcon Northwest, Voodoo, etc. Yes, with Alienware you really are paying an extra $1000 for a $200 case.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    9. Re:Surprising? by HardSide · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So very very true, but while on the subject many companies do that, when I used to review games for a site way back in the day, the distributor didn't wanna give us some games because of the bad reviews we gave out. Suprisingly one game company, completely forgot the name of both the company and game.They were so astounished by what their game got as in review points (it was really bad) that they sent us a copy of their next game to review for them before releasing it, thinking we had a better outlook on the game then most of the other websites. Moral of the story is, don't hide your mistakes, embrace it and fix them.

    10. Re:Surprising? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Funny

      I always wondered what review sites like "tomshardware" did with the piles of expensive video boards they must accumulate. Can they trade hardware for hookers and booze?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    11. Re:Surprising? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1
      Premium hardware at premium prices is far more accurate, the one thing I don't recall them ever doing is skimping on the $5,000 desktops.


      IMHO, their laptops are a bit on the mediocre side, especially in the battery life department. Then again, anyone buying a laptop for gaming deserves what they get. ;-)

      Their hardware is by no means junk. It's just that you can often get the same hardware from somewhere else in a different case for much less. But then again, some people are willing to pay for a name, even though Alienware went through some quality control and customer service problems about 1.5-2 years ago. Maybe this has changed since Dell bought them.

    12. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Unfortunately their "sizzle" causes customers to get burned.

    13. Re:Surprising? by Funkcikle · · Score: 1
      Yes, with Alienware you really are paying an extra $1000 for a $200 case.
      Hey, it works for Apple.

      (He said, posting from his very reasonably priced 24" iMac.)
    14. Re:Surprising? by skwang · · Score: 1
      Posting here because I mis-moderated your comment. Hopefully this will remove said moderation.

      I meant to moderate it as Funny.

    15. Re:Surprising? by qa'lth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually (I used to do this), you have to sent the hardware back when you're done with it. Or, you're usually given the option of purchasing it outright at reduced prices.

      One doesn't really accumulate much, overall.

    16. Re:Surprising? by rinkjustice · · Score: 1

      And do you think most companies give out free hardware to get "C" grade reviews?

      My understanding is that companies don't give reviewers the hardware/systems free, it's merely a loaner so they can test it. Maximum PC states this all the time in their magazine.

    17. Re:Surprising? by Endo13 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but most of Apple's products don't have identical items available from competitors and aren't nearly as much of a niche market.

      --
      There is no -1 Disagree mod. Slashdot.org/faq defines mod options. USE IT.
    18. Re:Surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You wrote "the one thing I don't recall them ever doing is skimping on the $5,000 desktops"

          They did with me. I bought an Alienware workstation for $5,000 and it was extremely unstable. They shipped it with a video card that Nvidia listed as not being supported for Win XP x64. Once I figured that out and swapped it with something that was supported, it went from crashing every few hours to a couple times a week. But after blowing 80 hours of my time trying to fix the system (which they refused to come out and fix despite me having paid for on-site service), I returned it and got hit with a $500 restocking fee.

          If you google Alienware, you will find numerous horror stories about machines that flake out and the technical support is horrid.

    19. Re:Surprising? by iocat · · Score: 1
      Well that's really the rub isn't it? Ideally if you release a bad product -- and everyone who releases products of any sort does occaisionally -- and you get nailed, you lick your wounds, try to fix things up, and do better with the next one. If you know your product is not where you want it to be, maybe you don't submit it to reviewers. They can review it if they want, but you're under no obligation to give them a free/pre-release copy to do so.

      But if you take a sour-grapes approach "no more products for you, ever!" you come off looking like a massive idiot.

      In this case, however, I think the site was asking for the exact same SKU they had bagged on before, and I can see the PR person being like "uh, why? no thanks." That's actually reasonable. But he hung himself with the further correspondance of course.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    20. Re:Surprising? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      We bought five Area 51m 766 laptops from Alienware in Early 2004. ALL FIVE have had to go back for repair - ALL with different hardware issues. Three of them have had to go back twice. Their turnaround on laptop repairs is three weeks.

      As for for price, I remember them being similarly priced to high-end laptops from HP. With their desktop version of the P4 3Ghz, 7200RPM hard drive and fast memory, they are very fast machines, but other components are cheap - like the damn NIC. The chipset and NIC was a SiS based and I've had intermittent problems with it ever since getting it.

      While my Alienware is fast, and it's been decent since the last time I sent it in, I'm counting the days (only a few months to go!) until the warrantee expires so I can at least be eligible to get a new one.

      One more small note - which is rather on-topic. They have a forum on their website in which you have to be a customer to post in, and I visited it to see if I could find an answer to a screen blanking issue we (and about 1000 others) were having. In my short time there I noticed that threads that were in any way critical of Alienware or showed any amount of frustration with Alienware were simply deleted by the moderators.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    21. Re:Surprising? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1
      The chipset and NIC was a SiS based and I've had intermittent problems with it ever since getting it.


      I had a motherboard with an SiS 735 chipset that completely blew up. It fried the controllers on two older hard drives that were in the box. But the power supply was and remains to be fine (I even checked it out with a meter). Not sure if it was the chipset or what, but the CPU (an AMD Athlon XP 2000) was fine...the only other major component on motherboards these days is the frickin' chipset, so I'm blaming SiS for their cheap chipset.

      The board that replaced is a VIA KT600. It seem to be a much nicer chipset anyway.
    22. Re:Surprising? by napanap · · Score: 1

      The day we all react to stories like this with a yawn, instead of outrage, is the day that we can kiss the the ideal of journalistic integrity goodbye. Journalists (including product reviewers) are not supposed to act as if they are part of the advertising department of corporations -- they are supposed to strive for independence and objectivity, otherwise their work becomes useless to their readers. Granted, journalists often fail to live up to this ideal, but that doesn't mean the ideal should be abandoned.

      Such reviewers should be ashamed of themselves, and we should as readers should not accept this type of conduct.

    23. Re:Surprising? by db32 · · Score: 1

      I haven't run into many people who actually bought an Alienware system. However, the few real life people that I know that HAVE bought them were terribly unhappy with them. The hardware was indeed mediocre, and if it was premium hardware, it was broken premium hardware that took months for them to get right. One guy had bought a laptop, arrived with cracked screen, he sent it back, they "fixed" it and sent it back a dead screen with no crack...he sent it back again (this was the last I talked to him, so I assume they eventually remedied it). All in all it took him something like an extra 3 months of back n forth and fighting with them to take care of it (Again assuming that the last laptop they sent back to him was indeed in working order). This is not the type of service you should expect when you spend that kind of money on "premium" gear.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    24. Re:Surprising? by Adlopa · · Score: 1

      Where PCs are concerned, it goes back to the manufacturer since it's often part of a loan pool. Review sites/magazines usually only accumulate hardware that a) is uneconomic for the sender to collect (i.e. too cheap), b) so crap that they can't be bothered collecting it or c) the PR company has lost track of. So, there are usually lots of 256Mb MP3 players and DVD writers kicking around, but few PCs and fancy graphics cards. This usually then piles up until it gets thrown out or given away.

    25. Re:Surprising? by hosecoat · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Alienware produces the greatest computers ever made. They are the epitome of style. They simply cannot be beat. Their machines are an excellent value.

      If you would like to have your product reviewed, please mail a demo unit* to:
      Joe Blow
      1 street
      AnyCity, USA

      *Demo units will not be returned

    26. Re:Surprising? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      My Acer Aspire 3100 plays all the games I want to play (including UT2004 & Oblivion which is nice considering my desktop plays Oblivion at about 10 frames / minute). Oh yeah, it was also under $600. I guess it all depends on expectations.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    27. Re:Surprising? by mollymoo · · Score: 1
      While my Alienware is fast, and it's been decent since the last time I sent it in, I'm counting the days (only a few months to go!) until the warrantee expires [...]

      I knew Alienware were pretty crappy, but I didn't know there service was so bad that they'd have you counting the days till you die. If you haven't done it yet, try to get an evening of hookers and cocaine in Vegas before you go. Shit, I'd advise that even to people who aren't terminally ill.

      --
      Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
    28. Re:Surprising? by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
      So uh...my site gets 3-4k unique visitors per month, how do I sign up to become a shill and get a free expensive computer?

      No seriously...if anybody from Alienware is reading this...I WILL GIVE YOU GOOD REVIEWS. I need a laptop BTW.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    29. Re:Surprising? by ZeroLogic7 · · Score: 1

      I bought an area 51 laptop at the start of the month for my wife's birthday. *I* was all excited about it. I checked up on it a week before it was supposed to ship and the site had indicated that it had already shipped. So I'm thinking, "under-promise, over-deliver." Oddly, no tracking information was sent to me. A week went by. Still listed as shipped. Still no tracking information. So I send an email to their sales address inquiring as to the status of my order. An automated response comes back with, "you should hear back from us within 72 hours." huh... ok. It's been six days now. I'm beginning to wonder if they meant 72 BUSINESS hours. So I get on their chat line. The dude on the chat line said that he didn't have access to the order information and to call some number. (That's awesome guys... have a support line with no access to BASIC order information...) So I call their number and within about a minute or two, I get a live person. After proving that I was who I said I was, he diligently puts me on hold and scurries about the home saucer trying to find the status of my order. After about five minutes, I'm thinking, "He has GOT to have the lo-down by now." And he comes back on the line. "Uh... yeah... I can't find anything on your laptop. I need to do more research. We'll get back to you in less than 24 hours." ?! ok... Are these people even IN the IT field? My original email inquiry has yet to have ANY reponse since the automated one. No one has followed up from my phone call. Are these people even selling product? Have I been scammed for $1800?

      I was waiting to check out my wife's new laptop so I could run out and get one just like it. It's too bad for them too. I had someone else pumped on the idea of alienware a couple weeks ago. At this point, they've lost at least two customers. (which DELL will be picking up shortly...)

      --
      THIS SPACE FOR RENT
    30. Re:Surprising? by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      At this point, they've lost at least two customers. (which DELL will be picking up shortly...)
      Sorry to break this to you, dude, but Alienware is Dell. In fact, I'm about to post another comment asking if the practice in the main article was happening pre-Dell, or if it's Dell that's had this effect.
    31. Re:Surprising? by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      They were shit long before Dell bought them.
      Anyone know if the 'bad reviews = no new products' policy was also in place before Dell? Or have Dell likely parachuted in some clueless marketing drone?
    32. Re:Surprising? by ZeroLogic7 · · Score: 1

      So what the hell is taking them so long? That was back in March. In the six or seven months they've owned them, Dell couldn't make them any better? If Dell wanted to improve their standings with PC enthusiasts, they'd liquidate their purchase.

      --
      THIS SPACE FOR RENT
    33. Re:Surprising? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      Sounds just like Alienware. Every time we sent a laptop back in for repair and called to get the status of it, they has absolutely NO idea.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    34. Re:Surprising? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      That wasn't very funny.

      You might want to check to see of the warranty on your sense on humor has expired and try to get your money back.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    35. Re:Surprising? by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Dell couldn't make them any better?
      I think your opinion of Dell and my opinion of Dell are, well, opposite. I would expect anything purchased by Dell to get worse. Except possibly Sony, Gateway and Acer.
    36. Re:Surprising? by Nerd4News · · Score: 1
      One of the car rags touched on this years ago, they described it as "damning with faint praise", when you get a bad product in you still give a positive review, but throw in lots of qualifiers.

      PC Mag & PC World do this too. I get a kick out of their reviews for a poor product that end with something like "This software will eat your first born and wipe out the registry on a daily basis but if you like its ability to save to a floppy drive it may be just what you're looking for."
  2. Time for a namechange, then! by c0l0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I, for one, suggest "AlienatingWare".

    --
    :%s/Open Source/Free Software/g

    YTARY!
  3. Question by Archeopteryx · · Score: 1

    When you have a review site, do you get to KEEP the hardware?

    --
    Dog is my co-pilot.
    1. Re:Question by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      >When you have a review site, do you get to KEEP the hardware?
      Depends on the supplier, some do, some don't. Also on the value of the item. It's not uncommon too to offer special 'journalist price' on items. Software either comes on review copies (rare), in boxes marked with 'not for resale' or just standard off the shelf copies.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    2. Re:Question by ip_freely_2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It depends on what is being reviewed. For most system makers, no.

      There are a number of systems built by the maker for review purposes..they are configured and then shipped out for review. The reviewer has a number of days to do their work and then the system is shipped back. The system maker will clean up, check and reconfigure the system then send it out to the next reviewer.

  4. No news here by suprcvic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I thought everybody just kind of knew that hardware companies weren't going to supply hardware to bad reviewers? That would just be counter-intuitive on the part of the manufacturer. That's pretty much why I don't put too much stock in reviews and try and dig as much info as I can out of user reviews.

    1. Re:No news here by udderly · · Score: 1

      Amen. I can't tell you how many times I have read a glowing review only to go into Amazon user reviews and find out that the product has some glaringly obvious flaw that makes it unsuitable for it's intended purpose. Even though I haven't always agreed with Consumer Reports' assessments, at least the Consumer's Union purchases the items themselves.

    2. Re:No news here by clickclickdrone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not true. I've given very poor reviews of kit and the manufacturer still supplies me with new product to evaluate. I've never had the 'Alienware' problem myself. The only thing like this is if the review is for a magazine/website that the PR company or supplier may think doesn't have enough clout in which case you'll get the 'sure, it's in the post' line and no amount of chasing will make anything actually turn up.
      One thing I would add though and this is purely anecdotal, I work within the UK market and there, it is an often repeated statement that US magazines can have very different standards for reviews and often print what the manufacturers give them to print rather than writing the copy themselves. No idea if it's true or not.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    3. Re:No news here by suprcvic · · Score: 1

      What you say about US magazines rings a bit true to me in that I've seen some reviews that almost seem like advertisements for the product rather than a comprehensive, unbiased look at the pros and cons of it. Haven't seen a terrible lot of them, but I have seen them.

    4. Re:No news here by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      If they're anything like 'Which' in the UK, I know what you mean. They have the right idea - buying the stuff themselves but usually come up with bizarre recommendations on stuff I know about making me seriously doubt their reviews on stuff I'm clueless about. When it came to computers or most techy toys/hiFi etc. I could usually find half a dozen or more errors in each review, table of features etc. making the conclusions laughable.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    5. Re:No news here by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 3, Informative
      I started dismissing Consumer Reports when I read that they rated eMachines the best computers. Not best value, or some other quantifier. Hands down best.

      I've been a subscriber for four years. I don't recall ever seeing them rate eMachines highly. In the most recent issue, they rate a Compaq Presario highly for Budget Models (512MB RAM, 160GB Hard Drive). For workhorse models (1GB RAM, 250GB Hard Drive), they rate a Gateway highly. But, for both Compaq and Gateway, they point out that support and reliability are below par. You should note that being rated HIGHLY, does not necessarily mean CR recommends a particular item.

      In general, CR recommends Apple. In their benchmarking system, Apple doesn't usually rate highly. There are almost always Windows machines that perform better than a particular Apple product (at least in CR's testing). But, when it comes to reliability, support and the general lack of Virus issues, CR prefers Apple.

    6. Re:No news here by dave562 · · Score: 1
      US magazines can have very different standards for reviews and often print what the manufacturers give them to print rather than writing the copy themselves.

      It is very true. The most blatant example of it that I see is in the automotive performance market segment. Most of the "product reviews" read just like the marketing materials for the product.

    7. Re:No news here by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I started dismissing Consumer Reports when [...]

      I tossed them out when they reviewed cereal and told me which tasted better. It didn't help that they claim to be methodical, but have the habit of changing the testing habits of the cars for whatever makes the best magazine cover and press release, not what actually gets valid results. I would still read them for the microwave and dishwasher tests, but all the other problems have me to where I can't bring myself to give them any money.

    8. Re:No news here by justsomebody · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought everybody just kind of knew that hardware companies weren't going to supply hardware to bad reviewers? That would just be counter-intuitive on the part of the manufacturer. That's pretty much why I don't put too much stock in reviews and try and dig as much info as I can out of user reviews.

      It is their product and reviews are part of the marketing. So,... yes, it is a common practice to be precise who will review your product and who will not. Just as company has to have a clue about promotion and advertising material.

      What I was disappointed more was the "Hollier than thou" attitude from Hexen.

      Emboldening two sentences, where one was put into mouth from them selves? The noisy part was actually written by Hexen and not Alienware as they would like us to believe. Answer Alienware provided was just saying, reviews are part of the marketing and we have to be careful about who will review. Hexen obviously hasn't got enough clue to know how business is running. If you want to make bashing (or even honest) reviews, then buy the goddamn hardware. Suppliers simply are not stupid to provide you with free hardware for a bad review. Not great, but it is how world is turning.

      But more disappointing was the fact that Hexen was the attacker here and Alienware acted as bystander.
      1. It was Hexen who asked for free hardware to review. Alienware didn't request them to review their hardware.

      2. It was Hexen who first attacked with
      the email inviting 'Alienware' to submit a G80 based system was sent without my authority.

      if i had known that there was any intention whatsoever to invite 'Alienware' to submit any product to HEXUS, i would have prevented that happening.


      3. It was Hexen who said ... the only inference which can be made from this is that 'Alienware' will only submit products to publications which will write nice things about 'Alienware'. Off course you fool. Reviews are part of the marketing. Marketing is part of selling the product. So, why pay and cover expenses for bad adds? Maybe in the "merry go round" country where Paul Dutton lives life is rosy. All other people actually live in reality. This is what answer That's was and remains Alienware's global marketing strategy from the beginning. We're hardly alone. means here. Why digging your own grave and putting nails in your own coffin? Hexen was just to childish to swallow "Face it, there is a zillion reviewers in the world, sorry, you're not our choice.". Yep it is hard to be threated like a commoner.

      4. It was Hexen who said
      you should not contact anyone at HEXUS again. no reply is necessary, or wanted. What a childish attempt. If it was done in e-mail following 4 or 5 previous e-mails it would show simple wish to pose "mexican standoff" to the correspondence or a wish to terminate that talk. But using this in the first e-mail (along with bashing the unprofessional approach of the other side) just dhows Paul Dutton lives in the "land of merry go round" and he's mentally exactly 3 years old.

      And my final notes to Paul Dutton
      1. You took the wrong pill
      2. Grow up or wake up, just pick your poison
      3. After nr.2 of your choice be careful to choose the right pill this time and notice that world is not turning around you and Hexen is not the center of the world. Some people don't give a slightest fuck if Hexen exists or not.

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  5. How is this any different from what by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    Microsoft is doing with the Vista EULA and has done in the past?

    ...Just by way of example, what about a security researcher who a year or so from now wants to compare the buffer overflow vulnerabilities of the original version of Vista with the inevitable SP1? Under Microsoft's rules, the researcher could not make public the results of the older version of the software. And if you think it highly unlikely Microsoft would actually object to the benchmarks in such circumstances, think again. In 2001 Microsoft came down on an independent lab that was about to go public with performance benchmarks comparing Windows NT and Windows 2000 (). Since neither the NT or Win 2000 EULAs had censorship clauses at the time, Redmond even went to the extreme of invoking the clause in SQL Server, since it was used in the lab's tests.

  6. Gasp! by gspeare · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've read through the whole article

    Who are you and what have you done with the real editors?!?!?!??

  7. Ahem.. by AdamKG · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alienware is AWESOME! Great! Superb! This article is FUD.

    /checks mail

    They're still Awesome!! HELLOooO!!! Your hardware rules!

    /checks mail again

    --
    groupthink: It's good for self-esteem.
    1. Re:Ahem.. by DynamoJoe · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you have to be Republican to get stuff from 'em.

      --
      bah.
    2. Re:Ahem.. by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Well then where's my latest then????

  8. Build your own! by pauljuno · · Score: 1

    Just one more good reason to build your own system. It's not that difficult and you'll get your system a lot faster than Alienware can deliver. I tried to buy an Alienware early this summer after having a real bad experience with ordering a Dell XPS 700 .... and they promised shipping in two weeks and then they change the time to two months. Yuck, and the worst thing about Alienware is they charge you upfront and just sit on the cash. I'll never buy again!

    1. Re:Build your own! by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      I tried to buy an Alienware early this summer after having a real bad experience with ordering a Dell XPS 700

      Uh, you know that Dell now OWNS Alienware. That might explain why you had bad experiences with both products.

    2. Re:Build your own! by GNious · · Score: 1

      hence "tried"

    3. Re:Build your own! by Fozzyuw · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Just one more good reason to build your own system.

      I would always advocate building your own vs. buying, however, there's becoming a finer line between pricing, power, service, and hassle. I recently (like 6-months ago, so I guess that's like a different era in computers terms) went through the whole, "I'm going to get a new computer" process. I ended up with a Dell XPS 600. I'm quite happy with it so far. Some small annoyances, I shouldn't have gotten the WinXP Media Center, so much crap software is installed on it, and for some strange reason, at random times, my mouse wouldn't activate on boot-up until I re-plugged it in.

      The thing is, I can build my own and I've done it enough in the past. However, build your own only works best if you have 'known good' parts you can swap out, should something drastically bad go wrong. Like my last effort to upgrade my old box to the point of building my own. New MoBo, CPU, RAM, etc. Well, the MoBo I ordered was bad, it fried the whole system, and I had to replace all the parts. I can tell you, it was not a pleasure to contact each manufacturer and/or online store to get the warranty invoked for replacement parts. It was taking over a month, and so I just bought a nice laptop instead.

      This time around, I could have built a 'faster' computer for the same price as some XPS systems, but then I'd have to still buy a Monitor and such. However, the speed I would get out of the new system wasn't significantly better than the XPS system I built. Nor did it have the 3-year warranty(even if Customer Service is a PITA). However, with my DELL laptop, I can tell you, when parts broke, like a Hard Drive, or RAM, one (long) phone call and I'd get a new replacement part in the mail practically the next day, with FedEx, where I could swap parts, and mail (at no cost) the bad part back. I also didn't have to setup the RAID drives or purchase a WinXP license, install all the software (though it would be better since I can skip all the Dell crap they add), etc. etc. Basically, it was easier and just as expensive, after doing to pricewatch.com and picking all my parts, paying for shipping, buying a monitor, putting everything together, crossing my fingers everything works, and hopping for the best, to just buy a Dell and go from there. Of course, now, I can just upgrade at this point. Which was my whole plan.

      Dells prices have gotten to the point that, it's actually not such a bad idea, if you have to get an entire new system, that you might as well get it all at once with a warranty for all your parts from the same place, to save some hassle.

      Cheers,
      Fozzy

      --
      "The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth." ~1984 George Orwell
    4. Re:Build your own! by Jett · · Score: 1

      This is a common trick with scammers who sell high-end components. Sell that high-end and hard to get item for $20 less than anyone else even though you know you can't deliver it because you don't actually have any. Wait a month or two for prices to drop to what you sold it for, then order a bunch and ship them to your customers.

    5. Re:Build your own! by dennypayne · · Score: 1

      Isn't it illegal to charge someone's credit card before you ship the product they are purchasing from you? Or am I invoking an "old wives' tale" here?

      --
      Erecting the wall of separation between church and state is absolutely essential in a free society. - Thomas Jefferson
    6. Re:Build your own! by IndigoZenith · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I had a real bad experience with an HP Laptop and then I tried a Compaq Laptop after, yet with no luck :)

      --
      "If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried"
  9. This is why you need independent reviewers.... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consumer Reports magazine has the right idea... If you're going to review and test products, you need to obtain them the exact same way, and through the same channels, that end-users do. Even if a manufacturer can seemingly be trusted not to withhold new products from reviewers to retaliate for a bad review, it doesn't mean they're not "cherry picking" the products they're sending them!

    Especially in cases where there are high numbers of D.O.A. or malfunctioning units, reviewers simply don't catch this problem if they're only receiving pre-tested, pre-selected samples for free evaluation.

    1. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      It doesn't happen now AFAIK but a few years ago graphics card manufacturers got caught out with drivers optomised for the current crop of benchmark programs - their real world performance was worse than benchmarks implied.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    2. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if all vendors would cherry pick the products they sent in for review, atleast they'd all be on level playing ground.
      The problem with buying review copies in stores is that you'll occasionally pick up a less-than-average product, which will result in a review worse than what the average buyer would get.
      With cherry picking, atleast you know you're comparing the same top quality products that vendors can produce.
      Ideally you'd be able to review a larger number of store-bought samples, from different production runs if applicable, but that'd be too expensive for most things electronical.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      I think using pre-release samples is fair game as long as you mention early on it's a pre-release, mark the review a preview and do not under any cicumstances give it a final mark out of ten or whatever. Only production kit should get a normal review.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    4. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      But then you'd get to test out the other important aspect of a customer's experience - that of the customer service. It's quite important to the 99% of the populace that don't know a phillips head screwdriver from a flat-head or nutdriver, so they could open the case...

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    5. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      That would not be a review of the product but a review of the store and/or vendor itself.

      Sure, it's important that the store & vendor don't screw you over if you happened to buy a bad version of their otherwise brilliant product, but it's not the same thing.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    6. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by thetroll123 · · Score: 1

      To be fair you can't really calculate DOA levels from a single purchase, either - you're going to conclude the DOA rate is either 0% or 100% with that sample size...

    7. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by VdG · · Score: 1

      I would have siad it was not so much a review of the store, as of the manufacturer's quality control.

      If I buy a new product, I want to be confident that it will work as advertised. I don't want to run the risk that it'll be in some way defective. Sure, I'd be able to get it replaced, or get a refund from the store but frankly I don't want the hassle.

    8. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Depends - in Apples case it's one and the same. For other products, it depends upon the manufacturer. Gateway, HP, Dell and Alienware (prior to Dell) - still manufacturer/product/QA.

      Name brand computers that are likely to be reviewed are usually warranteed through the manufacturer.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    9. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      ..... which would never have happened in the first place, if the law required hardware specs to be published in sufficient detail that any competent programmer could write a driver.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    10. Re:This is why you need independent reviewers.... by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      Some people don't seem to know a Phillips head from a Posidriv head. There's a well-known chain of hardware stores, based in Nottinghamshire, who stock only Posidriv head screws and only Phillips screwdrivers. One of these days I'll be bothered to write to them and ask them about this.

      I personally like those PC case screws that fit into a "naked" multi-driver. Weirdy threads, though ..... they're neither BA nor BSM.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  10. Translation back to native 1st grade language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Let me translate this back into the native 1st grade language in which this argument was originally expressed before it was dressed up in self-righteous ethical terms.

    Hexus.Net: Gimme free shit!

    AlienWare: No, you're mean.

    HN: Wah! I want free shit! You're a poopy-head.

    AW: I don't gotta give you nothin' if you're not extra-special nice to me.

    HN: Gimme! Gimme! Gimme! Waaaaah!

    AW: I'm taking my ball and going home.

    HN: I'll get you for this. I'm telling!

    1. Re:Translation back to native 1st grade language by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Disagree. I've worked for bad editors (try and say something nice, anything, we're carrying some ads for them next month) and good ones (say it like it is and if advertising dept call, hang up. Editorial never talk to advertising, it's unethical).
      That said, I'm not sure I'd have carried this as a story if I were in the same boat, I'd just write them off as a supplier of review product and more fool them.
      The fact they've been slashdotted into 'web server down for maintenance' I suspect they're starting to regret it a bit now.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    2. Re:Translation back to native 1st grade language by Skraeling2 · · Score: 1

      1st graders swear like that? What is this world coming to!?

    3. Re:Translation back to native 1st grade language by Alchemar · · Score: 1

      You forgot the first few line:

      HN: Gimmie Free Stuff!

      AW: Here you go!

      HN: This stuff sucks, Gimmie better free stuff!

      AW: Uhhh ...... NO!

  11. news flash: alienware overpriced by teh_chrizzle · · Score: 1

    in other news:
    water is wet
    the sky is blue
    size matters

    --
    sarcasm:
    -noun
    1. harsh or bitter derision or irony.
  12. You posted this to Slashdot? by popo · · Score: 4, Funny


    Fine. No hardware for you either.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:You posted this to Slashdot? by pedalman · · Score: 1
      Fine. No hardware for you either.
      And while we are at it, no soup for you!
      --
      Friends don't let friends line-dance.
  13. Re:Alien marketing practices? by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

    Exactly. Everybody does it. I don't see how this is any different than Microsoft and Oracle's EULAs which say you can't publish benchmarks without their permission.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  14. Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by Old+VMS+Junkie · · Score: 5, Informative

    I wrote for a couple of computer industry trade rags back in the early 90s and the editorial policy was that we never gave bad reviews. If a product sucked, the review was never published. We gave feedback back to the manufacturer but nothing got printed.

    The reasoning was simple. If the manufacturer really wanted a review printed, they would fix their product (and some of them REALLY wanted good reviews and actually did make improvements). And if the magazine wanted to continue to get advertising dollars, they didn't print bad reviews. It was the unspoken quid pro quo.

    1. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      I read an article a while back by a guy who was a motoring reviewer in the 60s and 70s. He talked about the time he had a new car on loan for review shortly before it was due to be sold to the public, and the brake pedal came off on the approach to a sharp bend at 140mph...

      Apparently he didn't mention it in the review because the manufacturer told them they'd fix the bug before they shipped. Obviously they had a lot of faith in those days.

    2. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by cyclocommuter · · Score: 1

      It's getting difficult to sort out real reviews from those pandering to manufacturers. Even internet forums are populated with reviews from supposedly regular consumers but which, in a quite a number of instances, turn out to be astroturfers who set out to generate a buzz.

      These astroturfers are often employees of the manufacturer or fanboys who get hardware/gadget in return for a favorable review.

    3. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by Thyamine · · Score: 1

      I'd be ok with that. At least your reviews were honest. When I read reviews I'm looking for real information or feedback. Perhaps I'm not as cynical as I should be, but I'm not looking for marketing drivel. If I want that I'll go to the manufacturers site.

      However I'd think the mark of a real (good?) review site/magazine/etc would be including the negative reviews to say 'Hey this is bad and we're calling them on it'. I've never been to hexus.net before, but I'll definitely begin to use them for reviews after this. Assuming that this wasn't all some advertisting ploy by them (ahhhh.. there's my cynicism).

      --
      I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
    4. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      The parent comments sound like the companies are using the reviewers for quality control. Maybe the reviewers should charge a consulting fee. I think an internal QC department may be in order.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    5. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by endofoctober · · Score: 1

      Doesn't that approach present a problem, though, for the consumer? I read reviews not only to know what to buy, but also what *not* to buy, so as a reader I would much rather have reviewers call both the good and the bad. Armed only with the "good" reviews, I feel I'm not getting enough information to buy, which is why I read the sites/mags in the first place.

      --
      - Jack
    6. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by gt_mattex · · Score: 1

      Or this whole story was a ploy to both build consumer trust and brand awareness through the careful exploitation of a product submitters blunder.

      As such they would stand to gain much at the cost of one niche hardware manufacturer's favor.

      --
      "No doubt one may quote history to support any cause, as the devil quotes scripture." - Learned Hand
    7. Re:Standard Marketing Practice, Nothing New Here by PCM2 · · Score: 1
      I wrote for a couple of computer industry trade rags back in the early 90s and the editorial policy was that we never gave bad reviews. If a product sucked, the review was never published. We gave feedback back to the manufacturer but nothing got printed.

      The reasoning was simple. If the manufacturer really wanted a review printed, they would fix their product (and some of them REALLY wanted good reviews and actually did make improvements). And if the magazine wanted to continue to get advertising dollars, they didn't print bad reviews. It was the unspoken quid pro quo.

      Ugh, appalling. I don't know which rags you worked for but you probably shouldn't name them.

      Full disclosure: I work for InfoWorld and though I don't usually work directly on our product reviews, I can tell you that no such policy is in place here. And, in all fairness to our direct competitors (like eWeek, Information Week, etc.), I sincerely doubt that any of the big name trades operate this way, either. Maybe the fly-by-night/niche operators, but nobody with an editorial reputation to preserve would stoop to these kinds of shenanigans. Keeping advertisers happy is the job of sales, not editorial. If you worked for a publication where the salespeople and the editors were one and the same, then you were not working for a magazine, you were working for a catalog.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  15. Alienware is based in South Florida by CiXeL · · Score: 1

    What would you expect??

    1. Re:Alienware is based in South Florida by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      > What would you expect??
      Hanging chad?

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  16. Worked for Apple by krell · · Score: 1, Troll

    "They have always had over-priced, flashy cases with mediocre hardware"

    Don't knock this business model. It kept Apple going in the years prior to OS-X and the iPod.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:Worked for Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Oh no he di'nt!

    2. Re:Worked for Apple by Gr8Apes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You should check Apple's latest prices, now that we can do apples to apples comparisons.

      I think you'll find that the hardware is relatively fairly priced, although most is higher level (except for the Macbook - still using a Core Duo - bah). $2500 for a dual Woodcrest system? That's an awesome price.

      Now, for the upgrades, they're on the order of Dell's pricing - far too expensive for what you get.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    3. Re:Worked for Apple by krell · · Score: 1

      "You should check Apple's latest prices, now that we can do apples to apples comparisons."

      Yes, things are pretty good now. That is why I mentioned the situation as being one in the past, prior to OS-X and other changes. You know, those mid-1990s machines from Apple that were as fast as PCs from two years before, but cost about twice as much as the PCs of the current year. "Yesterday's power at twice today's price."

