what defines a review v opinion with WHF ?

[admin_exported]

after many recent forums questioning WHF ratings and views on sony v panasonic, i am curious to know what defines a review.

i bought this months mag and the pana 50vt20 is an in depth review of connections and some bold statements and picture where as the sony just seems to go on about the harry potter movie, 2 totally different review styles and yet the less in depth sony comes out on top.

my other example is the review on the web site of the sony 46hx703, it is such a short piece of writing on a tv, surely that cannot be classed as a review ??

what does everybody else think and pls don't turn this into pana v sony again !

 

[The_Lhc]

All reviews are, pretty much by definition, opinions. What's your point?

 

[bigboss]

the_lhc:All reviews are, pretty much by definition, opinions. What's your point?

They're all reviews (WHFs' opinions) written in different styles.

 

[Andrew Everard]

...And as you will have seen in the magazine, to different lengths. Hence the different lengths on the website.

 

[Anonymous]

my point is that they seem more like opinions at times rather than in depth reviews, which im sure like most people, would hope you would be getting. i think sometimes WHF reviews leave you asking more questions than giving you the answers therefore having to leave you to trawl the web for more information. i find it frustrating at times, and with people questioning the star ratings, i just think all reviews should be in depth, all structured the same way with answers on all the points questions people would want t know.

thats my view so surely im not alone in feeling this way....

 

[Andrew Everard]

Yes, but one of those reviews occupied two pages of the magazine, and the other half a page. If we gave two pages to every product, the number of products reviewed each month would plummet, and these forums would be full of 'why haven't you reviewed the...' questions.

That said, we will be taking more space to review some significant products in the near future, and some typographical changes should allow more words in the existing space...

 

[Anonymous]

well make the magazine bigger but i suppose paper costs money. one thing i have mentioned in the past is the amount of the mag taken up by the buying guide at the back. the buying guide is half the magazine !!

surely that cant be right ? cant you just do a top ten products, leave the buying guide to the web site and allow an extra 40 pages to reviews hence reviewing more products. as a monthly reader i do get fed up with the buying guide and the volume of the mag it takes up.

take a technology mag i also buy (letter of the alphabet and a number) which covers all tech from computers, to phones, cameras etc. This months mag had 130 pages of reviews and less than 20 on top rated products. now thats a good balance

 

[Andrew Everard]

Well yes, we could make the magazine bigger, and yes we could include a lot more reviews. But of course both would have a significant impact on the cover price of the magazine, and many readers of the magazine find the buying guide - which occupies around a quarter of the editorial pages, not half of them - very useful.

And yes, I enjoy reading Q9, too...

 

[John Duncan]

130 pages of dog reviews?

 

[Anonymous]

great mag, recommend everyone reads it, i mean just look at the cover !

my WHF mag was page 3 to 80 reviews and 81 to 160 buyers guide, that is 50-50 in my opinion

 

[Andrew Everard]

You missed the fact that I said 'editorial pages'. There are a lot more adverts in the buying guide end of the magazine when compared to the front sections.

 

[John Duncan]

And by the way, Stuff's a better magazine than any other gadget porn mag...

 

[idc]

JohnDuncan:And by the way, Stuff's a better magazine than any other gadget porn mag...

No Playboy is.

 

[bigboss]

idc:
JohnDuncan:And by the way, Stuff's a better magazine than any other gadget porn mag...

No Playboy is.

What gadget?