Please, please, please... could you include a photograph of the remote handset in all your reviews?

Mr.H

New member
Jul 30, 2007
24
0
0
Visit site
Question: what part of a product does the user interface with the most often? Answer: The remote control handset. (assuming there is one, of course) I can't work this one out; in nearly all your reviews: "first tests", "test express", "group test", you nearly always include a picture of the remote handset. The one exception to this seems to be TV product reviews. Also, you hardly ever provide remote handset pictures in your "supertest", despite said test providing the most room for pictures! Maybe it's just TVs that don't include pictures of the remotes, but since most of the recent supertests have been of TVs, a "supertest review" is synonymous with "TV review". What is the reasoning behind not providing pictures of TVs' remote controls?
 

Clare Newsome

New member
Jun 4, 2007
1,657
0
0
Visit site
Thanks for the feedback - and very valid point.

We always take care to mention the remote in our reviews - in terms of layout, usability etc - but i'll look into adding separate shots of the remote where we have the room on bigger TV tests. Our photographer will be happy....
 

Thaiman

New member
Jul 28, 2007
360
2
0
Visit site
LOL....remote fetish!
I suppose I can see where you coming from, I did like the look of my old classe remote.. As for me I rather use all in one jobby instead of having 10 remotes clutter my living room.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Good thinking. Also I'd be grateful if you'd consider, when showing a pair of speakers, to have one of the speakers with the front cover on and one without.

Especially ATC speakers that are designed to be used with the cover on....

Thanks

jules.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Such good points. You wouldn't believe how different the TV remote is between a Pioneer PDP427XD and the PDP4270XD. Metal for the senior product, plastic for the junior.

Speakers are always shown with the covers off so we can goggle at the drivers. This is only likely to be the case in reality if you don't have a woman in your life (from a chaps perspective). Otherwise the covers are most certainly going to go onto those boxes! So, yes a shot would be good!

On a related subject, is there any reason why the freeview channel swapping of my Samsung PS50Q97HDX is so totally aweful. Slow, often doesn't respond and takes ages and ages to work through the channels. If I was to buy an external box, who makes the best with an ultra quick channel switch?
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
[quote user="Will Harris"]

On a related subject, is there any reason why the freeview channel swapping of my Samsung PS50Q97HDX is so totally aweful. Slow, often doesn't respond and takes ages and ages to work through the channels. If I was to buy an external box, who makes the best with an ultra quick channel switch?

[/quote]

Not a criticism I've heard before, but the WHFSV reviewers may know better. Could it be down to marginal signal strength, I wonder...?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Doubt it. I live in Fulham. The Pioneer before it was fine and my little Ferguson Freeview box (2 years old or is it 3) now with my sister and an old 15" sony CRT was also fine.

The Samsung is just a total pile of poo.

Any suggestions?
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
Suggests either the Samsung software is slow or its tuner has less sensitivity, which is why it struggles, even in Fulham. And you'd expect with Samsung sponsoring the team down the road its engineers would have thought of that...

IME, most Freeview boxes are much of muchness in terms of channel access speed. WHFSV had good results with the Bush DFTA3, which is about £30 and so might be worth a punt, while for a bit more dosh (£70) the Humax F2-FOX-T comes highly recommended.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts