It's just one example, but IMO it demonstrates how some publications talk up Particular Item X in order to generate commissions rather than because it's really that good. Jack Wallen at ZDNet:
The Minix Z97 is a workhorse that challenged my assumptions about mini PCs ... at $226 on Amazon, it's a steal
The mini PC I run is normally $159 but currently $132.04 (that is not an affiliate link; if you buy it, I won't get a commission).
It's got 16Gb of RAM to the "reviewed" PC's 12Gb, it's got just as much storage, it's got 4 USB A ports and a USB C port to the "reviewed" PC's three USB As, and its chip speed is within 0.2 GHz (3.4 vs. 3.6). The only difference I see that's advantageous to the "reviewed" PC, for nearly $100 more, is that while my PC has two HDMI ports, the "reviewed" PC has two HDMI ports and a DisplayPort port.
The article seems to indicate that Wallen received a review unit rather than spending his own money on it ... but did he even bother to compare prices/specs before flogging it for commissions?
When I'm shopping for anything that's expensive enough for me to want to consult reviews before buying, I generally look at "head to head" reviews of multiple similar products, and take note of whether a reviewer, or the reviewer's publication, receives commissions on sales.
No comments:
Post a Comment