I’ve written in the past about how user reviews on retailer sites (Amazon, Newegg, etc.) should always be taken with a grain of salt for the simple reason that you don’t know who is posting and what their motivation is. Here is a great example of that (article title: Slide Caught Posting Fake Positive Reviews For Their Own App).
For the most part, user reviews are usually a good thing and often times the only resource available. Much like measuring eBay feedback, I will typically ‘trust’ user reviews and ratings as long as they have at least 10 reviews available. A single glowing review, while probably fine, always looks a bit suspicious to me. Call me a cynic.
I’m curious if my opinion is shared or am I overly paranoid?
Like what you read?
If so, please join over 28,000 people who receive our exclusive weekly newsletter and computer tips, and get FREE COPIES of 5 eBooks we created, as our gift to you for subscribing. Just enter your name and email below:
No, you’re not overly paranoid – or at least, you’re not alone in that you – we – are.
I’m the same, I usually don’t trust user reviews alone unless there’s several good reviews, and even then, I usually always look around the net for other reviews by trusted sites.
I agree, your not paranoid, I too am asked frequently about user reviews in surveys I take when considering products. The only thing I would add to your running commentary about this would be that;
1. Check the date of the reviews is also a good practice.
2. Vendor review sites are not reliable in that many times, vendors have ‘preferred’ software packages for instance they promote for whatever reason (norton, mcafee are the ones I see most often) despite there being better or updated packages that don’t hose machines (oops… did I say that outloud). For instance a friend of mine recently based upon the review of a writer for a pc mag downloaded a ‘trial’ software package that touted that it was the best thing to catch some paranoid bot virus. Upon looking at the site, I notice that a few of the ‘adsense’ and ‘endorsement’ ads as well as the referral link had an affiliate tag to it. Subsequently, after downloading and installing the ‘Second Coming of Jesus’ he spent the next two days trying to get it off his machine due to system hangs, svchost failures etc. I took a look at his machine btw and he had adequate security suite to hand the ‘paranoid bot virus’ and all he needed to do was update his signature files (which ironically addressed the issue).
3. Realize that everyone has an opinion, and sometimes you just have to take the risk. Recently I downloaded a 10+ consultants share their tools article (http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=497) and was struck by the fact that everyone had different lists for the most part… many of these things based upon preference and others… I was personally wondering…. why would you load that?… anyway the point it, be discerning, have virtualbox to test stuff, and do back ups, especially when it comes to software… sometimes a simple “create restore point” can save your but… I am personally an Acronis fan for this very reason.
4. When it comes to pc maint and support, make sure to ‘lurk’ with a publication for a while and find out where the ‘tech’ is coming from. For instance I have been a fan of PC Mech for a few years because David is reliable, tested and concerned with serving the client in an expedient fashion, many tech sites are more concerned with making money from their blogs and not necessarily from end-user support, their reviews are based upon the latest commission offering they are going to get from advocating product… regardless of its integrity…
long winded… my opinion, I know… but I agree with David… being paranoid is SMART versus stupid… ignorance is fixable… stupidity is permanent…
I often wonder about the reviews I read, especially of technological products. I’ve seen products that have terrible ratings, ordered it and been 100% satisfied. This I attribute to people not reading the manual or understanding the product they are ordering (when related to technology). On the other hand, I’ve bought something with glowing reviews and been very disappointed. Perhaps these are the times that the owners post fake reviews (or maybe I don’t understand what I’ve bought
).
Excellent set of tips Derek – that comment is a blog in itself.
I don’t think it’s too paranoid to think that there’s a lot of unethical behavior posting reviews for products in which the poster has a financial interest.
The one that concerns me most right now is Windows 7. The bulletin boards, chat rooms, and blogs have near unamimous glowing reviews for this product that’s sitll months from commercial release.
This just doesn’t fit with MicroSoft’s practice of unleasing crap on the public, and then gradually addressing crashes and complaints until a workable version can be produced — usually around Service Pack 3.
This is a company that’s still promoting Vista as easy for a 4-year-old to use — nevermind that it takes forever to load, tweak, obtain drivers, buy new hardware, and deal with pesty pop-up warnings and constant “updates”.
Based on MicroSoft’s shoddy past products, and their current misleading “Mojave” and Vista PR campaign, I am taking the early product reviews as a likely attempt to create a positive buzz.
Actually, much of the ‘glowing reviews’ for Win7 are probably legit. I’m a Linux user, and I hate Windows, but after using Windows 7 I liked it. Mind you, I’m not about to suddenly start loving MS again, but it’s definitely a huge step in the right direction IMO.
User reviews should always be taken with a grain of salt. Actually I normally pay more attention to negative reviews.
I agree with LuisR, I tend to try to find negative reviews about a product or service especially if I see 20+ positive reviews. Not that I’m a negative person but I’ve actually bought products with negative reviews because I knew if I experienced the same negative that the reviewer did, I’d know how to resolve it.
Generally speaking, happy people don’t complain so user reviews typically start off slanted. I will look at user reviews, but generally don’t put much stock in them, UNLESS I see a trend in the complaints that point to a common fault or deficiency.
Sadly, even so-called professional review sites are often biased, or edited for sensationalism, often just for opportunistic bashes at MS. For example, note the title of the article from the highly regarded PCWorld, “SP3 Bug Makes Some AMD PCs Crash” (seen here: http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/006932.html)
Clearly PCWorld blames SP3 in the title to get your attention. You have to read the article to learn it was HP and other OEMs to blame – they put bad customized images on their AMD machines. Note my comment from May 17 – and their reply. Oh wait! No reply.
Note how titles of articles about IE8 compatibility issues point the finger at IE8. That’s funny. After years of complaints, IE8 is the first IE that actually conforms to Internet standards, and not Microsoft standards. So if IE8 conforms to Internet standards, and the sites don’t display correctly after upgrading to IE8, is that IE8′s fault? Not hardly! Fortunately, IE8 includes a compatibility mode.
Have insurance: buy from a reputable, authorized retailer.
If you are paranoid, we both are: I feel exactly the same. Also, sometimes the way the review is written sounds like a sound bite from a commercial.
Here is a follow up to what I was talking about….
http://windowssecrets.com/2009/02/26/02-Reviewers-rate-Norton-the-No.-1-security-suite
is a great example of hype… here is how I responded to them…
“Is there a way to discuss the articles or leave comments, FYI, I disagree with the Norton Article and references used to support it. Norton causes many problems on MANY of our clients machines, despite the hype. I used Advanced System Care (freeware) to show my clients that Norton, McAfee, and the biggies miss stuff. I regularly clean Vundu variants off Norton ‘protected’ machines.
Personally, I always wonder why no-one mentions ESET (nod32 or Smart Security Suite) as a matter of fact… it is what most hackers use….
Finally if the company has to release a ‘removal tool’ it should also tell you something.
IMHO… I recently wrote about how pc mag, world, etc have affiliate programs and how companies purchase advertising through them so the default setting for the most part is endorse despite the problems to the end user level…”
Yea, I saw that article (didn’t read it though), and I just shook my head sadly.
And NOD32 is great, I used to use it myself until I reformatted. Although, telling them hackers use it isn’t exactly the way to say it’s good…
Your probably right about the ‘hacker’ reference, but the point I was making was that if ‘hackers’ use it (highly paranoid, security conscious, and self-protective)then maybe the consumer might want to consider it…
I enjoy being a reseller for them too…. let me know if your interested in renewing Nod32