[H] OEM reviews, hole in the system?

[Ominous Gamer]

I'm so going to get slapped around for this...
You are correct, and stating it like this is a bit misleading and we will change the way this is discussed and worded in the future.

First off, there is nothing signed by anyone or by any company. There is no contract in place or exchange of funds, except when we purchase a computer system (through the same exact process you would) and when they refund us the purchase price.

Some companies cooperate with us, some do not. What Chris is referring to is we have agreements with marketing departments in some companies to return the systems for a refund after we are done with the evaluation. The agreement is verbal, and goes pretty much like this. "We buy what we want, when we want, write the evaluation, then contact you for an RMA to get our money back."

The Dell evaluation is the first we have published that was done without an agreement in place. We realize that there are companies that are never going to agree to our evaluation terms, but we also realize that there are companies in the marketplace that we cannot afford to overlook. So when it comes to companies that are highly visible and we think our readers should know about them and their systems and support, we will just buy them, and worry about the system later. The Dell system was rebuilt and upgraded and is being given to a Purple Hear combat veteran this month. While we cannot afford to give them all away, I certainly wish we could.

It is our desire to purchase all of our systems at some point in the future, but the economics currently do not allow that. I do not have $300,000 to invest in 'used' computers our first year into this.

I'm sorry, but if any part of the company knows you will be reviewing a system. Thats a red flag right there. To honestly believe that companies are going to treat you the same way as anyone else..thats simply does not add up. While I'm proud that you are this trusting; it does not work like this. I've been inside these companies before. There are people who make 40k a year doing just PR machines, if the marketing department knows you are coming. They are dang sure going to make sure they catch your order. Even if that means a few other lucky orders are going to get special treatment.

This also sheds a little light on why the last Falcon review as pulled.

I like how you are attempting to be unbiased and legit here, and from your financial point of view I completely understand.
However, your machines are tainted. Sorry.

Quoted Post (http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1028992933&postcount=52)

http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/172254.png (http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=174409)

[grizzed]

They might need to plug a few holes, but I think this can be done and I applaud [H]'s effort in trying to put out legit reviews.


***************
I'll add that I would guess that Falcon refused to RMA the system in the last review because of the problems [H] saw with the review process and they didn't publish the review. So now [H] is trying to recoup some of the loss by ebaying the system. That's a great idea and hope it works.

It's a guess, but I'd say Falcon doesn't want to play ball if things don't bounce their way. Will they refuse to RMA a bad review? I'd never get a falcon system, but I'm a lot less likely to recommend one to anyone who asks. Even after lurking here for a couple of moths I've seen [H] editors mention Falcon a number of times as a solid choice for people looking for a high end product with high end support and build quality.

[Oldie]

No, the way they're setting it up, the company would only know they purchased it after the review is done. In fact they've demonstrated that their reviews are not tainted, when they pulled the last FNW review. They inadvertently used the same account to buy the 2nd machine, so while there was no evidence of cherry picking, they couldn't conclusivley say that it didn't happen. It's actually rare to see a review site put this much effort into making sure thier results are the same yours would be, and I'll keep reading here because it.

FNW is a great company who really stands behind their product. If you're in the market for an OEM, based on reputation, it's hard to go wrong with a FNW product.

http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/685.png (http://www.hardfolding.com?go=38&tm=33&id=685)

[Ominous Gamer]

No, the way they're setting it up, the company would only know they purchased it after the review is done. In fact they've demonstrated that their reviews are not tainted, when they pulled the last FNW review. They inadvertently used the same account to buy the 2nd machine, so while there was no evidence of cherry picking, they couldn't conclusivley say that it didn't happen.

FNW is a great company who really stands behind their product. If you're in the market for an OEM, based on reputation, it's hard to go wrong with a FNW product.

http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/685.png (http://www.hardfolding.com?go=38&tm=33&id=685)


Read what I quoted Kyle on. They contact the Marketing department, before ordering.


http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/172254.png (http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=174409)

[Oldie]

Read what I quoted Kyle on. They contact the Marketing department, before ordering.

http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/172254.png (http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=174409)

No, you're misunderstanding here. It's like this:

Kyle calls Jim Bob's Computers:

Kyle: Hi, we'd like to review your rigs on our site, but when we're done we'd like to return them. We'll order them without telling you who we are when we do, but after we're done with it, we'd like to be able to call you to return it for a refund.

