K404 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Please keep this one focussed. The only rule in regard to availability is based around NDA. HWB quotes: So, what criterium can be used to determine if the hardware is unreleased or not? What we look at is if there’s some kind of NDA on the product or on any of the technologies the product is using. If both questions are negative, then there’s no problem to receive points. (http://hwbot.org/news/1656_clarification_regarding_unreleased_technology_and_hwboints) First of all, we believe that using new, unreleased, non-available technology is in conflict with one of the main principles of the HWBoints concept which states that the competition is (as) open (as possible) to everyone. We are aware of the fact that a lot of side notes can be made to this principle as you do in fact need a certain amount of financial input to compete at the very top, but using unreleased technology, which might annihilate the current top benchmark results, is even a step further as it’s available to only a very select group of people within the enthusiast community. (http://hwbot.org/news/1166_unreleased_technology_not_applicable_for_hwboints) Would people in the community like to discuss whether, after 2 years, the rule needs looked at again, to minimise/avoid (I wish) conflict over future releases/ paper releases? The options: The NDA-only rule is fine. NDA rule is a good start, but I would like to see extra rules discussed and added if suitable Remember: "NDA rule only" means that a product can have NDA lifted but never be released to market, meaning those with review samples or strong company contacts have an edge. Some products will not matter in 6 months, some will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Yeey, another thread. What I wrote two years back is still valid: Let’s start by explicitly stating that the key argument for giving a product or technology the tag “unreleased” is NOT “retail availability”, but merely the answer to the question “is this under NDA?“. Why? When trying to improve the competition, a lot of rules and regulations can be set in place to award less points for having either the financial possibilities or the right contacts. Although it sounds as a fairly solid concept, retail availability can not serve as valid criterium for any HWBoints restriction for the simple reason that the availability highly depends on local markets. Some products are not available in certain countries, but that does not mean those products should not be awarded any points. Two simple examples are the Intel Pentium 6500K, which was only available in China, and the Gigabyte GA-P55-UD6-C, which is not available in Europe, but is available in Russia. In the recent past, we have also seen that Zotac had released a special GTX260 OC card, but again only in China. Next to this, there’s also the problem with users who customise their hardware for higher performance. Someone who modifies the bios of their graphics card is using a bios that is not available in retail. Someone who modifies their graphics card by updating the existing PWM (example: Hipro5’s GTX260 or Tin’s 8800GTX) is using a product that is not available for retail either. So, what criterium can be used to determine if the hardware is unreleased or not? What we look at is if there’s some kind of NDA on the product or on any of the technologies the product is using. If both questions are negative, then there’s no problem to receive points. Two examples: The Rampage III Extreme is a new product from Asus which is using the X58 chipset of Intel. At the moment it’s not yet for retail, but neither Asus (board) or Intel (chipset) has set any NDA related to this product. Therefor, points are not a problem. The Evga W555 2xLGA1366 is a new product from Evga which is using the X58 chipset of Intel. The product is not yet available for retail, but neither Intel (chipset) or Evga (board) is using any form of NDA for this product. Therefor, points are not a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted January 12, 2012 Crew Share Posted January 12, 2012 NDA rule is fine by me, maybe add : in online competitions like the Country Cup availability of brand new products should be outligned in the Competition rules if they are allowed or not ( like what happened with 7970 ) Normal rankings will stabilise after a while when everybody can get their hands on the new hardware... don't see a problem there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) Normal rankings will stabilise after a while when everybody can get their hands on the new hardware... One thing you and some are people are missing is: Sometimes it is not -When- it is IF. Not every sampled product gets released. Going back to the Foxconn 790I. Everything about the product made it look like it was going to be released properly. Retail box, review samples, NDA lifted, BIOS development..... then it was cancelled. That is a chunk of my point. Wait until the product is OUT. Make sure it is released. People have to wait a little longer to get points FROM THEIR FREE, COMPANY SUPPLIED HARDWARE, but that's a better solution than the bitching that comes when things go "the other way" People can suggest what they see as "open availability" Personally, I do not consider eVGA pre-orders as availability... i'm sure everyone knows what product I am thinking of. I am not talking about the 7970 situation. Please, no-one mention that unless there is SOMETHING ELSE "wrong" with it other than a staggered, (mostly) paper launch. Massman suggested a time buffer for big hardware based on league. I'm suggesting a time buffer for all hardware to make sure it gets to market at all. It's common sense. Here's an idea. If HWBot increases its folder of company contacts and continues to grow (and I DO hope it does....) if companies care about good HWB exposure, maybe a wider set of rules for availability will encourage vendors to improve global availability. EVERYONE wins Edited January 12, 2012 by K404 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 1) Retail launches can differ region to region 2) Some products are not available in one region ("are never out") 3) Some products are out, but limited edition (10, 100, 1000 pieces) 4) Vendors can always fake releases if it really comes down to it In the end, the biggest loser of the whole story is that one person who was so happy to receive a rare product from a friend