Annoying Woman from a famous site reviews Lumia 1020 .. irks people off including me

[teckris]

My intention was not to defend Ms. Wood, to the contrary - I basically said that she sucks at her job. I have expressed my frustration with the community's reaction to others in this thread who have brought up valid points and been shut down by, for the most part, delusional ****** extremism. Anyway, here's a link to a post I made with a graph that shows the kind of abnormal battery draining I've observed:

http://forums.windowscentral.com/nokia-lumia-1020/235806-1020-battery-issues.html#post2064919

In this case the culprit was HERE Maps, but I regularly get the same kind of result with IE. Usually what happens is I go to lunch, browse the web for 5-10 minutes while I'm waiting, the food arrives and I turn off the phone. A couple hours later I realize "crap, I forgot to close out IE again" and in the meantime it's been steadily burning down the battery. It's really starting to bother me that if I'm super careful to always close everything, I can get excellent battery life - 3 days, and that's not just a projection. Actually real and tested. But if I make one mistake, it's right out the window. It shouldn't be this way.

hello Sir, you r trying your best to Stick to your Pointless Arguments and has opened your mouth only when there was some thing false you could say.
now you have brought a new topic to this thread, which is clearly showing how lazy you are. when you are using your IE and browsing you r responsible for closing it. Dont you turnoff your car after the drive? or it will turn off itself?

just dont shoot at us saying You want this platform to GO GOOD. its just like saying I will put you behind bars so that you will become good citizen.

 

[lantern20]

Here is the simple truth. If you see a sight with advertising in it. It will not be totally factual.

I think that's the issue. It is not an advertisement, it is supposed to be a review, from a site known as a review site. It would be similar to other sites; say a car site trusted to provide you with factual information you need to use to make a purchase. Then they gave a car a poor review because they couldn't drive a manual transmission saying they couldn't get the car to actually go even if said car worked perfectly.

 

[falconeight]

I think that's the issue. It is not an advertisement, it is supposed to be a review, from a site known as a review site. It would be similar to other sites; say a car site trusted to provide you with factual information you need to use to make a purchase. Then they gave a car a poor review because they couldn't drive a manual transmission saying they couldn't get the car to actually go even if said car worked perfectly.

Doesn't matter. If your reading a science journal with advertising in it. The content will not always be factual. I learned this fact in school. They are providing a service to advertisers not to consumers. Look at any site conducting reviews and pick an item that you are familiar with. Chances are that they will try to sensationalize one item that really isn't an issue. Its constant and its a human flaw. When CNET has a majority of advertisers that are affiliated with apple or android then they will cater to them. The market is also a majority apple and android so it benefits them to say things such as. Its a nice phone but iPhone does it better. Cnet probably has 100 viewers that use WP8 compared to 10,000 that use iPhone. I don't understand why people are making such a big deal. Its always been this way and always will be.

 

[falconeight]

It's not about just a phone.

It's about honesty and integrity in reviews where people expect to get factual information.

I'm not sure why expecting integrity at a job is such a problem with you. Just because YOU don't expect it doesn't mean others shouldn't.

Is everything people say in this forum factual? No its not, its biased and fan boyish. Not as bad as other sites but it happens.

 

[chocka]

Doesn't matter. If your reading a science journal with advertising in it. The content will not always be factual. I learned this fact in school. They are providing a service to advertisers not to consumers. Look at any site conducting reviews and pick an item that you are familiar with. Chances are that they will try to sensationalize one item that really isn't an issue. Its constant and its a human flaw. When CNET has a majority of advertisers that are affiliated with apple or android then they will cater to them. The market is also a majority apple and android so it benefits them to say things such as. Its a nice phone but iPhone does it better. Cnet probably has 100 viewers that use WP8 compared to 10,000 that use iPhone. I don't understand why people are making such a big deal. Its always been this way and always will be.

You are making it a big deal. You are not stopping defending her. Iphones are better in some ways. WP8 has its advantages too. But a lie is a lie and you cannot tell that it is wrong to call a lie a lie

 

[Reflexx]

Is everything people say in this forum factual? No its not, its biased and fan boyish. Not as bad as other sites but it happens.

