Dumb review over @ Cnet for G1

http://reviews.cnet.com/Asus_G1/4505-3121_7-32152982.html?tag=pdtl-list

Totally useless review, I am pissed because they are totally misleading the reader by comparing the G1 with 17" better gpu notebooks. The G1 is by far the best 15.4" gaming notebook, not even the alienware m5500 comes close.

 

I agree. the worst comment had to be under cons "its as heavy as some 17" notebooks". I can only think of only two 17" notebook that comes to the G1's weight.. those being the W2 and MBP. All the others are significantly thicker and heavier.

 

That is pretty horrible. They could at least match it up to notebooks in its own class. And the other three could have been configured to be a little more equal as well.

 

I feel that, by being part of the NBR community as well as being much more knowledgeable than CNET on the ASUS G1, we owe ourselves a favor to leave our remarks/criticisms at such ill-intended review. These comments above me are better left on CNET page to guide the rest of the Who-is-ASUS-world, since we all know how awesome the G1 is already...hehe.

Personally, I also feel that CNET isn't being stupid, but they are totally misled. Considering that the ASUS G1 is the first-of-its-kind (a 15.4" notebook that is a perfect blend of performances (gaming) as well as price), CNET probably became confused to which notebooks to compare it to (since most reviewers often like to compare notebooks to show their points). Low and behold, you cannot compare something that is first of its league to something else. Making this mistake probably lead them to a bunch of domino effects that contribute to the low scores, by ignoring the price, looking beyond the horizon of a 15.4"notebook, etc. In simple words, they did not know anybetter, and we should educate them so, instead of poining figures at their dumb review.

 

Quite a bad review. Comparing the most powerful 15.4" notebook to a 17" and making it look weak! They need to compare apples with apples!

The G1 is targeted at mainly gamers. Like the XPSM1710. What CNET did wrong was to compare the G1 to much larger, heavier, more expensive gaming notebooks. They really need to compare it to the E1505 and other notebooks in the 15" class.

 

This is not the first 15.4" gaming system they've reviewed though. I know they've reviewed at least the HEL80 for sure.

http://reviews.cnet.com/Velocity_Micro_NoteMagix_L80x_Ultra/4505-3121_7-32105684.html?tag=pdtl-list

That would have been a more fair comparison than the Clevo M570U & XPS M1710.

And they got the screen resolution wrong for the G1--they said it "only had" WXGA.

 

*made a mental note not to ever read a cnet review of laptops*

 

CNET is clearly missing the point of the G1. While it is a tad heavy (for a 15.4" laptop, NOT a 17" gaming laptop), it offers an amazing tradeoff between portability and performance. Tell, me, what other 15.4 inch laptop comes standard with a 7700 Go, A T7200, and 2 Gigs of 667MHz ram? Nothing. Granted, a $2500, 8 lb, 17" desktop replacements will give you much better performance, but their large frame destroys any portability. And don't even get me started on battery life. The G1's supposed ~3 hrs is clearly larger than most gaming laptops, which range from 2 hours to 30 minutes.

As Jason said, Apples to Apples. Good luck carrying an XPS 1710 to class every day. The Price/Portability/Performace ratio is astounding, and there is no other laptop that comes close right now.

Also, the CNET review says "33 frames per second" for F.E.A.R., but fails to mention what resolution, what AA or AF. These things have a HUGE impact on gameplay. Believe it or not, I got 30 fps on F.E.A.R. on a Turion (can't remember what model), a gig of ram, and Radeon Xpress 200m graphics! So, the review could be interpreted that the 7700's performance over the 200m is all of 3 fps, which we all know is not at all true. It's more like... 60+ fps.

 

That all depends who is doing the review. Dell for example understates the weight by almost 3 pounds in some cases. all munufs do it. asus usually by .5lbs. if you take the weight of a stated 17" nb from dell at lets say 6lbs. add another 2-3 lbs to that to get the true weight. Also very confusing is the comparison of a mobile notebook to a dtr notebook. Asus does not make desktop replacements. that have in the past here and there but they are focused on the mobile market. how can you compare a 17" dtr to a 15.4" mobile. there is a minimum of 4lb weight difference and almost double volume to the 17" dtr. cnet should hire reviewers who get this.

 

I would encourage people here to go and leave their comments on CNET has to how they think the review is misguided, I find quite often they'll compare notebooks that really shouldn't be though -- the G1 isn't the first offense.

 

Cnet is not very knowledgeable when comparing stuff like that. I'm a knowledgeable digital player user and some of their reviews about MP3 players aren't good. When it comes to ipods, it has high ratings even though ipod is not as good as other player out there.

The scores are stupid too, They compare uneven system , when Dell and Widow Pc is max out @ 2.3ghz, and Asus is 2.0ghz... and other 3 laptops are 17" with powerful GPU.

 

99% of CNET's reviews are stupid and done with a quickness because hey, they have a stash of products they have to review before certain deadlines.

The only 'decent' reviews provided by CNET are in their HDTV section, where they actually spend time with the TV (and even tell you optimal configurations for the TV).

Everything else is literally just a summary of the specs, some quick, useless benchscores, and a CNET score which they probably roll dices for.

 

I think my comment in the G1 thread should be reread.... I've thought about this since that post last night and everything I said still stands..... it's so off the wall that anyone with any knowledge of the system (and never having even touched one yet) can tell there is something very wrong with their "review"... Also, Andrew is right...... they often compare notebooks in either totally different price ranges, or sizes..... or even gaming models against ultra portables or business machines..... They've shown over the years that they have absolutely no idea what the hell they're doing when comparing notebooks. CNet has been a source of information for me since I was a little kid and they used to have a Saturday morning tv show...... but they should stick to things like small electronics reviews and we all know that will never be the same after the loss of JK..

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=91775&page=16

 

totally misguided review. you can't compare a 17" to a 15.4" notebook. What i'd question cnet is,"Can you find another 15.4" laptop that has a better graphics card than the G1?"

and they have the resolution all wrong. it's not 1280x800, it's 1680x1050.

 

I used to be a fan of Cnet.

However, I have found them less than useful for quite sometime now. Many of their reviews are outdated or incomplete. And those are the ones that usually come up when trying to research a product.

I remember trying to get solid info when shopping for a digital camera and being constantly frustrated by their lack of technical info or focus on purely cosmetic features. Same was true when first shopping for a notebook.

Cnet and, sadly, ZDNet have become the AOL of technology information. Which is attested to by user comments (usually 2-3 lines with no information or justification for the position of the poster - unless you count the unrestrained use of exclamation marks and the word "awesome" as being worth something).

 

Yea Cnets reviews have been useless for a long time, i thought for a while that their notebook reviews would be at least a bit better then their DAP reviews which are notorious for holding anything with IPOD in the name to a much lower standerd than anything else. for instance any other player would get ripped into for not having radio, not having a custom eq, things like that, and it would never be mentioned for the ipod. other things is youll see such wonderful pros as "many lovely colors", or my faverite, a con for the zen v+ "screen is too enjoyably watch videos on" when compairing it to the nano which has the same sized screen but no video capabilities.