Jim Bob: OK

Yes, they set up the agreement to return them after the fact, but they don't disclose who they are until after they've purchased it.


http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/685.png (http://www.hardfolding.com?go=38&tm=33&id=685)

[Ominous Gamer]

No, you're misunderstanding here. It's like this:

Yes, they set up the agreement to return them after the fact, but they don't disclose who they are until after they've purchased it.
http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/685.png (http://www.hardfolding.com?go=38&tm=33&id=685)


I completely argee thats how it goes down on [H]'s side.
The issue is that the companies know to expect something. It could any order coming from Texas, an order placed before such and such a date, etc.

Like I said, its nice that [H] is trying, but they should not be ignorant of the company they are dealing with.
These companies don't push out thousands of systems a week. You'd be lucky to show numbers that even suggest a couple hundred in a month.

If they know, they will act on it. It is how they survive.


http://www.hardfolding.com/ftag1.php/mem/172254.png (http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=174409)

[Kyle_Bennett]

Thanks for your thoughts on this and I do understand your concerns. I share your concerns on these issues.

Yes, we did have reason to think that the Falcon NW reviewed had the possibility of being tainted and that is why it was pulled. That is no secret and there is a thread that addresses that publicly (http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1010816). There were no attempts made to cover anything up or hide issues from our readership.

We do not have reason to believe any of our other evaluations published are tainted, which is why they are live on our pages. I think us pulling the last FNW evaluation is a testament to our dedication to this program and what it stands for.

We have made changes in our purchasing system to ensure that orders are not easily flagged and identified as being purchased by HardOCP. I am not going to discuss anything about those changes with anyone outside of HardOCP. We have identified issues through our experiences so far that certainly needed to be “fixed,’ and those issues are being giving attention. I never expected us to be perfect from day one and this is one reason that these evaluations have been published on our current website. These last few months have surely been a testing phase for us and we have learned from it. We have continually reached out to our forum readers for your consultation. You guys have done a lot to build a solid program and do rest assured that we listen to credible feedback.

I am not going to sit here and type up a novel to convince you that our program gives a valid representation of a real customer's experience. I will tell you that is exactly our goal though, and I think we are doing one hell of a fine job of attaining that. I will tell you that we are jumping through hoops to ensure we do the best job that we can. And I will tell you that if we have reason to believe a system is "tainted," you will not see the evaluation published on our pages.

Your beef seems to be that the marketing department knows that sooner or later we will be buying a system from them. I would suggest that any computer builder in the nation with any kind of visibility had better understand that we will be buying systems from them whether we have contacted them previously or not.

[djshelto]

I agree there's an increased chance of a "cherry-pick", but we don't know what the details of the agreement are. for all we know, kyle calls 3 months in advance and says "sometime in the next year we'll order a system for a review, we just want to make sure after the fact that we can let you know it's us and get an 'out-of-return-window' return"

there's no indication that they specify a time period, or a shipping location, or even a performance range, so the only way a manufacturer could be sure would be to cherry-pick every system until the review comes out, which defeats the purpose.

plus, as they get more experienced, i'm sure they'll find way to reduce the chances with each review.

damn, beaten by kyle

[drizzt81]

I was just wondering if the [H] had considered to e-bay off the systems afterwards, just like the Falcon? Or do you think that you'd lose [<- I really stink at spelling that word] too much on each system?

On the "red flag" post. Even if the company did get a 'red flag' in advance, you need to consider the positive externalities that this produces: Anyone living in Texas/ Alaska will get a 'cherry picked' system :D

[Kyle_Bennett]

I agree there's an increased chance of a "cherry-pick", but we don't know what the details of the agreement are. for all we know, kyle calls 3 months in advance and says "sometime in the next year we'll order a system for a review, we just want to make sure after the fact that we can let you know it's us and get an 'out-of-return-window' return"

there's no indication that they specify a time period, or a shipping location, or even a performance range, so the only way a manufacturer could be sure would be to cherry-pick every system until the review comes out, which defeats the purpose.

plus, as they get more experienced, i'm sure they'll find way to reduce the chances with each review.

damn, beaten by kyle

There are NO DETAILS in the agreement. The agreement is simply a verbal agreement with a few stipluations that go like this...."We buy the computer system we want to buy, when we want to buy, write our evaluation, THEN call for a full system RMA, and a refund of the purchase price." The one other stipluation is that we do not keep the system for more than 60 days from day of delivery.

