Sign In
Register
Help
Quote:
I never claimed that CR is a prime example of perfection! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
You can call me irrational if you wish but I would intuitively trust CR far more than someone who is reviewing something favorably and hawking it on the very next page. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
But irrespective of my irrationality, your above statement is not only needlessly very harsh and negative, it is predominently wrong; I have been subscribing to their magazine for over 2 decades and yes they have made errors at times but far fewer than your comment implies.
How many magazines can you name that have been instrumental in changing a variety of laws in our nation over the years that effect safety of all of us? They have been sued by many heavy weights and threatened to be sued by many more on numerous occasions. Perhaps you see these laws as needless inconveniences interfering with the much needed economic progress of the industry. Depending on their monetary interests, people can have a very different outlook and come to feel very strongly about them!
One can say that if for profit tech magazines were as thorough as CR, they may have disected a few machines and discovered truth of what is claimed by some people to be manufacturing flaws... confirmed them or refuted them, based on their own findings; I have never seen that happen. Ah, yes the budget, the lack of expertise, n=1 or even 4 means nothing... I do understand all those excuses and that is why I quite thoroughly agree that any comparison between for profit magazine primarily supported by advertising and CR is not only grossly unfair and inappropriate, it is lunacy.
Quote:
And anyone who's read CR's reviews in an area in which they have some level of expertise will tell you that just because you're an ad-free vehicle doesn't mean that you always do a good job understanding your product categories.
And anyone who's read CR's reviews in an area in which they have some level of expertise will tell you that just because you're an ad-free vehicle doesn't mean that you always do a good job understanding your product categories.
I never claimed that CR is a prime example of perfection! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
You can call me irrational if you wish but I would intuitively trust CR far more than someone who is reviewing something favorably and hawking it on the very next page. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
But irrespective of my irrationality, your above statement is not only needlessly very harsh and negative, it is predominently wrong; I have been subscribing to their magazine for over 2 decades and yes they have made errors at times but far fewer than your comment implies.
How many magazines can you name that have been instrumental in changing a variety of laws in our nation over the years that effect safety of all of us? They have been sued by many heavy weights and threatened to be sued by many more on numerous occasions. Perhaps you see these laws as needless inconveniences interfering with the much needed economic progress of the industry. Depending on their monetary interests, people can have a very different outlook and come to feel very strongly about them!
One can say that if for profit tech magazines were as thorough as CR, they may have disected a few machines and discovered truth of what is claimed by some people to be manufacturing flaws... confirmed them or refuted them, based on their own findings; I have never seen that happen. Ah, yes the budget, the lack of expertise, n=1 or even 4 means nothing... I do understand all those excuses and that is why I quite thoroughly agree that any comparison between for profit magazine primarily supported by advertising and CR is not only grossly unfair and inappropriate, it is lunacy.
Alam - IMHO - well stated. Well stated indeed.
Bjorn
MultiQuote