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    4. Re:Worked for Apple by Weston+O'Reilly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the problem with PCs and their fanboys - you mistake "flash" for "design". Apple's designs are functional - there are no alien head ornaments or strange plastic bubbles attached for "looks". If you honestly can't see that when comparing an Alienware case to the Mac Pro tower case, you're hopeless.

    5. Re:Worked for Apple by krell · · Score: 1

      "Apple's designs are functional - there are no alien head ornaments or strange plastic bubbles attached for "looks". "

      You obviously don't remember the Apple Cube and its accompanying jellyfish-like cable tangle.

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    6. Re:Worked for Apple by cptnapalm · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Mac G4 Cube.

      And example of Apple's flash over function for inflated price.

    7. Re:Worked for Apple by Large+Green+Mallard · · Score: 1

      Apple kept going pre-OSX due to good luck, not good business planning and strategy.

      Pre-Steve Jobs mk2, they had a huge confusing lineup of machines, some of which could whup the PCs of the day, and some which were boat-anchors when shipped.

      Pre-OSX, they were limping along with an operating system that had been dragged through a series of upgrades, kicking and screaming, for 15 years. I mean, yes, I'm glad I could play 1984 era games like StuntCopter on my G4, but I was less pleased by the 3-5 crashes per day when I was actually trying to use the thing.

      I think, looking back, it gets down to one thing: Apple survived because of the people who today will pay $900 for an IEC power cable.

  17. Consumers Reports by Qwavel · · Score: 1

    This is why you have Consumers Reports: they buy their products at the store and they don't take advertising.

    I acknowledge that it would be almost impossible for a web site to not take advertising, but buying product at the store is very important. For example, if you request an LCD for a review, don't you think they are going to look through a bunch of them and make sure you get the one with no dead pixels and no other problems?

  18. Servers too! by Minupla · · Score: 1

    Apparently Alienware took back the servers that ran the website too :)

    --
    On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
  19. This News, in Slashdot ... baaad for alienware bad by unity100 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would rather have my pictures of getting my ass whipped by a horde of crazy sado-masochist foot fetishist south african mongolian descent hentai zulu tribe circulate around the internet instead of this news in slashdot, if i were alienware.

  20. Alien?! Where??? by Nux'd · · Score: 1

    Seems to me that threatening a reviews site is a bad move. Rather than give into the threat, they may as well right an account of it. The scandal will draw peoples attention to the review site. Review site wins, Alienware grumbles.

    Rather than trying to force good reviews, a more diplomatic approach would have been to hint or bribe. Maybe even trick and swindle.

    Intimidation is bad! >:(

    1. Re: Alien?! Where??? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Seems to me that threatening a reviews site is a bad move. Rather than give into the threat, they may as well right an account of it. The scandal will draw peoples attention to the review site. Review site wins, Alienware grumbles.

      That's what I would do. Start the page with the regular sort of title and photo of the product, then just say that you can't review the product because the vendor didn't approve of your honesty in the last review.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  21. And here the come...slashdotting outta the turn! by Chas · · Score: 1
    Ohmygod! They killed Hexus!

    YOU BASTARDS!

    Anyone got the meat of the article?

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  22. Fiddling a review? by killeena · · Score: 1

    That is pretty talented. Perhaps they should go to Georgia to outfiddle the devil.

    --
    Freedom would be not to choose between black and white but to abjure such prescribed choices. -Theodor Adorno
  23. Shocked.... file under not news category by klubar · · Score: 5, Informative

    Is anyone surprised by this?

    Apple has been doing this for years.... sites or publications that don't give glowing reviews are not invited to press conferences, don't get the cool swag, are excluded from preview announcements, don't get access to excutives. It's one way that Apple manipulates (influences) the press... that's why sites that always give great reviews (see Wall St. Journal) always have easy access to the newest equipment and executives.

    Review sites are rampant with fradulent reviews on both sides. Manufacturers are giving hardware in exchange for favorable reviews and meanwhile many of the review sites are just shills for hardware vendors. It's always been somewhat true that the advertising side of publications had some influence over the editorial side, it's just gotten much worse (and easier to cheat

    1. Re:Shocked.... file under not news category by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Agree. Apple are extremely picky about who they'll give kit to for review. Their PR don't have the best reputation for being useful/responsive unless you're in their little book of favoured people - and it's a very small book.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    2. Re:Shocked.... file under not news category by Cruise_WD · · Score: 1

      Everybody seems very accepting of this situation...two questions spring to my mind:

      1) How should a consumer obtain a worthwhile review with no prior knowledge of a site's quality?

      2) Is there any way of organising the review system to not enourgage this behaviour?
      Consumer Review's policy sounds great, but expensive - how would you fund that sort of publication outside of advertising or selling real-world copies of the mag?

      --
      [ cruise / casual-tempest.net / xenogamous.com / transference.org / quantam sufficit ]
    3. Re:Shocked.... file under not news category by nine-times · · Score: 1

      First, of course companies do this. Think about it from Apple's point of view-- if you have cool swag to hand out, are you going to give it to the writers of MacWorld or one of those Dvorak types who have been claiming to 20 years that Apple's death is imminent?

      But that's not the thing that bothers me so much as an explicit statement that the thing is quid pro quo, or tit-for-tat, or however you want to say it. But worse than handing out "review" systems is the advertising dollars. It's always bothered me how, in the late 90s, PC Magazine always gave Gateway extremely good reviews. Maybe it's just me, but every Gateway system I've dealt with has been total crap, and you have professional reviewers giving them glowing reviews while every other ad in their magazine is a Gateway ad.

      To my knowledge, no one has publicly accused them of impropriety, but I find it more than a little suspicious and, to this day, don't trust any reviews out of cnet/zdnet (all owned by Ziff-Davis).

  24. Re:missing S in headline. by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    One of the best things about language is that it changes over time.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  25. Re:And here the come...slashdotting outta the turn by cciRRus · · Score: 1

    That's no Slashdot effect! Alienware just took back their server hardware.

    --
    w00t
  26. Don't panic. by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

    "Who are you and what have you done with the real editors?!?!?!??"

    Although the Slashdot editor only added two sentences of his own, he managed to commit two errors (one of punctuation and one of grammar) within that brief space. You may rest assured that the same elite editing talent as always is running the site.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
  27. Re:missing S in headline. by TechForensics · · Score: 1

    Not in Britain. Companies are always plural.

    --
    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
  28. Alienware still in business? by Albundy47 · · Score: 1

    These clowns are still in business? LOL! They will eventually go the way of such big hits as the PCJr, etc. eventually. Why anyone would pay them all outdoors and then wait for a prepaid system is absolutely beyond me. When its time for a new gaming rig, I simply buy a current model HP retail box off the shelf that suits my needs for processor speed, storage and has the appropriate upgrade options available. Then I immediately buy the RAM it lacks, an Nvidia video card and a current model soundblaster. I take this stuff home, spend about a 1/2 hour installing it, etc. and I am gtg for another few years. Simple, cost effective and decent value for the dollar. How can you go wrong? This costs little if anything more than building from scratch and I have had great experience doing my PC hardware this way for several generations of systems now. Alienware is teh suck and nobody should buy that crap. I once called them up when they were advertising Alienware recommends Windows XP Professional and I asked them, why? I wanted to know EXACTLY what the benefit is to a gamer in a home setting. I wanted to know exactly how a few extra utilities and support for domain names, etc. was going to be useful to a gamer in thier home. Of course, they couldn't answer me. So then I put it to them again, so where do you get off telling gamers they should buy this more expensive OS for home use? No reply. I hung up and resolved to never, ever blow a penny on anything bearing the Alienware name. Credit where it is due though, they did a fine job of alienating me permanently.

    --
    He who hesitates is lost.
  29. Re:missing S in headline. by krell · · Score: 2, Funny

    Companies are plural, but company is singular. No matter what country you are in, one business is one business.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  30. Hmmm, just had an idea by Starfleet+Command · · Score: 1

    Maybe I will start a review site and ask Alienware for a system to "review" ...hey, yeah...THAT's the ticket...

  31. My favorite line by HangingChad · · Score: 1

    From experience I've known that you and I see eye to eye on a number of industry issues but I'm a little baffled by your idealism on this front:

    Baffled by a company writing an honest review instead of a fluff piece. And this is what industry expects from trade rags. Pathetic.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  32. Kudos by Donniedarkness · · Score: 1

    Kudos to Hexus.net for actually telling us about this. I will no longer hold Alienware in the same esteem that I used to. I wonder what other companies do this?

    --
    Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    1. Re:Kudos by Oswald · · Score: 1

      Dude. All of them. That's why Consumer Reports has never accepted advertising or samples of product. It's not like they enjoy buying everything at full retail. It's just the only way to get products to review after you've written a few thumbs-down articles.

    2. Re:Kudos by kfg · · Score: 1

      I wonder what other companies do this?

      Within a margin of error and including the weasel phrase "to one degree or another," I hereby include a complete list of such companies:

      1. All of them

      Disclaimer: Naivete has been harmed in the production of this story. Thank God we still have the Easter Bunny.

      KFG

    3. Re:Kudos by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

      Thank God we still have the Easter Bunny.

      And a good thing too, since who else would maintain the Linux kernel?

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    4. Re:Kudos by kfg · · Score: 1

      Linus can't fool me, there is no Sanity Claus.

      KFG

  33. Re:missing S in headline. by krell · · Score: 1

    It makes no sense at all. One business is typically one business.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  34. alienware = dell by grindcorefan · · Score: 1

    The almighty journalists at hexus.net seem to be missing out on the fact that alienware is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dell. As the article fails to elaborate on that fact, it becomes less interesting. What would be interesting indeed is whether Dell is behind this or not, because that might give us a clue about their marketing practices, as well.

    1. Re:alienware = dell by desideria · · Score: 1

      They did mention this fact and even speculated on whether or not Dell was behind it. Why not read the article?

    2. Re:alienware = dell by grindcorefan · · Score: 1

      d'oh, must have overread that one :-(

  35. HardOCP too by homer_ca · · Score: 5, Informative

    HardOCP buys their review systems through retail channels and tests their tech support while posing as a regular customer. They're one of the few hardware sites that reviews the "consumer experience" instead of just the hardware.

    1. Re:HardOCP too by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 1

      And then to give those companies a taste of the "bad consumer experience" I bet they box it back up and return it to the stores.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
  36. Try Falcon by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    A wealthy friend of my wife's came to me saying she wanted to buy the best PC, and money wasn't an object. She doesn't know enough to put together her own system, but her work does require a powerful system since she does financial work including the use of fractal something or other in futures investing. Stuff I don't understand, but she runs Mathematica and Maple and the fancy graphical displays of those programs. She also plays around in Second Life and blah blah blah. Someone else had told her about Alienware, but she sensibly decided those machines were too gaudy.

    So I told her to check out Falcon. I mean, I'd much rather put my system together myself, but this Falcon system she got was gorgeous. The case was just stunning (which was important to my friend) and inside the case you could really tell that someone had spent a lot of time organizing things properly, trimming cables, etc.

    And the system is just wicked-fast. SLI, the whole nine yards. Drivers were all updated and there weren't even any of those shareware teaser programs like Dell and Gateway put on their machines. It was simply a beautiful PC for someone who could afford it.