The companies that have agreements with us have no idea as to when we are buying the system. Could be today, yesterday, or next year. They also have no idea who will purchase it, or where it is going to be shipped.

And yes, we are learning there are holes to be patched as we go. We have not run into any holes yet we did not think we could not fix.

[Velocity_Micro]

Here's where I sit on the review process, starting with this quote from my response to our first (not so solid) review of the ProMagix DCX. I hate bringing this review up, but it's where I started with the suggestion to buy anonymously and the public offer to accept all returns from [H] with no restock fees. This is the last we ever mentioned about it with anyone at the [H].

Chris and Kyle,

{Off topic portion of this original message was ommited)

I originally told Kyle how we were terrified to send a review to [H] and these are exactly the reasons why. You didn’t miss a thing. While I sincerely plead that all three of these missteps are anomalies that are way beyond our normal standards, I’m glad to let you decide. We are still happy to provide another review unit - anything you want next time to meet any price range. This time buy it anonymously and I guaranty to honor our return policy without the usual restocking fees. That’s the only way you can experience what any other buyer gets.

Thanks for the fair coverage.

Randy Copeland
President & CEO
Velocity Micro, Inc.

PS - I get involved in many customer support issues regularly, not just for reviewers. I also love answering sales calls - at least one or two everyday. I’m an enthusiast first.

Since then, [H] has purchased two more systems from us, both without any warning or fanfare. Neither were detected as review units by us, and the proof is the less than perfect nature of these systems. Remember, we are considerably larger than most boutiques, but nobody in our office can look at the name on every order to see if it's a secret review unit. We ship as many as 150+ systems some days! I'm sure it wouldn't change what we shipped out anyway, because we must provide the identical product to every customer order that followed the review, and it would be easy for a saavy customer to detect they got something less than the review unit - and they'd hammer us for it right here in the forums.

Smaller shops like some recent reviews posted here are so small that there is no possible way that the owner of the company is not instantly aware of the [H] order when it arrives. Some of these companies are only selling 30-40 units per month, that's only about 1 per day, and indicates only 3-4 employees in the whole business! Believe me, I was once that small, and I know the scoop on looking at orders to see if the light are going to stay on for another month. Fortunatly I made it through, but plenty of other companies fade away after a while when they experience how tough it is in our market.

So, does this make a review from a smaller company tainted? Hell no, because they are still bound to provide the same system to anybody who reads the review, and they will get nailed if there is a difference between what they send [H] and what they send you. Is the support better? Maybe a little. The packing? Maybe a little. But the product still has to perform, the features have to be included, and that's the bottom line.

It's a lot less formal agreement than many readers may think, and that keeps it flexible enough for [H] to make any adjustments as needed without notice.

[Kyle_Bennett]

Smaller shops like some recent reviews posted here are so small that there is no possible way that the owner of the company is not instantly aware of the [H] order when it arrives.

First off, thanks for your overall comments and contributions to our program Randy, your company has helped define our evaluations and exactly how we conduct them.

On the quote above, this is certainly an issue that has become aware to us. To say there is "no possible way" is a bit of a stretch though. :D Actually there are all kinds of ways around it, they are just not "easy" solutions. If we have to have a buddy in Arizona buy the system and then ship it to us, that is what we will do. One thing we do have is trusted friends all over these United States that are willing to help us.

[Velocity_Micro]

First off, thanks for your overall comments and contributions to our program Randy, your company has helped define our evaluations and exactly how we conduct them.

On the quote above, this is certainly an issue that has become aware to us. To say there is "no possible way" is a bit of a stretch though. :D Actually there are all kinds of ways around it, they are just not "easy" solutions. If we have to have a buddy in Arizona buy the system and then ship it to us, that is what we will do. One thing we do have is trusted friends all over these United States that are willing to help us.


I agree it's possible. I just can't decide if it's worth it. Fortunatly, it's not up to me! ;)

[electech98]

First off, thanks for your overall comments and contributions to our program Randy, your company has helped define our evaluations and exactly how we conduct them.

On the quote above, this is certainly an issue that has become aware to us. To say there is "no possible way" is a bit of a stretch though. :D Actually there are all kinds of ways around it, they are just not "easy" solutions. If we have to have a buddy in Arizona buy the system and then ship it to us, that is what we will do. One thing we do have is trusted friends all over these United States that are willing to help us.
How funny...that's what I suggested here (http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1028919501&postcount=18) when we were talking about the FNW article retraction.

So...are you gonna go in that direction? That might be the only for-the-most-part fool-proof way of getting eval systems shipped anonymously to you guys, especially since your full names happen to be your forum names as well, making computer hardware companies aware of who works for [H]ard|OCP.
:)

[DaVisionz]

Thanks for all the info guys, this is the honesty that keeps me coming back to the [H]!

I know you guys put your heart into what you do, and try to do the best job you can.

now if only i could manage to get a new system some day! hahah

[Zidoas]

Even if the company is on the "look-out" for review machines, that only means they are that much more careful in their building process. All is good for everyone including the customers.

In a rush back home, 4 hours ride. Will post more later if needs be.

[movax]

I really love the anonymous review system, though I understand the primary flaw is that [H] is drained of money faster than a divorce settlement does. If I understand correctly, most review sites get a unit gratis and returns it at the end of the review period, saving them money. In an ideal world, sure it could go like:

(assuming a boutqiue/highend dealer)
[H]: Hey, we just ordered a PC for review purposes, and we're done here. RMA it now?
Marketing: Sure, we hate bad publicity and will happily RMA the unit and refund the cost.
The crux of the matter I think is "How do I anonymously review the system...and then get a refund once we're done?"

[Kyle_Bennett]

How funny...that's what I suggested here (http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1028919501&postcount=18) when we were talking about the FNW article retraction.

So...are you gonna go in that direction? That might be the only for-the-most-part fool-proof way of getting eval systems shipped anonymously to you guys, especially since your full names happen to be your forum names as well, making computer hardware companies aware of who works for [H]ard|OCP.
:)

We are not going to discuss anything related to that publicly. Thanks for your suggestion.

[DaVisionz]

The crux of the matter I think is "How do I anonymously review the system...and then get a refund once we're done?"

that's why they have agreements with the company set up beforehand either a permanent agreement or one they set up perhaps months beforehand if they wanted to do it that way.

I think the best way would be to do a written legally bound contract with said company to allow x number of systems to be reviewed and returned per year

[MAngelo]

I am impressed that someone (Kyle) is going to such lengths in the name of ethics. In this day that's inspiring.

[magoo]

I think these are all great reviews. With the exception of MAYBE an identifier in the FNW evaluation, these are all honest and stringent reviews.

Not to rub it in to Velocity, but look at the fan deal in the latest review. Would a hand-selected model have the slightest risk of that happening?????I doubt it.

I applaud [H] and all the suppliers for a great job in this process. It is all killer and no filler, as it should be. :D

[El Nacho]

I am impressed that someone (Kyle) is going to such lengths in the name of ethics. In this day that's inspiring.


as i allways tell people.....quality vs quantity.......pick your side

[evilcartman]

I am impressed that someone (Kyle) is going to such lengths in the name of ethics. In this day that's inspiring.
QFT

The honesty and ethics of [H] is what makes come back day after day to read reviews and update myself in the computer world. Even if the OEM evaluations are somehow "tainted" there's no doubt in my mind that Kyle and his staff are doing everything in their power to make the process as smooth and honest as they possibly can. Writing good reviews of a company's product, without them necessarily knowing exactly what product is being evaluated, is certainly a large undertaking and I think the [H] staff should be commended for getting this far with their evaluations and the improvements they have made.

[altcon]

Well, Im a bit on the other side of the planet, but I think [H]'s reviews of just about anything are superb. Beggining in leading the change from benchmarks to gameplay and summing up with true full system reviews.
I believe kyle when he says they go to great lengths to assure unbiased reviews and make sure the companies don't know when their system is bought for evaluation.
I don't think there's any reason to buy a retail prebuilt system if you have newegg though... but that's another story.
Regarding the commments from Velocity, I think it shows that they're commited to their fanbase and buyers. It's not unusual for big stores to botch orders over here, have lame customer support and build systems as if they cost a dime even when they're top notch.
As a Tech who sells system out of a small botique I can say I find the reviews usefull in finding ways to improve upon what product our clients recieve.
So I think [H] should keep at it, and exactly in the same manner as they are currently, my hats off to you.

