Xref: utzoo comp.dcom.modems:9460 comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:9095 alt.bbs:5218 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!mips!apple!olivea!isc-br!tau-ceti!dogear!kharma!root From: dogear!kharma!root@isc-br!tau-ceti Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,alt.bbs Subject: Re: PC Magasine Testing Irregularities Keywords: communications software testing zmodem Message-ID: Date: 26 Apr 91 14:58:05 GMT References: <1991Apr24.035510.17297@osh3.OSHA.GOV> Organization: Computer Concern of Springdale, WA 1-800-786-7109 Lines: 36 chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Chip Yamasaki) writes: > In <89@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes: > > >The April 30 1991 issue of PC Magazine features reviews of 17 > >async communications programs that allegedly support ZMODEM and > >16550A FIFO UARTs. This issue has prompted a number of messages > >questioning the published test results and the procedures used > >to generate them. > While working for the State of Washington, we were using the reviews of certain magazines as basic info to form opinions on which network software and hardware we were going to consider. PC Magazine had just done a review of LANS and we read their findings with interest. The data turned out to be what could only be described as lousy approximations.. their conclusions weren't verified by installations of some of the products they reviewed. Since that happened, it has been my opinion that the folks at PC Mag are merely people with no great technical savvy, only a savvy for great technical jargon. Almost everyone knows that the first setup of something like a LAN is not going to have the efficiency of a system which has been tweaked and tuned to deal with the specifics of its use. It's spooky the way a magazine can bum-rap a product by virtue of its own misunderstanding of the technology. It is unfortunate that the readership believes that because it's a magazine about computers, that all involved in the magazine are experts. They aren't --especially in PC's case. I further suspect that the individual who posted the comment that 'megabucks in advertising dollars = great reviews' may have a valid point as well. Bob Kirkpatrick Dog Ear'd Systems, Spokane WA "Upgrading equipment is nice, but upgrading use is less expensive."