Sander Sassen replies...

[Sander Sassen]

Someone in our forums has a good perspective on all this and he worded it better than I could, so I'll quote him here as most people here make the same mistakes, please take his advice to heart, as he's right.

The problem with most people is that they tend to not read a post fully, or an article fully, prior to making up their minds. And of course it is far easier to just believe the negative spin of some company than the lone individual that has exposed them to lie and cheat and start a smear campaign. Rest assured that I would also not be supportive of Sander's article if it indeed was meant to smythe ATI. He however discloses all the information he has and provided PRELIMINARY(!) benchmarks of a PREPRODUCTION(!) card that was NOT(!) tested by himself and he provided a DISCLAIMER(!) to me that just shows he's covered every base, no need to attack the person.

Frankly ATI has succeeded to spin the attention away from the scores mentioned in the article and on Sander as a person, which is a clear sign of bad ethics in my book. Andrzej Bania continues to this day to respin claims Sander has already PROVEN(!) false, yet people simply ignore this. Bania continues to smear Sander, ridicule him, whereas Sander has done everything he can to stay HONEST and OPEN about what happened. If you have not fully read his rebuttal following Andrzej Bania's post I frankly don't think you have the right to post here, or anywhere else, regarding this topic.

Again, keep up the good work Sander,

---
Jason Silverman

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Someone in our forums has a good perspective on all this and he worded it better than I could, so I'll quote him here as most people here make the same mistakes, please take his advice to heart, as he's right.

The problem with most people is that they tend to not read a post fully, or an article fully, prior to making up their minds. And of course it is far easier to just believe the negative spin of some company than the lone individual that has exposed them to lie and cheat and start a smear campaign. Rest assured that I would also not be supportive of Sander's article if it indeed was meant to smythe ATI. He however discloses all the information he has and provided PRELIMINARY(!) benchmarks of a PREPRODUCTION(!) card that was NOT(!) tested by himself and he provided a DISCLAIMER(!) to me that just shows he's covered every base, no need to attack the person.

Frankly ATI has succeeded to spin the attention away from the scores mentioned in the article and on Sander as a person, which is a clear sign of bad ethics in my book. Andrzej Bania continues to this day to respin claims Sander has already PROVEN(!) false, yet people simply ignore this. Bania continues to smear Sander, ridicule him, whereas Sander has done everything he can to stay HONEST and OPEN about what happened. If you have not fully read his rebuttal following Andrzej Bania's post I frankly don't think you have the right to post here, or anywhere else, regarding this topic.

Again, keep up the good work Sander,

---
Jason Silverman

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

i don't know who you are or what this is all about, but around here there's a certain mistrust of members with one post and the black guy avatar

Welcome to AT :beer:

---

Note - Sander Sassen's email address confirms he is the real Sander Sassen.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Someone in our forums has a good perspective on all this and he worded it better than I could, so I'll quote him here as most people here make the same mistakes, please take his advice to heart, as he's right.

The problem with most people is that they tend to not read a post fully, or an article fully, prior to making up their minds. And of course it is far easier to just believe the negative spin of some company than the lone individual that has exposed them to lie and cheat and start a smear campaign. Rest assured that I would also not be supportive of Sander's article if it indeed was meant to smythe ATI. He however discloses all the information he has and provided PRELIMINARY(!) benchmarks of a PREPRODUCTION(!) card that was NOT(!) tested by himself and he provided a DISCLAIMER(!) to me that just shows he's covered every base, no need to attack the person.

Frankly ATI has succeeded to spin the attention away from the scores mentioned in the article and on Sander as a person, which is a clear sign of bad ethics in my book. Andrzej Bania continues to this day to respin claims Sander has already PROVEN(!) false, yet people simply ignore this. Bania continues to smear Sander, ridicule him, whereas Sander has done everything he can to stay HONEST and OPEN about what happened. If you have not fully read his rebuttal following Andrzej Bania's post I frankly don't think you have the right to post here, or anywhere else, regarding this topic.

Again, keep up the good work Sander,

---
Jason Silverman

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

i dont recall the word pre production in the original article. but the disclaimer was there none the less

i can neither believe you nor can i believe ATI because atm its their word against yours. you cant verify the benches because u dont have an R520 which is fair enough. ATI cant really discredit them at the same time either as they've got an NDA with the press and of course theyre just going to say that R520 is better than everything else.

though if you are telling the full truth about your decisions you made about attending ATI specific events, then i think they were abit heavy handed

and yes single digit post count and blackguy avatar probably wont get much cred here lol

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Someone in our forums has a good perspective on all this and he worded it better than I could, so I'll quote him here as most people here make the same mistakes, please take his advice to heart, as he's right.

The problem with most people is that they tend to not read a post fully, or an article fully, prior to making up their minds. And of course it is far easier to just believe the negative spin of some company than the lone individual that has exposed them to lie and cheat and start a smear campaign. Rest assured that I would also not be supportive of Sander's article if it indeed was meant to smythe ATI. He however discloses all the information he has and provided PRELIMINARY(!) benchmarks of a PREPRODUCTION(!) card that was NOT(!) tested by himself and he provided a DISCLAIMER(!) to me that just shows he's covered every base .However he did accuse all the other hardware review websites in his review's introductory part as being "suck ups", you be the judge of how to interpret this part and if you need an explanation from the "journalist" for making such an accusation.

Frankly ATI has succeeded to spin the attention away from the scores mentioned in the article and on Sander as a person, which is a clear sign of bad ethics in my book. Andrzej Bania continues to this day to respin claims Sander has already PROVEN(!) false, yet people simply ignore this. Bania continues to smear Sander, ridicule him, whereas Sander has done everything he can to stay HONEST and OPEN about what happened. If you have not fully read his rebuttal following Andrzej Bania's post I frankly don't think you have the right to post here, or anywhere else, regarding this topic.


---
Jason Silverman

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

Fixed.

 

[Sander Sassen]

Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

How is it funny ? You lost your objective skills when you published it and retracted it. Why should I bother with the rest of what you havent retracted. :laugh:

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

How is it funny ? You lost your objective skills when you published it and retracted it. Why should I bother with the rest of what you havent retracted. :laugh:

cut him some slack jack, everyone drops the bat in the heat of the moment. he realises what he said came across the wrong way

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

How is it funny ? You lost your objective skills when you published it and retracted it. Why should I bother with the rest of what you havent retracted. :laugh:

cut him some slack jack, everyone drops the bat in the heat of the moment. he realises what he said came across the wrong way

Maybe he will realise the whole "controversy" was wrong couple of months/years down the road as well ..

Funny to note Sander quoted a person who pointed out that "Sander covered his bases well" :laugh:

 

[gsellis]

Pete responded.

/thread

 

[jiffylube1024]

Very nice post Pete! Excellent points and proof aplenty!

I think part of jam3's argument was debating the semantics of 'journalism' - that just because it's complete hogwash or a fabrication, it can still be called journalism, just under the "bad journalism" label. While he is technically correct, this isn't exactly what we are striving for here. At least, I think it isn't .

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

How is it funny ? You lost your objective skills when you published it and retracted it. Why should I bother with the rest of what you havent retracted. :laugh:

cut him some slack jack, everyone drops the bat in the heat of the moment. he realises what he said came across the wrong way

Maybe he will realise the whole "controversy" was wrong couple of months/years down the road as well ..

Funny to note Sander quoted a person who pointed out that "Sander covered his bases well" :laugh:

I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss. I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy. I bought the book.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss.

Thanks for the concern.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy.

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" .. :laugh:

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss.

Thanks for the concern.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy.

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" .. :laugh:

Ahh, is this something you know for a fact? Or just your opinion? Of course it cant be anything else but the latter. You really need to work on your assumption level. See, this is why I'm looking forward to after the release and have a chat with you. You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Ahh, is this something you know for a fact? Or just your opinion?

General consensus. My opinion is no different. Why do you think those details were necessary ?

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
See, this is why I'm looking forward to after the release and have a chat with you. You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

Sure, I'm looking forward to the release as well. Frankly I cant wait as I will be upgrading once Nvidia & ATI come out with their midrange cards.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

How would I be wrong ? Sander simply doesnt have ANY proof. I wont dissappear no matter how many times you try to bring that up, maybe you are going overboard in your "wishful thinking" here.

 

[reever]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss.

Thanks for the concern.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy.

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" .. :laugh:

Ahh, is this something you know for a fact? Or just your opinion? Of course it cant be anything else but the latter. You really need to work on your assumption level. See, this is why I'm looking forward to after the release and have a chat with you. You have gone waaaaay overboard on your quest here. Too much to take back if you were wrong. You better not dissappear.

And if you're wrong, what then? I think it's time to get off your high horse

 

[crazydingo]

Why do the post whores on this forum keep pressurizing the newbies into going back to lurking ? Beats me.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

Most people do not read the rebuttal. They just hear what a friend tell them and believe it. Anyway, I certainly have nothing against you, but I do think you could have done it more tactfully. It is one thing to post preliminary benchmarks when you yourself are not under an NDA, but to do that combined with an attitude, questions your credability.

