WHF is biased towards Apple
This is a gripe to me. A mag should report objectively and by doing so create an incentive for manufactures to compete on important stuff like sound quality and price. When one of the most important mags has a bias towards a certain brand, this incentive dissapears.
I'm sure I will get scolded for even saying this, so I will provide an example.
I've bought a Samsung Galaxy S, instead of an iPhone 4, mainly for it's audio capabilities (they can both make calls and browse the web). Why?
- Recent Samsung MP3 players get excellent reviews on *other* websites dedicated to mp3 players.
- It supports FLAC, it also supports every other important audio and video codec and format, including H.264 and DivX HD codecs and MKV format.
- It has 16 GB of storage space and a micro SD slot to extend the storage with another 32 GB.
- It has a S-AMOLED screen.
- It's less than half the price of the equivalent iPhone 4 at the moment (mine was €460 without simlock and without contract).
WHF reported on the iPhone 4 unveiling with a minute by minute report. Yet not a word on the Galaxy S, had it been an Apple product I'm pretty sure it would have been mentioned here, yet, because it is not, not a word. In fact, there's quite a few other competitors to the iPhone that don't get mentioned either (HTC and Sony).
Why would manufacturers that are not named Apple even try to compete if objective media don't treat them fairly?
(Oh, I'm not "an Apple hater", I actually like the iPhone 4 a lot and recommend it to friends that don't like to tinker with their computers or phones and have no interest in FLAC. I have learned this is a necessary precaution when even mentioning competing products)