[newsclues]

I have an air gradient monitor.

There are three outputs. LEDs that go from green to yellow or red. The small display. A webpage dashboard. Or you can plug the data into HA for whatever you want.

The only issue I have with the display is that it’s monochrome and that prevents making data easy to read the trends, by showing positive changes as green or negative ones as red.

If the display is too small the LEDs are easily visible for quick information and then the dashboard is for more data.

Reviewers often have their issues really understanding how people use products, often because rapidly changing things to review, doesn’t allow them the time to truly use and understand a product.

[jeroenhd]

> Reviewers often have their issues really understanding how people use products, often because rapidly changing things to review, doesn’t allow them the time to truly use and understand a product.

The reviewer states:

    I’ve been using AirVisual Pros for the past five years.

so it's not like they're new to the field. They know what they want out of the product they're reviewing. That may not be what someone reading the review may be after, but that doesn't invalidate the review.

[radlad]

I'm not sure this contradicts GP's point - this reinforces that the author is comfortable using a different product (AirVisual Pro) and may therefore, almost paradoxically, struggle more with a product that displays data differently than someone who has never used either product.

To draw a parallel, I think an iPhone user may have a harder time using Android than someone who has never used either phone.

Admittedly, I'm another happy AirGradient user.

[newsclues]

Yes, time to adjust and familiarize oneself with a new product is often too short. Let alone adopting new sensors into a smart home ecosystem and fully setting everything up the way you want, rather than just the default settings, etc.

I get a new laptop and phone and generally dislike it, because it's not what I am familiar with and it's not yet setup just the way I like it.

And then there is the fact, that the reviewers favoured product has a logo on the product page for the reviewers publication.

There is certainly potential for financial interests to impact reviews.

[ahaucnx]

Achim from AirGradient here. Some thoughts on this.

Purely focusing on the display, I can see a certain logic to say: Display not working => Not recommended. And probably I chose the wrong title for this as it made the article too much focused on this aspect.

However, the main critique for me is actually the general subjective nature of the article and the lack of a systematic testing approach for the monitors. In my opinion this review should not to be called "The Best Indoor Monitors" if Wired has an intention to provide objective and a balanced assessment of indoor monitors.

Of course I am unhappy that our monitor got labelled as "Not Recommended", but the bigger picture to what extent these "Best ..." reviews do provide a fair and comprehensive assessment is in my opinion the much more important discussion that we should have.

[geerlingguy]

That, and many reviewers are given the "here's 20 products, I need an article hitting these buzzwords in X Weeks" task.

You can't just do that and get in quality testing time with more than one or two products.

Reviewing things fairly and helpfully is hard and takes time, and especially as AI slop takes over writing (thankfully it looks like this article at least has a byline), I think it's going to be harder and harder to find actual useful human reviews to guide decisions.

[dylan604]

Come on, these are air quality measuring devices. You set them all up, set their panels next to each other for the duration of the testing, and then you evaluate their performances. It doesn't take much time. You look at them when you take readings at whatever interval to compare accuracy. You glance at them to see readability. It doesn't require a lot of effort.

This is quite different from being tasked with comparing bicycles which would require a lot of effort to give equal time to each one. Unless the journo was a world class rider, I'd be shocked if they rode any one of them for more than 5 minutes.

[geerlingguy]

Applied inversely to bikes: Come on, these are bikes. You get on the bike, you pedal around, it doesn't take much time.

These devices usually have between 3-8 sensors inside (with wildly varying quality and quality control), run firmware that _usually_ has access to your WiFi or requires an app to run on your phone (security implications), and are meant to exist in your home for years at a time.

Good reviews which consider all those aspects take time and effort, even for simpler devices.

[dylan604]

If you are actually in good faith comparing the zero energy collecting of values from a set of monitors to the physical exertion of riding a bicycle as the same thing, then I just cannot have a conversation with someone that is deliberately being that obtuse.

[vdqtp3]

Why do you believe that collecting data, collating it into useful information and making conclusions from that information is "zero energy"? Yes, testing bicycles will require more calories and exertion, but that doesn't mean that testing computers, sensors, or other technological devices is a zero energy effort.