Conflict of Interest?

[Kumagoro]

I had a flick through Custom PC while at Tesco and saw that they have done another
mass PSU test. It is the third time they have done such a test and this time an
Enermax PSU won. In fact three Enermax got awards and if I remember right, were
the only three to.

Now the tests were done at Enermax UK's test site which they freely admit to. In
my opinion that's more than just a smidgen of a conflict of interest there.

Also, in the first test they did of this kind a Tagan PSU came out top and surprise
surprise they did the tests in Germany at Tagan's test site.

I cant remember what the result of the second test was but I would bet a decent
amount of money that it was done at Enermax and an Enermax PSU won that time
too.

What do you lot reckon?

[Clunk]

Does seem a bit of a coincidence. I dont read custompc, but I thought they were ok?

[MadduckUK]

why the hell do you need a "test site" to bench a psu? whats wrong with there office?

[Clunk]

Only 2 plug sockets.

[Agent]

why the hell do you need a "test site" to bench a psu? whats wrong with there office?

Because the proper equipment used to put load and test PSU's to a professional / safety based level isnt cheap.
There is a difference between wacking a few devices on a PSU and taking readings, and pushing them to within watts of their rated output, while taking precise measurements.

[Dorza]

I thought when I read it, that it was a bit strange, particularly when you consider the price range of the PSUs: £152-£227 ; absurd prices for a PSU and they all had decent value ratings; one had 80% for its value score. They all had a perfect stability rating too. This is without mentioning the fact that almost no one needs a 700+ watt PSU. They haven't taken the price:whoNeedsIt ratio into consideration one bit.

Only one group of people would consider paying those prices for a PSU in the home and thats over zealous teenagers building their own rig for the first time. You might also get the odd extremist doing some over kill as well, but thats it.

Other PSUs in the test were also rated very highly and are what nearly all of us would probably consider before the PSUs in question above.Yet not one of these more practical PSUs got an "Approved" stamp, which is odd in its self because they usually approve things too. If enermax wanted to give them a nudge they could easily have done it.

[mcmiller]

i havent seen the article but i'd be inclined to say that as enermax are probadly footing the bill for custom pc to do this then there'd probadly want some favourable results, rather than some article sayin its overpriced blah blah
tbh i'm very secepticle with magazine reviews especially games as they never seem to mention the bugs or glitches which is annoyin when you've brought the game on the basis of a magazine review and its crap

[Saracen]

I've never worked for CustomPC but I have worked for Dennis Publishing quite a lot, especially for PC Pro. In the hundreds of articles I've done for them, and in the thousands of articles I've done for other magazines and publishers over about 15 years of writing, I have never, ever, not once, done anything less than express an honest opinion based on a fair test of a product and on more than 20 years in the industry.

Also, not once, have I had either a magazine try to exert pressure to draw one conclusion or another, either good or bad, or a manufacturer try to do so. There has never been a shred of editorial pressure.

The most I've seen is that manufacturers hold press events, and you get invited. That might be involve a few drinks in an evening, or it might involve a trip to far off places for a worldwide launch, or to do an interview. And yes, it's usually paid for. Even so, every single product review of mine is done on the basis of the merits of that product, and NOTHING else. Why? I daren't do otherwise. I'd be out of work in quick time.

But all that hospitality does mean that you get to know people, so when you want to do a review, you can ring someone you know and stand a much better chance of making your case for the loan of hardware. So the hospitality oils the wheels in that regard. But, at least so far as I'm concerned, the product still stands or falls on it's merits.

As a freelance, my reputation is critical. If an editor ever got the impression that work either wasn't competent and balanced, or worse yet, was 'biased', I'd get no more work from that editor. And, as we all (including editors) tend to regularly end up at the same major events, we all know each other. It's a fairly small world, and a freelancer that was amenable to "influence" would soon be rumbled, and word would go round like wildfire. And at that point, I could start looking for another type of work, because I'd be finished as a journalist.

I can't, and won't guarantee that all people are as objective, and I have no idea of the basis on which that PSU test was done, but I will say it's eminently possible that it was done at a manufacturer's facility merely because they had the necessary specialist test gear. It doesn't mean it wasn't arm's length, or that there was any influence, let alone collusion.

But, knowing Dennis Publishing, I'd be very surprised if they'd let any influence get to them, because just as I'd lose work if editors lose confidence, magazines lose readers if they lose confidence. Reputations are hard to gain, very easy to lose and damn near impossible to regain.

So while it's very easy to be cynical and take pot-shots at reviews, maybe Enermax have won several times because they happen to be very good at what they do?

[IBM]

Maybe, but that wouldn't be half as much fun, now would it?

Who wants to read a post titled 'Enermax does well because they make good kit'?

[Saracen]

Maybe, but that wouldn't be half as much fun, now would it?

Who wants to read a post titled 'Enermax does well because they make good kit'?

True enough. Lots of people like nothing so much as a good whinge, whether justified or not.



More seriously, having said that, I'm just trying to provide a little context. As I said, I know nothing about that particular article or CustomPC, having never worked for them, and nor do I claim my experience is necessarily representative of the whole industry, or that magazine articles are always absolutely ethical. I certainly wouldn't claim they're always right, because many's the time I've seen an article on a product I've just reviewed or am currently reviewing making statements that a product does something or has some feature, and I know that to be utter cobblers because I've got said product in front of me and the article is categorically wrong. Or conversely, claiming that it doesn't do something or have some feature when I'm sitting there looking at that 'non-existent' feature or facility.

