2CPU.com » News » February 2002 » Honesty: The best policy?

If you remember, the other day I made a news post about Epox waiting for a “fixed” southbridge from AMD before releasing their 760MPX based motherboard. The original post went like this:

We all know that Epox was planning a dual AMD MPX motherboard, and we all know that the current crop of MPX motherboards have some southbridge issues (USB anyone?). Well it looks like Epox is planning to hold off on their board until the issues (and the southbridge) are fixed. Here is a quote from their site regarding their M762A motherboard:

Will be arriving around end of February due to the redesign of the South Bridge.

That sucks that it has been delayed, but it's nice to see a company take the initiative and wait until their board actually works before releasing it.

It seems that my comments on that particular issue have ruffled the feathers of a few different manufacturers. A representative of one company joined our IRC channel last night and expressed some concern about my comments, and another representative (from another company) had a nice email exchange with me last night where they basically threatened me. “Take down or change your comments or we won’t work with you ever!” was the gist of the exchange (not that they have ever sent us anything anyway). But I digress…

Through the course of these exchanges, I rethought my original comment and decided that it was indeed a bit misleading. Maybe I give you (our readers) too much credit and assumed that by “broken southbridge” you understood that I was talking about the USB issues on the current crop of 760MPX boards. So, I changed my original comment to read like this:

That sucks that it has been delayed, but it's nice to see a company take the initiative and wait until everything on their board actually works as expected before releasing it.

What burns me up is that I have been more than fair with all of the MPX boards, from every company. The two that contacted us were not even mentioned in the news post, only “implied” (according to them). Pardon me for calling a spade a spade, but the USB on the southbridge of all currently shipping MPX boards IS BROKEN. This is fact. Putting a PCI USB adapter (1.1 or 2.0) in the box does not constitute working USB and it sacrifices one usable PCI slot. To quote myself (again):

The USB issue is the only thing I could find to count against this board. I know it is not a Tyan thing, or an Asus (MSI, Epox, Gigabyte) thing. It is a problem with the chipset.

http://www.2cpu.com/Hardware/tyantigermpx/6.html

Our view here at 2CPU.com is and always has been that we are only accountable to ourselves and our readers. We will never bow to a manufacturer’s requests unless they are rational and/or warranted (like testing a preproduction motherboard or something of that sort). I did find fault with my original comment, and I changed it.

We have been flamed by manufacturers before regarding our take on their products, and we have been flamed by readers saying we are brand biased. The truth is that some manufacturers are willing to take the good with the bad and move on, but they realize the worth of a site like this in getting their word out. Sometimes that word is a bad word, it happens. But when I am called “unethical” because I state the obvious, I get seriously offended.

We (the staff) have been discussing this at length, from all possible angles. It actually caused me to lose sleep last night (seriously). We would like to know what you think about all of this, because in the end, we are only here for you, and you guys are the ones supporting this site and keeping us going in tough financial times.

JEC252 Too much time on my hands Posts: 3701 Joined: 2001-05-23

#13737 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:15 PM I'd say that your comments could have been better worded with some close scrutiny, but myself and I'm sure most of the other readers were just fine with them as-is, understanding that the issue with the boards was only with USB. Let's face it, if anybody didn't know, they could have easily found that out by some simple digging around on this site. Even comedians must assume a certain level of knowledge from their audience, and we must as well. If you don't know what we're talking about on this site we'd be glad to bring you up to our level, but 2cpu shouldn't stoop to the lowest common denominator because in not catering to that level is where 2cpu gets its real value, in catering to those with a base knowledge higher than the average of the population. We expect more than just bland C|Net articles* from 2cpu, we expect more technically oriented articles with information that matters to the readers. In return, 2cpu should be able to expect a higher base knowledge and experience level from its regular readers. While there will be newbies here, and in fact they should be welcomed, 2cpu should endevour to bring them up to the level of the rest of the readers, not use dumbing down tactics to make the topics readable by the general population. In that way more people become more proficient computers and are motivated to go even further than they have already, not to feel that computers are too hard for them to learn from dumbing-down articles. *I have nothing against C|Net, mind you, but they are designed to be readable by everyone and hence seem rather long-winded to myself and my guess would be that I am not atypical of 2cpu readers. Once again we've saved civilization as we know it. And the good news is, they're not gonna prosecute!

