Hey everybody! I'll be putting out a more official announcement shortly, but I wanted to post here on gdgt feedback first about many of the big changes we've made to the site. In fact, I think the new gdgt might well be the biggest shift in thinking we've had about the site since its launch.
While gdgt will retain all the same great social tools around electronics that we've built over the last couple years, the new gdgt is narrowly focused on one thing: being the best product reviews, recommendations, and discovery tool around. This is what gdgt users have asked us for for years, and this is what we believe we can do better than anyone.
A big part of this is direction the gdgt score and gdgt recommendations: our thoroughly researched meta-score, and discriminating stamp of approval, respectively. Poke around, you'll see it starting to crop up all over the place. We're very, very excited about it. We've got a little more on gdgt scores and recommendations here: gdgt.com/help/#gdgt-score
We're already working like crazy on updates, features, and fixes, so definitely us what you think!
Discussion about
Big changes for gdgt...
Honestly, I think it's gorgeous! The design work here is just amazing. Definitely loving it. Keep up the great work team gdgt!
Nice overhaul. I like the separate columns for critic and user reviews with the immediate comparison of the two. If you go to the page for the Galaxy Note, it shows the fairly large dichotomy between the opinions of "critics" and the people who actually use the thing on a daily basis. I think this redesign will help expose some of the biases of the tech media elite over time. This further underlines why I haven't read mainstream sites for reviews in years and instead depend on the real world users who review stuff here on gdgt. I just hope the critic reviews don't ever overshadow the more valuable (at least to me) user reviews.
On the topic of people who write reviews for a living, does the "Conclusion" paragraph on each gadget constitute an "official" review from a member of the gdgt staff? If so, you should start tagging those with the name of the reviewer. If not, what are those summaries based on? Clearly, "Pass on it" doesn't seem to jive with the user opinions of the Note, but is more inline with the "critic" reviews.
Also on this topic, I presume there will soon be some official gdgt staff reviewers that will be listed in the critics column. If so, surely you will show who the reviewer is, and not make it nameless like the "Conclusion", right? The way most people end up following reviews is by finding a reviewer whose opinion they trust and following them primarily, with other reviewers as backup info. I don't think people generally give a blanket trust to all of a site's reviewers just because they are staff members. There have often been some writers for sites whose opinions I wouldn't give a penny of credibility to while simultaneously taking another of the site's reviewers very seriously. If staff reviewers become a feature here, we need to know who they are. I'm sure you know this, but I have to bring it up just in case since the nameless "Conclusion" already makes me just a little nervous.
You might also consider prominently featuring the reviews of gdgt users who consistently get highly voted up by others on the site, since people seem to appreciate their opinions. I still feel those reviews are more valuable to me than Engadget's or a lot of the other sources out there.
Anyway, loving it so far. I don't mind that the discussions have taken a back seat as long as they never go away.
On the topic of people who write reviews for a living, does the "Conclusion" paragraph on each gadget constitute an "official" review from a member of the gdgt staff? If so, you should start tagging those with the name of the reviewer. If not, what are those summaries based on? Clearly, "Pass on it" doesn't seem to jive with the user opinions of the Note, but is more inline with the "critic" reviews.
Also on this topic, I presume there will soon be some official gdgt staff reviewers that will be listed in the critics column. If so, surely you will show who the reviewer is, and not make it nameless like the "Conclusion", right? The way most people end up following reviews is by finding a reviewer whose opinion they trust and following them primarily, with other reviewers as backup info. I don't think people generally give a blanket trust to all of a site's reviewers just because they are staff members. There have often been some writers for sites whose opinions I wouldn't give a penny of credibility to while simultaneously taking another of the site's reviewers very seriously. If staff reviewers become a feature here, we need to know who they are. I'm sure you know this, but I have to bring it up just in case since the nameless "Conclusion" already makes me just a little nervous.
You might also consider prominently featuring the reviews of gdgt users who consistently get highly voted up by others on the site, since people seem to appreciate their opinions. I still feel those reviews are more valuable to me than Engadget's or a lot of the other sources out there.
Anyway, loving it so far. I don't mind that the discussions have taken a back seat as long as they never go away.
Regarding your points, in building many of the gdgt scores we (soft-)launched the new site with, there have already been numerous instances where user reviews have had significantly more influence on a product's final score than did critic reviews. In the end, the data -- and our research -- tells us the truth.
Still mixed on writing first-party reviews outside what we're already doing, which is essentially a form of reviewing (or meta-reviewing, as it were). It might happen, but not immediately.
Scores, conclusions, and recommendations are co-edited solely by Marc (gdgt.com/profile/marc/) and myself. That's it. The Galaxy Note is a fine example: that was my conclusion, and that's certainly not obvious from the post. But it's not intended to be, we aim to come from a position of unified -- not individual -- opinion and authority.
We'll be doing more with user review quality and ranking soon -- gdgt is now finally (and officially) a reviews site, so you can expect us to act that way.
Thanks for the feedback!
Still mixed on writing first-party reviews outside what we're already doing, which is essentially a form of reviewing (or meta-reviewing, as it were). It might happen, but not immediately.
Scores, conclusions, and recommendations are co-edited solely by Marc (gdgt.com/profile/marc/) and myself. That's it. The Galaxy Note is a fine example: that was my conclusion, and that's certainly not obvious from the post. But it's not intended to be, we aim to come from a position of unified -- not individual -- opinion and authority.
