GOLs are the only independent testing group that I trust completely and I'm thankful they are around.
They spelled out the source of the jammers and the special circumstances of any tested.
THEY ALSO KNOW HOW TO USE THE CAPS LOCK KEY
Printable View
GOLs are the only independent testing group that I trust completely and I'm thankful they are around.
They spelled out the source of the jammers and the special circumstances of any tested.
THEY ALSO KNOW HOW TO USE THE CAPS LOCK KEY
Quote:
Originally Posted by spankyaf
ASK URSELF THIS QUESTION MISTER ROCKET SCIENTIST
IF GOL DIDN'T TEST THE LASER JAMMER, WOULD THE MEMBERS OF THE FORUM WHO HAVE BEEN RIPPED OFF BE GOING THROUGH THESE PROBLEMS?
THE ANSWER IS NO.
NOW GO BACK TO SCHOOL.
It was NEVER our intention to mislead anyone and we have learned a very valuable lesson going into the future. We will update our website. We will do things very differently in the future. Thanks for your constructive criticism. We appreciate this type of feedback.
TeamQuack, what is up with all the "shouting" via all-caps? I think that you are the one who needs to go back to school. Take some socialism classes in order to learn how to communicate both more clearly and effectively to others.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamQuack
IT IS NOT GUYS OF LIDAR'S FAULT THAT PEOPLE ARE STUPID.Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
No matter how we presented the results, there will always be people who are too stupid. It's not our responsibility to protect people from themselves!
WRONG. The first mention of it in the section near the top of the page, in the section entitled "The Jammers" which details which jammers were tested, and where they came from, and how they were installed.Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
The fact that the LI was a prototype has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the test methodology.Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
1. I don't see how "development unit" differs from "prototype", especially when we used the same language in "The Jammers" section! There was absolutely no intent to mislead anyone, and it would be a BIG stretch to think that anyone could be misled due to such wording.Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
2. We said "The Laser Interceptor was a "development unit", which could be updated with new software in the field. How does that imply that software upgrading would be possible on a retail unit? In fact, the very opposite is true!
Yep. It was a "comparison test", with several products tested under the exact same set of controlled conditions. Therefore, all of the results were reported together in the results summary.Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
If someone would have actually read the page, they would already know this. There is NO reason to repeat every detail about each jammer every time it is mentioned on the page, especially when there is a section DEDICATED to this! Every time a jammer is mentioned, do we need to say "The Laser Interceptor prototype, provided by Laser Interceptor, with the heads mounted blah blah blah"... that's just stupid!!Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ
All we do is test the products and report the results exactly as they happen, and that is exactly what we did! Bottom line: Guys of LIDAR disclosed everything 100%.
If people don't like our tests, or they feel misled, they are of course free to compleyely ignore our tests altogether and make their purchasing decisions based on whatever set of criteria makes them feel comfortable. We don't make or lose money either way, and we test because we enjoy it.
ALSO: WHAT DO YOUR POSTS HAVE TO DO WITH THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD, WHICH IS THE OUTRIGHT LIES AND LIBELOUS STATEMENTS ABOUT US MADE BY CERTAIN PARTIES? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
thank you happyQuote:
Originally Posted by happya$$
as i have mentioned before i have a degree in physics and i'm currently getting my masters so you know of all people, I APPRICIATE YOU GUYS WORK. i appricaite the science of it. the methods you use. and again, the only reason i have been here is because of you guys.
as you have seen this is nothing agsint you or GOL, i feel that you guys are being used by LI. thank you for understanding where i come from with my criticism. i will stop with all my rant's now. thank you again.
If someone told me I needed to take some "Socialism Classes" I would beat the crap out of them. Communism is perfect on paper but in real life its a failure, just like the LI and the scam being run on people who buy the "LIE" or lets say...."LI"...same difference
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEM-TEK
Are you an idiot or something, he means this in terms of relating to other humans not political ideologies. But considering pretty much every single one of your posts, you should definately look into taking some.
Goodbye. :P
He doesn't need Socialism Classes. Instead, he needs some serious medical attention for his mental conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmaartAasSaabr
:lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by SmaartAasSaabr
I agree with what's been said about the removal of that thread from RR.net, and that its intent was not to either erase my posting there, nor cVr's.
That said, I do feel bad that I haven't had the time to get back to this thread in the last few days, but since I again have a little free time, I thought I should, in all fairness, revisit it again.
I want to say, yet again, that for anyone who was on-market at the time of the 2007 round of the GOL laser jammer "Shootout," yes, the LI was a very, very attractive item.
