I used to enjoy coming to this site, it was a daily fix for me. That is until recently. The number of premium posts has increased dramatically. Today i see that on the home page there are 15 posts that are premium and only seven that are for unpaid members. I think that i have to find a new daily fix. 🙁
xperiencewindows
<p>I agree with OP. This is not a knock on Paul, but it's simply hard to justify paying for some of the articles or content the articles discuss. But business is business.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#232782"><em>In reply to PincasX:</em></a></blockquote><p>It's hard to argue against Paul's coverage when you can read only 3 of his articles per month 🙂 My problem is that since I can neither read the comments on those articles or comment on them myself, there's not much motivation to read them. Then it's just Paul mono-logging.</p><p><br></p><p>But as a non-paying member … </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#232907"><em>In reply to pecosbob04:</em></a></blockquote><p>You may be right, but if it's a bug, correcting it has been a low priority.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#233153"><em>In reply to pecosbob04:</em></a></blockquote><p>I guess it depends on your point of view. Any bugs can tarnish your reputation. As a developer any unfixed bugs in my work get under my skin. If there's not time to fix the problem it's probably better to just change the policy so the requirements and the implementation match.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#236887"><em>In reply to PincasX:</em></a></blockquote><p>Thanks for pointing this out and thanks to the thurrott.com folks for fixing it.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><a href="#232959"><em>In reply to PincasX:</em></a></blockquote><p>To be fair to Paul, I want to read and comment everywhere, not just on Paul's site. So one shouldn't conclude that Paul's content "isn't compelling" just on the basis that I value it more with the ability to read comments and add my own.</p><p><br></p><p>In any case, I'm just one member so the true value of Paul's work isn't decided solely by my opinion. :)</p>
Bats
<p>Sooooooooooooooooooo….</p><p>Those who are complaining about the Premium content……would you say that Thurrot.com IS PRICING IT WRONG?</p>
Bats
<blockquote><em><a href="#389763">In reply to madthinus:</a></em></blockquote><p>So I take it, that you are one of the few of that bought a Microsoft Band watch, due to Thurrott's glowing review of it? You must also have a Lumia phone or perhaps even a Continuum? These are just a couple of the endless number of products Thurrott endorsed, just to watch it fail and disappear. You call that trust?</p><p><br></p><p>As for Clickbait,….Thurrott did confess to practicing it on a Windows Weekly podcast. However, he did justify the practice by saying that the clickbait article did nothing more than lead you to his "quality" article, which brings us back to……(see first paragraph). </p><p><br></p><p>I have watched and listened to Paul since episode 1 of Windows Weekly. I know how the man writes. I know how the man thinks. In my heart of hearts I do believe he's trustworthy…. to a point. However, it's only "to a point" because he's constantly wrong. The reason for that, I believe, is his mis-analysis of data, as well his lack of understanding and vision from a corporate standpoint. Not just, but from a "real person" as well. "Real person" as defined as someone who goes out into the real world and experiences real case scenarios with his/her technology. If you ask me, Thurrott is like Windows Defender…he's sandboxed (lol). Remember when he called Chromebooks and iPads devices that you can't do real work in? He was ridiculing those devices/platforms for years! Then he sees his good friend McKracken and Thurrott became educated on the spot. </p><p><br></p><p>Bottomline is this: When you can't analyze the data right, you're opinions will almost always BE WRONG.</p><p><br></p><p>Fair and balanced? Is Thurrott fair and balanced? Truthfully, lately he has. However, for the most part….no. Being that he runs a Microsoft site, I can understand the slant, but Thurrott tries to make it seem that his site is for honest analysis of tech news, in general. Look,…I get it, ok. This is a Microsoft site. However, when I read something that doesn't make sense, I have call them out for it, like that really funny statement by Brad Samms when he said that Surface computers was the savior of the PC industry. LOL…that was funny. You want a real example? Thurrott wrote an article about some law that he said was "hastily" passed in Australia. I think it was about privacy. It was clearly an F'in lazy article, where he doesn't even describe the Australian Law, itself. You trust that? That is fair and balanced to you? </p>