Windows Vista Hardware from AMD & Microsoft: Here’s My Story

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.jasondunn.com/windows-vista-hardware-90' target='_blank'>http://www.jasondunn.com/windows-vista-hardware-90</a><br /><br /></div><i>"There’s a big blow-up about Microsoft “bribing” bloggers, so I figured I’d better get on the record now before someone accuses me of “hiding” something. On the 22nd of December I made a comment on my blog about receiving a new piece of hardware, but I mentioned that I wasn’t sure if I was allowed to talk about it yet - because the hardware wasn’t released yet and not up on the OEMs Web site for sale. Obviously now that this story has gone public, I can, so here’s the story."</i><br /><br />I was originally writing up a post specifically for Digital Media Thoughts about this issue, but it ended up being easier to just direct people to read the post on my personal blog. I felt that the issue was important enough (since it involves my personal integrity) that I should step up and make sure everyone knows the history of this issue and my stance on it. It's a very long post (I started working on it yesterday), but I think it covers everything about this issue. Comments here (or there) are welcome.

[bcries]

Resident communist here. I confess that I haven't yet read much of the blogger outrage over this Vista/AMD promotion, and perhaps I'll take a look at it later. But at first glance, my reaction is one of amusement.

These days, in the broader world of computers and personal electronics, reviewers often get free stuff. Whether that compromises them or not is a question that I find sort of moot and silly - reviewers are usually in a business, just like the makers of the products they review. The desire to turn a profit is just part of business.

Appearing "neutral" or on the side of the consumer is good business sense for a reviewer - namely, because this builds a feeling of trust that leads to repeat site visitors. On the other hand, playing ball with manufacturers (and their MVP programs, promotions, NDAs, etc.) gets a reviewer early access to the products that consumers want them to review - also good business sense. If the two of these strategies seem to conflict, the reviewer just needs to find the right balance. But both strategies are, at least in part, business strategies that result in personal gain for the reviewer (plus the occasional free phone, mp3 player, PC, etc.)

So I'm a little puzzled that there would be any "outrage" - as if reviewers are really just like the rest of us, and write their reviews for kicks. They don't. My feeling is that this kind of outrage is either motivated by jealousy (gee, I'd love one of those Alienware systems) or extreme idealism about a kind of natural, voluntary ethic that runs contrary to profitability. I used to get ticked that some Pocket PC reviewers have been keen to excuse OEM policies out of a concern for the OEM's profit margins, or as it has been more delicately put, "the success of the platform."

That was until I realized that the success of any "platform" (Windows Mobile, Windows Vista, whatever) intimately impacts the success of reviewers who specialize in it. With this kind of natural connection, expectations of "neutrality" are plainly rediculous. No outrage required.

[aroma]

Me thinks I sense a little envy. From some of those reactions, you would think this is the first time a reviewer has ever received a free product... OH PLEASE. As I mentioned over on Zune Thoughts here (http://forums.thoughtsmedia.com/showthread.php?t=513), I hope you enjoy the system. I for one LOVE the cases that your unit is using.[/url]

[sojourner753]

I'm always contemplating people's motivations when it comes to what they stand to gain or lose.

I've never questioned your integrity when it came to the ThoughtsMedia network. Your full disclosure has been something that I've respected from the beginning.

I think its to some degree envy, but also the fact that some bloggers have not dealt with this responsibly. Whether it was in being open, or in the way in which they do disclose the information.