rogersr Aspiring Duallie Posts: 96 Joined: 2000-07-21

#13738 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:21 PM Right on...kinda! Of course you guys are right, but why make it this public? The new sentence is better, if they still have a problem with it, then don't listen. You said yourself, they never sent stuff anyway, so who cares? I would have solved this by simply posting a new News item, a Correction, which said that the last sentence of previous news item was misleading, and has been changed, along with the new content. That's it. Nothing more was required. I wouldn't have mentioned a thing about the hardware vendors. It's nobody's business other than between you and them. I've seen this stunt before, many times. By bringing it to public as has been done (oooh...we're being opressed by some big hardware vendor), it creates a "geek community vs them" attitude which typically results in a flurry of activity (web hits) as the story gets picked up by other sites. It is not news-worthy in the least (at least not to me, I realize this stuff happens every day, in every industry). Making it public is a little self serving. Nothing can be obtained from it other than a traffic spike over the next few days. It's something I'd expect from Tom's Hardware, not 2CPU. Just my 2 bits. Rhino

Phobos SMP Newbie Posts: 10 Joined: 2002-01-07

#13739 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:22 PM I think I would have to say that what you said was just fine as it was. Nowadays you run into lots of "review" sites that really just seem to be a front for verbally selling products to people. Instead of honest reviews you get sites labeling products as the greatest thing since the invention of pr0n. I don't think you really stepped on any toes, or shouldn't have, with what was said. True, it was to the point and in a no-holds-barred sort of way, but it wasn't incorrect at all. The southbridge IS broken on those boards, and many people are upset by that fact, myself included. I think some companies are simply looking for praise from all angles because they're used to it from the kiss-ass review sites that do nothing but praise them. But your website is hear to inform Joe Blow Average about the news going on in the dual cpu world. Had what you said been a complete lie, or if you had said something to the effect that "xxxxxxx company really sucks it. What a bunch of losers. Epox is smart. F**k the other companies!" then I would see their point in complaining, but you simply reported it as it is, not as they wanted it to be. That's what reporting is about. If you try to soften the truth so you don't step on any toes, you might as well just post "Today some parts were released." and call it a day. Keep bringing us the truth as it is, not as they want it to be. I come here for honesty, not for sugar-coated "news".

Big B Psychic or Psycho? Posts: 3631 Joined: 2001-07-03

#13740 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:27 PM "We have been flamed by manufacturers before regarding our take on their products, and we have been flamed by readers saying we are brand biased. The truth is that some manufacturers are willing to take the good with the bad and move on, but they realize the worth of a site like this in getting their word out. Sometimes that word is a bad word, it happens. But when I am called Hardware Forums|2CPU|My DVD's|Heatware=BigB Gigabyte NF650SLI|2GB OCZ PC6400|Pentium E 2160|GF7900GS (SLI)...XP SP2 MSI P965 Neo-F|1GB SuperTalent PC2-5300|PentiumD 920|Radeon X1650...XP SP2

Wowzers Frustrated Guru Posts: 74 Joined: 2001-05-18

#13741 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:32 PM The real issue here is: will this site become a corporate mouthpiece like so many others? Around the net this site is considered one of the most relyable and responsible sites that follow hardware. It is a natural target for corporate bullys that would like to use it for their own ends. It is very difficult to avoid the "Carrot and the Stick" technique that is employed by so many to get you to do what they want. I wish you all the best and hope that you can stick to your principles to avoid those companies that just can't seem to take the good and the bad both. Is it the Red wire or the Yellow?? Your case-mod will self destruct in 5 seconds!

