The problem with Which is that their reports are also taken out of context, not read, and applied to people where the items are really not suited - third hand like "advice" from a well meaning uncle.
If ye read the articles, take on the advice learnt and then discover further to make up ya own mind. Which doesn?t cover everything relevant for everyone.
But how would you know?
I did answer that of course. Keep up.
Their reviews are rubbish for the most part.
I remember Jaguar creating a stink when Which members' reports on reliability said they weren't the best. But if they'd actually read the article fully, the members all liked their Jaguars rather more than some that scored better in the reliability stakes. But of course the press only reported the 'sensational' bit.
Why did you subscribe to a very expensive magazine when you knew the reports were rubbish?
Somewhat longer than 2 years. The Panasonic sets I had before (and which make I've gone back to) lasted 10 years.
Batteries? They have batteries - that can be replaced?? Wow, who'd a thought it.
Hmm, so everybody who called me had poor equipmnet and both my handsets had the same fault? Landline and calls were just fine with hardwired phone connection and also a borrowed cordless set.
The replacements also have none of the problems I had before.
I don't know about Tim, but over the years Which? has done sample trials and several other sales promotion gimmicks ("free quide for the confused", free prize draw, scratchcards?) just to hook in subscribers.
For a laugh I did such a trial about five years ago, and found it stuffed with technical flaws and self promotional congratulation for no real reason except to convince subscribers to stay subscribing.
The chances are that here, a few of us here have taken a peek at Which? at some moment of lunacy, and then decided their purchasing matters should be taken into their own d-i-y hands, outside of Which? (and BBC Watchdog) while folks still have their own faculties.
I pity a new amazing device manufacturer that makes a valiant attempt to sell into the UK market, going up against product pre-selection tactics (margins) of the main store multiples, then the high costs of advertising (football) and then lastly these "consumer" organisations filtering with their prejudices (journalism).
We don't get to see on store shelves the more technical and exciting products from a new producer. That choice is taken out of our hands - the shop display space has been paid for by an incumbent manufacturer (Sony, Panasonic, Sky) to sell an inferior "value for money" product.
Which? doesn't educate choice. They seek with the rest of the cosy sales industry to reduce it.
Thank electrons for the internet!
You are a silly fool, eh? What makes you think I've subscribed to it?
FiL takes Which, which is how I happen to see it. Their reviews are largely content-free and are obviously aimed at dumb-clucks. So f'rinstance for cameras, it's rare that they explain that more mega-pixels does not necessarily equate to better pictures. It'll be "Takes great pictures" or similar banality.
The BiL bought, perhaps still does, appliances based on Which recommendations. So 15 years or so ago he buys a new Sony telly, and thinks it's wonderful, even though at a cursory glance one could see that the colour registration in the whole of the upper left screen quadrant was completely off.
The fact that you're still here to tell the tail doesn't convince as a test of safety for the product, sorry.
As I said it's many years since I subscribed to Which. But I'd like to know just how you test all the various brands of anything before buying?
So you've made a point of visiting your library or whatever to read a big variety of reports fully and thoroughly before pronouncing them rubbish, then?
Why didn't he get it replaced? Or do you think since Which recommended it, they're all like that?
I take it no product you buy is ever other than perfect, and works perfectly over a long long life?
a poll of colleagues at work used to be quite a good way of doing it. nowadays the Internet is a useful source.
I didn't bother mentioning it, although it could probably have been adjusted. They seemed happy enough.
Continuing your policy of jumping to conclusions and making it up as you go along, eh?
I see that's what Dianne Abbott did this morning on LBC - putting random figures together about extra police numbers and the cost. With pay for these extra police ranging variously from £30/year to £2000/year. On *her* figures.
It can be - but you still get lots of contradicting advice. People are more likely to complain than praise - so any market leader in terms of sales is going to have more failures or problems.
I don't think there is any convergence adjustment on an LCD - unlike with older CRT sets.
You have jumped to your conclusion about a 'best buy' TV based on a sample of one? Unless I'm missing something...
Very true. That's more the sort of gaff one would expect from Boris.
My opinion on Italian electrics and vehicles is 'avoid'. So I don't need to test those.
Nah, if you are at least half technically minded, the function, the specifications, advertised attributes of most gadgets and appliance is plain obvious, and ye will reach a handful choice of items with a little bit of effort. Then find internet reviews, and sift out dumb users (and dumb websites) to get the functional lowdown - and see if ye can work around or ignore any shortcomings others have.
No actual need to pay to test anything, if you get the above right.
I generally do.
That could be difficult with some white goods. ;-)
Cars tend to be a different matter. Not everyone thinks ultimate reliability or running costs the most important thing. Otherwise we'd all be driving the same car. In other words if you fancy the looks and driving experience of an Alfa, you'll likely end up buying one regardless.
As I've said, I've not even looked at Which for about 20 years or so. Before that, reader's surveys were of interest, since a larger proportion of owners were likely to reply than anywhere else. And given they were paying good money for such a service, not in their interests to be dishonest.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.