Unbiased Mobile Tech Sites?

[bijak_riyandi]

I'm tired seeing all these Windows Phone bashing with the rotten "no apps" argument from these so-called "tech sites"
I want to know which tech sites you found to be quite fair with all ecosystem (generally not biased to any platform AND not biased against any platform)

so far, I've found that Engadget and Pocketnow to be quite fair with their reviews

what about you, guys?

 

[A895]

That is it unfortunately. I mean lack of apps will be universal ding against WP until they get some developers on board.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

 

[bijak_riyandi]

I'm fed up with tech sites that have no other argument than "no app" just to ensure their hatred towards Windows Phone blatantly shown in their reviews

and I'm not here to argue about apps, so I'm not gonna comment anymore on that

 

[Sanjay Chandra]

Verge is fair but weird score system (always read reviews and leave out scores)

They thoroughly write things from an average consumer point of view.

Just try to read one review and see for yourself.....

Pocket Now is good one as well (I like youtube reviews)

Sent from my GT-I9500 using WPCentral Forums mobile app

 

[A895]

Verge is fair but weird score system (always read reviews and leave out scores)

They thoroughly write things from an average consumer point of view.

Just try to read one review and see for yourself.....

Pocket Now is good one as well (I like youtube reviews)

Sent from my GT-I9500 using WPCentral Forums mobile app

Verge is not fair. They do reviews from a average hipster point of view. I frequent there everyday and I have been a member there for 2 years. That site has gone down quality wise. They censor and delete comments and lock up posts that criticize the Verge or the moderators.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

 

[A895]

ArsTechnica is a good site. They are fair as well.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

 

[A895]

I'm fed up with tech sites that have no other argument than "no app" just to ensure their hatred towards Windows Phone blatantly shown in their reviews

and I'm not here to argue about apps, so I'm not gonna comment anymore on that

It's not hatred if it is a fact. Would you suggest people who look up reviews are ignorant of any cons they may be unaware about? Its not just for WP fans, you have to cater to a large number of people who may be just searching for reviews on a particular device. If that us the only con against WP nowadays that is a good thing, I remember when the cons were a lot longer.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

 

[Xellsama]

It's not hatred if it is a fact. Would you suggest people who look up reviews are ignorant of any cons they may be unaware about? Its not just for WP fans, you have to cater to a large number of people who may be just searching for reviews on a particular device. If that us the only con against WP nowadays that is a good thing, I remember when the cons were a lot longer.

Sent from my XT907 using Mobile Nations mobile app

I think it's more when the review calls the app store "bare", or always refer to it in ways like "there are no apps", "there are only very few apps", or even vague terms like "a fraction of iOS and Android's app store". It just doesn't convey the accurate state of the Windows Phone store. The store now has about 1/4 of total app number from the other two, though majority of the big name titles are already here. Typically it'll be some third party, especially apps made by a small group that's not there, but then again the same can be said for vice versa. There are third party apps found on WP developed by smaller groups not found on the other two; it's just the overall size of their store making it a little more obvious to see in WP store.

I think something like "the app store, while lacking in total app numbers, has grown to offer the majority of the key apps that any typical users would want." is a better description. So whenever the writer say anything close to that I'd think it's a fair (relatively) review.

 

[A895]

I think it's more when the review calls the app store "bare", or always refer to it in ways like "there are no apps", "there are only very few apps", or even vague terms like "a fraction of iOS and Android's app store". It just doesn't convey the accurate state of the Windows Phone store. The store now has about 1/4 of total app number from the other two, though majority of the big name titles are already here. Typically it'll be some third party, especially apps made by a small group that's not there, but then again the same can be said for vice versa. There are third party apps found on WP developed by smaller groups not found on the other two; it's just the overall size of their store making it a little more obvious to see in WP store.

I think something like "the app store, while lacking in total app numbers, has grown to offer the majority of the key apps that any typical users would want." is a better description. So whenever the writer say anything close to that I'd think it's a fair (relatively) review.

I see, i think that "The Windows Phone app store while lacking more newer and a few popular third party titles, it has a quite a few apps and games and then even some of it's own exclusives that can satiate most consumers". That seems a bit more accurate.

 

[omgitsnick]

I really find MobileTechReview a really good tech site. Despite the website and YT videos being a little bit unpolished, Lisa's info are waaay too accurate, and that's what's important. She isn't biased, and she does make a fair argument of pros and cons.

Another is Michael from PocketNow. I think out of the PocketNow staff he's the most neutral - the rest falls into fanboyism, especially Jaime, he's like the Molly Wood of CNET, now NYT.

 

[bijak_riyandi]

Another is Michael from PocketNow. I think out of the PocketNow staff he's the most neutral - the rest falls into fanboyism, especially Jaime, he's like the Molly Wood of CNET, now NYT.

ooookay, so I have to rephrase my argument here:

"so far, I've found that Engadget and Michael Fisher of Pocketnow to be quite fair with their reviews"

 

[jmshub]

Ars Technica is my goto tech news site.

 

[a5cent]

I think Aanandtech is very good, as they do a good job of separating the facts from what is opinion, but they don't have as much content as they used to. They target a more knowledgeable audience than the average consumer however (IMHO what makes them far better than the superficial "reporting" offered by most tech sites). Their focus is also more on general computer technology, not just mobile technology.

Arstechica would be my other choice.

 

[gedzum]

I really find MobileTechReview a really good tech site. Despite the website and YT videos being a little bit unpolished, Lisa's info are waaay too accurate, and that's what's important. She isn't biased, and she does make a fair argument of pros and cons.

Another is Michael from PocketNow. I think out of the PocketNow staff he's the most neutral - the rest falls into fanboyism, especially Jaime, he's like the Molly Wood of CNET, now NYT.

I agree with these selections, particularly when it comes to their youtube presence. Michael Fisher is definitely one of my favourites, his presentation and clarity as well as the way he expresses himself makes it really easy to watch and listen to the content he puts out.

 

[Laura Knotek]

I like ZDNet's: All About Microsoft by Mary Jo Foley and Ed Bott Report.

 

[snowmutt]

GSMArena is fine. Boy, they are long reviews as well.

News wise, I think most sights are okay. It is just in the reviews and the comment sections you find the bias.

 

[xconomicron]

I used to frequent Pocketnow...however there seems to be a lot of fanboyism going on there now -minus "Tony Stark" Fisher....Anton, and Adam Lien...

Taylor, Jaime (where the meaning of fanboyism could be considered as a cliche), Adam Dowd (the most anti-Microsoft, Microsoft guy you'll ever meet), and Brandon (I think he left) all seem to be what's wrong with Pocketnow....err now.

I venture over there from time to time now. However 9x's out of 10, I'm only giving site clicks to Fisher.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Peter Bright from Ars Technica is another good writer.

 

[a5cent]

I think Laura is making an important point! It's actually the writers/reviewers themselves that are important, much more so than the tech site!

 

[travis_valkyrie]

I agree with these selections, particularly when it comes to their youtube presence. Michael Fisher is definitely one of my favourites, his presentation and clarity as well as the way he expresses himself makes it really easy to watch and listen to the content he puts out.

I vouch for this as well. TechnoBuffalo is another general tech site, and Jon Rettinger.