Are we tech editors of a news site?

If someone goes to a forum, there isn't an expectation that every poster is credible and knowledgeable.

If you are an editor of a large tech site, there is a level of credibility that comes along with that.

It's ridiculous that I even have to explain this. I'm pretty sure you know that you're wrong and you just don't want to admit it.

 

[Reflexx]

I think that's the issue. It is not an advertisement, it is supposed to be a review, from a site known as a review site. It would be similar to other sites; say a car site trusted to provide you with factual information you need to use to make a purchase. Then they gave a car a poor review because they couldn't drive a manual transmission saying they couldn't get the car to actually go even if said car worked perfectly.

Even then... an advertisement isn't allowed to lie about the capabilities of a competing product. Apple wouldn't be allowed to put out an ad that says WP can't upload to Facebook.

This review did something that would be considered illegal if it was an ad.

 

[Reflexx]

Doesn't matter. If your reading a science journal with advertising in it. The content will not always be factual. I learned this fact in school. They are providing a service to advertisers not to consumers. Look at any site conducting reviews and pick an item that you are familiar with. Chances are that they will try to sensationalize one item that really isn't an issue. Its constant and its a human flaw. When CNET has a majority of advertisers that are affiliated with apple or android then they will cater to them. The market is also a majority apple and android so it benefits them to say things such as. Its a nice phone but iPhone does it better. Cnet probably has 100 viewers that use WP8 compared to 10,000 that use iPhone. I don't understand why people are making such a big deal. Its always been this way and always will be.

The "big deal" isn't her bias. It's the lies.

...and your perplexing support of unethical conduct.

 

[wamsille]

I don't understand why people are making such a big deal. Its always been this way and always will be.

The issue at hand is the ?journalist? employed by CNet did not provide accurate information.

You can share photos and video on Facebook. This ?missing? feature was available had she bothered downloading the Facebook app or linking her Facebook account in the accounts + email option under general settings.

You can Instagram ? there are multiple clients available. Many people have already highlighted the fact that a simple search for apps in the store would reveal six clients; 6tag being a preferred application.

Molly Wood has previously shown a distaste for Windows Phone. OK. Fine, I would rather impress a detractor than someone who raises a Microsoft flag in their front yard.

From a techincal standpoint, Ms. Wood did not have her Lumia 1020 review unit set up correctly. Instead of demonstrating the sharing options of the 1020, she choose to highlight issues that are simply not present.

As for the camera, it is widely known the 1020?s camera has delayed startup and capturing speeds. There is a noticable lag between taking shots and for a number of people that is certainly not acceptable. Again, Ms. Wood fails to point out and share the specific reasons behind this.

When utilizing the Pro Cam application and shooting in high resolution, two photos are being captured/processed simultaneously - a 38 MP shot and a 5 MP over-sampled shot. The 5MP shot is what you would share on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. The 38MP retains the most detail and is the source photo for the majority of major edits a user will make. This is where that lossless zoom comes into play and how you can adjust the scene by zooming out and back in on other objects. You can then reframe shots and share multiple and unique takes on an individual scene.

Activating a Windows Phone and assigning a Microsoft account to it is quite simple ? honestly no more complex or involved than what Google and Apple have you do with their offerings. From the add account page you can link social networks (Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn) to the device quickly and easily. And to be honest, the other operating systems offer similar integration if not the exact same options. Once you are up and running with the device, you can choose to install official / unofficial applications for these networks if you would rather have them sandboxed from your People Hub. You can still share photos and video, of course.

Missing, incomplete or simply inaccurate information in a review is misleading to the reader. Whether you have a personal bias or not, you need to report on facts and include as much objectivity as you can. Subjective things like whether the camera lag is tolerable or not should be up to an individual to decide.

Websites are welcome to have an overall opinion on technology, prefer one OS over the other, one tech company over another, etc. Google isn?t necessarily a darling all over the internet, nor is Apple. But, if you are going to report on something ? ANYTHING ? you need to present the facts completely and accurately. Your job is to be objective.

 

[MobileVortex]

Wow, that is just terrible. I hope you guys can get CNET to post an apology!

