Let me give you a few examples. Recently, I reviewed Apple's stunning iMac Core Duo here in Connected Home Express. I described the machine as "a winner ... with legs for the future," and I highly recommended it, especially for people who don't mind living on the edge (considering some software incompatibilities with some Mac OS X software). In the weeks since writing that review, I've turned to the iMac as my main email and Web machine, and I've spent a considerable amount of time working with its digital media features. I even reformatted my iPods so I could use them natively on the new iMac.

Somewhat predictably, I've run into a number of problems. Surprisingly, many of these problems have forced me to hard-reboot the machine (by holding down the power button until the device shuts down, then turning it back on). This is something that I've never had to do with previous Apple machines, and I find it disturbing. The Finder, OS X's shell (and Windows Explorer equivalent), crashes fairly regularly and can't be resuscitated. My iPod shuffle refuses to eject and then lingers in iTunes as a weird pseudo-playlist, and the iMac squawks when I remove the device manually. The iMac's three USB 2.0 ports are woefully inadequate—I need at least six, but eight or more would be better—and the Belkin USB hub I often use refuses to let attached devices appear in the Finder. I purchased a song from iTunes, and it won't download successfully despite repeated tries. Finally, 2 days ago, Apple Mail started crashing incessantly, for most of a day. I'm not sure what fixed it, but when I tested it for the umpteenth time late that day, it started working again. Now I'm not sure that I trust it.

Here's an even worse example: In October 2004, I reviewed HP's Media Center Extender on the SuperSite for Windows and awarded the product four stars out of five, noting that it was "an excellent solution for enjoying your digital media content from anywhere in the house, especially if you can connect the two via wired networking." That statement was true during the month-long testing period. But since then, I've tried to use the Extender, and an almost identical Linksys model, as my primary TV interface, and I've given up time and time again.

The problem is that the Media Center Extenders perform horribly over wireless networks, don't support all the features or even media formats that a true Media Center PC supports, and have never been upgraded as promised with new functionality. Protected content, such as that from HBO or Cinemax, refuses to play over the Extenders, and viewing rented movies from services such as MovieLink or CinemaNow is a nightmare. If I was reviewing this device now, I'd award it two stars out of five. I've wanted to toss it out the window more times than I can count.

So what's the moral of this story? I'm not sure. Like any tech reviewer, I try to get it right the first time because I know people are relying on me to make expensive and crucial decisions about consumer electronics and computing products. I have no reason to give products an artificially high rating, and plenty of reasons not to. But I'm as human as the next guy, and I can make mistakes. What I'd like is the ability to go back and fix things at a later date when necessary or, if possible, even confirm what I've previously written.

As for that iMac, I still like it a lot, and coincidentally, Apple just released OS X 10.4.5, which addresses a few Intel-specific Mac problems. But I stand by the notion that it's not ready for mainstream computer users. I'm sure Apple will fix any remaining problems. But I wish the machine was a slam dunk, and it's not. And I figured that out much sooner than the expected 28 days.