You have to look at it from our point of view. You also have to remember that posting a pre-production board isn't very good for the PC community because the board is not finalized at that point and therefore, is unfair to ATI.

Basically what I am saying is this. If you knew it was a pre-production board, it should have been stated in bold, extremely bold text with another disclaimer to say that the board will likely change before the final product hits the shelves. Because the fact is, ATI could release the product superior to the one that your sources reviewed. We just do not know at this point... Yes, ATI is acting shady, yes the PR fella for ATI acted poorly... Basically, everyone involved in this acted poorly at some point.

I think you took things to personally with ATI and took things in the wrong direction. There were other fair ways to get back at ATI while not ripping on the credability of other review sites. The problem with getting in this so personally, is that you are going to have a very difficult time to not be biased in the future. For instance, people are going to see you as biased from this point on, due to this ATI/Sanders scandel. So, your site mine as well be an exclusive nVidia website.

Well, these are just my opinions. I think it is sad to see people name calling in here and ripping on you or ATI. The fact is, most people would never be this disrespectfull to either you, ATI or anyone else for the matter in person. But being behind a computer where no one knows who you are allows people to act like complete dickwads.

Anyway, good luck to you in the future. Hopefully you and ATI can come to a resolution through all of this, but I have my doubts that it will ever happen.

 

[BlingBlingArsch]

totally right, ppl aren´t stupid. if they see someone who does stupid benchmarks they will beat the crap outa him. next time sanders should try to sneak real benches or be quiet until he gets his chance to test the board. everythin else is not journalism.

 

[crazydingo]

Cameron Wilmot from Tweaktown:

Originally posted by: Cameron Wilmot
Sander could have saved himself a real world of pain by saying who supplied the benchmark results but of course that?s not going to happen in this world or any other. He claimed in a follow-up article that a particular board partner was not pleased with the treatment HA received from ATI but don?t forget this world is all about money and as much as one can get. I can quite safely say no board partner (or employee of a board partner) would ever go behind ATI?s back and provide benchmarks of a product under NDA, it just doesn?t happen ? especially not in Chinese culture. Maybe if the board partner was dodgy they?d provide phony benchmark numbers well in ATI?s favor but HA?s benchmarks showed the Radeon X1800XT struggling to make even an impression on nVidia?s GeForce 7800GT. The only company that could have possibly had R520 samples in-house would be Sapphire (the company who makes cards for ATI) and we highly doubt they would have provided HA these benchmarks considering how close Sapphire (who is based in Hong Kong anyway) is with ATI anyway ? and we know for a fact Sapphire to this day still doesn?t have R520 samples. Remember everything comes down to bottom lines and Sapphire would not risk their relationship with ATI for a tech site, not at all.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Someone in our forums has a good perspective on all this and he worded it better than I could, so I'll quote him here as most people here make the same mistakes, please take his advice to heart, as he's right.

The problem with most people is that they tend to not read a post fully, or an article fully, prior to making up their minds. And of course it is far easier to just believe the negative spin of some company than the lone individual that has exposed them to lie and cheat and start a smear campaign. Rest assured that I would also not be supportive of Sander's article if it indeed was meant to smythe ATI. He however discloses all the information he has and provided PRELIMINARY(!) benchmarks of a PREPRODUCTION(!) card that was NOT(!) tested by himself and he provided a DISCLAIMER(!) to me that just shows he's covered every base, no need to attack the person.

Frankly ATI has succeeded to spin the attention away from the scores mentioned in the article and on Sander as a person, which is a clear sign of bad ethics in my book. Andrzej Bania continues to this day to respin claims Sander has already PROVEN(!) false, yet people simply ignore this. Bania continues to smear Sander, ridicule him, whereas Sander has done everything he can to stay HONEST and OPEN about what happened. If you have not fully read his rebuttal following Andrzej Bania's post I frankly don't think you have the right to post here, or anywhere else, regarding this topic.

Again, keep up the good work Sander,

---
Jason Silverman

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

Since you quoted this I and said it was a good perspective; I take it you did wind up releasing your benchmarking scripts as well as the system configuration?

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: crazydingo
Cameron Wilmot from Tweaktown:

Originally posted by: Cameron Wilmot
Sander could have saved himself a real world of pain by saying who supplied the benchmark results but of course that?s not going to happen in this world or any other. He claimed in a follow-up article that a particular board partner was not pleased with the treatment HA received from ATI but don?t forget this world is all about money and as much as one can get. I can quite safely say no board partner (or employee of a board partner) would ever go behind ATI?s back and provide benchmarks of a product under NDA, it just doesn?t happen ? especially not in Chinese culture. Maybe if the board partner was dodgy they?d provide phony benchmark numbers well in ATI?s favor but HA?s benchmarks showed the Radeon X1800XT struggling to make even an impression on nVidia?s GeForce 7800GT. The only company that could have possibly had R520 samples in-house would be Sapphire (the company who makes cards for ATI) and we highly doubt they would have provided HA these benchmarks considering how close Sapphire (who is based in Hong Kong anyway) is with ATI anyway ? and we know for a fact Sapphire to this day still doesn?t have R520 samples. Remember everything comes down to bottom lines and Sapphire would not risk their relationship with ATI for a tech site, not at all.

hehe....