 

[Lucidlore]

Yup!



It was only in response to previous derailment of the thread. Completely OT but this thread is a trainwreck anyway.



If you actually read anything I wrote, you'd know I only want this platform to succeed. Which do you think is going to help more with that? Denial + witch hunt, or improving the design of the OS so that it's impossible for average people to come to these wrong conclusions?

Oh, so wp8 really can't upload to facebook and instagram ? Molly Wood is right ? By calling her out on her lies, I'm in denial ? Are you done with the red herrings or do you have some more to throw my way ? If you want to explain to me what specifically about the OS is unintuitive and give me a point by point comparison with the capabilities of the operating system compared with IOS or Android, and then explain to me how these features could have possibly confused Molly Wood, then I'm all ears. But until then, maybe you should stick to the threads that actually discuss the features and flaws of the OS rather than trying to downplay Molly Wood's professional incompetence by claiming that the OS is unintuitive without explaining what exactly makes it unintuitive when compared to its rivals on the market.

 

[tgr42]

I've already explained what is unintuitive and how to improve the OS earlier in this thread.

When I mentioned denial, I was referring to people in this thread denying that the OS shared any of the fault for this mess, denying that the OS could be improved to eliminate these kinds of misunderstandings, and denying that average users regularly experience the same kinds of misunderstandings.

I believe that attacking Ms. Wood contributes very little to the long term success of the platform. Improving the OS to be more friendly to average users on the other hand would contribute a great deal more. But those improvements won't ever happen if everyone denies that they are necessary and worthwhile. As I wrote earlier in this thread, this is exactly the same problem that the Linux/open-source desktop has always had. There is a joke that "next year will be the year of the Linux desktop!" and it never happens, and never will happen. (Never should happen either, IMO.) But I think WP has a lot of merit, and if MS just stuck with it and really made an effort to keep improving it - especially for novice users - it would have a much better chance of achieving a significant market share. In countries other than just Estonia.

 

[Lucidlore]

I've already explained what is unintuitive and how to improve the OS earlier in this thread.

When I mentioned denial, I was referring to people in this thread denying that the OS shared any of the fault for this mess, denying that the OS could be improved to eliminate these kinds of misunderstandings, and denying that average users regularly experience the same kinds of misunderstandings.

I believe that attacking Ms. Wood contributes very little to the long term success of the platform. Improving the OS to be more friendly to average users on the other hand would contribute a great deal more. But those improvements won't ever happen if everyone denies that they are necessary and worthwhile. As I wrote earlier in this thread, this is exactly the same problem that the Linux/open-source desktop has always had. There is a joke that "next year will be the year of the Linux desktop!" and it never happens, and never will happen. (Never should happen either, IMO.) But I think WP has a lot of merit, and if MS just stuck with it and really made an effort to keep improving it - especially for novice users - it would have a much better chance of achieving a significant market share. In countries other than just Estonia.

See, this is your problem -- you're delusional. Look, I will readily admit that the OS isn't perfect, and that I'm sure that there are plenty of places where it can be improved. It's a work in progress, and I have no problems admitting that. But YOUR PROBLEM is that you think that some how, someone as knowledgeable as Molly Wood, as an editor of Cnet, would be stymied by these supposed inefficiencies of the OS had she given a good-faith effort to review the phone. I can see my grandma (the average "stupid" user) not being able to figure out how to to post a photo on facebook with a wp8 device. In my wildest imagination, I can't for the life of me figure out how Molly Wood -- someone who has, I'm sure, reviewed and used scores of smart phones -- would be so confused by wp8 that she would cavalierly declare that a top end smartphone in 2013 can't post pictures to Facebook

You seem to have this image in your head of Molly Wood sitting there in a corner trying to post a picture on facebook with futility, yanking her hair out, and throwing her hands up in frustration as she is bested by the complexities of wp8. That isn't reality, and as long as you continue to adhere to this portrayal, I will continue to call you out on it. More likely, she got her hands on a review unit that someone else set up for her without linking facebook, spent thirty minutes taking a few pictures with it, saw that there was no instagram app installed, and, without doing a search in the app store, just concluded that the phone cant post pictures to facebook and instagram, and passed this misinformation off to the public. That, my friend, is professional incompetence. This is why I have a problem with your posts. You insist that the phone is inefficient (which may well be true) but by doing so in this thread, you shift blame for Molly Wood's incompetence and failure to do due-diligence on a product she was reviewing away from her, and on the product itself. Even if you are right, you are being disingenuous, and you know it

