6 ms·

The test is factual. The fact that turning off caching triggered a browser bug is not consumer reports problem nor do they have an obligation to figure out wh

The test is factual. The fact that turning off caching triggered a browser bug is not consumer reports problem nor do they have an obligation to figure out why. They exist to report on existing things even if they have bugs. The idea that battery life for a browsing workload should be tested from cached sites is silly, as is the idea that not using a check box on the menu makes them out to get Apple.

Terribledactyl 10y ago
The browsing workload should be partly cached content and mostly new, like in the real world. Otherwise, what are we doing here?
- slantyyz 10y ago
  Well, no battery test truly represents real world, so I don't think it's a big deal. The same testing methodology in the past gave the "Recommended" badge for Macbook Pros. Why should we question the methodology only when it produces a result that people don't like? -- edit, just noticed the article I posted this comment on got merged with another by the moderators, so it's a dupe within the overall thread.
lucb1e 10y ago
> The fact that turning off caching triggered a browser bug is not consumer reports problem nor do they have an obligation to figure out why. Agree. Unfortunately this makes the test flawed, since it tries to simulate real-world behavior, but they couldn't know that unless they knew there was a bug in the cache thing. > The test is factual. Only if the report mentioned their testing methodology, i.e. if it mentions that they turn off caching for all laptops to better simulate browsing patterns. I expected Techcrunch to mention this but they neglected to.
kstrauser 10y ago
> They exist to report on existing things even if they have bugs. On one level, sure. They found a legit bug. However, the bug was in a codepath that regular users would never experience. You and I might, but we're not the ones reading Consumer Reports to pick a laptop. My non-technical friends certainly aren't going into hidden settings to turn off browser performance features, but they're the ones who'll see that bad review and worry about it. > The idea that battery life for a browsing workload should be tested from cached sites is silly How many first-time-ever websites do you encounter every day? I guarantee that you don't download a new copy of jQuery on every website you visit, or reload every static asset on your favorite sites that you hit daily.

Terribledactyl 10y ago

The browsing workload should be partly cached content and mostly new, like in the real world. Otherwise, what are we doing here?

slantyyz 10y ago
Well, no battery test truly represents real world, so I don't think it's a big deal. The same testing methodology in the past gave the "Recommended" badge for Macbook Pros. Why should we question the methodology only when it produces a result that people don't like? -- edit, just noticed the article I posted this comment on got merged with another by the moderators, so it's a dupe within the overall thread.

lucb1e 10y ago

> The fact that turning off caching triggered a browser bug is not consumer reports problem nor do they have an obligation to figure out why. Agree. Unfortunately this makes the test flawed, since it tries to simulate real-world behavior, but they couldn't know that unless they knew there was a bug in the cache thing. > The test is factual. Only if the report mentioned their testing methodology, i.e. if it mentions that they turn off caching for all laptops to better simulate browsing patterns. I expected Techcrunch to mention this but they neglected to.

kstrauser 10y ago

> They exist to report on existing things even if they have bugs. On one level, sure. They found a legit bug. However, the bug was in a codepath that regular users would never experience. You and I might, but we're not the ones reading Consumer Reports to pick a laptop. My non-technical friends certainly aren't going into hidden settings to turn off browser performance features, but they're the ones who'll see that bad review and worry about it. > The idea that battery life for a browsing workload should be tested from cached sites is silly How many first-time-ever websites do you encounter every day? I guarantee that you don't download a new copy of jQuery on every website you visit, or reload every static asset on your favorite sites that you hit daily.