bascheew He who rarely posts. Posts: 24 Joined: 2001-05-11

#13742 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:42 PM I never at any point considered any of your posts/reviews/comments to be brand-biased in anyway. When I read your original comment a few days ago I knew exactly what you meant and don't think you were implying anything misleading about any other board maker. It's obvious to everyone that the southbridge is flawed, and yes everyone knows that it's the chipset and not the board makers fault. I don't think it's unreasonable (although I don't like it) for companies like Tyan, Asus, MSI, etc. to release their boards with a USB card. They want to get products into the market as quickly as is possible and if they were to wait on a fixed Southbridge they'd loose out. (From a business perspective that is.) And at the same time I admire Epox for holding off (and we can imagine how frustrating that must be) to ensure that every aspect of the board functions properly. Does that mean my next board will be an Epox? No, not really. I'll do my research based on my needs and then I'll make a decision. USB works (with a PCI card) on the current MPX chipset and that's really all that's important to me. (The fact that I lose a PCI slot is one of the less-important criteria for me) I'm more concerned about stability, speed, compatibility, and features. And that what it comes down to. If the board makers can't handle the truth, then that tells me someone is a little insecure about their own position/product... The users of 2CPU are the buyers of these products. Just the fact that we use 2 CPU boards shows that we know enough about computing to not be "mislead" by a non-politicaly-correct comment. We well understood what you said! Keep on giving us the facts and we'll keep supporting you. This statement is false.

JohNEE <font color="#E22000"><b>News Monkey</b></font> Posts: 361 Joined: 2000-05-10

#13743 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:46 PM BANG ON!! Don't give an inch - they sure as hell wouldn't if you'd really been telling porkies - you'd have been hearing from their legal dept. rather than a rep. Fact is your right and they don't like it, they took a gamble to get on to the market first and lost. Unfortunately sometimes the truth hurts and the consumer/end user shouldn't be left carrying the can. It seems to me that AMD is the one supplying the less than perfect chipset - but, I bet they daren't argue with them so, it's the consumer they pick on. It's absolutely right you use the fully independent nature of this site to state the facts for the benefit of the consumer - precisely why I contribute to the site - unbiased information - you can't beat it when there are decisions to be made. As ever, keep up the good work. The Toaster Dual PIII 800E, T100, Win2k, 512MB Crucial, 2940U2W + 2x 18.4 Gb 10k II's, GF2 Ultra, TBSC, Pioneer DVD-ROM, Plextor 24/10/40A, 3com NIC - in a modded Aopen HX08.

The_Shrike SMP Newbie Posts: 19 Joined: 2002-01-24

#13744 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:54 PM I just wanted to take this opportunity to voice my support for your opinions, and the actions of this website. I have been reading 2CPU for sometime, and only recently I have begun posting here.... but I digress. Thank you for having the integerity to remain above the corperate ass-kissing contest much of the hardware community has degenerated into. I value your honesty, and your insight- and I look forward to more in the future. Thank you, The Shrike

bdohmen SMP Sailor Posts: 671 Joined: 2001-10-26

#13745 Posted on: 02/09/2002 10:55 PM I say stand your ground. The ONLY way I would possibly consider backing off is if AMD contacted you, because its THEIR chipset. I dont think you were at all unfair in your review. If you give in to the critique of the manufacturer then this site will just become another anandtech. | MSI 875 Neo | P4 2.4C | 1024MB PC3200 | WD Raptor |

Jim_ Administrator Posts: 3464 Joined: 2000-03-15

#13746 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:06 PM Originally posted by rogersr Making it public is a little self serving. Nothing can be obtained from it other than a traffic spike over the next few days. Is it self serving due to the fact that you think we'll receive a traffic spike over the next several days as a result? This doesn't help us at all, to be honest. Page views for us is virtually irrelevant because we make absolutely nothing on banner views anymore (not that we made -much- in the past). Traffic schmaffic. One could hypothesize that it might draw additional regular readers to the website, I suppose. However, I doubt this will get run on other websites and that certainly wasn't our intent. As stated in the post by Hooz, we account to -you-, the reader. As always we value your opinions on matters that pertain to the operation of this site. We're here for -you-, after all. Originally posted by rogersr It's something I'd expect from Tom's Hardware, not 2CPU. Heh, this made Hooz and I laugh. A lot. That's all I have to say for now. :-) [url="http://www.2cpu.com"][size=1]2CPU.com[/url] - Because two are always better than one! [url="http://www.jimkirk.org"]jimkirk.org[/url] - Not a Myth any Longer. Just a Dad.[/size]

MalHavoc Administrator Posts: 40 Joined: 2000-03-10

#13747 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:12 PM I think the fact that the news post was changed/altered AND a reason was given is better than simply changing it. By giving the reason, the hardware vendors got what they wanted (clarification on a point), AND the readers got to know why stuff was changed. Personally, when I see news or articles changing on websites without a valid reason, I get a little suspicious. If there was ever any thought that 2cpu was "selling out" by altering the news post, I'm pretty sure that by putting the reason (the discussion with the hardware people), there won't be any money changing between said company and 2cpu in the future. If anything, doing what Hooz did makes me support 2cpu even MORE. /me gets 2cpu news staff a reinforced soapbox so they can all stand on it in the future. MalHavoc Systems Administrator for http://www.BeyondUnreal.com and http://www.ReefCentral.com http://malhavoc.homeunix.com/