However, at the same time, I do *NOT* think that, even for one minute, the GOL - either collectively or individually - EVER tried to "push" this product, nor, for that matter, hide or even try to minimize the fact that it was indeed a pre-production unit, and what's more, one that was actively being worked-on by its primary developer, during the testing scenarios.
This was easily clear to me as I read the published GOL tests.
And no, my first language was not English. Similarly, I'm often in the habit of reading faster than is good for me - thus missing important details. :oops:
Even so, I could readily see that there were repeated mentions of the LI being a pre-production item, and took those cautions to-heart.
Similarly, I would say that anyone who either followed the discussion threads relating to that GOL event or in the early discussions of the LI product itself should have *easily* come upon the fact that the tested item was a pre-production unit. I honestly can't even begin to count how many times such warnings were issued.
Furthermore, many of these warnings were issued by some of the individually most vocal members of the GOL. Happya$$, if I recall correctly, was among the first to express his own displeasure at the price-increase, one-vs.-two emitter diode, and also the lack of retail support scheme, each at its initial time-of-disclosure.
One can easily do the searches here, and find those very threads and posts, and I would encourage anyone with residual/lingering doubts to do so.
I honestly don't know how ANYONE could possibly blame the GOL for anything to do with the LI, given these hard facts.
A bit late here, as I have been a bit busy with other threads.. :lol: ...anyway, I agree with TQ, that the GOL site should be changed.
The problem is, even though those of us here know and understand the differences, the general public does not. They go there from a link, click the link at the top to "skip" the info and go directly to the results. they then see the LI mixed in with all the other jammers and they think it's retail, since they didn't catch that little line that said it was prototype. I've personally heard this from several people who didn't know better.
There are many websites that link to that and proclaim the LI the "winner" not even mentioning it was a prototype.
Look at it like this.
How many of us have been looking for something, say a video card for the computer. We go to Tom's Hardware, click on the latest video card roundup, skip the intro, and go right to the pretty graphs and start comparing. we look for the games or programs we use, much like someone may even look for the Laser gun they go up against, see who did best, and go from there without reading all the "fine print"
I personally feel it's a Disservice to the public leaving it "as is". It's NOT the same as the retail.
The "prototype" should be removed from the main results page, and instead put a link to another page clearly stating it was a prototype, since the main results were for "Retail units".
I agree absolutely.
In my first reply - on RR.net - I also said the same as you did, RacerX, that the results should have been published differently (although, admittedly, my reply was nowhere near as well-reasoned nor as eloquently put as yours here).
The GOL's specific aim during that test, if I remember correctly, was to test production-retail units, and yet, for whatever reason, the LI's results, even though they were clearly identified as of prototype stage and that the developer was on-hand, was still included in the main bodytext and graphics.
Hindsight, of course is 20/20, but certainly, the ability to change the layout of that page is/should still be possible, particularly given the current storm of accusations, etc.
i agree with you, but changing it now would be like trying to change the past... what is done is done... GOL 2008. is something we shuld be waiting for to clear things up...Quote:
Originally Posted by TSi+WRX
^ That, most certainly.
The tests of production-retail units is definitely something that we are *all* waiting for, I think. :)
Indeed, it may simply be counterproductive for the GOL to change the old testing page - seeing that the new set of tests, and results, should be just over the horizon.
here's one more example why it needs to be updated correctly:
http://www.consumersearch.com/www/au...rs/review.html
here's a small quote:
"Speed Measurement Laboratories did not test laser jammers in 2007, and most other tests are older as well. One exception is a test conducted in March 2007 by Guys of Lidar. By far, the most effective jamming system in that test was the Laser Interceptor (*est. $660, two transceivers; $1,110, four transceivers)."
Not to mention we all thought the retail WOULD be the same at that time.
it isn't and people STILL look at that like it is. There are group buys out there quoting the same thing currently.
:?
Quote from the site RacerX posted:
This thread is not for the faint of heart. :lol:Quote:
RadarDetector.net is the best user-to-user help site we've found. It focuses on everything related to radar detectors and offers unvarnished -- and sometimes un-censored -- discussions that can be useful, but might not be for the faint of heart. The outlaw image of the world of radar detectors is certainly alive and well here.
Good point, RacerX.
But I think it'll take more than just modification of the GOL website - it's going to require that whoever writes such articles will need to read better, too.....
The citation you gave is a perfect example.
Certainly, I do think that changing the presentation of the data would/will help, but it seems that perhaps this writer wasn't reading, in the first place. :wink: :?
SAID IT BEFORE AND I SAY IT AGAIN....I think you should be top man there Racer-X
TSi+WRX
Yep, which goes perfectly with the first point about the "average" person skipping right to the results.
