I feel from a reviewer perspective, it's not on them to understand the build process. Their entire viewpoint is meant to be based on the consumer's side. They try out the product and relay that info to their viewers. It's subjective, but that doesn't make it wrong. You criticize viewers of those journalists for not trying out the product themselves, but that's the entire point of watching them. I'm not going to spend $500+ buying a Humane pin just to see if it's good. Not everyone has time and money to buy the products themselves. Although the Humane AI pin has received a lot of updates, it doesn't change the fact that everything the pin does a regular phone does better. Why buy a dedicated hardware and pay a more expensive subscription when I can just use chatgpt straight up? Why would blogs and tech reviews do an update video when no significant changes has been made? The consumer don't care about business processes like six-sigma or competitive. They care if a product is going to add any significant value to their lives. I understand what your point is, but it feels misdirected.
So if am not a professional athlete - I cannot criticize a professional team? If I am not a construction worker - I cannot criticize the layout of my room or the poor condition of the road? if I a not a michelin star chef - I cannot criticize my meal? Also, are you aware that those guys critique multi million/billion dollar conglomerates that can and should pay attention to even the smallest details, especially for the price that they are asking? Geez, God forbid they hurt someone at Apple for price gauging or someone at Samsung for not getting the UI right 😅. If they review something from a small player, they take that into consideration, if the price is right. If somebody bashes a small company trying to make something out of nothing in good faith, reasonably priced, but falling a bit short, then yes, this is a bit of an asshole/privilege behaviour and usually the audience picks up on that. It's in the consumer's interest to cheer for the underdog because it means more choice on the market. Competition for consumers is what moves progress forward. If we listened to you, our pinnacle in mobile technologies would still be Nokia 3310.
These Guys are end users. My point is there quote “that it’s the worst device ever” the problem is there reasoning is base on its inability to perform like a cell phone. My problem is the lack of understanding that these products intentions is not to replace a cellphone. How many times do you get cellphone failures, or your electric car battery drains despite is supposedly having a huge range. Should we label it the worse products ever as well?
I agree to some extent, however, the things That made them determine it was the “worst device ever” was base on there initial assessment, that carries a lot of weight and can seem bias. My point was before making such an announcement address the intention of the device and yes give an initial assessment! However, do follow ups especially when your main concern have been addressed.
This guy is showing examples of how it works and I've had my AI pin and everything is fine with mine as well, so I don't understand how there's so many bad reviews. Maybe they haven't had enough time with it To understand how to use it.
Another dumb take on critical feedback. If you think the Humane AI pin is revolutionary, then you're in the minority. Almost anyone feels it's superfluous at best, and at worst a non functional version of their vision.
Who almost everyone? How come these guys are not saying the same about Apple Vision Pro! I had the Apple Vision Pro and Returned it because it wasn’t revolutionary at all, and had a lot of flaws!! Why didn’t those guys say Apple Vision Pro was the worst device ever!! And look at the enormous amount of returns they had!!
![[안방1열 직캠4K] 베이비몬스터 치키타 'DRIP' (BABYMONSTER CHIQUITA FanCam) @SBS Inkigayo 241110](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tnlxo79cAqY/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel from a reviewer perspective, it's not on them to understand the build process. Their entire viewpoint is meant to be based on the consumer's side. They try out the product and relay that info to their viewers. It's subjective, but that doesn't make it wrong. You criticize viewers of those journalists for not trying out the product themselves, but that's the entire point of watching them. I'm not going to spend $500+ buying a Humane pin just to see if it's good. Not everyone has time and money to buy the products themselves.
Although the Humane AI pin has received a lot of updates, it doesn't change the fact that everything the pin does a regular phone does better. Why buy a dedicated hardware and pay a more expensive subscription when I can just use chatgpt straight up? Why would blogs and tech reviews do an update video when no significant changes has been made? The consumer don't care about business processes like six-sigma or competitive. They care if a product is going to add any significant value to their lives. I understand what your point is, but it feels misdirected.
So if am not a professional athlete - I cannot criticize a professional team?
If I am not a construction worker - I cannot criticize the layout of my room or the poor condition of the road?
if I a not a michelin star chef - I cannot criticize my meal?
Also, are you aware that those guys critique multi million/billion dollar conglomerates that can and should pay attention to even the smallest details, especially for the price that they are asking? Geez, God forbid they hurt someone at Apple for price gauging or someone at Samsung for not getting the UI right 😅. If they review something from a small player, they take that into consideration, if the price is right. If somebody bashes a small company trying to make something out of nothing in good faith, reasonably priced, but falling a bit short, then yes, this is a bit of an asshole/privilege behaviour and usually the audience picks up on that. It's in the consumer's interest to cheer for the underdog because it means more choice on the market.
Competition for consumers is what moves progress forward. If we listened to you, our pinnacle in mobile technologies would still be Nokia 3310.
These Guys are end users. My point is there quote “that it’s the worst device ever” the problem is there reasoning is base on its inability to perform like a cell phone. My problem is the lack of understanding that these products intentions is not to replace a cellphone. How many times do you get cellphone failures, or your electric car battery drains despite is supposedly having a huge range. Should we label it the worse products ever as well?
I agree to some extent, however, the things That made them determine it was the “worst device ever” was base on there initial assessment, that carries a lot of weight and can seem bias. My point was before making such an announcement address the intention of the device and yes give an initial assessment! However, do follow ups especially when your main concern have been addressed.
This guy is showing examples of how it works and I've had my AI pin and everything is fine with mine as well, so I don't understand how there's so many bad reviews. Maybe they haven't had enough time with it To understand how to use it.
Another dumb take on critical feedback. If you think the Humane AI pin is revolutionary, then you're in the minority. Almost anyone feels it's superfluous at best, and at worst a non functional version of their vision.
Who almost everyone? How come these guys are not saying the same about Apple Vision Pro! I had the Apple Vision Pro and Returned it because it wasn’t revolutionary at all, and had a lot of flaws!! Why didn’t those guys say Apple Vision Pro was the worst device ever!! And look at the enormous amount of returns they had!!