VoidHawk =============== Posts: 72 Joined: 2000-04-19

#13748 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:13 PM With you guys 100% on this. RioWorks SDVIA(BIOS 1.70)|2x PIII 733|512MB|2x IBM75GXP 30GB(RAID 0),DVD-ROM,LG CD-RW|SB Live Platinum|Kyro II, 64MB

BuyALambo =============== Posts: 95 Joined: 2000-03-28

#13749 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:15 PM Last time I checked, this site was non-profit. This site is also funded by and written for the readers. Bringing this topic onto the front page is just further proof that 2cpu doesn't sugar-coat anything. Credit to Hooz for keeping us all in the loop. The moment that 2pcu stops telling all, is the point when it becomes a [H]ardware site like all the others, paid by the manufacturers, and written for the manufacturers. Keep up the good work. Now those manufacturers that have the problem, If they would just quit wasting time bitching, and spend the time working on a solution/fix for the problem That would be great, thanks, mmmkay

wpinkney SMP Newbie Posts: 32 Joined: 2002-02-03

#13750 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:38 PM I would have a great desire to tell the mobo man to mind his own business. Tell them to send you a mobo with a *working* southbridge and you will stop saying that the southbridge is broken. I think if they have a problem with articles that are written on a free site such as this then they should publicly challenge them on the forums. This would give me great respect for the mobo manufacturers and would benefit this site and them. Crying about it to 2cpu and not correcting you publicly makes me think of them as babies. As to what I think of how you handled the issue, you did the best you could considering the benefits of having good relations with the people whose product you would like to review. You didn't really change anything with the clarification of your article, I don't think that anybody really believed that the southbridge was completely broken. Alot of the viewers are using the *broken* southbridge, including me. s2462ung | 2x1gig MP | 512 meg ram | antec sx1240| gainward g4 4400 golden sample |

Cory <font color="#E22000">Do you like my hat? It's made of MONEY!</font> Posts: 412 Joined: 2000-05-19

#13751 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:41 PM I've written and deleted several long-winded posts in the last hour. I think I'll keep it short and to the point instead. I don't think Hooz's original post was off-base in the least. I knew exactly what he meant, and I'm sure everyone else did too. I think Hooz was just expressing his personal preference for the "wait until it's fixed" approach. I know a lot of people were tired of waiting to get their MPX on, and are quite happy with the current solution of shipping a PCI USB card with the boards. And that's fine. To each his own and all that jazz, right? But I think you all know us well enough to know that while we work hard to be objective, we also have opinions and we aren't shy about sharing them. And that's ok because what _I_ know is that our readership is smarter than the average internet-browsing bear, and they can tell the difference between facts and opinions. If I may be so presumptuous as to speak for not only myself but for the rest of the crew, I would say that that is one of the things that we really appreciate about all of you. Oh, and on the subject of not airing these kinds of things in public, I couldn't disagree more. I think it's important to keep this stuff out in the open. I can just see the rumours that could be spawned if bits and pieces of this were to leak out, and people didn't have all the facts to work with. That's the kind of crap that can quickly degrade the trust that readers come to place in a site. I think it's much better to keep these things out in the open, so everyone knows where everyone else stands, don't you? [url="http://www.2cpu.com"]www.2cpu.com[/url] [url="http://www.cory-grimster.org/boxen.html"]Boxen[/url]

Phyz Registered User Posts: 101 Joined: 2001-08-23

#13752 Posted on: 02/09/2002 11:51 PM If the manufacturers have problems with the truth, that's their problem...thanks for keeping it real guys.