Either way, lesson learned I believe. :)
In the future I don't think that any "prototype" tests should be published at all. Far too often, they don't represent what the "retail" units are. this has shown in the past tests as well.
I would still encourage manufacturers to send units for GOL to test, this way they can get some good feedback, but they don't have to have concerns of results being published, plus they can continue to develop those products out of public view until they decide to announce things.
I think that would be best for all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davekr
Thanks for the vote of confidence Dave. :D
I have to use the same stuff everyone else does, and at the end of the day I'd hope we can all look out for each other, which is why we are here in the first place, to learn what does and doesn't work, and what will work best for us. :)
Ideally we should all be able to see and cut through any BS, and have a variety of like products to choose from, whether it's a jammer, detector, etc..
The way I see it there are three sides to that "golden triangle".
Customer service - no explanation needed.
Durability - Make a product that lasts.
Performance - Make a product that does what it claims to do.
If someone has all 3, they are good to go. :D
i agree with what dave has said. and as for the "golden triangle", thats the business model everyone strives for, and hope to achieve. one of the seats i just finished doing, i had to tear it apart at least 13 times before i got it looking right. i make sure its up to snuff.... 8)Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX
I agree Racer-X I am sure I do not speak alone in saying that if you were on the team I think it would dismiss a lot of the BS going on about the GOL. You have uncovered more problems/concerns than any other memember on the board for us to benefit from. And it's greatly appreciated.Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX
You are truly a NO BULL$HIT guy...
Speaking of lessons learned, consider this:Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX
Someone is looking for a jammer, your not-so-bright "average joe". Even though he isn't so bright, he overlooks numerous higher-ranked search engine results which indicate that other laser jammers are the best peforming, and somehow finds his way to the GOL website. He doesn't care where the jammers came from, how they were tested, or why they were tested the way they were. Instead, he ignores all of this information and only looks at the the pretty charts and graphs. Solely based on this information, he assumes that the Laser Interceptor that was tested was a retail unit, and then he somehow figures out where and how to purchase one. Then, he proceeds to WIRE TRANSFER $500+ of his hard-earned money to Elvis, or Ivan in Croatia!? To me, that's a pretty BIG stretch, but I guess it could happen. IMHO, there's only so much you should have to reasonaby dumb things down for people!
But here's one [perhaps twisted] way to look at it: IF somone was actually dumb enough to do this, and then feels like they got burned somehow, they will have learned a hard but valuable life lesson worth WAY more than the $500+ they dropped on a Laser Interceptor! :lol:
And if they don't learn their lesson, that's fine too: if they are that incredibly stupid in the first place, and they also don't have enough brian cells to learn from their mistake, then we are probably much safer without those people on the roads period, let alone speeding! :lol:
X2, I think we'll be going in that direction...Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX
Ummm, RacerX has been part of the GOL team for a while now :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by davekr
Professor I have attempted to find a list of the guys am I missing it?Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
So now does that dismiss a lot of the BS going on about the GOL :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by davekr
Nah you're not missing it, we don't have a running list anywhere. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by davekr
:wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
devil's advocate....blue devil though :twisted:
-just wanted to add that re-organizing the results isn't changing anything, data is data.
-of course the guy supporting LI wants the GoL page to remain unchanged.
-excellent research RacerX. hopefully you of all people appriciate the method to my madness.
-outlaw's are NOT the majority of members here, i would chalk it up to nerds and wannabe's who like to experiment with techMology (my guess)
-last but not least...common sense isn't so common. look at me! :lol:
oh yeah and jim...nothing personal. GoL never lost any credibility, its just a matter of the growth and power that GoL has and channeling it for the use of good!
Thx, and you're right. As someone once put it, at some point GOL seems to have "crossed an invisible line". Even though at the end of the day we're just a bunch of enthusiasts doing what we enjoy and posting the results, at some point people began to forget that, and gave us more "power" and started holding us to much higher standards and obligations than perhaps we ever intended. And with that comes both the good and the bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamQuack
Those brian cells are really needed :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
How many Ğaverageğ people are there? I`d wager pretty much anyone that has looked at GOL site has spent some time here. Average is the guy who buys a Phazer or a ZR3 at the stereo shop.
Especially for the Brian who lives down the road from me. He is five and a half cans short of a six pack.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmaartAasSaabr
Getting addicted to Heroin is the closest Neil Brown from Laser star and his Shills will ever get to any Golden Triangle............ :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by RacerX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Southeast_Asia)
:lol: I don't know if that's twisted, or just simply hilarious. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
Good points, though. :)
But then again, I've also learned that one simply can't give stupidity enough credit. :)