www.hardwarezone.com.sg (/)
-   HardwareZone.com Reviews Lab (online publication) (https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/hardwarezone-com-reviews-lab-online-publication-26/)
-   -   Shootout: Flagship smartphones compared (https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/hardwarezone-com-reviews-lab-online-publication-26/shootout-flagship-smartphones-compared-6184901.html)

wind77 18-01-2020 02:04 PM

Shootout: Flagship smartphones compared

I almost fell of from my chair, when I reached the conclusion page.

A total of 5 benchmarks were done, and Samsung Note 10+ lost to ROG Phone 2 in every benchmark.
Despite such fact, Marcus awarded "Best Flagship Smartphone" to Samsung Note 10+.

If this is a PAID review , and HWZ is not impartial in the assessment, pls do disclose so, instead of misleading the viewers.
If this is not a PAID review, kindly explain why the result from the benchmark was totally ignored.

Dr.Vijay 21-01-2020 05:05 PM

That's because raw benchmark performance scores don't mean much for mobile phones the same way they do for a notebook/desktop system for most intended usage.

There's more to a phone than just benchmarks and this article has been marked as a condensation of all individual phone reviews where much has been discussed at great lengths in each individual article.

If the aim of the article was to announce the fastest phone tested, then yes, it would go to the ASUS ROG Phone II. However, the shootout is about the best overall flagship phone.

wind77 21-01-2020 07:04 PM


If HWZ intends to compare products on a fair/objective basis, then make it clear that all factors leading to the conclusion are accounted for.
In this comparison, 5 benchmark tests were used, and there was no mention of other "qualitative" or "subjective" factors used. You can't convince readers that Product A is chosen becuz of some "holy" factor that has a weightage of 100 points, vs quantitative benchmark tests that has 1 point of weightage.

Further, I also noticed that you did not openly deny that this is a PAID article, so I understand that this article is not impartial/fair.
As such, I have no further comment on a PAID article, but regretted that HWZ did not declare so, right at the beginning.

Dr.Vijay 22-01-2020 01:49 PM

Hi wind77,

All of our reviews always factor the full gamut of considerations - it's only when we don't, that is when we explicitly mention such.

The article was derived from our print edition and thus it's not our usual full-fledged, every-detail packed article. As such, we've pre-declared that this is more of compilation article than all-encompassing one and that we've asked readers to check out the individual reviews for our full experience and opinions in the respective articles.

I didn't answer your last question as we've never had a paid review -- the very idea of such a review is flawed to begin. We've never had such and we will never harbour such.


Originally Posted by wind77 (Post 124710467)

If HWZ intends to compare products on a fair/objective basis, then make it clear that all factors leading to the conclusion are accounted for.

All times are GMT +8. The time now is 09:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © SPH Magazines Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.