We'll be doing more with user review quality and ranking soon -- gdgt is now finally (and officially) a reviews site, so you can expect us to act that way.
Thanks for the feedback!
Great stuff Ryan and the rest of the gdgt staff. I have faith that you will continue finding ways to improve the experience.
Thanks! One of the things I'm wondering about is whether this new direction "reads." Is it clear that the gdgt score represents expert opinion + aggregate critic and user sentiment + in-depth research? And more importantly, is that the kind of thing that's potentially valuable?
I'm not sure it is obvious, but in its lack of explanation, I think most people will assume as much after they have seen at least one that says, "Conclusion: We like it". Prior to seeing one of those, it might be a lot less clear.
Is it valuable? That depends. Personally, I would generally only put stock in the opinion of someone who has actually used a device. Obviously, the gdgt staff can't use every item on the site, so many of the conclusion will just be second-hand opinion based on others' opinions. If the approach is, "We read all those reviews so you don't have to," then the conclusions can be very valuable if that is what the reader is looking for. For my own use, I will mostly be ignoring these summaries since they aren't attributed and it is second-hand in most cases. Other people might really appreciate that, though, and I certainly don't expect you guys to treat my opinion on this as the norm among gdgt users. I'd say keep it up and pay close attention to the feedback on it, but be prepared to drop it if it seems to be causing concern among too many users.
Is it valuable? That depends. Personally, I would generally only put stock in the opinion of someone who has actually used a device. Obviously, the gdgt staff can't use every item on the site, so many of the conclusion will just be second-hand opinion based on others' opinions. If the approach is, "We read all those reviews so you don't have to," then the conclusions can be very valuable if that is what the reader is looking for. For my own use, I will mostly be ignoring these summaries since they aren't attributed and it is second-hand in most cases. Other people might really appreciate that, though, and I certainly don't expect you guys to treat my opinion on this as the norm among gdgt users. I'd say keep it up and pay close attention to the feedback on it, but be prepared to drop it if it seems to be causing concern among too many users.
This is good stuff (and I'm happy), but I'd like to see an app or at least mobile web version.
As a support specialist for wireless technology for a major player, gadgets are my life, and I enjoy supporting them both on and off the clock. I hope the changes made enable me to one day be a professional blogger for gdgt!
Me want mobile app.
Seriously bud. Love the site, keep up the great work - but you guys need to let us go mobile so that we can show everyone our tech porn on our phone without having to pull up the site. Is this a doable?
And for crying out loud, release Android and iPhone at same time. Not iPhone first and then Android "later". Ever see a 39+ year old man cry? It ain't pretty.
Seriously bud. Love the site, keep up the great work - but you guys need to let us go mobile so that we can show everyone our tech porn on our phone without having to pull up the site. Is this a doable?
And for crying out loud, release Android and iPhone at same time. Not iPhone first and then Android "later". Ever see a 39+ year old man cry? It ain't pretty.
This weekend I was checking out the new site, clicked 'Reviews' and saw the "Routers" category. Ok I'm fairly interested in replacing my router when I find the right one so let's see what we can see....
A big list of models. Very pretty, but my quest is now over. At this point on any other site, I start filtering. Lots and lots of filtering. I only want to see dual-band wireless routers with cable modems built-in. Nothing else is of interest, but there is no way for me to filter out the irrelevant models on your site.
Please correct me if I am missing something. If I am not, consider this my one major request for this otherwise joyful site. I currently cannot use it because the information that is truly useful to me is virtually impossible to find.
P.S. Going one step further, why not apply this browsing workflow to the Recommendations page too? I.e. I click all my filters to only show products I am interested in, THEN I get the GDGT recommendation. Using all your wondrous know-how and insight you've already gained reviewing the products, you can tell me which one of the filtered items I should buy.
Oh and finally, points out of 100? What does a 1% difference really mean in reality? Why not do it out of 10, or 20? That way the numbers become far more meaningful. I remember some consultant I met who only used a points system of 1 to 4 in surveys etc, to remove the '3' 'indifferent' option. The philosophy is the same - make the numbers meaningful.
Otherwise, keep up the good work! I'm loving the endless activity on this site and it is a site that I feel I can contribute to, be heard, and that is not full of idiots in the comments section (I can't judge this post of course!)
A big list of models. Very pretty, but my quest is now over. At this point on any other site, I start filtering. Lots and lots of filtering. I only want to see dual-band wireless routers with cable modems built-in. Nothing else is of interest, but there is no way for me to filter out the irrelevant models on your site.
Please correct me if I am missing something. If I am not, consider this my one major request for this otherwise joyful site. I currently cannot use it because the information that is truly useful to me is virtually impossible to find.
P.S. Going one step further, why not apply this browsing workflow to the Recommendations page too? I.e. I click all my filters to only show products I am interested in, THEN I get the GDGT recommendation. Using all your wondrous know-how and insight you've already gained reviewing the products, you can tell me which one of the filtered items I should buy.
Oh and finally, points out of 100? What does a 1% difference really mean in reality? Why not do it out of 10, or 20? That way the numbers become far more meaningful. I remember some consultant I met who only used a points system of 1 to 4 in surveys etc, to remove the '3' 'indifferent' option. The philosophy is the same - make the numbers meaningful.
Otherwise, keep up the good work! I'm loving the endless activity on this site and it is a site that I feel I can contribute to, be heard, and that is not full of idiots in the comments section (I can't judge this post of course!)
follow this discussion
share:
36 users following this discussion, including:
This discussion has been viewed 1676 times.
Last activity .