who works in a HW company. Whether it's a friend of TiN who was happy to open the package with the Untouchable in it, or the friend of Shamino who received a Dreadnough 790i mainboard, or the friend of Hicookie who received a fully modified mainboard. Besides, none of those HW ever dominated the leagues. It's a non-issue really ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Dreadnought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 1) Retail launches can differ region to region2) Some products are not available in one region ("are never out") 3) Some products are out, but limited edition (10, 100, 1000 pieces) 4) Vendors can always fake releases if it really comes down to it In the end, the biggest loser of the whole story is that one person who was so happy to receive a rare product from a friend who works in a HW company. Whether it's a friend of TiN who was happy to open the package with the Untouchable in it, or the friend of Shamino who received a Dreadnough 790i mainboard, or the friend of Hicookie who received a fully modified mainboard. Besides, none of those HW ever dominated the leagues. It's a non-issue really ... You've kinda missed my point as well. You are talking about scenarios of limited availability. It has to be released at all before your comments come into play. I would also like to see discussion about regional availability once a product is released though. What if that wibtek board comes the next must-have? Should one region be enough to call a product "available" (ignore the size of the region, juat "one region") You have said it's a none issue because no previous product has been THAT important. We are talking about the FUTURE. Get guidelines in place BEFORE the event happens. See that it is a loophole waiting to happen. Can vendors fake retail products on a shelf? Who cares about one person, if the rest of the community cannot match it. The MAJORITY should be catered for. PJ.... your stance on the many/ the few, the future/the past varies depending on the situation. Be consistent please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massman Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I'm consistently inconsistent. But, fine, I'll just give up on this one. I've explained how this works plenty of times, I'm not going to waste more time on this. Let me know once you guys agreed on how to define retail availability and how to enforce that ruling. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Ney Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 BAN E6500K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crew Leeghoofd Posted January 12, 2012 Crew Share Posted January 12, 2012 (edited) Remember F1 compo Kenny ? With the ASUS MARS cards, the Americans claimed it was a paper launch and only the happy few got cards to bench on. We provided a link from a few euro shops that had the cards really in stock in their warehouse... And if released limited availability is what ? 20pcs 5 pcs ? 1pc ? Talk about faking cards on shelves... Didn't eVGA played the ball with putting their classified cards available for sale a few hours before the end of that particular stage ? Didn't see any card in stock in any online shop... Loopholes will be part of any competitive hobby, sad but true... Also limited hardware like Expander can easily be avoided as there are plenty of quad SLI boards out. Without adding the extra difficulty of a daughter card. Specific Region launch also seems far too hard to lay down in rules. Who decides if a particular product is really worth al the pain and aggrevation ? Is it required to set world records scores ? It's already pretty complex to define all this. Adding more rules will make it even more complex and even then people will find "legal" ways of circumventing them... Edited January 12, 2012 by Leeghoofd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eeky NoX Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 BAN E6500K ...don't have finished wit it yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K404 Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 I think the EVGA "trick" is a perfect example of why this area needs more discussion, and there should be some formal HWB/community definition of "availability" IIRC, the cards weren't for "sale" they were "pre-order" which is not the same as available in any way. I can pre-order IB if I hunt out the right shop who wants to price-gouge me. Is it available? Does NDA have to expire for pre-orders to be legally made? Would a company care? Everyone has their own definition of the things this subject covers... and it makes for a minefield. So far, the vast majority seem happy with "NDA only" if the community feels that way, that's fine. The community is why I brought this up..... and yet we ALL know this will NOT be the final discussion about it. I won't even have to start the next thread in X months time to prove i'm right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knopflerbruce Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Retail availability = in stock in at least one shop. If it's available in ONE shop, even in very limited quantities, it's fine. Just to define that term. The NDA rule works pretty well, if it's replaced it must be with something that improves the current situation. And more fair doesn't necessarily mean better in this case, you can have a very fair rule that's very difficult to moderate. NDA is a known date, so very easy for us to tell if it's lifted or not. Retail availability is more difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZMBKLN Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Here's my quick thoughts... All this "Retail Availability" stuff... That can vary between regions and continents. You'll never get 3 people in a room to agree on what "Retail Availability" actually means.... It's IMPOSSIBLE to enforce. NDA's are universal. If it's past the NDA date in your time zone... GAME ON! It's EASY to enforce! I think that fairly accurately sums the situation up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebanik Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Being in India, we are the ones who really face the problem of products being launched and still not available in our country but as most of the ocers before me has commented, anything beyond NDA is almost close to impossible to manage hence selected option 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.