[loupgarourouge]

I have been reading [H] for over five years now, and if there's one thing i've seen, its this. You guys make a point of being consistently thourough and innovative. If nothing else, there's a huge track record standing as proof that you guys will continue being able to come up with creative and honest ways to maintain the integrity of your review process. No one who has come up with so many new ways of reviewing hardware and software over a five year span can't have a few tricks hiding up their sleeves, that they rightly don't need to share. With such a history, its only fair to trust Kyle and the others in the review process. Do you still want a second opinion? Thats why there's more than one hardware site.

Honestly, if more sites picked up similar methods, who knows what might happen? All these OEMs might have to tinker with every order they get to achieve a level of perfection, so that they constantly get good reviews. I think this is one place where the customers would be happy to suffer with imperfect companies, as they are at a good risk to recieve a hand tweaked system tainted by the CEO himself even.

Thats just my 2 cent euro coin.

[Demon_of_The_Fall]

There really is a huge amount of time and effort going into these system evaluations and I think it's fantastic.

I only wish there were a review site in Europe that went to the same lengths as you guy when it comes to full system reveiws. The lack means that I really have no idea what OEM to recommend when a newb wants to buy a system. So it always ends up dell :(

[major_foad]

I've been reading [H] for over 5 years as well, I remember when the reviews were similar to every other review site - but they were still better thought out and more thorough. That's why I stuck around - the reviews were high quality and honest. Some of you should check out the archives of old reviews. The more recent developments in methodology i've had to adjust to, but it gives a great picture of what you really get when you buy something rather than a bottled number. I think this is extremely true with the system review process. Kyle's no fool, he can outsmart the OEM's and get an anonymous system.

PS: Kyle used to do the news, too - those were the days.

[accidentalsuccess]

I just thought I'd show my support of what Kyle and the rest of [H] is doing. I'd also like to show support for velocity for stepping up to the plate and getting involved in a dialogue about these issues.

QUALITY reviews of OEM systems are invaluable to technogeeks like us since we know what to recommend to our family/friends/friend-of-a-friend when they ask "what computer should I buy". I am VERY grateful to have an enthusiast's take on a pre-built system, since there is NO way I'm building one for everybody who asks what they need to play all the pretty games they see running on my rig or whatever.

I've been reading [H] since, oh I don't know, geforce2 reviews (I've lost all track of time and space for when that was, espcially since there was a ton of versions and refreshes) and I've always felt that you guys do your best to provide a TRUE review of what my money will get me. Thanks and keep up the great work!

[Raalle]

In addition to the other positive comments here, I'd like to add that it's nice to see someone from a company (in this case, Randy Copeland of Velocity Micro) posting as well.

I think it's a testament to the quality of [H]ard|OCP that companies trust them and hearing directly from Mr. Copeland speaks highly of his commitment to [H] readers too. It's definitely something to keep in mind if you're considering a prebuilt system.

[swatbat]

I'll add that I would guess that Falcon refused to RMA the system in the last review because of the problems [H] saw with the review process and they didn't publish the review. So now [H] is trying to recoup some of the loss by ebaying the system. That's a great idea and hope it works.

It's a guess, but I'd say Falcon doesn't want to play ball if things don't bounce their way. Will they refuse to RMA a bad review? I'd never get a falcon system, but I'm a lot less likely to recommend one to anyone who asks. Even after lurking here for a couple of moths I've seen [H] editors mention Falcon a number of times as a solid choice for people looking for a high end product with high end support and build quality.

I asked Kyle about that in a pm. He said that Chris had mailed the system back to Falcon and he(Kyle) called them and told them to send it back to him and charge them(Hardocp) for it. From the pm with me.

As for the FNW system, Chris packed it up and sent it back and it was decision to call them and ask them to return it and make sure and charge us for it. I dont think it is fair for FNW to invest in a system that was not used to give them any press.

Pretty much Kyle felt that they should take a hit on something that should have been caught. Anyway it is nice that he is not only looking out for the readers but also showing a great deal of respect to the companies that build the stuff.