Article Information

Email this Article Printer-Friendly

Reader Comments
uh, well if your reviews are posted, then you can EDIT them or ADD to them. Crazy idea huh. -Rick Riok -February 15, 2006 On the flip side, you can see this alot in the gaming circles of the web as well. I know a number of both printed and online versions of the review crews have policies against reviewing software which has been patched. Some of the games scoring in the low 40% at review time, turn out to be 80-90% gems and cult classics after a patch or two... a bonus for the bargain bin shopper, but a harsh kick to the developers. websurfer -February 15, 2006 Wow. Over the years I've heard slams against computers similar to those you list about the iMac Core Duo, but never about a Mac. "Not ready for mainstream computer users"? Thanks for being honest. Actually, I've come to believe that most articles need to be written as blogs, with some kind of comment area down below. Give the author and editor space right below, then allow other comments to continue. Some publications might allow that comment area to be off in a "your voice" section, while others might want those comments right under the original article. Add this "Author's Update" to Connected Home Mag and more of us will trust y'all even more! Thanks. Craig Roberts -February 15, 2006 Paul, I agree with your comments and feel that a "28 Days Later" feature should be a regular for follow up of reviews. I am usually an early adopter of hi-tech but have learned the hard way that most things don't always work as they should especially wireless networks. J P Kelly Royal Oak, Michigan J P Kelly -February 15, 2006 I'd suggest updating the review and moving it back to the front page after your re-review - make it standard with _every_ review you do and people will begin to expect and even require it. Design a score chart that has X days used on one side with the score and X+30 or X+90 days on the other with the now curent score. I'd expect most products would go down over time as the shine begins to wear but ones that stay at the same level at X+90 days would be the ones I'd really look at getting (I have become patient in my older years). Derek A. Muenzel -February 15, 2006 Isn't this why we blog rather than do reviews? If there was some way to link an actual review (which is a good thing) to bloglike updates, or updates IN a blog then wouldn't that solve the problem? As far as rating? Just say no. I've reviewed software for catalogs before and while this is far from the same thing (since catalogs are always supposed to be positive, for instance) you can't really get a good rating on something you've used for afew hours or even days since problems don't often show up until you're looking at the cool features or it's had a chance to burn in (and up). --woody C. Woody Butler -February 15, 2006 No worries Paul. I've made a few purchases with the help of your reviews. A good review is still, at worst, an opinion, and at best, a partial evaluation. By the way, your review on Windows Media Center 2005 compelled me to order that version of Windows when I purchased a new PC and, wow, I enjoy the benefits of my "Free Tivo" almost every day. Keep up the good work - you rule. Lou Lou -February 15, 2006 @websurfer: The Dev should have done a better job in the first place - I am a software dev tester and I see it in my own shop....testing is relegated to last minute ad hoc - if there is ever a place to take time out from the project, do it at the end, during testing! Derek A. Muenzel -February 15, 2006 @Derek A. Muenzel: That's fine the dev's should have done a better job, but in my 10+ years as a network admin/architect, Comp. Sci Professor, and 20 years of all around tech guy - I've never seen a perfect product, software or hardware, that can sustain the rigors of the real world ... otherwise we'd all be driving perfect cars, in houses were roofs never leak, with internet connections that never lag or go dead. My point was made in reference to the light that Paul's comments address the fact that reviews don't stand up to the test of time, whether positive or negative, unless as others have stated - there is a public forum allowing the reviews to be a living document. websurfer -February 15, 2006 Consider yourself lucky to be able to hold onto a product long enough to have it explode in your face. Especially at the higher end of the hardware business, reviewers don't get to keep the gear, so there's no telling what the product will do in the long-term. On the flip side, it's also irritating to read bad reviews of a since-upgraded product. OK thanks, but that review was of v2 and the product is now at v7. Yet a lot of sites are just not that dilligent about (or interested in) updating their content. And I agree with Lou - you rule. Suasoria -February 15, 2006 I was glad to read this article. I have been considering purchasing a media center extender but had some reservations as to whether it would play eveything the computer does itself. They need to allow the end user to customize what the extender can play by adding third party codecs. So I guess now I'll have to wait for version 2 or 3 before making the purchase. Awaitingperfection -February 15, 2006 this seems incredibly stupid, to assume your negative experiences with a device will be commonplace... it sounds