Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 59359	2005-06-29 23:41:00	PC World Reviews 19" LCDs	KiwiTT_NZ (233)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
368103	2005-06-30 05:49:00	Farmers don't sell computers anymore, seems even spending up big on fantasy advertising didn't help their cause in the long run.	Metla (12)
368104	2005-06-30 09:44:00	Farmers don't sell computers anymore, seems even spending up big on fantasy advertising didn't help their cause in the long run. Well they were selling PC Compnay PCs. So perhaps they had a bad experience. :D	pctek (84)
368105	2005-06-30 14:12:00	I still know people who are suffering from the PC-Co closeup..... :(	Chilling_Silence (9)
368106	2005-06-30 18:07:00	I hardly ever read their "tests" anymore. I'm convinced their tests are just copied from their American cousins. Edited with local prices etc. IMO the mag has deterioated to such an extent that it is now not worth buying. (Though I still do. Habit) This downhill slide started when Peter Kane left. Has anybody else noticed they no longer keep telling us about their record sales figures?	JJJJJ (528)
368107	2005-06-30 21:15:00	LOL How about some constructive critisism if you dont like it people. After all it is their forum. :thumbs:	Sam I Am (1679)
368108	2005-06-30 22:15:00	I hardly ever read their "tests" anymore. I'm convinced their tests are just copied from their American cousins. Edited with local prices etc. IMO the mag has deterioated to such an extent that it is now not worth buying. (Though I still do. Habit) This downhill slide started when Peter Kane left. Has anybody else noticed they no longer keep telling us about their record sales figures? I had version one of my reply ready to go. But I won't post it for obvious reasons, since it would have breached the forum rules. Lets just say Jack that I fail to see why you continue to buy the mag if this is how you feel. Enough said.	Biggles (121)
368109	2005-06-30 22:34:00	I think my comments were constructive, Sam. I generally purchase magazines for more indepth research and PC World does have some good articles. This particular article was a letdown.	KiwiTT_NZ (233)
368110	2005-06-30 23:59:00	I had version one of my reply ready to go. But I won't post it for obvious reasons, since it would have breached the forum rules. Lets just say Jack that I fail to see why you continue to buy the mag if this is how you feel. Enough said. Why do I continue to buy the mag. Simply Habit. And perhaps a sense of loyalty. After all I have not missed a copy since 1993. But I would suggest you browse back through old issues and then tell me today's mag is still as good. And without wishing to start an argeument. I am not very impressed by your "take it or leave it" response	JJJJJ (528)
368111	2005-07-01 03:25:00	Well I read it. Sony won. Of course. They didn't really go into detail but then you could write pages and pages. One thing the prices are off - the AOC is $569 from certain other retail places. And it didn't mention it has a zero bright pixel warranty as well. Although mention is made of that being variable to different models. Ok, lots of comments on this one since I posted yesterday. I'll start with this one... Yes Sony won, they had the best monitor. Are you suggesting something fishy is going on? You're dead wrong if you are and I take offence to the inference. I have a set amount of space in the magazine to squeeze my feature into, it'd be great to go into more detail and publish ALL our scores/specs/graphs like online review sites are able to but there simply isn't the space in a printed magazine. We always list the manufacturer supplied RRP. Of course this is nearly always different to street prices which vary from store to store depending on how big they want their margin to be. Makes sense yes? I can't very well list the lowest price I find on www.dodgy1manbusiness.co.nz. The safest and fairest price to list is the manufacturers RRP.	Scott Bartley (836)
368112	2005-07-01 03:33:00	Why do I continue to buy the mag . Simply Habit . And perhaps a sense of loyalty . After all I have not missed a copy since 1993 . But I would suggest you browse back through old issues and then tell me today's mag is still as good . And without wishing to start an argeument . I am not very impressed by your "take it or leave it" response As I was not impressed by you assumption that all we do is change prices and the assertion that our mag has gone down hill to the point where it is not worth buying . You disparage what I do for a living and expect me to put on my smiley face? I think you're talking to the wrong guy if that's what you want . Yes, we do localise US PCW articles - with a fulltime staff of just 4 editorial people of which just 2, myself and Scott, test products, this is the logical thing to do . US PCW has a large staff testing lots of products and where those tests work fine locally, we'd be stupid not to use the material so we can test the stuff that is different in the local market . We actually put in a lot of effort and when someone writes off the work you do in such a cavalier, uninformed way, well, you ge a bit annoyed . Scott tested all those LCDs, I tested all those laser printers . I do not think the mag was better back then . You do, I assume because the things that you value as important in the mag may have changed (I know you hate digital camera reviews being included, for example) . But not liking the type of content now is not the same thing as it been "worse" . Other's will find the shape of the mag now more to their liking . But I don't want to get into a fight about it either . I'm simply saying that if you dislike the work we do that much, and consider us such a sad bunch of hacks, then why buy the mag out of an illogical sense of loyalty? Seems silly to me . If I don't like something, I don't buy it . I have a greater loyalty to my own money . I find your reasoning for why you buy the mag when you value it so little to be perplexing .	Biggles (121)
1 2 3 4