> That review was pure cotton candy -- published the day before the device was released, with a few other similar embargoed pieces [1]. I was convinced that he just wanted to keep getting scoops.
That's a very serious accusation. Do you have any proof to back it up? If anything, The Verge has been quite critical of technology products, and I have no reason to doubt that there's anything untoward influencing their reviews (other than from blatant Apple fanboyism, particularly on the part of Nilay Patel. Take a look at his recent iPod Nano review[0], for example).
(Which I don't agree with, the way it was written) And then you go on to accuse the same website of something else:
> blatant Apple fanboyism
Seriously? - And how is this related to the OP? And from the review you've linked to:
> The new nano might have Apple’s connector of the future, but everything else about it clings tightly to the past — to a world in which iTunes is still the center of the digital media universe, not a bloated relic badly in need of a fresh start and new ideas.
This is so fanboyish that it's worth the side snark?
> Which I don't agree with, the way it was written
The OP's saying that a technology website is allowing itself to be swayed for the sake of scoops. This is one of the most serious accusations you can make of a journalist, because it's basically saying you can't trust anything they write.
> This is so fanboyish that it's worth the side snark?
Nilay gave the device a 7.7 when Apple clearly fucked up with the Nano. There was a TON of potential for smart watch innovation with the previous Nano. Apple even acknowledged it when they added clock faces to the Nano last year. There were very successful Kickstarter projects based on using the Nano as a smart watch. Instead of making that official, Apple fucked it all up by (yet again) completely changing the form factor.
My accusation is very different from the OP's because it's not based on any factual misconduct - it's simply the result of Nilay (like many other people) getting sucked into the RDF and drinking Apple's Kool-Aid far too much. If you watch the Vergecast, you'll understand very quickly that he has a barely concealed raging hardon for all things Apple.
I don't see how they do. Of course he was convinced, otherwise he wouldn't be making that statement in the first place. My question was why he thought that.
That's a very serious accusation. Do you have any proof to back it up? If anything, The Verge has been quite critical of technology products, and I have no reason to doubt that there's anything untoward influencing their reviews (other than from blatant Apple fanboyism, particularly on the part of Nilay Patel. Take a look at his recent iPod Nano review[0], for example).
0: http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/10/3481926/apple-ipod-nano-r...