PC Magazine... Please Stick to Reviewing PC's not Cars

[Alexander]

I've read almost every bit of news regarding the Model S. Including articles that bash it in one way or the other, and I'm fine with that. I'm not a fan boy by any means, and sometimes the negative reviews can make really good points. Not to mention that Tesla is known for using criticism constructively, and in the end their criticism will result in Tesla making their products that much better. So I welcome negative reviews.

But this is the first article I've read where the author is clearly out of his element and presents misleading facts to backup his prospective. I respect everyone's opinion, but not when their so desperate to make a point that they intentionally distort, mislead, and conceal facts. I don't expect everyone to think EVs are the way of the future, but if you're going to make an argument against it, at the very least do some research and get your facts straight.

I have a deep respect for PC Magazine. But this was poor journalism, and I don't think PC Magazine did themselves any favors by stepping out of their element by trying to analyze a completely different industry. Maybe they could of done an article on the iPad like touch screen, or the new App for Android and iPhone. Being in the IT industry myself, and a long time subscriber to their material. I don't think I'll be able to take their word for something quite so easily as might of done in the past.

Read the article and see what I mean. Here is the link:

Electric Cars Are Not the Answer | News & Opinion | PCMag.com

If you have an opinion post it here AND in the comments section so non club members can read what you have to say too.

 

[Designtime]

I also think that criticism is fair game and should even be welcomed. That said, PC Mag is TERRIBLE. I don't read it because I am actually afraid it will make me dumber.

 

[artsci]

I also think that criticism is fair game and should even be welcomed. That said, PC Mag is TERRIBLE. I don't read it because I am actually afraid it will make me dumber.

I think Gourmet magazine is working on a review of the Model S. If you know good food you obviously are qualified to do an auto review. Just like the PC people. I'm looking forward to Road & Track's review of the new Apple Macbook Pro.

 

[Plug Me In]

I'm curious if that made the print edition. Seems to be the ever widening standard on the internet to use cherry picked facts or to cite other's opinions as research and promote it as journalism. Anyone with above average writing skills and a passing knowledge of electric vehicles could churn out an article like that in a couple of hours.

 

[dsm363]

I e-mailed the editor:

Electric Cars Are Not the Answer | News & Opinion | PCMag.com


Do you know if this article was fact checked or reviewed by an editor? It has an obvious bias which is fine but has multiple factual errors such as 'The thing is, that Tesla Model S costs $94,900' which is only the performance version before a $7,500 federal tax credit. The base version costs $59.900 before the $7,500 federal tax credit. Even if you give the author the benefit of doubt and assume he's only talking about the 85 kWh version, that is $79,900 before $7,500 federal tax credit. Only listing the maxed out performance version (top of the line) then complaining they are too expensive is highly misleading and not good journalism. Thanks.

Also:
"Sure, but electric cars remain severely impractical. "

As someone who has been driving this car since September, I find this an amusing statement. Just because something is expensive, doesn't make it severely impractial. Did the author even bother to drive a production version or is he basing everything off of this ride 3 years ago?

 

[Doug_G]

I'm curious if that made the print edition.

Highly unlikely. PC Magazine Goes 100% Digital | PCMag.com

 

[Getting Amped So]

What do you think Mr. Lendino said in 1997 about those wacky hybrid cars? Some people can't see past the next 12 months.

 

[SuperCoug]

I'm looking forward to Road & Track's review of the new Apple Macbook Pro.

GREAT LINE! :biggrin:

I love it and will use it to defend the Model S against anyone unfortunate enough to read this horrible article!

 

[DJ Frustration]

Honestly, this wasn't super misleading...just a little bit. Thankfully most of the haterade was thrown on other cars and not the Tesla. You guys should read some of the shade that is thrown at Tesla by searching for news items on their stock, TSLA. It's comical.

 

[Alexander]

I think Gourmet magazine is working on a review of the Model S. If you know good food you obviously are qualified to do an auto review. Just like the PC people. I'm looking forward to Road & Track's review of the new Apple Macbook Pro.

I also think that criticism is fair game and should even be welcomed. That said, PC Mag is TERRIBLE. I don't read it because I am actually afraid it will make me dumber.

LOL, thank you for brightening my day, lol

 

[FalconNinetyD]

Sort of ironic that a computer publication is complaining about the high cost of new technology...

 

[ThortsMD]

The author made the point that "

The thing is, that Tesla Model S costs $94,900. For that reason (...) pure electric cars won't be the answer for mainstream consumers—today, tomorrow, and possibly forever." He compared the S and all electrics to fast, powerful ICE cars (2014 Corvette and Mini Cooper S or a tweaked Volkswagen Golf TD). The thing is, these cars will *never* make a model with speed, grace, style and acceleration at $35-$50K like Tesla will.​

 

[brianman]

The thing is, that Tesla Model S costs $94,900.

