AMD strictly moderated (AMD)

[chipdesigner]

The other reviews didn't bother to test with a USB device plugged in.

Read the opinion post that goes into detail:

-----------------------------

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/01/29/opinion_core_duo_microsoft_power_drain/
Windows / Core Duo fiasco: An industry asleep at the wheel?
By Aaron McKenna
Published Sunday 29th January 2006 18:54 GMT


Late on Friday evening, after nearly two weeks of testing and investigation, we revealed (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/01/28/toms_hardware_uncovers_power_drain_issue/) that Intel's mobile dual-core poster boy suffers from a major flaw which sees USB devices sap upwards of 80 minutes of battery life. Intel has pointed the finger squarely at Microsoft, claiming that it's a bug in one of their drivers that's the cause of the power drain.

Apple, who is getting into Core Duo processors in a big way this season had better hope that it is a Microsoft driver which is at fault and not the processor itself. Otherwise they're in as much hot water as the Wintel dynasty is at the moment. As one seasoned journalist put it to me over the weekend, these two (Microsoft and Intel) are such slippery characters that anything could be the cause of the battery-sapping issue. Both companies are so shrouded in mystery, NDA's and a culture of secrecy that it might take us some time to untangle the mess entirely.


We can only imagine that Intel puts enormous amounts of pressure on Microsoft to take the rap for this bug which essentially takes the centerpiece of the Intel's marketing efforts for Core Duo - imporoved battery life - and beats it around the head with a 2x4. However it is strange that this bug only shows up on the Core Duo chipset, and when combined with the likely back-room haggling and arm twisting that went on last week between the two companies in order to see who would take the blame; we have a gut feeling that there is still more to the story than what we know today.

What we know for a fact is that they both knew about the problem since at least 12 July 2005 and with the first Core Duo systems coming to retail this month it didn't look like either party was rushing to tell the buying public about the problem.

Indeed, those who did speak to us about it only did so anonymously and when they were told that we had the goods on Core Duo and were about to start raining on the parade. Others claimed to have no knowledge of what was going down when I approached them about the problem last week.

Instead of throwing out direct accusations and giving specifics I decided to talk to one particular manufacturer, Rock, who had just sent out a well-timed press release on their new Core Duo notebook, the Pegasus 550N. I asked their PR contact, who asked the engineers, if they knew about any issues with Core Duo that had showed up during their testing of the processor or at any other time. They claimed no knowledge whatsoever of what I was talking about. [Update: Rock has issued a "no comment" on 30 January]

This means that either they haven't bothered to rigorously test the part and were not privy to internal Microsoft or Intel rumination's; or they were keeping mum, presuming that I was a journalist who had heard a few rumours and wanted to scare something interesting out of them.

I would of course point out that they deserve the benefit of the doubt to an extent; in that they simply might not be able to notice a strong hint if it landed on their shoulders and started to make disparaging comments about their mothers.

Any of these three possible explanations to their lack of disclosure on the subject doesn't paint them in a particularly flattering light, but it must be said that they were stitched up: I didn't tell them exactly what I knew and I didn't give them the chance to anonymously come clean and denounce Wintel to us without having to worry about a backlash from the all-powerful dynasty, as their peers have done.

All of this combined - the silence of Wintel and the notebook manufacturers, as well as the palpable lack of a fix for the seemingly simple problem - doesn't paint anyone in a particularly flattering light.

Certainly the lack of the fix to what is supposedly a simple registry error will give license to conspiracy theorists to claim it is a problem with the chip itself and not Windows XP SP2. This would certainly turn quite a few heads towards Apple, whose partnership with Intel is starting to look a little less rosy than it was a week ago.

What really and truly ticks me off is the fact that between them Intel, Microsoft and the system manufacturers have kept their mouths shut for six months and were going to start selling these machines without acknowledging the bug or providing an immediate fix for it. The sad fact is that I think they would have got away with it, too.
The failure of the technology press

I would say that the calculation was made that in the first month or two they would be able to sell thousands of Core Duo machines and not have to worry about the problem cropping up until users began digging deeper. This is a massive, simply incredible, failure of the technology press.

I've read scores of Core Duo reviews and previews over the past month. After being told of this particular problem a week ago I began to read them more closely, and I've turned up an impressive array of quotes for my personal scrap book of infamy: "While offering 14.5% longer battery life, the Core Duo notebook also brought us a 16.6% increase in performance. More performance and longer battery life? Who could ask for anything more?" was the quote from one review.

There were plenty more like that, all of which begs the question: Why is it that it was only Tom's Hardware Guide reviewers who turned up this problem? Judging by the problem, stemming from USB device use as it does, the reason we believe we found the problem is not just our enthusiasm for what we do, but also the diligence and many hours of research we put in every product that crosses our desks. Putting in that extra bit of effort seems to have paid off this week.

Maybe everyone just had a bad day with their Core Duo tests (may they grant me the same benefit of the doubt on the day I put a stone through the glasshouse window), but I think the problem is laziness. Most reviewers probably thought to themselves "Stick in the benchmarks, make sure you have a clean install of Window's for each one but let's not do more than we bloody well have to..."

Testing takes a long while (ask anyone who has ever had to install SysMark onto a machine...) and can be quite boring and mundane at times, particularly when you're doing it several times a week to several systems at once. So you can see where the mentality comes from to avoid doing more than you really have to. The problem with this is that as the watchdogs we're supposed to do the rigorous testing and research, or else people will wind up spending their hard earned money on products that aren't what they seem to be.

This is not a "We're Holier-Than-Thou" rant, and we're not looking to laud our victory and keep score. Indeed, far from it. I don't want Tom's Hardware Guide to be in any way, shape or form "Holier-Than-Thou" with regards to its competition.

This is because I am a consumer as well. I want to be able to read a variety of reviews of a product and know that each and every one I read has been written by reviewers who are all equally as thorough as the other.

I don't want to have to do as one has to with the current crop of Core Duo reviews and keep my eyes peeled for that one review that notices the "minor" flaw that sees my soon to be new notebook cutting its battery life by 80 minutes because I've had the audacity to plug something into the USB port.

Sadly, this probably isn't the first or the last time we'll ever see the likes of Intel and Microsoft keeping something from the public for their own good. But the press shouldn't be coming out of this as badly mauled as the people over whom we are supposed to watch. A lot of reviews will now be cast into doubt as readers ask themselves "Well, if they couldn't find the flaw with Core Duo what else are they missing?"

We review products so that you know what you are getting when you spend your money. This is the unwritten agreement that you sign with us: You provide us with page impressions which we use to sell advertising to keep ourselves in business, and in return we give you the unbiased and thorough low-down on everything that crosses our desks. Nobody in the press is guilty of corruption in the Core Duo case, but they are guilty of complacency and negligence.

They need to wake up and smell the coffee. One among us shouldn't have to be the watchdog who puts in longer hours of testing in order to make sure as sure that a product will not disappoint and anger consumers. Sure we'll get plenty of praise for having been the one reviewer among many to have caught out Intel and Microsoft on this one, but as a consumer and a reader of many reviews I don't want to have to rely on just the one publication.