It *was* an older CRT set. I said "15 years ago" - see above.
You did. I didn't say it was a Best Buy, although it might have been. What I was actually commenting on was that people slavishly following what Which has to say, even though a cursory examination of their reviews shows them to be poor.
LCDs were around 15 years ago.
So the example you give to prove this hypothesis turns out not to have been a Which recommendation? Merely a product bought by someone who also subscribes to Which?
Typical logic of a Brexiteer, I'd say.
Casting emperors new shoes effects aside, Sony certainly had picture issues back then with some of the high end 36" widescreen CRT WEGA monsters.
Was it one of them? Should it been sent back for sorting?
I have friends that went through that hassle.
Did I say it wasn't a Best Buy? You'll really have to see someone about this bad habit you've got of jumping to conclusions. It renders your arguments, such as they are, worthless.
The BiL in question "bought, perhaps still does, appliances based on Which recommendations." as I said earlier. I've no idea whether he picks Best Buys or not or whether Which has some other category.
Pretty well all widescreen CRT sets had convergence issues. Which is why you never saw one used in a critical application in broadcast. Always a
4:3 scanned to 16:9.
Excuse me for assuming you were following and replying to the thread. Should have realised you'd just jumped off in an arbitrary direction.
I'm sure that all makes sense to you.
"Megapixels A megapixel (Mp) equals one million pixels. The term is used in reference to the resolution of the digital camera. More megapixels mean more detail, so you can create bigger prints without noticing blockiness on the picture. Megapixels aren't the be-all and end-all though ? the digital camera's lens quality, sensor quality and sensor size play a big role in how sharp and colour-accurate your pictures are". (Which? 2017)
I'd suggest it was faulty.
Notice they don't bother to tell you why though, or the extent to which these factors interact or matter.
They don't tell you how fuel injection works on a car report either.
It was designed as a consumer guide to buying a product. Not a magazine for enthusiasts or hobbies. If you want the ins and outs of a camera, there are plenty of specialist mags that will give you that information.
Why have you snipped out the context?
I'm afraid you're going to have to look it up for yourself - my point was that you hadn't taken the time to read what you were attempting to criticise. Or lying for some reason. Or you are simply trolling.
Sony were using the Trinitron system and made their own tubes. Widescreen always has more problems with spot size and registration, One of the reasons people went away from 110 degree tubes.
Most consumers don't care, Which? tends to simplfy things to a single score (used to be blobs) if you need more detail look elsewhere.
This is why killfiles were invented.
That's what I found when I subscribed many years ago. I was always satisfied when I bought one of their recommendations. For things like household appliances, etc. Which all I wanted from was adequate performance and life.
For things I cared about - like cars or say AV equipment - I'd still read their comments, but at the end of the day make up my own mind.
Of course I'm sure some on here would go and look at every washing machine on the market and research it thoroughly on the net (which was in its infancy when I took Which) Good luck to them.
So 15 years or so ago he buys a new Sony telly, and
Probably a CRT and has used the vacuum cleaner close by hence the need to degauss.
In my very limited experience with Which? on subjects/products that I do know something about and have independently researched I've found that they get some of the basics wrong and their best buys are based on erroneous pricing.
I also got the impression that they rate a product with, say, 100 widget functions more highly than a product with only 50 widget functions irrespective if the widgets are actually useful.
+1
I remember looking through a survey of printers, and they completely missed any kind of "total cost of ownership" comparison, which should have been one of their top selection criteria, particularly in this area.
You usually get the printer price and the cost per page - how hard is it then to work out the cost of ownership?
Lol. Only a complete wally would think that's how safety is established.
NT
Yes all you need to know is what consumables it will use, add them up. But does the printer need toners, waste bottles, transfer belts, drums, etc. do you want to find out for every printer to see which is cheapest or do you expect the expert reviewer to do it.
BTW I do not consider which to be experts, if you see a which review about anything you are knowledgeable in you will soon see how cr@p they are.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required