Use this form if the comment contains offensive or otherwise inappropriate content. An email message will be sent to our moderators who will take appropriate action if necessary.
 |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
Use this form if the comment contains offensive or otherwise inappropriate content. An email message will be sent to our moderators who will take appropriate action if necessary.
|
|||||||||||
 Popular Projectors:Where to Buy:Research: |
| ||||||||||
In regards to Stuart’s comment below, there is a very distinct difference between product reviews and product reliability testing. All publishing sites, whether it is ProjectorCentral, CNET, or the NYTimes, review new products as they come to market. The review process includes a comprehensive look at how well the product performs relative to its specs, a personal judgment by the reviewer on its suitability for the intended application, and commentary on how it stacks up against competing products. In the case of ProjectorCentral, after we complete the review of several similar projectors, we include a Shoot-Out review that offers a detailed commentary on the relative merits of each projector to the other.
This is not to be confused with reliability testing. Reliability testing relies on probability theory. It is a rigorous process in which a representative sample of a product is pulled from a production line and placed in a controlled test environment that is representative of its intended use, where the extremes of temperature, contaminants, altitude, humidity, vibration, shock and other factors that are important to the utility of the product are stressed and monitored by test equipment and those conducting the test. The objective is to discover any inadequacies in the product relative to its intended use. This type of testing is usually done with an independent testing lab and is beyond the scope of nearly all Internet publishers with perhaps the exception of Consumer Reports.
David Colin, Projector Central