like you have bad RAM or a misbehaving USB device sean broderick -February 15, 2006 Umm, you almost certainly have some bad RAM installed. Just boot from the Hardware Test DVD that came with your iMac and run the extended hardware test. Did you install any third party memory? If so, I'll bet you anything you simply have a bad RAM module. I have an iMac Core Duo and have not had any of the same issues you're describing. A bad RAM module will cause the exact same kinds of problems you're describing. Dr. Mac -February 15, 2006 I completely agree with Dr. Mac. I have not seen ANY of your issues with the intel iMac, but have seen bad RAM cause those same problems in a variety of Macs. I did see one Mac with a bad logic board exhibit the same symptoms, but that is a rarity. I would suspect the RAM even if the Hardware Test DVD says it checks out. Crow -February 15, 2006 Paul, in regards to your desire to revisit a review, you may want to take a page from our friends at PBS's Motorweek. They have a segment called the long term road test. You could have a new column called "28 Days Later:" You can always kick the tires at the showroom, but you never know how it drives until you've had her awhile. Michael Sumin -February 15, 2006 Bad RAM will absolutely cause the same problems you're describing with ANY computer, whether it be a PC or a Mac. Simple logic dictates that you likely have a bad memory module in there, nothing more. I'm surprised that someone who does "tech reviews" for a living wouldn't have known this right away. Test your RAM and if it's a bad chip from Apple, it's covered under the system's warranty. Or if it's a bad module from a third party that you installed yourself, you just simply need to exchange it for a good one. Rob -February 15, 2006 You're piqued that the iMac doesn't have eight USB ports - OR MORE? Egads! It's a computer; not a waffle-iron. And it doesn't take 28 days to count the ports. Well, maybe on your dream machine it might... ;) Nubo -February 16, 2006 You could probably count 100,000 or so USB ports in 28 days, which is a bit excessive even for a dream machine. But there is a lot of difference between counting and actually realizing how many you need to use. When I first got the computer I'm using now it had plenty of USB ports but since than that has changed, and the built-in ones just aren't adequate. I'd also guess if his attached devices would show up in when connected to his hub then it wouldn't have come up as an issue. Dijit -February 17, 2006 Your reviews worth more to me if you find a good way to address this issue. If there is updated opinion, it should be impossible to read the original review without being aware of the update. Perhaps you could show an original review date, a "last updated" date, and attach the addenda at the end of the review. If you implement a "28 days later", please do so as a section of the newsletter that provides an alert to the change and links to the updated review. The most important updates would be those related to changes in your opinion or the facts about the reviewed item. These might result from additional experience with the item, some revision in the item or the way it is marketed, or changes in the competition which impact your bases for the assessment of the item. It would also be helpful for some items to have a reaffirmation of your review after some time. E.g, "It's been x months since I reviewed this item; I have been using it ever since; and my opinions have been confirmed by this experience." JoeM -February 28, 2006 I agree that reviewers should post follow-up reviews. Any software or hardware is going to have problems and most aren't caught in many reviews. I can think of many products that have had useability bugs or defects that were never mentioned in the article. In my purchasing experience, I look for the best overall reviews and then look at the user reviews. While many user reviews aren't helpful ("this sucks!!"), you can see a pattern develop. Then you ask yourself "can I live with this problem?" I have never found the overall user consensus to be wrong. Many products' defects only show up in later reviews that compare v2.0 with version v1.0. IE, you never saw problems with the MX1000 mice until the G7/ G5 mice came out. If you read user reviews you see intermittent lag issues are common, which kills the MX1000 as a gamer mouse. The G7 needs frequent battery replacement but I see 0 lag or performance issues out of hundreds of reviews. I was seriously looking at those beautiful Gateway 21" WXGA monitor and saw several serious recurring issues. I see many happy customers, but I also see the same issues across many sites & forums - "Day 10 syndrome." The DVI-D fails @ Day 10. Frequently. You never see these in the reviews. You might see "we initially had a bad product but company X sent us a new one." Well, what was wrong with the first one? Something like this needs to be implemented across the whole industry. Hae-Yu -March 7, 2006 READER COMMENTS: We want to hear what you have to say about this article!     Acceptable Use Policy Your Comments (required): Your email is only used if our editors need to contact you. It is not used or stored for any other purpose, nor posted with your comments. Enter the text from the image below Please refresh the page if you have trouble reading this text.