this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
826 points (94.3% liked)

Technology

59200 readers
3846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Pretty damning review.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I think that their point that it's an $800 product for a last-gen card, there really isn't anyone out there that should buy this, and therefore it's a bad product is valid. They could have handled the whole thing better and honestly should've just scrapped the video before release.

Auctioning off the prototype when the company asked for it back is pretty inexcusable. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't malicious, but they clearly have problems with internal communication of things like this are happening.

At any rate, it's going to be a spicy WAN show this week. Linus needs to actually watch the video and address this point-by-point. If he "reads the comments" or cherry picks some of GN's weaker arguments he's just going to end up throwing fuel on the fire.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago

It's pretty normal for water blocks to come out well after a GPUs release. Also it looks like it was a new product/company so it makes sense the design took longer than the competition.

[–] Wrench 29 points 1 year ago

Then they shouldn't have reviewed it if their decision was made before even holding the product in their hand.

They could have reviewed it from the point of view of an R&D curiosity with the potential future iterations and cost reductions as the new startup finds their feet. Because, you know, that's what it was. But they decided to shit all over it for dishonest reasons instead.

[–] nachom97 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I dont think it was malicious, but it is incredibly negligent. It puts a huge stain on the company that’s expected to honor embargos for unreleased products.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

@wordle I also have the same thoughts as you.

[–] Anonymousllama 6 points 1 year ago

I feel that if LMG looked at this product and thought "hey this is really dogshit", the decent thing to do would have been to go back to billet and tell them we can't cover it at all (and cop the loss of few hours as part of running an ethical business)