Not so random observation:

Microsoft grants a license for DOS to Digital Equipment for the Rainbow computer, for a flat-fee of US$95,000.

http://www.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist/comp1982.htm

To PcMag: Those in previously expensive houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

[AustinPowers]

Not wanting to defend the article too much, but blatant factual mistakes about the Model S aside, the author does make some very valid points.

I think he is right that getting the majority of people who drive big old gas guzzling cars into buying modern tech Diesel, natural gas or hybrid cars is far more effective in achieving big short term ecological advantages/gains. In the long run, EVs and hydrogen cars might be able to take over completely, but for the majority of people - at the moment - they are just not the best choice.
Why? The author is right on this - EVs on the whole are still far too expensive compared to highly economical ICEs, and the infrastructure is as lacking as when it comes to gas stations that sell hydrogen.

We Tesla enthusiasts regularly don't like to admit it, but for the average Joe EV's won't be feasible enough at least for a few more years - perhaps Gen III will be the game changer - Model S is just a great first step, but nothing more - yet.

 

[Robert.Boston]

@AustinPowers: True, but my father also couldn't understand why PCs had any value. His mainframe was so much more capable! As I said in my comment on PCMag.com, it all comes down to the battery. Right now, it's expensive. We're in the "plasma TV" phase, where you had to be wealthy or a real fan to justify the expense. Now, flat screens are everywhere. Battery technology won't improve with the same rapidity, but it will improve. Drop the cost of batteries by ~30% (per kWh) and increase the power density by ~20%, and suddenly EVs will have a much larger market.

 

[jandkw]

@AustinPowers: True, but my father also couldn't understand why PCs had any value. His mainframe was so much more capable! As I said in my comment on PCMag.com, it all comes down to the battery. Right now, it's expensive. We're in the "plasma TV" phase, where you had to be wealthy or a real fan to justify the expense. Now, flat screens are everywhere. Battery technology won't improve with the same rapidity, but it will improve. Drop the cost of batteries by ~30% (per kWh) and increase the power density by ~20%, and suddenly EVs will have a much larger market.

Robert.Boston: I agree with you that the battery is still expensive. But so as the first PC. I was involved with the very first IBM PC and should know better. That 8086 PC was expensive with very little applications supported. Then the revolution began and it only took a few short years to turn the IT industry upside down. There were a lot of critics said PC is a toy and can never make a dent to the mainframe. Well, I think everyone knows the turf war is over today in corporate computing. I agree there are still some shortcomings in EV due to the battery, charging capability and availability but with many development projects going on in the lab, I am quite positive about the future of battery technology. I am a little surprise the PC Magazine writer didn't see that in spite of the PC revolution which beat out the expensive big iron computers (ironically this is the period the PC Magazine started). I believe the EV revolution is just the beginning.

 

[Suzieq]

hopefully the model S wont' feel like an 8086 PC in a few years... ;-)

 

[kgb]

I agree with @AustinPowers that some valid points were made, however this was an "opinion" piece, not jounalism. In making his case, he made argument errors by comparing apples to oranges.

One valid point was that getting the masses away from gas guzzlers to more efficient vehicles will have a greater impact due to the diminishing returns, however even if you switch from a fuel efficient hybrid to a BEV, you go from 2,000-4,000 galons over the life to ZERO... and isn't that the ultimate goal? We are using a limited resource for which we are putting americans in harms way. Yes we have access to a lot more on our soil (recently), but how long will that last. We are just putting off the inevitable. I can't speak for others, but one main reason I went gasless is that I enjoy driving without the guilt of contributing to wars in the middle east... and I pay a premium for that. (I also pay a premium for being an early technology adopter - I like the "cool factor")

The other major flaw in his argument was pointed out above. To make the point for the ICE, he was comparing the best features of various ICE vehicles to the worst features of various BEVs. For example, you can't compare the Corvette's performance to the Model S (although you can), but the Model S isn't TM's sports car. The proper comparison for performance would be Corvette v. Roadster. Then, you can't compare the fully loaded price of a premium sedan like the Model S with the base price of a Chevy Cruze etc... Proper comparisons need to be done within a class. The person shopping for a Hummer H2 is not going to consider the Tesla Roadster. The person considering the Corvette is not going to consider a 5+2 seater like the Model S, etc...

 

[Jaff]

This sounds prophetic...kind of like IBM's glacial entry into the home computer market (thinking that people will never want / need / be able to afford home computers)...I believe Microsoft "ate their lunch...", didn't they? :wink:

The author made the point that "

The thing is, that Tesla Model S costs $94,900. For that reason (...) pure electric cars won't be the answer for mainstream consumers—today, tomorrow, and possibly forever." He compared the S and all electrics to fast, powerful ICE cars (2014 Corvette and Mini Cooper S or a tweaked Volkswagen Golf TD). The thing is, these cars will *never* make a model with speed, grace, style and acceleration at $35-$50K like Tesla will.​