    I don't know about dropping over $7k on a PC that I'm going to have to upgrade in 18 months anyway, even if it does include two 21" LCD monitors. But she's as happy as if she'd just blown Brad Pitt. God I hope she doesn't read this.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Try Falcon by asliarun · · Score: 1
      "her work does require a powerful system since she does financial work.." "she runs Mathematica and Maple and the fancy graphical displays of those programs"

      IMHO, it looks like your friend would have been better off with a high-end workstation than a high-end gaming box. Admittedly, the box itself would have probably not suited your friend's aesthetic sensibilities, but a good solid workstation would have given way better performance and reliability than a gamer's godbox. With a Dual Woodcrest 3.0GHZ, ECC RAM, and a high-end workstation graphics card, she would get way better 2D rendering and multi-monitor support than with a SLI something. On a sidenote, i'm a little curious myself if a workstation card would be capable of running a modern 3D game at decent resolutions.
    2. Re:Try Falcon by rossy · · Score: 1

      Wow, I guess I'll go check into Falcon.
      So, I'm not sure I get the reference to Brad Pitt... I'll have to check with my girlfriend on that.. to get the female perspective.

      --
      Ross Youngblood
    3. Re:Try Falcon by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      ...On a sidenote, i'm a little curious myself if a workstation card would be capable of running a modern 3D game at decent resolutions...

      A few years ago, the answer was no, as things like Direct X 9 wasn't supported. These days...I dunno if that's changed or not.

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    4. Re:Try Falcon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I would've suggested investing in an Apple Mac Pro, rather than an over-priced Wintel PC:

      Mac Pro with two (2) 3.0 GHz Xeon Dual Core 2 CPUs
      16 GB of RAM
      (4) SATA HDDs (I think over 2 TB total)
      1 to 4 PCIe graphics cards (take your pic)
      up to eight (8) 30" display (hey, she said money was no object)
      a FibreChannel card to connect to an Xserve RAID (for thos really big .jpgs, I guess)

      GUARANTEED she would be much happier with that (and running Mathematica), rather than spending all of that money and STILL having to deal with multiple drivers, Service Packs, spyware, AV software digging into the registry, and God-knows-whatever-else would bury itself into a Windows OS.

      Oh, unless she wanted to install Windows on the Mac, which she can do...

    5. Re:Try Falcon by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      I thought it was a typo when you entered 16GB of RAM. I actually went to the site to check it - I was impressed.

      Hopefully Vista will not have the 2-3 gig RAM limit.

    6. Re:Try Falcon by Odin_Tiger · · Score: 1

      Admittedly, the box itself would have probably not suited your friend's aesthetic sensibilities
      Sys makes some beautiful single- and dual-processor graphics workstations with plenty of room to customize without breaking the budget.

      --
      Unpleasantries.
    7. Re:Try Falcon by dave562 · · Score: 1

      The x64 version definitely shouldn't.

    8. Re:Try Falcon by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      With a Dual Woodcrest 3.0GHZ, ECC RAM, and a high-end workstation graphics card, she would get way better 2D rendering and multi-monitor support than with a SLI something.

      How many years has it been since 2D was an issue? Any decent graphics card can do 2D as fast as you can manage, and workstation graphics are for CAD - the only difference is the ability to draw antialiased lines or something (important to CAD - not so for games). If you want a nice fast box, you can get a supermicro that does dual Opterons with 8G or more and also has SLI for your gaming needs.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    9. Re:Try Falcon by Venik · · Score: 1

      Obviously she needed a computer, not a fruit. Latest Sun Blade would do nicely.

    10. Re:Try Falcon by Cederic · · Score: 1


      Put it this way. You record yourself blowing Brad Pitt on video and you'll never have to work again.

    11. Re:Try Falcon by kevinadi · · Score: 1, Troll

      For some people, if Steve Jobs farted into a bottle, they'll pay $10,000 to inhale it. And another $10,000 for the bottle (with Apple logo on it, of course).

      Funny thing is, the case of MacBook shutting itself down and losing data in the process doesn't seem to bother these kind of people.

    12. Re:Try Falcon by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      Macs have service packs too, they just give it a cute animal name and charge $100 for it. :) GO AHEAD MODS, DO YOUR WORST!!!!

    13. Re:Try Falcon by kevinadi · · Score: 1

      and I got modded down for bashing Steve Jobs and Apple. How predictable. Replace "Apple" with "MS" and "Steve Jobs" and "Bill Gates" and surely I'll get +5. Plus some windows joke, of course.

      This fanboyism is making me sick. Apple is NOT perfect and Steve Jobs is NOT a god. Some of their stuff are good, some are bad. Hiding the truth won't help anyone, including Apple. You want Apple to grab more market share? Accept some criticism.

      I like Apple's product as much as the next geek, but their current mindset of arrogance is unacceptable. iPod is THE perfect mp3 player, but they refuse to acknowledge their quality problem as of late. They should have no excuse for shipping ipods with a virus. Their laptop overheating and shutting down is their problem. But they're maintaining the "we can do no wrong" attitude by refusing to acknowledge that there's a problem until customers start screaming in their ears.

      I've been seriously considering to get a Mac for my parents due to its many plus points compared to PC, such as no virus, good design, nice interface, etc etc that I'm sure they'll love. But, the sudden surge of problems with their product combined with their unwillingness to accept that it's their fault that their QA is flawed has led me to believe that that $1,500 is better spent elsewhere.

      Karma be damned. Apple, currently, sucks. Until they get this crap sorted out, I won't recommend them to anyone. You fanboys can spend your money on their faulty products all you want, but most sensible people won't. When all this shit is taken care of, I'll gladly recommend Apple again wholeheartedly.

    14. Re:Try Falcon by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Dude, I did recommend an Apple. Whaddya think, I'm a moron? No, she's got some whacky proprietary app that her company says "requires a PC". I explained about running Windows on an Apple, too, but somebody got in her head at work and that was that.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  37. ask the Brits. by krell · · Score: 1

    "Not in Britain. Companies are always plural."

    I wonder what the British have to say about this. What is the most famous British corporation of all? It is probably the BBC. On the BBC's own site, hosted in the United Kingdom, you find this line "BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites." See the treatment as singular. There are 340 times as many references (34 million to 100 thousand) for "The BBC is" are there are for "The BBC are", which makes the latter grammatically incorrect usage look more and more like a mere mistake.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:ask the Brits. by Riktov · · Score: 1

      The BBC site may have a policy of using the singular, but not a single one of its British employees would consider plural as incorrect.

      Use of the plural "are" with company names is accepted usage in British English. You can argue all you want, but it's a fact.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_ English_differences#Singular_and_plural_for_nouns

  38. The email chain hurts Hexus too by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now I've finally managed to read the full article, the email chain is pretty embarassing. When words like 'moron' start getting bandied about then the author has overstepped the bounds of professionalism IMO.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  39. Re:This News, in Slashdot ... baaad for alienware by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    I don't really think the typical Slashdot reader is a potential Alienware customer.

    Quite honestly, I don't know who buys their machines anyway. You'd have to have a lot of money to spend, have no intelligence to shop around, have no skills to build your own machine, want to have a very powerful machine yet value looks over performance. These just don't add up to any type of person I can imagine, except perhaps spoiled rich teenage kids.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  40. Is Hexus is being run from their mum's spare room? by igb · · Score: 1
    The `journalists' --- to stretch a point --- are being juvenile. Clearly, every company's strategy is to only get good reviews. Clearly, writing bad reviews makes people less willing to lend you hardware gratis. If you find that shocking, you are so naive as to not be safe on the streets without having to hold the back of the coat of the child in front, and you probably have your mittens on a piece of string through the arms. There's an ocean between writing reviews of weird niche hardware for some free-to-air ad-funded website and being Woodward and Bernstein, and making out that a rather witty piece of email from a vendor is akin to the Saturday NIght Massacre is just laughable.

    ian

  41. This is perfect.... by T.Louis · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just as I'm about to launch my new site: http://www.pleasesendyouritemstomecauseiwillonlywr itegoodreviews.com/ This site is of course ad-free and will be sponsored by people that send stuff. The new breakthrough will be "The Button" on the site. We have only one button and it will take you to random company that has sent stuff. Thanks!

  42. Re:missing S in headline. by clickclickdrone · · Score: 3, Informative

    In Britain companies can be plural or singular depending on context. You would use singular when the company is acting as one e.g. 'Zob corporation is in agreement with the ruling' but plural when the corporate entity is not acting as one e.g. 'Zob Corporation are internally in disagreement about the best way forward'. See the Economist style guide here.
    http://www.economist.com/research/styleGuide/index .cfm?page=805687

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  43. Where's my alien? =( by Nux'd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now that I've actually RTFA, it doesn't sound like a threat to me.

    "We'd love to have a SKU which we can review and activate on launch day, to coincide with NVIDIA's release."

    (The offer is made)

    "Hello Tarinder,

    I'm afraid, after the last review, our ability to send you any hardware for review is pretty much gone."

    (The offer is refused)

    "Matt,

    the email inviting 'Alienware' to submit a G80 based system was sent without my authority."

    (the offer wasn't permitted)

    Matt was responding to an invitation. He declined because it's not his job to allow for less-than-perfect reviews.

    Could it be that hexus is upset by this refusal?

  44. Actually, they were purchased by Dell by _KiTA_ · · Score: 1

    Actually, Alienware was purchased by Dell recently. (Important note: I work for Dell as a phone tech support grunt.)

    While Alienware is being pretty much kept as a seperate entity, Dell doesn't put up with this kind of stuff. We don't need to try and force people to give us good reviews -- we EARN our good reviews, and if we don't get one, well, we examine it and use them as important guides for improvements. If someone is taking the time to complain it means they at least care enough to think that there's room for improvement -- you don't get anywhere by ignoring the complaints, or as in this case trying to supress them.

    The first thing you're told when you start at Dell is that we win with Integrity -- we don't waste our time trying to flim flam customers when we can just build a good product that brings them to us with honesty, ethics, and integrity. (Not to mention good support.)

    I would be very, very surprised if in a week the person who sent that email to that review site has a job or wasn't in some form of coaching. Heck, I'd frankly be somewhat surprised if someone very high up in Dell didn't send an apology to those affected review sites about this.

  45. Crooked or Par for the course? by gyranthir · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that in general it is beneficial for Alienware to leverage there products against the review site. I am not saying it's a fair or good practice but it's definitely something a lot of other companies do. Give them a good review or they take the ball home with them. In the sense of real journalism it's a bunch of crap serious reviewers don't care what this companies have to say or think, and will call a lemon a lemon. But a lot of these sites are marketing tools to help make all of the partners money and they will do anything to continue that relationship because it is mutually beneficial for them to work hand in hand. This is why you don't see many "good", well known, hardcore, or elite review sites reviewing Alienware products because Alienware knows to stay away from them because they will call it like they see it. Sometimes Alienware Gear is good but a lot of time it's run of the mill product in a slick package, and that's about all. You're paying for the name not the quality at that point, and people should already know that.

  46. British usage by krell · · Score: 1

    "The point is, an "s" at the end of a word is not necessary to consider that word as representing more than one object (i.e. plural). In the case of Alienware..."

    Why not check the actual British usage? If you look for references at the BBC's own site, they use "the BBC is..." almost all the time, and rarely use "the BBC are.... If the BBC "are" not up on correct British usage, then who is....ahem...are?