Can they make the review process perfect? No way in hell. Can they work to make it better then anyone elces. Yes they can. Mind you as of now it is fully possible that a company could try to flag them on a review. Smaller companies would have a better chance at this unless Kyle starts having them shipped to another state and then shipped to the OEM office. The good thing is that time is against the OEM. If they say something will be built and shipped in less then a week they don't have but so much time to really overcheck the system. Review systems for mags can have a few weeks of love with a builder to make sure they are perfect. Also remember you don't see mags mention defective machines all the time. Some do some don't. One could think that they may get another machine from the builder and not say anything.

[Kyle_Bennett]

Just to be clear, HardOCP did ask Falcon NW to ship the system back and charge us for it. FNW did not require this, and graciously offered to eat the costs associated with the system. HardOCP screwed up the process and HardOCP should pay for that box. FNW conducted business as anybody would and they should not have to literally pay for our shortcomings. I personally see the situation as a very valuable lesson that brought with it some great value in making our program better.

[BodySnatcher]

Steaming pile of cow dung is representative of the original post in this thread.

I, for one, was curious that Kyle even bothered to review "mamma I wanna computer" machines. Heck I even thought he had gone soft, (yeah he is getting older ;) ) be that as it may, he still did it right buying the machine on the web, prolly using someone else's addy to hide who it is, and I am sure he is using a disguised (stolen) :eek: credit card, ...NOT.

Geesh, come on guys, if Steve could milk the "keg-fell-on-me-so-I-can't-work" scheme for a year I think they could buy retail machines without anyone at the vendor knowing about it.

END

[grizzed]

HardOCP screwed up the process and HardOCP should pay for that box
wow .. I stand corrected. Definitely not what I would have expected. You certainly took the high road and it's more evidence you're holding back nothing in an effort to put out the best product you can and do the right thing while you're doing it.

[MaingearDude]

Here's where I sit on the review process, starting with this quote from my response to our first (not so solid) review of the ProMagix DCX. I hate bringing this review up, but it's where I started with the suggestion to buy anonymously and the public offer to accept all returns from [H] with no restock fees. This is the last we ever mentioned about it with anyone at the [H].



Since then, [H] has purchased two more systems from us, both without any warning or fanfare. Neither were detected as review units by us, and the proof is the less than perfect nature of these systems. Remember, we are considerably larger than most boutiques, but nobody in our office can look at the name on every order to see if it's a secret review unit. We ship as many as 150+ systems some days! I'm sure it wouldn't change what we shipped out anyway, because we must provide the identical product to every customer order that followed the review, and it would be easy for a saavy customer to detect they got something less than the review unit - and they'd hammer us for it right here in the forums.

Smaller shops like some recent reviews posted here are so small that there is no possible way that the owner of the company is not instantly aware of the [H] order when it arrives. Some of these companies are only selling 30-40 units per month, that's only about 1 per day, and indicates only 3-4 employees in the whole business! Believe me, I was once that small, and I know the scoop on looking at orders to see if the light are going to stay on for another month. Fortunatly I made it through, but plenty of other companies fade away after a while when they experience how tough it is in our market.

So, does this make a review from a smaller company tainted? Hell no, because they are still bound to provide the same system to anybody who reads the review, and they will get nailed if there is a difference between what they send [H] and what they send you. Is the support better? Maybe a little. The packing? Maybe a little. But the product still has to perform, the features have to be included, and that's the bottom line.

It's a lot less formal agreement than many readers may think, and that keeps it flexible enough for [H] to make any adjustments as needed without notice.

I coudn't have said it better myself. I agree 100%.

-Wallace

[swatbat]

It is always nice to see the oem's comment on the review process. You would think if anything they would be afraid of a review that they really have no control over but these companies have seemed to stand up for it. It shows they have faith in their product which is always good. With any luck hardocp will find more companies willing to join their program. Props to both maingear and Velocity for responding in this thread.

[jon_k]

Kyle,

I'd just like to say how much I appreciate all the hard work and extra miles that you go through for your reviews. Your comments in this thread are proof of why I only trust HardOCP reviews these days. Every site out there reviews only one thing: performance. However, you review performance as well as stability and quality. IMHO stability and quality are just as important as performance, and you review it in such a way (buying annonymously) that I know if I were to buy a system or component I would get the exact same results that you had in your review. That is why I only trust HardOCP when I lay down my $$$ for computer equiptment.