You may think that giving her a hard time does little to the long term success of the platform, but I disagree. While I know it's a long shot, the point was to try to get her to either 1) apologize, or 2) make some kind of retraction. Wp8 is still a growing platform, and while the people here likely know the OS well, the lay-man with an iphone in his pocket would probably look to people like Molly Wood to form (what they think to be) an informed opinion on the OS. So if we can get her to admit that she was lazy and this laziness resulted in her disseminating false information, THAT would do the platform a whole world of good.

 

[Reflexx]

I've already explained what is unintuitive and how to improve the OS earlier in this thread.

When I mentioned denial, I was referring to people in this thread denying that the OS shared any of the fault for this mess, denying that the OS could be improved to eliminate these kinds of misunderstandings, and denying that average users regularly experience the same kinds of misunderstandings.

I believe that attacking Ms. Wood contributes very little to the long term success of the platform. Improving the OS to be more friendly to average users on the other hand would contribute a great deal more. But those improvements won't ever happen if everyone denies that they are necessary and worthwhile. As I wrote earlier in this thread, this is exactly the same problem that the Linux/open-source desktop has always had. There is a joke that "next year will be the year of the Linux desktop!" and it never happens, and never will happen. (Never should happen either, IMO.) But I think WP has a lot of merit, and if MS just stuck with it and really made an effort to keep improving it - especially for novice users - it would have a much better chance of achieving a significant market share. In countries other than just Estonia.

You keep wanting to go off topic.

There are other threads where you can say the same things that are on topic.

We, here, believe that truthfulness in reviews is important because it will have a very real influence on how unknowledgable people will perceive the OS. You can argue against truthfulness here if you'd like. However, if you'd like to argue a completely different subject then do so in a different thread.

 

[tgr42]

You seem to have this image in your head of Molly Wood sitting there in a corner trying to post a picture on facebook with futility, yanking her hair out, and throwing her hands up in frustration as she is bested by the complexities of wp8. That isn't reality, and as long as you continue to adhere to this portrayal, I will continue to call you out on it.

No, this is not how I see it.

More likely, she got her hands on a review unit that someone else set up for her without linking facebook, spent thirty minutes taking a few pictures with it, saw that there was no instagram app installed, and, without doing a search in the app store, just concluded that the phone cant post pictures to facebook and instagram, and passed this misinformation off to the public. That, my friend, is professional incompetence.

This is how I see it.

This is why I have a problem with your posts. You insist that the phone is inefficient (which may well be true) but by doing so in this thread, you shift blame for Molly Wood's incompetence and failure to do due-diligence on a product she was reviewing away from her, and on the product itself. Even if you are right, you are being disingenuous, and you know it

What I am saying is that they are both to blame. When her video is showing the Share list without Facebook in it, I see not just her but thousands of people who look at that list and throw up their hands. It is certainly possible to design this user experience in such a way as to not depend so heavily on prior state (account configuration which may have been done a while ago, never, and/or by someone else). If it's possible to design a user experience in such a way that the user cannot fail in spite of themselves, why not do it? Sharing a photo on Facebook is such common usage scenario for someone who chooses the Share option that it should be opt-out in that list instead of opt-in like it currently is, especially when the OS has special built-in support for Facebook in particular. And now you've made me repeat myself.

 

[Lucidlore]

No, this is not how I see it.



This is how I see it.