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:British usage by souplogic · · Score: 1

      ...yeah in times like these when a post is bogged down by people with nothing better to do to than complain about non-existent grammar errors, only to be intelligently and respectfully corrected by someone who is then further challenged by those with nothing better to do but argue about the bloody headline some more...

      I just have to say

      OOOOOOOH SNAP!!
      You just got your bitch-ass served, didn't you??

      Thank you so much to the above; not only have I learned something interesting about British business lexicon today - complete with corroborating URLs, but I get to a see such a glorious shoving of humble pie down a well-deserving slashdotter's throat.

  47. Re:Try Falcon on an artificial playing surface! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...a hypothetical person came to me stating he/she wanted to astroturf for company "A". She stated she didn't have the technical expertise to do it on her own, so she wanted to pay for someone else's expertise. I told her I could do it, with the following formula:

    1.) Point out superficial problems with company "B", then supply a reference to company "A".
    2.) ???
    3.) Profit!

  48. Re:This News, in Slashdot ... baaad for alienware by Brunellus · · Score: 1

    hese just don't add up to any type of person I can imagine, except perhaps spoiled rich teenage kids.

    We have a winner. I've really been racking my brains to figure out who's driving the hardware arms race...and I'm thinking that the more-money-than-sense affluent suburban kids must be doing it.

  49. Now hold on a moment by Lurks · · Score: 1
    I've read through the whole article and it would appear that the above is what the rep said.

    I'm not sure you actually did.

    This is a case of removing a quote without context. If you examine the history of the dealings, Hexus offered a review to Alienware and Alienware refused. There's no threats and in fact the same computer system had been previously reviewed so the Alienware guy saying he'd have rocks in his head to have to go back after a previous review seems fair comment to me? What is all being spun as threatening an editorial publication is actually nothing of the sort. It's entirely up to a company to send a review product or not and they'd be fools to do so unless they thought that the publication would at least give it a fair chance.

    I don't know, I think the whole printing of a private email discussion is pretty low too and the editorial rants about all sorts of things you simple cannot infer from what was actually said.

    1. Re:Now hold on a moment by greatbodyshop · · Score: 1

      So how do the Hexus guys really behave?

      If you read the emails without the Bob Crabtree introduction IMO things look totally different.

      Alienware never asked to see the review before publication, asked for any changes in the review. Basically after a system was panned based on too high a cost in comparison, Hexus goes back the Alienware and in essence asks for the same system back but with a different graphics card. Alenware refuses, and at the same time makes the statement that based on the last review they will not be sending any more systems for Review. Later in an email Alienware alters this position, but the question is Is this a case of corruption as Bob Crabtree and Paul Dutton state quite forcibly. I think not, basically Hexus was a well respected enthusiast site, where based on the various posts, the regular visitors are quite technically competent, and are likely to build their own systems, or buy from a specialized reseller. It is clear that this is NOT Alienware's target market. They offer a high priced solution, based on a brand. How much value you give to the brand is subject to perspective. It could be argued that if Hexus really does have the large reach it claims it is possible that the alternative solutions they propose are not available in those markets, or not well supported. It also could be argued that the true cost of a system is what you paid for it LESS what you can sell it for when you want to get rid of it. Would the Alienware system have a higher resale value? That is a judgment call, but possibly backed by a company the size of Dell it might. In addition Alienware's target audience is more likely the well healed gamer who simply does not want to spend the money or time to put together a system on their own and are willing to pay a significant premium for that opportunity.

      So basically does it make sense for Alienware to focus on a review site like Hexus, where to a certain degree their system being reviewed is used as an example of just how much value for money you can get with either build your own or one of the smaller companies. It is interesting to see that configuration wise there certainly was quite a bit of similarity. It is not unusual for some private system builders to say, look at the Alienware system and I can build you one just like for a lot less.

      So is Alienware obligated to support these sites? If they decide that a review that basically dings them based on cost, and it is obvious that they are not going to dramatically reduce prices, is not helpful for marketing, and so they decide to support sites that are more orientated to people buying more "brand name" systems, is that really corruption??

      I thought that the comments from Paul Dutton were totally unprofessional. I think the allegations being put on the site could certainly be considered Libelous, especially in light of Alienware providing a professional letter explaining exactly their intent. A blogger at Wired, than takes a position in opposition to Hexus and Crabtree then moves on accusing Wired of influenced reviews.

      It is clear that Hexus is taking what could be called a holier than thou position. So just how holier are there.

      Did they for instance point out Paul Dutton's relationship with Mesh? http://forums.dvdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=39995

      While visiting the various forums on the Hexus site, I decided to look at the DVdoctor site, which appears to have both Paul and Bob as partners. There is a rather telling interchange when one of the other Partners John Ferrick takes issue with an article that Crabtree wrote http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7075
      Titled:
      Microsoft Vista EULA spits in the eye of self-builders worldwide. On DVDoctor Ferrick posts an alternate view http://forums.dvdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=39995

      What is amazing is to see how quickl

  50. I laughed when I first read their auto reviews by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

    It seems that to get the top rating in Consumer Reports, all that's required of a car are cushy seats (apparently every reviewer at CS weighs ~300 lbs) and a plethora of cupholders. I kid you not, most CS car reviews that I've read have like one sentence on the ride quality/handling, one sentence about engine power, and the four paragraphs that lovingly describe in enhaustive detail the number and location of cupholders and how easy it is to adjust the color of the radio backlight. Ugh.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  51. Re:Is Hexus is being run from their mum's spare ro by Nux'd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree. Mr Bettinson didn't have to give a reason for refusal, but he did. This was taken by the people at hexus to be a threat or hint that they would accept so long as a better review was given. Did Mat Bettinson say he'd conditionally accept? It was a straight refusal in my eyes. So any reasons given for the refusal would serve to inform rather than persuade.

  52. I can see that by Explodo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The high-end Alienware laptops blow. My company has gone through 5 of their "desktop in a laptop" computers in less than 2 years because the level of quality is so low that they just don't last. The Intel systems just stop working after a little while(requiring Alienware replacements because Alienware won't refund our money) and the Aurora 7700 "gaming" laptop won't even play Stronghold 2(too choppy) or Black and White 2 (speeds up and slows down a lot). However, if you read the reviews of the hardware, they're all glowing and happy about them. The problem is that regular laptops simply aren't powerful enough for our needs. Even the fastest laptop processors are FAR behind desktop processors as far as performance is concerned.

  53. Woo ooo a New Review Site by lordmage · · Score: 1

    I guess we can now trust Hexus.net right?

    Or was this just a ploy.. to get people to see them as "independent"?

    --
    I can program myself out of a Hello World Contest!!
  54. I am shocked.....SHOCKED! by Brunellus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Somehow, I'm not surprised that hardware reviewers throw massive hissy fits. "Professionalism?" Please. These are guys who are given new, shiny toys to play with. They then get to write about the experience on the internets, and people think they're pretty cool. I would be shocked by the presence of professionalism among the reviewer corps, not its absence.

  55. Typical Dell. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm posting this AC as it would not be in my best interest to have what I'm going to say come back to haunt me.

    This type of strong-arming is a typical Dell business strategy; in face I'll go so far as to say it is the ONLY business strategy I've seen Dell use.

    As an employee of a Dell channel reseller (I'm not exposing either the channel or the reseller) my experience is that you do business with Dell, or you don't do business with Dell. That's to say you play by their rules, sign a contract, then you are at the mercy of Dell. Dell will determine whether or not they will make it worth your while to sell their products; often this means you're actually paying Dell for the (dis)pleasure of selling their products.

    Apple is no better. Apple is actually worse in the sense that they have contractual quotas which require a reseller to sell a certain dollar amount of their products in a given time period or lose reseller status; which is ridiculous since there's almost no demands for their products outside of the Home, Home Office, and Education markets.

    I think that the smart consumer is the one that ignores industry rags and websites and talks to knowledgeable friends. Don't have a techie friend? Ask a tech at a local repair shop; hell, you might even end up getting a better than OEM system at a great price, not to mention you're supporting local business.

    All of the large OEMs, regardless of niche and channel, manipulate how the public perceives their product. Bad press can be even worse than recalls or manufacturer defects with regard to repeat business. In this case, Dell can suck it.

    Eventually, regardless of bad press, if your customers aren't satisfied with your products, you've either got to change your business model to meet their needs, or you go out of business. Dell's at a tipping point for a variety of reasons. I have a few simple suggestions for Dell that will turn it back into a reputable company: Don't intimidate your resellers & the press, stndardize your product lines and work with suppliers to ensure consistency across your product lines, DO NOT OUTSOURCE YOUR TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND CUSTOMER SERVICE, and remember you're not in a high margin business; creating artificial sales goals which are unrelated to market conditions and trends is not wise.

    In closing, support your local computer shop if you need a powerful workstation. The only people who should be dealing with the giant OEMs are people who don't know any better!

  56. what does that have to do with anything? by krell · · Score: 1

    "But most businesses are made up of more than one person"

    What does this have to do with it? All objects are made up of atoms. Does it then follow that "My pencil are broken" is now proper usage?

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  57. Even Consumer Reports... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Consumer Reports isn't perfect.
    A good example is the Ford Fusion.
    It failed to get any recommendation. Why do I feel this is odd? Simple the Ford Fusion and the Mazda 6 are the same platform. The Ford is cheaper and I admit that the Mazda is prettier but even the reviews seem to be match in each category. The Mazda is listed as recommended while the Fusion isn't.
    I don't care what the source is, there will be bias.

    Never trust a single source.

    But then I would never buy an Alienware computer. If I want a super hot system I will build it myself.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Even Consumer Reports... by ardin,mcallister · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, Ford owned Mazda.. Then again, I could be wrong.

      --
      "Some men just want to watch the world burn..."
    2. Re:Even Consumer Reports... by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

      I just looked at the consumer reports web site. You're right the Mazda 6 is recommended and the Ford Fusion does not get those kudos. But it seems to be primarily because the Ford is a new model and the Mazda 6 is not. So the Mazda 6 has "average" reliability and the Ford just has "NEW" for reliability.

      That said, the Mazda 6 didn't exactly get glowing reviews. The article basically points you towards the Honda/Toyota models and says they're more refined.

      I've found that overall consumer reports gets it right more often than not. They're also transparent with their testing procedure. That's far more important than if you agree with their conclusion; at least you can see how/why they came to their conclusions.

      --
      You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    3. Re:Even Consumer Reports... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The Mazda is listed as recommended while the Fusion isn't.

      Well, I can think of many reasons to recommend one over the other. I am not sure what CR uses as their criteria, but the warranties are different, as are the dealer networks. Even with the same car off the same line badged to two different companies, the ownership experience will differ. Of course, if they are reviewing the product, regardless of the dealerships and support, then they should both get the same recommendation.

      Never trust a single source.

      Never trust Consumer Reports. They are good for some things, but they are simply insane on others. There was a dishwasher comparison I wanted years ago. So I bought one. And in it, right after my article, was a cereal article. They compared cereal and, with a straight face, told me what I should like better. Telling me the washing speed of a washer is one thing, but calculating a "crunchiness index" and using that to determine how much I should like it is simply insane. They purposefully changed the testing proceedure twice in order to cause vehicles to tip to get in the news. A reasonable testing company would not have changed the testing proceedure after having started testing. They did so only to get into the news. And they lied about it.

      Why the CR rant? Because I wanted you to know that I am no CR fanboy. I hate them. But that doesn't mean that they are always wrong. Here, the Ford dealer is crap, but so is the Mazda dealer. Where I've lived before, there was a nice Mazda dealer, but no nice Ford dealers. So I'd pick the car based off the nameplate. There is a difference, even if they are off the same line.

    4. Re:Even Consumer Reports... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Ford owns a part of Mazda. They do not own Mazda.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  58. Great marketing strategy by Phat_Tony · · Score: 1

    Great strategy on Alienware's part. As this circulates the net, most of their potential customers will know never to believe that an Alienware machine is actually good, regardless of what the reviewers are saying. That'll do wonders for their sales.

    --
    Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
    1. Re:Great marketing strategy by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "Great strategy on Alienware's part. As this circulates the net, most of their potential customers will know never to believe that an Alienware machine is actually good, regardless of what the reviewers are saying. That'll do wonders for their sales."

      Well, that's Hexus' hope, at least. This is their attempted revenge against Alienware since Alienware declined to send them a system... the same system that Hexus had already slammed.

      You're correct that it may cause some people to learn that this is how the the manufacturer/reviewer relationship generally works, and some may even believe that it is only Alienware who does this. But the fact remains that if some online review site trashes your product, and then asks you to send them the same product again, you're likely to refuse.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  59. Subject by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Incorrect title. It should read, "Website Claims Alienware Rep Admits Trying to Fiddle Reviews."

    Not that I've ever owned an Alienware system or would lay out the money for the same components I can get cheaper elsewhere, but a little journalistic honesty would be nice here.

  60. Skewed logic from AlienWare by graffix_jones · · Score: 1

    If I were in charge of AW, I'd make sure that Hexus recieved a requested unit for review.

    Why?

    Simply because if Hexus has been critical in the past of a ('our') product, then when they release a favorable review regarding another of the company's products, it appears much more honest (and thus more trustworthy) than a site that has always had glowingly positive reviews of our product line.

    Plus it gives AlienWare a chance to prove that they indeed listen to criticism and intend to correct design (or marketing) deficiencies in an effort to make their product the best it can be (because that's what 'AlienWare' stands for, right?)

    Of course, this could also point to the fact that AlienWare knows the new product sucks, so they're avoiding those reviewers that will point out this little fact in an effort to sell as many units before general discontent rears it's ugly head.

    The editor of Hexus did kinda come across as a dickweed in his e-mail, but that's forgiven because he's British... I don't think they know how to sound polite.

    1. Re:Skewed logic from AlienWare by shark72 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Simply because if Hexus has been critical in the past of a ('our') product, then when they release a favorable review regarding another of the company's products, it appears much more honest (and thus more trustworthy) than a site that has always had glowingly positive reviews of our product line."

      Hexus asked for the same sku again. No reason why they would have reviewed it differently.

      "The editor of Hexus did kinda come across as a dickweed in his e-mail, but that's forgiven because he's British... I don't think they know how to sound polite."

      I doubt being British has anything to do with it. Many of the guys who run review sites are amateurs with delusions of entitlement and no sense of professionalism. As another poster put it, they are "children playing at business."

      Back when I was hands-on in providing gaming hardware to reviewers, there was a world of difference in working with the print pubs vs. reviewer sites. Hexus' reaction was nothing new... the review sites all seemed to be run by people with the mentality of 16-year-olds who would pull stunts just like Hexus did: printing your private emails if you dared to refuse to send them free stuff.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  61. What's wrong with that? by pseudorand · · Score: 1

    First off, the reviewer shouldn't be keeping the hardware in the first place. Hardware should be returned once the review is published, else the REVIEWER has a conflict of interest. And if Alienware doesn't want their product reviewed, then they simply miss out on free publicity with the reviwer noting that Alienware declined participation (which makes readers wonder if Alienware thought their product wasn't up to par). That's how the game works. If the reader trusts the reviewer, Alienware is acting in their own disinterest. If the reader doesn't, then the review wouldn't have much of an effect on that reader one way or the other anyway.

  62. Same Old by UMTopSpinC7 · · Score: 1

    Every company does this to some extent. I'm not surprised at all.

    --
    Not the lead singer of Coldplay
  63. My Alienware... by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    My wife and I both have identical Alienware laptops. They are great, awesome, amazing. And I will never buy one again. My wife had a Hard Drive fail in hers and she sent it in to get repaired. Now enter the fun part. While her's was still out, I did the slow kid bit and spilled water in my laptop.

    Now I acknowledge this is all my fault, voided the warranty, and all that. My dumb fault, period. Nonetheless, I call up Alienware to send in the laptop for repair. I arrange everything, have it shipped USPS express, etc. I kept my tracking slip until it was received, and called to confirm once I saw that it had been. The *ssh@t on the line told me that my laptop was received, and they could confirm it. Two weeks later, I haven't heard anything. I waited this time because I didn't expect miracles with the mess I made. Well, I call, and they claim now they never received the laptop. They had only received my wifes.

    The SOB's, when I was unable to immediately provide a tracking number, accused me of lying and having never sent the laptop in the first place. Furthermore they absolutely refused to lift a finger to try to find the laptop. Now, I didn't hold onto the tracking slip, but you can go to your local post office from where you sent your express package, and get a copy of the number. And I did, after several people at Alienware, in so many words called me a liar, and one person flat out did the same.

    They eventually found the box. After that it was a two month wait for the replacement motherboard.

    So, I will never buy a laptop again from a company that A) accuses me of being a liar without proof, B) will not help a customer unless they could be heald liable, C) actually loses a $3,000 laptop, and D) to a far lesser extent makes me wait 2 months for a motherboard (which by some miracle was the only thing I destroyed.) They did end up sending the whole mess up the chain, and eventually someone did give 10% off the repair cost, but it does not make up for them calling me a liar. The 2 months wait is fine, stuff like that happens all the time, and while annoying I could let go, and the 10% makes up for losing my system in their receiving warehouse, but nothing will repair the part where they called me a liar.

    1. Re:My Alienware... by pdschmid · · Score: 1

      2 months? I would have burnt down their building by then. Seriously, anything longer than 2 weeks is totally unacceptable. I personally always spend the additional money to get next day warranty on-site, because I am not even willing to wait 2 weeks for a computer or run the risk of shipping it in.

  64. Re:Alien marketing practices? by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    The rightness or wrongness of an act is orthogonal to who does it.

    EULAs restricting the publication of benchmarks are wrong, no matter who tries to impose them. And restricting the supply of review samples to publications likely to give favourable reviews is wrong, no matter who does it. Good on Hexus for exposing this fraud.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  65. Re:missing S in headline. by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    "Alienware" is the name of a company. Therefore, it is correct to treat it as a plural.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  66. Shouldn't it say by abshnasko · · Score: 1

    "Dell Admit Trying to Fiddle Reviews" ?

  67. Emachines, are they really crap? by sowth · · Score: 1

    I thought Emachines were a piece of crap too. My dad's had been infected with a virus/trojan and didn't work (piece of crap OS--I think it came with WinME and they gave him WinXP to upgrade), so he bought another computer. He gave it to me, and I installed Linux on it. Except for needing --directisa (or some simiar flag) on hwclock, it works flawlessly. It is all integrated and probably not very upgradeable, but overall not a bad machine. I don't know if other models are worse though...

    1. Re:Emachines, are they really crap? by Copid · · Score: 1

      In my experience, they come from the factory configured in a very fragile way. Like most major manufacturers, they pump up one particular spec (mabye a fast clock rate on the processor) and skimp on everything else, but that's not the core of the issue. My experience with eMachines has always been that they ship with drivers that are easily broken and a generally weird OEM Windows deployment. When I worked at a university help desk, we keep statistics on makes and models to do recommendations for future students, and eMachines absolutely dominated the complaints lists.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    2. Re:Emachines, are they really crap? by sowth · · Score: 1

      Well, my experience was with eMachines and Linux, so I didn't see any of those problems. Hahaha! So I guess if you install some other OS, they are okay... Maybe?

      That could be why it died so fast when my dad had it. I don't think he ever heard of linux.

      Most brand name manufacturers ship their crap overclocked? I didn't notice it with this machine ( I didn't fiddle with the bios. Linux ran rock solid, IIRC.), but that is just another reason not to go with brand name computers. Cheap parts and screwed up configs.

      I just go with brand name parts and put it together myself, but many people don't know how to do that, so they just pick a brand name computer. Problem is, there is no one solution. You can't just tell them to find a local computer store to put one together, because half of them have the same problem. Not as many as the national corps, but enough to worry.

    3. Re:Emachines, are they really crap? by Copid · · Score: 1

      Coincidentally, I was just talking to our a hardware manufacturing engineer at the office about PC power supplies today, and he said (without my prompting), "I had never heard of any computer manufacturer using 150 watt power supplies in PCs until I opened an eMachines system." I don't know how common it is, but that could go a long way toward explaining complaints of unreliable hardware operation. Of course, it's probably also a clear indication of the average amount of skimping that goes into the selection of parts for off-the-shelf PCs.

      Anyway, in my experience, just installing plain vanilla Windows XP on a machine that was unreliable running whatever customized OEM abomination they ship with the system often does wonders for stabilizing the system. I've learned not to trust things like "Bob's Wizz-O Problem Reporter Service" that come pre-installed and use up 20% of my system resources straight from the factory. The phrase "more harm than good" comes to mind.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  68. that's damn silly. by krell · · Score: 1

    "In Britain companies can be plural or singular depending on context. You would use singular when the company is acting as one e.g. 'Zob corporation is in agreement with the ruling' but plural when the corporate entity is not acting as one e.g. 'Zob Corporation are internally in disagreement about the best way forward'."

    That makes as much sense as someone who has an upset stomach or a numb foot referring to themselves in the plural until the bodily disagreement has passed ("I'm healthy and happy today" vs "Our stomach is upset today"). It's still one company, regardless.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:that's damn silly. by GC · · Score: 1

      we are not amused

  69. Re:missing S in headline. by HiThere · · Score: 1

    You can see company as a collective. Thus "Alienware" would be a macro for "people who are collected together under the name of 'Alienware'". So it is seen as a plural form. Thus "Alienware admit..." translates to
    "People who are collected together under the name of Alienware admit..."

    It's not standard American, but I believe that something similar to this was the original concept of a company. Thus one may have companions on a hike, and the companions on a hike are a company of hikers.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  70. Devils Advocate by Durzel · · Score: 1

    There is a little too much editorialising in that article in my opinion, phrases like "People will have been buying Alienware's over-priced, fools-gold systems as a result of corrupt reviews written by corrupt journalists" smack of petulance rather than the staple of a professional review site. I appreciate Hexus are probably wound up by Alienware's apparent policy of no longer sending them hardware, but that's not the way to show it. The whole thing reads like Hexus just basically wanting to give Alienware a bloody nose.

    Rebutting each point of an email with assumptions about "what was really meant" don't look that professional either. Nowhere in Bettinson's emails did he explicitly say that "Alienware was demanding that we lie about Alienware's products in future reviews and that the company was surprised that we hadn't lied in our review of the Area-51 7500 system", yet that's what we're told is the hidden subtext.

    You also have to question the professionalism of a "Director of Communications & Strategy" who says in an email "i'm of the view that it would be manifest to any right thinking person that you have behaved like a moron [...]".

    It all reads like kids playing at business, which is very strange really.

    (That's not to say that Alienware aren't ridiculously overpriced, they are - but that's not what this article was about)

  71. Re:This News, in Slashdot ... baaad for alienware by Andrew+Nagy · · Score: 1

    I would rather have my pictures of getting my ass whipped by a horde of crazy sado-masochist foot fetishist south african mongolian descent hentai zulu tribe circulate around the internet instead of this news in slashdot, if i were alienware.

    Man, am I ever glad you're not Alienware.

    --
    Yes, you can dance to Radiohead.
  72. magazines by beaverfever · · Score: 1

    "Review sites... and are effectively on the the dole by accepting both advertisements and "review" hardware from advertisers."

    Besides review sites and, in similar circumstances, magazines accepting advertisements and review product, the articles you will find in many magazines discussing hot new products and how great they are etc. (be it a computer, women's fashion, travel, or any other magazine) can be essentially unmarked paid advertising and a part of the deal which gets a full page ad paid for.

  73. Re:This News, in Slashdot ... baaad for alienware by unity100 · · Score: 1

    I emphasized slashdot in that even if the buyers of alienware dont frequent here, most regulars of the site are very active "netizens" and the news will spread much wider very fast due to them (us).

  74. Reviewer Paradigm and Tainted Samples by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    Not really related to Alienware, but I'm actually in the middle of building a new system right now, and have been struggling with three issues while picking components:

    Reviewer paradigm: Since so many reviewers depend on the manufacturer's for their samples, they can't piss off the supplier with a bad review on a bad product. Therefore negatives are always cleverly worded, or they do the "ample ashtrays" trick and focus on the useless things that are done right. Professional reviews become almost worthless (mind you, consumer reports doesn't bother comparing evaluating geek parts like mobo's...just general consumer products, so they're worthless in this endeavor, too). On the other hand, try relying on amatuer reviews like Newegg's product feedback, and you can bet that a big chunk of the people who ever bothered to come back and write a review are the one's who had problems, so there's a paradigm shift the other way from that method of research.

    Lack of experience: There's a few good exceptions like Toms Hardware and Anandtech, but it seems most sites don't actually test the products they review, they just compare specs. Toms Hardware would be great, but they can't review everything, and they only do one sample of each for a limited duration, so quality control and durability issues don't show up. Amatuer reviews like Newegg shoppers are also usually close to worthless in this regard, because they're usually from kids who just unpacked their new video card or whatever and are so excited to talk about it they just had to go write a review immediately.

    Tainted Samples: I can't say for sure whether this is happening, but I've heard accusations of it, and comparing amatuer to professional reviews supports the accusations. It seems manufacturers are often (understandably) careful to send reviewers pre-tested and known to be perfect samples. In particular I noticed that motherboard reviews from the professionals all tended to be very positive and everything worked out of the box. Consumer reviews, however, showed most products to be very mediocre: plenty of DOA's, abnormally warm chips while others report cool running, and buggy BIOS'es...lot's of buggy BIOS'es in fact.

    It does make me wonder how much of this Alienware has to go through in deciding what components to offer in their builds.

  75. Steps... by Aetas · · Score: 1

    1. Buy the hardware. 2. Benchmark the hardware. 3. Return the hardware. Am I the only one that isn't missing the obviousness of this?

    1. Re:Steps... by shoolz · · Score: 1

      No, you're not the only one missing the obviousness, but you are missing a few steps:

      4. ???
      5. Profit!

  76. Consumer Reports REFUSES free stuff... by mi · · Score: 1

    Their reps buy wares to test as regular customers, without announcing themselves as representatives of the organization.

    Getting free stuff is always going to be inducing conflict of interest for the reviewer. The maker of the product will also always be inclined to send them a better version of the product.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  77. You're mistaken by 2short · · Score: 1

    Got a reference there? Because the one thing I have never, ever seen CR do is call anything "Hands down best". Their reviews always have qualifiers, and indeed, focus on helping you understand the various trade-offs available.

      Come to think of it, I've read all their desktop computer reviews since before eMachines first came out, and eMachines has never been the top rated.

    I beleive eMachines has been rated a "best buy", but that is indeed calling it "best value" at its price point. And I'd agree with that rating: about a year ago when I looked for a cheap desktop with no monitor, eMachines was the clear choice if you wanted to stay under $500.

    1. Re:You're mistaken by chrismcdirty · · Score: 1

      No reference. IIRC, it was something I'd received in the mail in order to persuade me to buy CR. And it was likely more than a year ago. Words and such may have been changed to protect the innocent.

      --
      It's like sex, except I'm having it!
  78. And of course consumers don't care by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

    about ride quality, ergonomics, or the ability to pass.

    Hello McFly? Ever compared the wind noise inside a well-designed car with the hurricane-level buffeting of a poorly-deisgned one? Ever driven an underpowered car and had a hard time getting out of the way of a dangerous situation, or difficulty merging because you can't get up to speed on a short on-ramp? Ever come up on something unexpected in the road and had to swerve around it and been unsure if the suspension would handle the swerve at speed? Ever had someone unfamiliar with your car drive it and seen them unable to figure out how to work the headlights/wipers? Ever ridden in an under-sprung car and had it bottom out dangerously when you hit a big pothole?

    We're not talking about whether they tell you about the ability to drive the car like a Formula One racer, they don't provide even the rudimentary information you need to make an informed car buying decision. If you're concerned about just the ability to reach freeway speeds in a reasonable amount of time, you'll have to look elsewhere. It's not car reviews for consumers as opposed to enthusiasts, it's car reviews for complete idiots. Just like their computer reviews: single-faceted, shallow, and free of essential content. But they'll tell you the location, size, and quality of each and every cupholder in that new SUV.

    Sorry if this makes you feel bad about your over-priced subscription to CR's rag, but that's just the way it is.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  79. Well..... by EEDAm · · Score: 1

    Reading TFA (am I unwell?) then this appears really pretty differently. Hexus gave a system a thumbs down review, mostly on price and then solicited the marketing guy for another test system a bit later. He writes back and says that "executives" in the States had instructed him not to send any more kit to them and that in any event it should be pretty logical that they don't want to send the same test rig back for more of the same. Nothing else. The email is very short. Then 'Head of Communication' for Hexus whales in and completely goes off on one and says that the marketing guy is a "moron" and that his email is purile (hello pot calling kettle, over??). He has put 2 and 2 together and made 22 and completely goes off the deep end. Its not even the marketing guy who has said that he is unwilling to send kit - he has been directly instructed by his bosses! The marketing guy then goes back in what is clearly a private email (it even says it on the Alienware email disclaimer) which offers an apology if his email sent the Hexus bloke off on one and in a conversational way suggests they all calm down. Next thing Hexus has published this seriously up itself moralistic mighty-pen-of-freedom piece now they have clearly worked themself up into an almighty tizz. I don't have any problem with someone writing a robust defense of editorial freedom (and it is something that all writers get worked up about) but if you read the blokes emails without the 3 pages of sermonising first its obvious Hexus got themselves in a state about the *idea* that they were being threatened but which is a massive over extension to an email which is "sorry my bosses says I can't send you any more kit" - a message he obviously had to impart somehow otherwise they'd be saying "why don't Alienware send us any systems anymore". The Hexus review uses words like 'corrupt' and 'illegal' and comes across like some hysterical internet rant. Its pretty clear they have libelled the guy and also breached copyright in publishing the emails. But most of all they've made themselves look pretty bloody silly. If that Head of Communications worked for any kind of serious commercial publication he would be sacked not the bloke following orders from his bosses.

  80. Easy answer by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 1

    All the reviewing sight has to do is buy the hardware (a business expense) and make the review, being straightforward and fair. Also include in the review the experience asking the company for hardware.

    The company will learn quickly, especially if the reveiw is unfavorable that trying to fool the public is a bad idea and any strategy for fooling the public to make money will be exposed, and should be in the consumers information when the go to buy a product.

    But I am talking about a fair and unbiased review. It's true it might be hard to do when the company had such a bad/vindictive approach.

    This would add street cred's to the reviewer and take it away from the manufacturer. Seem fair doesn't it. And seems like proper approach.

  81. Possible Solution? by Puk · · Score: 1
    Every time they release a new product, post a mini-review:

    "We would be happy to review this product, but unfortunately the company has refused to send us any samples since we [posted] a negative review of one of their products."

    ... with a link to the review in question. Not sure it would work, but assuming you have other companies who you can still review and which will still draw people do your site, might have a positive effect.

    -puk

  82. Simple solution... by JumperCable · · Score: 1

    If a company won't send you their product to review since they are afraid you will trash it, you can always suggest to them that if their competitor has a product that sucks that just came out to send it to your for review.

  83. Official Alienware Response by nateMCC · · Score: 1

    Alienware's official response to this is as follows: "In response to a recent report concerning Alienware's system review process, Alienware would like to take the opportunity to clarify that process. As a matter of long standing policy, Alienware makes no distinctions on who receives a system for review. Alienware offers an equal opportunity to all publications for system reviews. In addition to offering review units to publications, Alienware offers reviewers a unique guidance approach that is available at any point during the review process. The objective of this approach is designed to answer any questions on features, hardware, software benchmarking or any other issues during the course of the evaluation. Furthermore, Alienware does not have access to the review until after publication, but during the review process, Alienware strives to ensure that, if the system is to be compared to another brand, the two systems contain similar hardware specifications - creating an "apples to apples" comparison. Though every effort is made to observe these policies and practices, on occasion, it may be difficult to accommodate the requests of certain publications due to supply limitations or other situations beyond Alienware's control. Alienware has a long standing reputation of excellence in product reviews and we strive to meet those requests when at all possible so that we continue to deliver an unparalleled product reviews experience for our colleagues in the media and, in return, we expect that all media publications exercise fairness and accuracy when reviewing Alienware products." Also, please check out Alienware's response on Hexus, where this all began: http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=7113&pa ge=5&search=alienware

  84. Horrible experiences with Alienware by Gel214th · · Score: 1

    I've had horrible experiences with Alienware and won't recommend the machines. My system shipped with the wrong video cards, two 7800GTs in SLI instead of two 7800GTXs. The system has a X-Fi Elite Pro in it, but Alienware does not have the Software Installation CD (with all the little goodies included). So, if I want to reinstall a single item of creative software I need to either Respawn the entire system (Completely wipe everything) or pay Creative 25US$ to have a CD Shipped to me. The system itself came with old Nforce drivers, and efforts to install new drivers failed. Alienware tech support told me not to worry if the driver update seems not to have worked, I don't need it anyway. The system shipped with numerous systems switched off or not configured optimally. The HP CD Label Writer burner didn't have the software installed to burn labels and I had to download it separately. It was certainly not the experience I expected for a >6000US$, Flagship Alienware ALX system. The Alienware 'Adrenaline' (This is just Powerstrip) video card optimizer causes crashes, and I had to turn it off. Although the system is supposed to be 'Water Cooled' I still have to have all three fans running otherwise case temp hits 43degrees celcius. With the fans on it hovers at around 32 degrees celcius. And thus, I will never again recommend nor will I ever purchase a machine from them again.

    --
    -Gel214th