Nightclaw SMP Newbie Posts: 46 Joined: 2002-01-24

#13753 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:11 AM Sounds like a couple motherboard mfgrs. are beginning to follow what I call the "Ford rule of product reviews." Ford's apparent philosophy is that if someone writes a disfavorable review of their products and practices, then they either publicly denounce the reviewer or sue said reviewer to pull the offending review out of public view. This despite articles being truthful and revealing about Ford. It's unfortunate that certain motherboard manufacturers have chosen to follow a similar path of product positioning, but fortunately all theyre toothless in the matter. Unless an article is plainly and provably slanderous, all the offended parties can do is complain. Since your article explicitly calls attention to the fact that it is a chipset problem and not brand-specific, all they can do is make a racket. My advice: log off, and go catch up on lost sleep. Tyan S2460 - Deceased: 2x AXP 1900+ |2048 MB regECC (4x256M Viking)|ATI Radeon 8500DV 64M|WDC SATA-RAID Controller|2x Maxtor SATA 160GB drives|SB Audigy Platinum EX|16x DVD-ROM|Yamaha CRW2100FXZ

nitro_fish SMP Newbie Posts: 295 Joined: 2000-02-02

#13754 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:21 AM I feel that Hooz's original comment was not out of line in the least. For some manufacturer to take offense to it would be a far stretch of the imagination IMHO. By Hooz changing the comment I feel that he did the right thing by letting the readers of 2cpu know exactly why. I think the readers would deserve a reason why it was changed. I hope that the majority of our readers if not all of them feel the same way. If it wasn't for the readers and their donations we would not be able to provide them with the uncompromised content that they deserve. Both Hooz and Jim_ never hold back on a review. They are people of integrity and will not ever mislead you by being biased. They have always set the precedence here and will continue to do so. Aloha and Mahalo nui loa! Some kind of smoking silicon disaster in the making

hardy SMP Newbie Posts: 6 Joined: 2000-12-28

#13755 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:26 AM Hooz is right "they" are wrong, even more so if you believe in freedom of speech. I'm still holding out my buy of any MPX board because of the USB issue. Right On Hooz... Asus P2B-DS|2xP3 450|4x256MB Crucial|Asus GF2 6600|Plextor Ultraplex40Ts (2x)|Plexwriter 12/10/32S|Maxtor DiamondMax60+ (2x 30GB)|3Com 905C-tx|SBlive|LiteOn TX600 case|Enermax 350W PSU

DracoDan Witty text Posts: 331 Joined: 2001-09-11

#13756 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:29 AM rogersr: I agree 110% with H00z and Jim_, These guys aren't in this for money like toms hardware is. They are there simply to help out us people that need help on our Dual boxes, therefore, they could care less about huge numbers of page hits that this might bring. Tomshardware on the other hand is a commercial site that makes money off of this kind of thing and would post something just to get page hits. I find it reassuring that they posted that they made the change since many people aren't going to read the old post to find out if something has changed. I also think that none of the manufacturers should have released boards with broken usb. The least they could have done is put separate usb controllers onboard so as not to use up the already limited 32/33-pci slots. The fact that manufacturers would come into the irc channel and threaten to stop sending stuff or working with the 2cpu staff is an insult. THIS is where toms differ so much from 2cpu, they would remove such post (or never have made it in the first place) so as to not anger the manufacturers and chance losing their support. Heatware Ebay feedback

kme Unregistered

#13757 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:30 AM Stand up! You are entitled to your opinion. If you write BS we - the readers - won't come back. If you write the truth, we DO come back. As we do. Don't let these guys threaten you. Actually I think you should name the other company as well. Epox was never high on my wish list. Now they are even lower. "The Register" and "The Inquirer" face your problem all the time and they play hard ball and print all the threaths. You should do the same. Actually, you should be happy. Imagine - you are so important that these guys are afraid of your opinion! Mike