"I can quite safely say no board partner (or employee of a board partner) would ever go behind ATI?s back and provide benchmarks of a product under NDA, it just doesn?t happen ? especially not in Chinese culture."

chinese culture, where 90% of the world's software piracy (for profit) happens, as well as the first source of most leaked photos regarding technology.... yes, that certainly shows they have high enough standards one could "safely say" they are beyond something as unscrupulous as that.... :roll:

 

[rbV5]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Sander Sassen
Funny, I guessed you missed this one, or didn't you bother to read the rebuttal at all?

Edits
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1814.6/

Regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

How is it funny ? You lost your objective skills when you published it and retracted it. Why should I bother with the rest of what you havent retracted. :laugh:

cut him some slack jack, everyone drops the bat in the heat of the moment. he realises what he said came across the wrong way

Maybe he will realise the whole "controversy" was wrong couple of months/years down the road as well ..

Funny to note Sander quoted a person who pointed out that "Sander covered his bases well" :laugh:

I certainly hope you don't go back to lurking after the release. We will have things to discuss. I for one will always trust the "little rebelious" guy over a corporation. Corporations are very secretive and deceitful (yes all of them) out of necessity.
Its always one little guy who has enough guts to speak out and expose. I watched a program last night about a guy named Kevin Trudeau. He wrote a book called "Natural Cures "they" don't want you to know about". They being the superhuge drug companies, FDA, FTC and a wealth of other regulatory agencies. He exposes them all and the corruption risking imprisonment to do so. This one little guy. I bought the book.

Yea, whatever:roll: meet Kevin Trudeau what a piece of work.

 

[jam3]

I can quite safely say no board partner (or employee of a board partner) would ever go behind ATI?s back and provide benchmarks of a product under NDA, it just doesn?t happen ? especially not in Chinese culture

What? Those kind of broad statements just floor me!

Guess what, no employee of the FBI would ever be a whistleblower!

No one in law enforcement steals!!

No government official in China has ever taken a bribe.

[sarcasm off]

And fyi for everyone I could care less about whether or not I put an ATI or Nvidia in my Rig, I choose the best card at the time of my purchase.

I am waiting right now to make some decisions and in an atmosphere where I see nothing but lies, spin, smear, alleged SEC violations, and a product insanely late and nowhere near the specs they said they would be from ATI. And the numbers are going to have to be, to quote the ATI PR machine "Dominating" for me to choose a card that will most likely, due to the manufacturing problems, settling for 16-bit, and clocking really high to compensate; use dual slot cooling, needs a master card for crossfire (I am setting up an SLI or Crossfire rig), consumes more power, generates more heat, and makes more noise. I am leaning towards NVIDIA.

Thats right I am simply leaning that way, if after I see some numbers from my number one trusted journalistic source ( i.e. Anandtech) will I make my decision) and like every good capatilist in this world should, I will buy the best product.

The ATI loyalist's are also really starting to stick their arses out on this one and it just continues to show. So go ahead and judge Sander for some private e-mails that an ATI PR rep took public in order to smear him, all I can say is that I hope someday all the statements youve ever thought you made in private get used by a PR rep, or a co-worker to smear you in the public forum.

If you want to be mad at Sander then ask him for things like,

Could you please post a picture of the hardware you ran this on?
Is there a second source who will backup (even on pre-production hardware) your numbers?
Do you have any evidence to back up your benchamrks besides a single source your obviously not going to expose?
If your not willing to post verifiable evidence will you retract the article?

Don't start by assuming he's wrong cause of some e-mails he wrote, dig into him for the content of the article and demand proof of his assertions, stop with all this ad hominem nonsense.

In all honesty I could already slam the article on a rational logical argument, using the core rules of journalism and the content of the article. Its beyond obvious he forgot a few rules about journalism and testing, like have a second source, and verify your results.

I am hear saying what I am saying because I read Sanders, "Slander Sander" article and Aderzej's post that prompted it, as well as the e-mails, and Sander wrote that one about 20 times better than the benchmark article. This is where ATI made yet another mistake and instead of attacking the article they used a PR rep to attack Sander as a person.