But, conversely, readers need to be aware that articles are either written by staff members with a specific workload to achieve and limited hours to do it, or by freelancers that are paid by the word (or 1000 words, usually). So if an article takes me half a day, I get a specific fee, or if it takes me all week, I get the same fee. So, naturally, I'm going to be aiming for closer to the half-day than the week. The proviso on that is that the article still has to be fair, balanced and competent. You can't (or at least if you do, it'll become obvious and you'll lose clients) just superficially skim over a product and slap together a rewrite of the press release. But nor can you spend a month digging into every last nook and cranny and giving a product the evaluation that a buyer will after a month's intensive use, if it's a 500-word article that may pay for (for example) £100. If you try to do the latter, you'd starve.

If I wrote the review, what the reader will get is my honest opinion and assessment based on a reasonable amount of time with the product, on 25 years in the IT inudstry and in all probability, on plenty of experience of previous versions of that product or other similar products .... or both.

But at the end of the day, it's an assessment based on a reasonable amount of time, relative to the fee I get paid. It has to be. And there've regulary been occasions when I turn down work because it's an area I don't know enough about to have a competent opinion. An example would be Project Management software. I've used several, done PM courses in the past, but I don't feel I know enough to competently assess the product. C compilers is another example. Again, I've done courses, used C (commercially), but not extensively and certainly not recently. So I don't take on the work.

So whenever I read a magazine review, I bear two things in mind :-

1) How long is the article? The wordcount gives you a feel for the fee the writer will have got, which places a practical limit on the time he'll have spent on it. That put's some context on the depth you can expect.

2) What do I know about the mag, and more particularly, the writer? Some I have great regard for, such as Davey Winder and Jon Honeyball on PC Pro, for instance, and Guy Kewney on ZDNet as another. But some, and they often don't last long, are muppets.

[MadduckUK]

journalists commenting on the integrity of journalists. would take a pretty stupid one to question there own kind.

[GeorgeTuk]

journalists commenting on the integrity of journalists. would take a pretty stupid one to question there own kind.

I think he was just commentating from a viewpoint within the industry.

[Nick]

journalists commenting on the integrity of journalists. would take a pretty stupid one to question there own kind.

Nope. We do it all the time.

[Saracen]

journalists commenting on the integrity of journalists. would take a pretty stupid one to question there own kind.

On the contrary, it would take a pretty stupid one not to.

We have seen corrupt politicians, crooked judges, bent policemen and kiddy-fiddler priests. Yet I'm supposed to assumed journalists are perfectly ethical, and above that? I'm not that naive, sport.

Newsflash, Madduck. Journalists, like everybody else, are people. I don't make assumptions, PERIOD. That's what I was trying to say. Besides, I'm paid to question things. That's what a journalist does .... or at least, is supposed to.

What I do do is to react according to observation and experience. I was trying to do was put the supposition that that article was suspicious into context, based on extensive personal experience of the industry. But I said that that experience, while valid, may not be representative.

So I'm certainly not saying things don't happen. What I'm saying is that personally I've never been offered inducements, and never seen concrete evidence of anyone else getting them either.


But, back to power supplies, I currently have a vested interest in PSUs as I'm ststem-building and that's a significant question for me. So I went and bought CustomPC, and have read that article.

My conclusion .... either the test results are a complete fabrication and the test figures utterly false, or those awards were the only conclusion CustomPC could reasonably come to.

Why?

17 PSUs were tested.

Only four didn't fail stability tests. CustomPC didn't invent or decide the pass point for the stability tests. It's part of the ATX spec.

So, if they test a PSU and under heavy or full load, it fails to provide a voltage that is within they ATX spec, they can hardly then give it an award, can they? People would rightly be screaming about that if they did, because out-of-spec voltages can cause system instability, and perhaps even physical damage.

Of those four that passed the stability test, one (the Tagan TurboJet TG100-U95) did so by running extremely hot, with apparent inadequate cooling resulting in both heat transfer to the PC, and a lot of noise. Can they then give that an award?

The other three that passed stability tests were Enermax.


So what I see is either a total fabrication, and my personal experience with Dennis Publishing leads me to think that;s very unlikely, or what boils down to a statement confirming that Enermax can make PSUs that comply with the ATX spec, but that other firms seemingly can't.

What other conclusion could CustomPCcome to?

The REAL story from that article is not that Enermax scooped the Awards, but that what the <bleep> are the other companies doing supplying PSUs that don't even meet the ATX spec, thereby providing you, me and everybody else with very dubious value for money.

And I speak as someone that had a PSU blow up taking with it three hard drives, a VERY expensive video card and a DVD-RAM drive when they were &#163;300. That (brand new) PSU cost me (or rather, OcUK) quite a lot in consequential loss.

[Saracen]

Nope. We do it all the time.

We wouldn't be competent if we didn't.

[nichomach]

The REAL story from that article is not that Enermax scooped the Awards, but that what the <bleep> are the other companies doing supplying PSUs that don't even meet the ATX spec, thereby providing you, me and everybody else with very dubious value for money.

And that rather makes me a wee bit worried about the Tagan that's running my system at home...