Apple Watch proves that product reviews are broken

“Apple Watch reviews were published yesterday,” Neil Cybart reports for Above Avalon.

“The majority of reviewers thought the Apple Watch was a great device and has potential to be a game changer in how they use technology,” Cybart reports. “The problem is that unless you read every review, you wouldn’t have known that. Instead, the collective conclusion from the web yesterday was that the Apple Watch flopped with early reviews.”

“There were 21 Apple Watch reviews published, but the 4 reviews that were more critical of the device got the most attention, leaving the 14 glowing reviews behind,” Cybart reports. “Meanwhile, most of the important features of the Watch such as watch bands and durability were either not included or buried within lots of other text. Simply put: product reviews are broken. There needs to be a better way to review products.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: It’s not the review that’s broken, it’s the media, especially in the U.S., that’s broken.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Fred Mertz” and “Dan K.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
The 2:26 Apple Watch review (with video) – April 9, 2015
Tech.pinions’ Ben Bajarin reviews Apple Watch: ‘Powerful’ and ‘completely new’ – April 8, 2015
WSJ’s Stern reviews Apple Watch: ‘Good looks and coolness’ – April 8, 2015
The Verge’s Patel reviews Apple Watch: ‘A masterpiece of engineering’ – April 8, 2015
WSJ’s Fowler reviews Apple Watch: ‘The first smartwatch worth buying’ – April 8, 2015
Yahoo Tech’s Pogue reviews Apple Watch: ‘Magical’
New York Times’ Manjoo reviews Apple Watch: ‘A power you can’t live without’ – April 8, 2015
Bloomberg’s Topolsky reviews Apple Watch: ‘The world’s best smartwatch’ – April 8, 2015
USA Today’s Baig reviews Apple Watch: ‘Second to none; I want one’ – April 8, 2015″>Daring Fireball’s Gruber on a week with Apple Watch – April 8, 2015
Tech.pinions’ Ben Bajarin reviews Apple Watch: ‘Powerful’ and ‘completely new’ – April 8, 2015
WSJ’s Stern reviews Apple Watch: ‘Good looks and coolness’ – April 8, 2015
The Verge’s Patel reviews Apple Watch: ‘A masterpiece of engineering’ – April 8, 2015
WSJ’s Fowler reviews Apple Watch: ‘The first smartwatch worth buying’ – April 8, 2015
Yahoo Tech’s Pogue reviews Apple Watch: ‘Magical’
New York Times’ Manjoo reviews Apple Watch: ‘A power you can’t live without’ – April 8, 2015
Bloomberg’s Topolsky reviews Apple Watch: ‘The world’s best smartwatch’ – April 8, 2015
USA Today’s Baig reviews Apple Watch: ‘Second to none; I want one’ – April 8, 2015

34 Comments

    1. Cultures, as with youth cultures, tend to follow a sine wave of behavior over time. I very much suspect that the current wave of worthless/propagandist/filtered/politicized/lazy/perpetual-August-Effect low quality, no integrity news… will be followed by an effort toward stricter integrity. The same goes for our current fscked-up biznizz culture, the dumbass elements of the youth culture, etc.

      IOW: Change is eternal. Wait around awhile and the status quo will change whether it likes it or not.

      1. haha.. the problem is not “youth culture” the problem is the baby boomers. Their gen controls the media, and shovels the shit.

        The “youth generation” already found other ways to get news- and your generations news format is not it.

        Nice try tho.

        1. No, I’m referring to the changing culture generically called the ‘youth culture’. Every generation has a predominant cultural outlook that affects its behavior over time. But you are correct IMHO that it is at this point predominantly the ‘baby boomers’ who have the shovel. – – I don’t know why you brought news formats into the conversation, but certainly you are correct about news sources for the latest ‘youth generation’.

          The general POV about me is that I think about systems and how they change over time. That includes the western cultural systems over the last couple centuries as well as where it is going in the future. I only think of the ‘now’ relative to the past and future.

    2. MDN is correct, but not for the reasons people think. These journalists know exactly what they’re doing: pandering to a specific market of readers who are either anti-Apple, delusional, confused, or desperate (example: those who refused to purchase Apple stock before it began its meteoric rise, and now want somebody to validate their wrong choices). One great example is John Dvorak (remember him)? He flat-out stated the Apple Watch would be a bust here:

      http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2461557,00.asp

      Yet instead of being tossed out on his keester, he is still gainfully employed and continues to enjoy a good following.

  1. In this case, reviews are mostly irrelevant, because Apple is not trying to convince random people to buy an Apple Watch. Apple wants their existing iPhone customers to buy Apple Watch. There will be more than enough “early adopters” from that group of friendly potential customers, to quickly sell Apple Watch in the tens of millions. And then, actual customers (not reviewers) will be talking about Apple Watch… success will be undeniable.

  2. Don’t forget in 1 year I am willing to pay $20 for your Apple Watch so I can sit it next to my MessagePad 1000 and iSight external Fire Wire camera, and Apple Hi-Fi.
    I will pay $21 for the watch edition.

    1. The iSight firewire camera we had lasted many many years watching the lobby so anyone at their Mac could see who was walking in. So 9 hour days, 5 days a week for about 7 years.

      Still have my MessagePad 120 and it still works.

    2. So what’s your point? That someday the Apple Watch 1.0 will be superseded and rendered obsolete by some new form of tech, just like what happened to the PDAs of the 1990s and external webcams?

      Well, duh.

      1. It’s been a *lot* worse, more than once, in the past, and it will be again in the future.

        The periods of good, objective, ethical and honest journalism have always been rare and brief. (Even some periods that looked that way weren’t all they were later cracked up to be, either.)

        Enjoy the ride, and keep looking for pearls in the hog mash…

    1. you remember the olympic gold medallists… they often win by fractions of a second and get all the endorsement $$$ and fame.
      horses win by a nose and owners get $$$
      if you play the stock market and win 51% of the time you will be richest billionaire.

      all that said Apple Watch isn’t ahead by a nose but by several circuit lengths.

      —–
      btw: the haters say the iPhone isn’t much better than Androids yet Apple takes 90+% of all the cell phone profits in the world (samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, Google, Nokia etc make up the rest)

  3. I don’t think the people actually wanting an Apple Watch for what it does for them cares about any of the recent reviews. It’s probably just the reporters preening and the ones that want popularity to go one way or the other and probably won’t be invested in an Apple Watch that actually care what the reviews say..

  4. Here’s the top stories on Apple Watch when searched on google news:

    Did Apple Flub The Timing Of The Apple Watch?
    Forbes-1 hour ago
    The Apple Watch reviews are already in, and the verdict is pretty consistent: Apple’s long-awaited smartwatch looks great, but it’s slow, the …

    Why The First Apple Watch Apps Will Suck
    Co.Design-6 hours ago

    Apple Watch Review: Bliss, but Only After a Steep Learning Curve
    Highly Cited-New York Times-10 hours ago

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.