ATI seems to be losing control, and yes it is up to any organization to be transparent and honest in order to get good media coverage, not the other way around. Sander most likely wrote that article from a point of anger and retaliation (which is not wrong but his failing to get a second source and verify his facts was). But this appears to have been ATI's fault. Sander or any journalist has a right to write what they want and ATI getting mad and , to quote, "Cuttting you[sander]off", is completly ludicrous. They are obviously and blatantly attempting to control the press ( i.e. spin ) in a time when there have a horrible manufacturing problem with the r520.

To sum it all up, if ATI would have just been as honest and as transparent as possible, (without giving away to much to NVIDIA), about the entire problem it would benefit them in the press. Or they could simply just not make any statements at all "we choose not to comment at this time". Instead leaked information got out and they choose to spin the press, and now there choosing to smear individuals. This just plainly disgusts me.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: jam3

I can quite safely say no board partner (or employee of a board partner) would ever go behind ATI?s back and provide benchmarks of a product under NDA, it just doesn?t happen ? especially not in Chinese culture

What? Those kind of broad statements just floor me!

Guess what, no employee of the FBI would ever be a whistleblower!

No one in law enforcement steals!!

No government official in China has ever taken a bribe.

[sarcasm off]

And fyi for everyone I could care less about whether or not I put an ATI or Nvidia in my Rig, I choose the best card at the time of my purchase.

I am waiting right now to make some decisions and in an atmosphere where I see nothing but lies, spin, smear, alleged SEC violations, and a product insanely late and nowhere near the specs they said they would be from ATI. And the numbers are going to have to be, to quote the ATI PR machine "Dominating" for me to choose a card that will most likely, due to the manufacturing problems, settling for 16-bit, and clocking really high to compensate; use dual slot cooling, needs a master card for crossfire (I am setting up an SLI or Crossfire rig), consumes more power, generates more heat, and makes more noise. I am leaning towards NVIDIA.

Thats right I am simply leaning that way, if after I see some numbers from my number one trusted journalistic source ( i.e. Anandtech) will I make my decision) and like every good capatilist in this world should, I will buy the best product.

The ATI loyalist's are also really starting to stick their arses out on this one and it just continues to show. So go ahead and judge Sander for some private e-mails that an ATI PR rep took public in order to smear him, all I can say is that I hope someday all the statements youve ever thought you made in private get used by a PR rep, or a co-worker to smear you in the public forum.

If you want to be mad at Sander then ask him for things like,

Could you please post a picture of the hardware you ran this on?
Is there a second source who will backup (even on pre-production hardware) your numbers?
Do you have any evidence to back up your benchamrks besides a single source your obviously not going to expose?
If your not willing to post verifiable evidence will you retract the article?

Don't start by assuming he's wrong cause of some e-mails he wrote, dig into him for the content of the article and demand proof of his assertions, stop with all this ad hominem nonsense.

In all honesty I could already slam the article on a rational logical argument, using the core rules of journalism and the content of the article. Its beyond obvious he forgot a few rules about journalism and testing, like have a second source, and verify your results.

I am hear saying what I am saying because I read Sanders, "Slander Sander" article and Aderzej's post that prompted it, as well as the e-mails, and Sander wrote that one about 20 times better than the benchmark article. This is where ATI made yet another mistake and instead of attacking the article they used a PR rep to attack Sander as a person.

ATI seems to be losing control, and yes it is up to any organization to be transparent and honest in order to get good media coverage, not the other way around. Sander most likely wrote that article from a point of anger and retaliation (which is not wrong but his failing to get a second source and verify his facts was). But this appears to have been ATI's fault. Sander or any journalist has a right to write what they want and ATI getting mad and , to quote, "Cuttting you[sander]off", is completly ludicrous. They are obviously and blatantly attempting to control the press ( i.e. spin ) in a time when there have a horrible manufacturing problem with the r520.

To sum it all up, if ATI would have just been as honest and as transparent as possible, (without giving away to much to NVIDIA), about the entire problem it would benefit them in the press. Or they could simply just not make any statements at all "we choose not to comment at this time". Instead leaked information got out and they choose to spin the press, and now there choosing to smear individuals. This just plainly disgusts me.

Again, good read.

 

[jam3]

Oh and dingo since you like to backup personal attacks so much how bout this one:

Good program but fortunately for Sander, he's been trying his best into spinning this "controversy" with that angle to garner the sympathy votes. "My girlfriend and I were ..." wonder why Sander used that detail in his "rebuttal" ..

No, its called empathy, cause unlike you most of us have a significant other and understand they are fairly demanding of our time

&