Hooz Administrator Posts: 2337 Joined: 2000-03-29

#13758 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:46 AM I am purposly refraining from posting the names of the companies involved. That point is irrelevent here. Just the fact that they would take the time to instigate this dribble is disconcerting, at least to me. In any event, Epox had nothing to do with any of this... Except waiting on a fixed southbridge before shipping their board (ie. The two companies I heard from were not Epox). I really appreciate your support through all of this and I think that if some of the higher-ups at these two companies knew what transpired, well... It would be taken care of. If any one of those higher-ups are reading this, I do have the original emails and an IRC log. In closing, I thought you might like to read the end of my last email to anonymous company #2 (and this is all of the email exchange I will post, so don't ask ): And you did make me think about my wording on my news post, so I did edit it. It now reads: "That sucks that it has been delayed, but it's nice to see a company take the initiative and wait until everything on their board actually works as expected before releasing it." That is the most you will get from me on this issue unless you can provide me with a board with working USB and prove me wrong (And I promise I will give the board as fair of a review as I am able). If that happens, then I will post a full retraction. Until then, let's not forget Epox's own words on the issue: "Will be arriving around end of February due to the redesign of the South Bridge." Thank you for your time. Micah "Hooz" Schmidt Owner/Webmaster http://www.2cpu.com micah@2cpu.com [size=1][url="http://www.2cpu.com"]2CPU.com[/url] - Because two are always better than one! Are you folding? [url="http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_summary.php?s=&t=3074"]2CPU.com Folding@Home Team[/url] [url="http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=19979"]My Heatware[/url][/size]

Jim_ Administrator Posts: 3464 Joined: 2000-03-15

#13759 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:46 AM Originally posted by kme Epox was never high on my wish list. Now they are even lower. Just a little note on this point. We aren't saying anything negative about EpoX, in fact we're not saying anything negative about any hardware manufacturer, specifically. EpoX decided (for whatever reason, I won't even begin to presume that I know positively why) to hold back on a 760MPX board until AMD sorted out the problems with the southbridge (USB issues). I don't think we should necessarily be praising EpoX either, as stated above, we don't know their motivation for this decision. Are they being honorable to the user community by holding off and ensuring a flawless product hits the market? Or are they simply behind in their development schedule and the 'wait' for the updated southbridge happens to coincide with this? We don't know. I don't know. Just an update. I'm pretty sure Upaboveit wanted to make some additional comments on this issue and I'll leave it to him as he has a unique perspective. *EDIT* Damn you Hooz for beating me to the punch. :-P [url="http://www.2cpu.com"][size=1]2CPU.com[/url] - Because two are always better than one! [url="http://www.jimkirk.org"]jimkirk.org[/url] - Not a Myth any Longer. Just a Dad.[/size]

LordDavon http://www.nvmax.com Posts: 74 Joined: 2001-03-10

#13760 Posted on: 02/10/2002 12:47 AM My 2 cents: I have this to say, I think both 2cpu and the motherboard manufacturers are correct. Here are the 2 sides: Consumer) When we here about a board/chipset we get all excited. We wait for the release of all these amazing features only to find that a feature is disabled. Why was it disabled? There were issues with certain devices not being compatible. This to us looks like a malfunctioning board. Even though the manufacturer "covers up" the issue by supplying a USB card, we still know there is a "flawed" chipset inside. It does not live up to our expectations and therefore must be "broken"! Manufacturer) The manufacturer is providing a product that meets certain standards. They have found a compatibility issue with certain devices and the onboard USB chipset. Instead of sending this type of trouble to the customer they decide to disable this feature and supply a fully functional, higher end card (one they didn't even have to pay for from what I have heard). This disabled feature is like so many hundred other features they have the option of turning on. They have chosen to disable this feature while still providing the customer all of the functionality and quality that they try and provide with all their products. This board works as promised. My point? We as the consumer have a way of demanding 100%. We see disabled, integrated USB as a motherboard being broken. Is it? No. Is it liable to say it is? I am not a lawyer, but I guess it would stand up enough to make it to court. Is the manufacturer providing a broken chipset in their board? Nope. It is functioning 100% as they stated it would to you at the time of purchase. I commend 2cpu for their stand and agree that this is a viable news item, but remember... If it is posted on the front page, it WILL be taken as fact. You are a type of media and as such carry a journalistic truth. If you call something broken, it will become news that it is broken. LD

Eraser SMP Newbie Posts: 36 Joined: 2002-02-09

#13761 Posted on: 02/10/2002 01:01 AM Hey guys, I've been a regular visitor to your site for almost a month now. I must say that I value your truthfull and to the point articles. In my opinion, you shouldn't even worry about these guys. I knew about the USB issue before I bought my motherboard (ASUS A7M266-D). Its a crapper of a deal, but it didn't change my decision to get the board. Yet, I can't help but feel a since of dread when I hear of companies who try to silence sites like this. I say keep your freedom of speech. Don't bend over for these corporite nazis. Keep the truth comming! We're behind you all the way.

2CPU.com » News » February 2002 » Honesty: The best policy?