What I am saying is that they are both to blame. When her video is showing the Share list without Facebook in it, I see not just her but thousands of people who look at that list and throw up their hands. It is certainly possible to design this user experience in such a way as to not depend so heavily on prior state (account configuration which may have been done a while ago, never, and/or by someone else). If it's possible to design a user experience in such a way that the user cannot fail in spite of themselves, why not do it? Sharing a photo on Facebook is such common usage scenario for someone who chooses the Share option that it should be opt-out in that list instead of opt-in like it currently is, especially when the OS has special built-in support for Facebook in particular. And now you've made me repeat myself.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the scenario of "thousands" of users falling into the trap you've described. Someone who sinks 300 bucks, or 200 bucks now, on a 1020 after contract wouldn't be that technologically ignorant. I'm glad you walked back the "Molly got confused !" contention. It's clear as day that she probably didn't spend more than an hour or so with the phone before she made that video. I just still can't get over how she could *honestly* assume a smartphone would lack the capability to post pictures to facebook. If I got my hands on a new smartphone tomorrow and can't figure out how to post a picture to facebook, my default position would be to wonder what I did wrong, or if I received a defective product. I sure as hell wouldn't just assume that the phone lacked that capability altogether.

 

[kbilly70]

What I am saying is that they are both to blame. When her video is showing the Share list without Facebook in it, I see not just her but thousands of people who look at that list and throw up their hands. It is certainly possible to design this user experience in such a way as to not depend so heavily on prior state (account configuration which may have been done a while ago, never, and/or by someone else). If it's possible to design a user experience in such a way that the user cannot fail in spite of themselves, why not do it? Sharing a photo on Facebook is such common usage scenario for someone who chooses the Share option that it should be opt-out in that list instead of opt-in like it currently is, especially when the OS has special built-in support for Facebook in particular. And now you've made me repeat myself.

Unless you can prove that it is somehow harder or less intuitive to share on WP than on iOS or Android, your continued argument that part of the blame is the WP OS doesn't hold up. Granted, I haven't been on iOS for over a year and I haven't fired up my Android devices in months, but on both of those platforms you had to actually download an app to share as far as I can remember. How is that any easier than the experience on WP? Especially when FB is baked into the OS?

Yes, MS could design the user experience so that one cannot fail. But that is a different argument and has nothing to do with how the "review" was handled.

 

[tgr42]

Have you ever actually helped clueless people use technology products? You (and most people around here) give them far too much credit. I've helped people who found it nearly impossible to just enter text into a form on a phone, like you need to do when configuring account settings. And people jump to conclusions all the time. Can't immediately figure out how to do something? It must not be possible. Really, so many people think that way. And when they get stuck, they return the phone and get an iPhone, or even a feature phone.

 

[lantern20]

Have you ever actually helped clueless people use technology products? You (and most people around here) give them far too much credit. I've helped people who found it nearly impossible to just enter text into a form on a phone, like you need to do when configuring account settings. And people jump to conclusions all the time. Can't immediately figure out how to do something? It must not be possible. Really, so many people think that way. And when they get stuck, they return the phone and get an iPhone, or even a feature phone.

The point is that she has reviewed WP before, she is not a noob. I posted the link earlier in this thread. She mentions setting up FB integration. She is familiar with it so, either she is showing signs of early onset Alzheimer's or she blatantly "forgot" that type of integration that is asked when setting up the phone. On her twitter feed she said she wasn't aware of any instagram apps being out for WP at the time of the review, a few days ago, when they have been available since April. People expect honesty from reviewers, not ads for other products. If she is advertising for other products, she should put a disclaimer stating as much. Perhaps something to the effect of; my reviews are biased and take everything I say with a grain of salt as I claim to not always provide factual information.

 

[kbilly70]

Have you ever actually helped clueless people use technology products? You (and most people around here) give them far too much credit. I've helped people who found it nearly impossible to just enter text into a form on a phone, like you need to do when configuring account settings. And people jump to conclusions all the time. Can't immediately figure out how to do something? It must not be possible. Really, so many people think that way. And when they get stuck, they return the phone and get an iPhone, or even a feature phone.

What does this have to do with the topic? You continue to state the people here should not fully blame the reviewer and that the OS itself is partly to blame. If the features exist in WP and the review states otherwise, how can you argue the OS is partly to blame? Because it's not fool-proof? Is it fool-proof in iOS and Android? If not, then why continue to make this argument.

I have not seen anyone here arguing that WP is perfect or that it can't be improved. But that is not the argument. Misleading information being passed off as fact in a review is.