Published on 19th September 2009 by
(see Issue 73, p63)
Originally Posted by Phil RhodesQuote:(see Issue 73, p63)
Bit-tech really has just become an online advertising site for CPC, hasn't it.
Originally Posted by smc8788Lol, they're not adverts stupid, they're just letting you know there's a review of a different product related to this one in a different publication (of which the author of this review is also a staff writer).
It's like 3 words in the whole review, not a massive flashing advert. Get over it and save your nitpicking for something that actually matters.
Originally Posted by JipaI don't mind the ad, but I do mind the "UK only"-extras. It's not like they sold CPC here, nor is it like I could ever get lucky with the competitions :( With so many international readers I think I'm not alone with these issues... Would be awesome if there were different versions for UK (b-t.co.uk) and elsewhere .com, but ofcourse that's too much work for the few thousand(?) active foreign readers.
Originally Posted by smc8788But every tech site operates this way, so why is bit-tech any different?. Most are US based, but there are others based around Europe as well. This one happens to be based in the UK. The availability of the competitions is at the discretion of the company that it advertising it, and they will know it's UK based so will generally only offer it to UK residents. It saves on postage costs and other issues. The bit-tech staff have no bearing on this so if you want to complain, get on the phone to the relevant companies' PR team.
As you say, going international is a hell of a lot of work, and would require a lot more staff (and readers) than the site currently has.
According to our measurements, the Foris lags behind the practically lag-free Dell 3007WFP-HC by just three milliseconds;
The Eizo has even less input lag than the practically lag-free Dell
Originally Posted by thEcatTo be honest I don't mind the occasional magazine reference but when I see conflicting statements on one issue I start to question all conclusions.
The lag conclusions, yes plural, vs the test result shown are very strange. Leaving aside my disagreement at using a LCD as a zero lag control we have:
Quote:According to our measurements, the Foris lags behind the practically lag-free Dell 3007WFP-HC by just three milliseconds;
Quote:The Eizo has even less input lag than the practically lag-free Dell
The former in the text, the latter bellow the 'lag test' picture. Confusing, especially as the 'lag test' picture shows the Eizo not 3ms behind the Dell but a full 26ms behind according to the timer and 2 frames behind according to the counter. 30ish ms isn't bad I suppose but add in a possible 20 odd ms for the Dell and... Sorry, it makes no sense.
As I don't usually view my monitor from a 40 degree angle I find the Lagom 'Viewing angle and gamma test' the most useful. Just take a picture at head heigh and normal viewing distance. In an ideal world all the text should be all but invisible. 'the colours tended to wash out when we moved to around 45 degrees off-centre' is not very helpful.
Anyway, expensive monitor. I'll stick with my year old LP2475w, left to right colour shift and all.
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
11th February 2016
10th February 2016
9th February 2016
© Copyright bit-tech