Hi, long time no see, I was just looking around the site and I notice something strange, why does the LX-01 have 5 stars but the LX-01BD have 3? I though they were the same product, apart from the Blu-Ray player, if someone from What Hifi could give me an answer, I would appreciate it, thanks.
This does not make any sense! To what hifi team!
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
This does make perfect sense to what hifi team. You see, as the BD version review makes clear, that one was tested over a year after the original LX-01, and in that time we felt the market had moved on, and the BD version was less competitive.
Yes, it's that old problem of not having the dates on the reviews - it's in the Content Management System, so you'd think it's just be a matter of flipping a virtual switch to have the review date appear on the page, but apparently repointing the Great Wall of China would be a breeze by comparison with adding this functionality.
It's frustrating, I know, but if you read the two reviews rather than just the stars, the reasons for the ratings become clear.
Yes, it's that old problem of not having the dates on the reviews - it's in the Content Management System, so you'd think it's just be a matter of flipping a virtual switch to have the review date appear on the page, but apparently repointing the Great Wall of China would be a breeze by comparison with adding this functionality.
It's frustrating, I know, but if you read the two reviews rather than just the stars, the reasons for the ratings become clear.
Big Aura
Well-known member
Getting all low-tech, but couldn't you just add a date in at the end of the text of all review going forward? (post dated: 2 August)
EDIT: I cannot believe I checked my watch for the date there, it's my first wedding anniversary! Don't tell 'er indoors...
EDIT: I cannot believe I checked my watch for the date there, it's my first wedding anniversary! Don't tell 'er indoors...
Thought about that, but A) it means some poor individual's got to back through all the reviews subbing in issue dates, and B) it wouldn't be searchable by date.
Although the date the review was posted on the site, but not the issue in which it appeared, does appear when you do a search, which makes it doubly frustrating.
Although the date the review was posted on the site, but not the issue in which it appeared, does appear when you do a search, which makes it doubly frustrating.
ajharris:One other question, why did cnet give it a much better rating, just wondering, thanks.
No idea - you'd have to ask them that if it isn't clear from their review.
No idea - you'd have to ask them that if it isn't clear from their review.
Stroll DMc:Why not at least do it for all of the reviews from now on then?
Well, because it'll be no time at all before I'm answering questions asking why some reviews have dates and not others, and agreeing that it's confusing.
But I'll put the idea forward - I'm as frustrated as you that something seemingly so simple is apparently so complex to execute.
Well, because it'll be no time at all before I'm answering questions asking why some reviews have dates and not others, and agreeing that it's confusing.
But I'll put the idea forward - I'm as frustrated as you that something seemingly so simple is apparently so complex to execute.
Andrew,
Thanks for the update.
I have used your hi-fi, home cinema equipment, etc reviews on a number of occasions to help me narrow down the field when looking for equipment to audition and have found the information to be very helpfull. On the one occasion where the item had not been reviewed at that time and I couldn't get a response on the forum from any staff (Panasonic PTAE-3000), I simply went an auditioned it, which is what you would normally recommend anyway. So even although I didn't get a response your general advice on buying held good anyway.
Suffice to say I think the review staff do a good job of highlighting equipment pros and cons and they have steered me in the right direction many times. This post is not meant to be critical of the review staff.
I would suggest that failure to provide any dates on reviews is potentially more confusing and is also unfairly damaging to the credibility of the reviewers. Unfortunately, it can look like the reviewers are contradicting themselves, as opposed to objectively and professionally amending their views as a result of other factors that have changed in the intervening period, such as new competitors, updated models, etc.
No wonder you're frustrated about this, your computer boffins are letting the side down and unfortunately you and others have to deal with the questions.
If you do introduce review dates on future reviews, perhaps some confusion could be alleviated by an explanation in the reviews section such as,
" Any undated reviews were carried out prior to ??/ ??/ 2009,
when we introduced review date information in response to customer requests.
We are unable to add dates to reviews prior to ??/??/ 2009."
Obviously you'd need to put dates instead of question marks, or the forum might go into meltdown.
Thanks for the update.
I have used your hi-fi, home cinema equipment, etc reviews on a number of occasions to help me narrow down the field when looking for equipment to audition and have found the information to be very helpfull. On the one occasion where the item had not been reviewed at that time and I couldn't get a response on the forum from any staff (Panasonic PTAE-3000), I simply went an auditioned it, which is what you would normally recommend anyway. So even although I didn't get a response your general advice on buying held good anyway.
Suffice to say I think the review staff do a good job of highlighting equipment pros and cons and they have steered me in the right direction many times. This post is not meant to be critical of the review staff.
I would suggest that failure to provide any dates on reviews is potentially more confusing and is also unfairly damaging to the credibility of the reviewers. Unfortunately, it can look like the reviewers are contradicting themselves, as opposed to objectively and professionally amending their views as a result of other factors that have changed in the intervening period, such as new competitors, updated models, etc.
No wonder you're frustrated about this, your computer boffins are letting the side down and unfortunately you and others have to deal with the questions.
If you do introduce review dates on future reviews, perhaps some confusion could be alleviated by an explanation in the reviews section such as,
" Any undated reviews were carried out prior to ??/ ??/ 2009,
when we introduced review date information in response to customer requests.
We are unable to add dates to reviews prior to ??/??/ 2009."
Obviously you'd need to put dates instead of question marks, or the forum might go into meltdown.
Thanks for everyones reply, now I understand why, but yes, dates would be a good idea as I was very confused why one product got 3 stars and another almost the same got 5, thanks Andrew and everyone else.
For those inclined, viewing the page source code shows an element (around line 113) called 'class="dtreviewed"' and also gives the date of the review next to this. Clearly this information is both in the CMS and also publishable, strange it can't be displayed???
Big Aura
Well-known member
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram