Reviews Written By: A1VNZN4R20WFQAprovided by Amazon.com |
 | ||
 | Antec USB-Powered Notebook Cooler | |
 | "Antec does the job" | 2009-11-15 |
| After over a month, I am very satisfied with the Antec Cooler and would order it again. Durability is still an open question, but at this price, I would be very happy to get two years out of it.
PROS Fairly priced Relatively quiet Light weight Effective cooling with my Macbook Pro 15" Well-designed to carry around with laptop Pass-through design of USB plug frees up port CONS "On" light is a laser-like blue LED from hell | ||
 | Roku Digital Video Player | |
 | "Roku vs. Vudu" | 2009-10-21 |
| Over several weeks in September, I conducting a shoot-out between the Roku and the Vudu streaming video players with both connected to my AV system. My equipment included a recent-model 52" HDTV, a PS3 for playing BD, Comcast digital set-top box with HD subscription, and a fairly high-end integrated stereo tube amp with a couple of omni speakers positioned on either side of the TV. Eventually, I settled on the Roku and returned the Vudu to my local Big Box electronics store. Why?
Here are the criteria I used to make my decision, indicating which of the two systems came out ahead in each. 1) IMAGE QUALITY There is no doubt that based purely on maximum video quality capabilities of each box, the Vudu wins hands down via its HDX option. While this provides near-BD quality picture and sound, the Vudu can only achieve this by pre-loading the program onto its internal drive, a process which takes a minimum of several hours following placing the order. While this is not strictly speaking streaming video, it is certainly the next best thing. It also appears that Vudu has more streaming/downloadable HD/HDX content than either Netflix or Amazon VOD. And in general, Vudu offers superior image quality to the Roku streaming options in both SD and ordinary HD. This Vudu advantage is in my case significantly mitigated by my owning the PS3, which gives me high-quality playback of both BDs and upscaled DVDs. That is because through Netflix, along with my Watch Instantly cue, I have my by-mail DVD cue which I have upgraded to include BD where available for a nominal extra charge. More on that below. Winner: On the streaming/downloaded video, Vudu is a clear winner; but factoring in the Netflix USPS cue, it becomes practically speaking and in my particular case a virtual tie. 2) SOUND QUALITY Other online reviewers have reported that the Vudu HDX format offers the finest surround sound of any online system. Since I don't care about, and my audio set-up does not support, multi-channel sound, I did not compare the two systems on that criterion. I took the digital audio feed from both boxes via TOSLINK optical and input it into the stand-alone stereo DAC in my hi-fi. The sound clarity this way is phenomenal, with dialogue far more intelligible than with my former 5.1 system. Vudu claims superior support for advanced audio codecs, but of course that is only for streams and downloads--without factoring in the reference-quality audio available on the physical media accessed via a Netflicks mail subscription. Winner: For my purposes, with my system, a tie. 3) CONTENT Here is where it gets tricky. With 2000+ HD videos to stream/download, Vudu claims to offer the most HD content of any of the competing streaming services. This appears to be correct. I would also venture to say that compared to Roku, Vudu has taken care to ensure that all its streaming content, and its HD content in particular, is of a generally high quality. Having said that, however, the reality is that compared to Roku, Vudu is a one-trick pony, albeit it performs that trick extremely well. Like Apple, it has opted for a closed, proprietary stream, all hardware and software under one roof and closely integrated. It is this integration, coupled with its ingenious peer-to-peer video file-sharing technology, that afford Vudu a palpable edge in streaming video quality. But wait. Through my Netflix subscription and my BluRay player, I have access to a far larger pipeline of HD content than any of the streaming services currently offer, and combined with the Roku player, these two pipelines are largely complementary. For $2 extra per month, Netflix automatically sends me the BD version of all movies when one is available--so far, if a BD version exists, I have received it. Between viewing these BDs and upscaled DVDs as they arrive, I am able to watch my Roku streaming queue, chosen from the thousands of top-notch documentaries, classic foreign films, and vintage Hollywood movies Netflix offers online. Many of these films are either not available anywhere in full hi-def or are are not dramatically enhanced by the full hi-def experience, so watching them in SD is not a great sacrifice. So far, the video streaming has been solid and glitch-free and the quality consistent and sufficient to be enjoyable, if not as thrillingly impressive as with the Vudu. As someone who did not have a Netflix video-by-mail subscription prior to buying my Roku, I must say I am surprised at how well that service works for me. The Netflix online interface is fast, easy to use, and elegantly designed. Their phone-based customer service is refreshingly excellent, truly superb in my experience. The mail stream is fairly seamless and extremely well designed and implemented. My wife's and my viewing habits are such that we are not always chasing the latest releases the moment they become available, so we have thus far not encountered any issues with deferred fulfillment of movies in our mail queue. As for the Amazon VOD, I have used it far less than I initially thought I would. This is because I have been frankly overwhelmed by the wealth of titles I have managed to cue up in my two Netflix streams; watching these leaves me neither the time nor the incentive to seek out additional content at additional cost. As for the MLB stream--well, I just haven't had time to check it out yet, my interest in baseball being rather limited. Winner: If it were all about the amount of quality HD streaming content, then it would be Vudu, hands down. But for me clearly this isn't the case. My de facto hi-def stream is now my mail queue, which offers me far, far more variety than Vudu's HDX online stream, while the breadth and content quality of the Netflix SD online stream simply leaves Vudu's in the dust. What I thought initially was going to be a huge advantage for Vudu has in fact reversed into a huge advantage for Roku/Netflix. 4) CUSTOMER SERVICE Vudu really shines here, in my experience. They employ knowledgeable, helpful support staff who communicate clearly and really engage to help solve issues and give useful advice. After ordering my Roku online through Amazon, I was almost immediately presented with a fulfillment problem. My order was processed by Roku before I was able to update my shipping information, necessitating contacting customer service to try to implement the necessary changes before physical shipment. This turned into a real eye-opener: conflicting and universally unhelpful information and instructions from multiple personnel via multiple calls made necessary by being cut off while on hold for supervisors. Rote email replies from support staff who seemed either not to have read or not to have grasped the main content of my straightforward messages. My impression is that Roku's CS is not well designed for anything that is not clearly spelled out for their staff in a manual. In the end, I had to order a second unit with expedited shipping, then call Fedex to cancel delivery of the first unit. Given that the media content of the Roku system carries the excellent customer service of Netflix (as described above), I can split the difference and call its overall CS experience middling. However, given the general solidness of the Roku platform and exceptional ease of setting it up, I suspect that most day-to-day support issues would be more apt to involve Netflix. Winner: Nevetheless, based on my actual experience, I will give this solidly to Vudu. The company is clearly investing some of the premium price for their product back into this area, and it shows. 5) HARDWARE Roku's self-contained little black box is a paradigm of simplicity and functionality. While the Vudu's RF remote enables users to hide the whole installation behind doors, many of us, me included, do not have that option. Besides, the small, lightweight Roku will fit in unobtrusively just about anywhere you have other equipment on an open shelf around the TV. With its PITA, optional-at-extra-cost outboard wireless receiver hooked up, the Vudu adds yet more wires and annoying blue lights to your AV center, as opposed to the Roku with its built-in wireless and single, discrete white power light. The Roku is legendary for its ease of set-up, and that reputation is well earned. Although it comes with clear, simple instructions and all necessary parts and connectors, the Vudu does not quite achieve this. In fact, the Vudu's optional wireless kit includes a second unit which must be directly connected to your wireless router via a LAN port--a problem if your router has only a single LAN port and it is already in use, as was the case with mine. I had to hook up an ethernet switch just to try the Vudu out. Having said that, the Vudu hardware worked flawlessly once installed. In conjunction with their elegant on-screen menuing interfaces, the remotes for both the Roku and the Vudu are models of intuitive functionality and minimalist design. Winner: The Roku. 6) EASE OF USE The user interfaces of both boxes can be divided into two components: on screen and online. On screen, via the boxes: As mentioned, both systems are extremely well designed for on-screen functionality via their remotes. Navigation is simple, hierarchical, and intuitive, with both audio and visual cues. The big difference between the two is that with the Vudu, viewers are able to order all content directly through the main on-screen interface. For Roku viewers, on the other hand, only Amazon VOD content can be ordered direct from the box; Netflix content has to be loaded into the online queue using a computer and an Internet browser, at which point it is instantly available on the Roku. Online, via computers: Although some may give great weight to being able to search and order the entire online library via the box and TV, in practice I have found it preferable to preload my queue through the browser. Reasons: speed, flexibility, access to full keyboard and mouse, ability to access outside review sites such as Rotten Tomatoes. Whether I do it in another room in advance or sitting in front of the TV with my laptop, it just works better for me. And online is where Netflix really beats the pants off Vudu. I was always somewhat put off by the Vudu website, which required me to buy the hardware and set up my account just to get full access to search their online movie database. I really don't get why they have imposed such a limiting restriction, effectively making it impossible for me to know what I am buying in advance. Once I did get access to it, I found the searching and linking capabilities left much to be desired compared to Netflix's system. No fuzzy searching, for one, meaning that if I didn't type a title with perfect spelling, I got no hits. Slower, less feature rich, less intuitive. Netflix implements their dual queues (mail and online) elegantly and seamlessly through separate, parallel tabs in the same browser window. The Netflix artificial intelligence technology is remarkably effective at recommending new movies for me from a variety of genres based on my ongoing reviews of content I've already watched. If I have put a film into my mail queue and it suddenly becomes available online, I am automatically notified. Everywhere I am, I can navigate to a related action or area without losing what I've already got. Brilliant. Even if I take away the mail queue factor, Netflix online is just so much more, and so much better, than Vudu online. Winner: Roku for its being able to queue from the brilliant Netflix web site 7) COST Hardware, for those who, like me, require wireless internet access and already own a BluRay Disc player to access true hi-def content: Roku: $99.00 (with current free shipping offer) Vudu: $225.00 ($150 plus wifi kit, but not including any local sales tax and cost of ethernet switch if required) As well as allowing the viewing of rented streaming and downloaded movies, the Vudu player contains a hard drive that enables the owner to purchase movies from Vudu and store them permanently in the player to view at any time. The Roku player does not have this capability. However, I for one have no desire to own movies that are tied to a single piece of hardware such as the Vudu player. Vudu rentals are pay-per-view only, with recent HD/HDX movies typically priced at $5.99. Roku/Netflix content is "all you can eat," i.e., a monthly flat-rate content charge. (However, if you choose to access Amazon VOD on the Roku, that content is, like Vudu's, mainly pay-per-view.) Using the Netflix instant queue, the Roku owner is able to start any number of movies, pause them for days or weeks at a time, then pick them up again where they were left off. On the other hand, all Vudu and Amazon VOD rented content must be viewed within 30 days of rental, and once started, every rented movie must be finished within 24 hours. The figures below are based on using the Roku strictly with Netflix content and no supplementary Amazon VOD. Amazon VOD's content charges are similar to Vudu's. Content, based on viewing 10 hi-def movies per month: Roku: $10.99 (Netflix "all you can eat" online plus one-disc-at-a-time basic BluRay by mail) Vudu: $59.99 (via HD streaming and HDX downloads) Content, based on viewing 20 hi-def movies per month: Roku: $16.99 (Netflix "all you can eat" online plus 2-disc BluRay by mail) Vudu: $119.98 (via HD streaming and HDX downloads) When considering this comparison, remember that the Vudu costs are for EXACTLY ten and twenty recent BD-quality movies per month, and no other content; each additional HD or SD title viewed will increase the cost. On the other hand, the Roku costs simply guarantee the ability to view 10 or 20 desirable movies on BD by mail--both Roku options includes unlimited access to the entire Netflix online video library of HD and SD titles at no additional charge. IMPORTANT NOTE: I have calculated the maximum number of by-mail Netflix BD discs available under the two Roku options based on the postal turn-around times in my area (the Massachusetts South Coast); slower turn-arounds in your area will reduce your viewable BD content accordingly. To clarify, the current generation Roku player cannot deliver BluRay quality video, while Vudu can, via HDX. To enjoy BluRay quality with Netflix/Roku, you have to own a BD player and have at minimum a one-disc-at-a-time BD Netflix subscription ($10.99/mo.). Winner: Assuming you would not even consider the Vudu unless truly hi-def video were extremely important to you, the platform offering the best value will be highly dependent on whether or not you already own a BluRay player and whether or not the Netflix mail queue will work for you. My answer to both is "yes," and so the rather dramatic cost comparisons above pretty much speak for themselves: Roku hands down. However, if you don't already own, and don't plan to buy, a BD player, this obviously changes things drastically. In that case, Vudu's higher hardware costs and pay-per-view content fees will be greatly mitigated. Nevertheless, in the long term, adding a BD player to your mix and going with Roku/Netflix may well be more economical, particularly as the price of these players keeps coming down. SUMMARY: Somewhat to my surprise, I found that by the end of the trial, I preferred the Roku/Netflix platform by a fairly wide margin. During the process, I determined that the ability to stream/download extremely hi-def content directly was not as important to me as I had previously thought. This is solely due to the Netflix mail queue working so well for me--something else I hadn't been expecting. Since the only compelling advantage of the Vudu for me--and its single greatest strength--is to deliver stable, super-hi-def online content, discovering a cheaper, more flexible alternative changed everything. As always, YMMV. | ||
 | Klipsch iGroove SXT iPod Sound System | |
| "iGroove SXT: a sweet spot under $200" | 2009-08-13 |
| What with the constantly shifting field of makes, models, and versions, reviewing these iPod speakers can seem like a mug's game. I read dozens of reviews in the process of shopping for a speaker/dock for my wife's ceramics studio, then proceeded to a local "Big Box" electronics store to audition a few of the likely prospects. What is clear from my experience is that to be genuinely helpful, reviews need to be more specific about the reviewer's taste in music and general audio expectations, and the reader needs to grasp some basic audio realities in order to interpret reviews usefully. My wife's listening tastes include a lot of music with high dynamic range: classical, choral, acoustic folk and jazz. This raises the bar in terms the level of equipment performance necessary to produce pleasing sound. If you have similar tastes, you may want to read many of the reviews, both professional and consumer, with a degree of skepticism. In addition, you may be better served by actually auditioning and purchasing units in stores rather than simply trying to choose a product based on reviews alone and purchasing online. Of course, Amazon's generous return policy mitigates this consideration. In general, key price points determine sound quality. At $200, the late lamented Athena may have been a notable exception with performance rivaling Bose, but be very skeptical of claims that Unit X selling for $150 "sounds just as good as the [$300] Bose." We found this was generally a result of wishful thinking or uncritical listening. Each price point represents challenges, decisions, and inevitable compromises for audio designers. There are damn few true audio miracles. Our goal going into the BB store was to find no-frills iPod speakers for my wife that could at least equal the performance of an original JBL OnStage which due to a design flaw was no longer working for her. The unit was to be used in her pottery studio as an alternative to her Shure earphones, and we were looking to limit the cost to around $150. We auditioned the floor models using her iPod with some demanding symphonic source material such as the Hallelujah chorus from Handel's "Messiah" and Holst's "Planets." Many glowing reviews and the high iLounge rating led us to try out the Logitech Pure-Fi Anywhere 2s first, but we were quickly disappointed that the impressive soundstage and highly detailed midrange and highs seemed to be achieved at the expense of smooth, balanced sound. "Where's the bass?," we both asked. This was a unit that we felt would soon become tiring to listen to, analytical as opposed to musical. (In this regard, we actually preferred the sound of the much-cheaper Pure-Fi Express Plus.) Initially reluctant to go over the $150 price point, realities finally pushed us to try out the Klipsch, and we quickly decided that the slightly higher price was well justified. For our listening tastes, we found the Klipsch to have the best balanced sound under $200, integrating detail, sound stage, clarity, and above all, harmonious musicality. To achieve this from a small box, the bass is slightly boosted, but was not what we would call boomy. Out of the store and in the pottery studio, the igroove is if anything exceeding expectations. My wife goes in to work a little early just to spend some time listening to music through it. Of course it's brand new, but this emphasizes the significant step up the Klipsch represents over her old JBL--and all the newer JBLs in the store. In her small studio, and at the moderate listening levels she prefers, the volume on the Klipsch is normally never maxed out to the point where it distorts--and it will at maxed volume on some material. Another important consideration: The original OnStage design lacked any sort of well or support for my wife's standard sized iPod, which merely sat on top of the base connector. For lack of any remote, this meant that there was frequent clicking and twirling of the iPod wheel while docked, leading over time to a stressed iPod connection and eventual partial audio failure. Now we are very aware of this issue and shop accordingly. The Klipsch holds the iPod firmly in place when manually interacting with it--and due to limitations of nearly all the remotes we see, at least some manual interaction is still necessary. Does the Klipsch sound as good as the Bose? No. But we were unwilling to pay for that qualitative improvement. For our listening habits, we think that the Klipsch iGroove SXT currently occupies the sweet spot among the sub-$200 iPod speakers we heard. | ||
 | Cuisinart Chef's Classic 8-Quart Stockpot with Cover | |
| "Excellent ergonomics" | 2009-04-22 |
| I too ordered this pot based on the Cook's Illustrated recommendation, and I am not disappointed. As a vessel I use primarily for handling large volumes of liquid, it is ergonomically nearly perfect. The height/diameter ratio is just right, as is the weight for a pot that will have to be carried full to the sink and then maneuvered to drain. As CI notes, the handles on both the pot and lid are particularly large, sturdy, and well designed. For those who complain that the sides are not thicker/sturdier: Folks, this is a stock pot, not a dutch oven. You don't really need or want side heat for most purposes, and thicker would mean substantially heavier. As is, the sides are hardly flimsy, so this would be a poor trade off. Moreover, without sandwiching in more aluminum up the sides--WAY more expensive--thicker sides would merely add more weight without really improving performance or durability. | ||
 | Cuisinart Chef's Classic 12-Quart Stockpot with Cover | |
| "Excellent ergonomics" | 2009-04-22 |
| I too ordered this pot based on the Cook's Illustrated recommendation, and I am not disappointed. As a vessel I use primarily for handling large volumes of liquid, it is ergonomically nearly perfect. The height/diameter ratio is just right, as is the weight for a pot that will have to be carried full to the sink and then maneuvered to drain. As CI notes, the handles on both the pot and lid are particularly large, sturdy, and well designed. For those who complain that the sides are not thicker/sturdier: Folks, this is a stock pot, not a dutch oven. You don't really need or want side heat for most purposes, and thicker would mean substantially heavier. As is, the sides are hardly flimsy, so this would be a poor trade off. Moreover, without sandwiching in more aluminum up the sides--WAY more expensive--thicker sides would merely add more weight without really improving performance or durability. | ||
 | Kuhn Rikon Safety Lid Lifter Deluxe Can Opener | |
| "The last can opener I will ever buy" | 2009-04-22 |
| I can't imagine the Deluxe Kuhn being improved on any time soon, and at any rate, I am so satisfied with it that I can't see myself spending money on a replacement even if it is. This thing is innovative, sturdy, attractive, practically effortless to use, and superior in every way to every other opener I have come across. I was surprised to read a review here claiming that for the elderly and those with arthritic hands, this opener is more difficult to use than conventional openers. While I do not have manual mobility issues myself, this is so far from my own experience that I really wonder if the reviewer owns a defective sample. There is no can opener I have ever used that comes close to my Deluxe Kuhn in ergonomics/ease of use. The large, vinyl-covered knob, which has a somewhat soft feel and is easy to grip between thumb and two fingers, spins freely on its own when the opener is not engaged, as though it runs on ball bearings. In use, I find it difficult to impossible, in fact, to gauge when I have finished running through the can and am simply twirling round through the opened gap. Perhaps it is the fact that it turns in the horizontal instead of the vertical plane that causes problems for some people. | ||
 | White Supreme Juicerator Juice Extractor | |
| "Reliable old workhorse" | 2008-11-29 |
| We have owned our Acme since approximately 1978, give or take a year or two. I can't compare it to anything else because we haven't used another machine since purchasing it. Moderately noisy and a hassle to clean, but it is an incredibly reliable workhorse that just keeps on going. Built like a tank. With the same design as the one shown here, our old model has all stainless removable parts over the white enamel motor housing. While the fact that it does not automatically eject pulp is a minus on the one hand, on the other hand, the Acme extracts up to 20% more juice according to independent reviews. | ||
 | The Cook's Illustrated Guide to Grilling and Barbecue | |
| "My desert island grilling book" | 2008-09-17 |
| Yes, if I had to choose just one grilling cook book, it would be this one--not just for the exhaustively clear and detailed instructions for barbecuing a comprehensive range of foods, but for the outstanding sauce, rub, glaze and marinade recipes. It's all carefully tested and presented for both charcoal and gas grillers. br /br /There are even some "ultimate" recipes in here; the one for charcoal grilled maple glazed salmon comes to mind.br /br /I upgraded to this new edition when it was first published, and it was well worth it for key additions like that grilled salmon.br /br /For its sheer competent scope, this book has no true rival of which I am aware. It deserves a place in the core cookbook collection of the serious griller, from beginner to expert. | ||
 | Logitech Harmony 550 Universal Remote | |
| "An elegant and beautifully implemented concept" | 2008-09-13 |
| As a first-time Harmony owner, I am amazed at how easily and seamlessly I was able to configure a relatively complicated AV system with the Model 550. Following the directions in the package, I was quickly able to install the software in Mac OS X, then use it to access the online database and begin to configure the system. Even my relatively obscure, tweaky CEC CD player was listed, and also the IR4PS3 infrared remote solution for my Play Station 3 BD player. However, my new Vecteur integrated amp wasn't there, and this prompted a call to tech support. The Level 1 tech instructed me to finish the initial download to the 550, test it out, then call back to get a Level 2 tech to get the Vecteur settings working properly. I had to spend about 15 minutes on hold on the call back, but once I got through, the L2 tech patiently and competently walked my through a trial and error process to get everything working perfectly. (He even found a configuration for my Vecteur that someone else had come up with, and lo and behold, it worked, programmed in a way that is superior to the manufacturer's own remote!) I couldn't be happier with this setup. The Activities paradigm is absolutely brilliant, instantly performing multiple complex configurations in response to simple commands (Watch TV, Play DVD, Listen to CDs, etc.). I have a Samsung LCD TV but have experienced none of the problems others have described, nor did I have issues with use of the software, either locally or on the web. Perhaps these are things that Logitech has addressed over time. The buttons are a bit small, but well laid out, and I find this a minor tradeoff against the bonus of a smaller, more convenient and comfortable remote size. The viewing angle on the LCD screen could be wider, but this is also a minor issue for me. At the current price, this remote, which affords access to the excellent Harmony online system, is an incredible bargain! Equipment controlled: Samsung LN52A650 LCD TV Motorola DCT6200 digital cable box Sony PS3 Blue Ray player (via IR4PS3) C.E.C. TL51XR CD player Toshiba M782 VCR Vecteur Ai4 integrated amp | ||
 | Bell'O AVSC-2124 Versatile Wood Trim Audio Video Furniture System (Cherry/Black) | |
| "High quality and excellent design" | 2008-08-31 |
| After careful comparison shopping online, we bought this unit specifically to support a new 52" Samsung flat panel LCD TV. Bello does a great job of packing the parts, and our box arrived in excellent condition with all necessary components present and accounted for. Note that despite the minimalist structural design, this stand weighs 70 lbs., a good indication of the ruggedness of its steel frame and safety glass shelving. It's not really designed to shove around, so plan on doing final assembly on the spot you want it, as per the directions. Assembly of the relatively few parts is fairly straightforward and should pose no problems even for novices if directions are understood and followed precisely. Note that the plate glass shelves may be too heavy for some people to handle comfortably without assistance. HOWEVER: We found that the instructions for distributing the plastic shelf support buttons among the three levels were not made sufficiently explicit. We suggest you study the illustrations and evaluate the number and locations of the total thirteen of these crucial parts BEFORE actually removing the adhesive backing and beginning to stick them in place. Aesthetics seems to be Bello's strong suit, and we found this unit to be true to form. If anything, it looks even better than the photo when assembled and loaded. The cherry wood bezel is thin veneer but serves its purpose, lightening and softening the dark glass and steel. In our case, it blends well with major cherry living room pieces and in particular, with the Touch of Red bezel on our Samsung. The "cable routing system"? If you're looking at the photo, then you're seeing it all: just the two horizontal slots in the back support, serving the two lower shelves. If you need or want more than this, you're on on your own. It is fine for our purposes, so I didn't deduct stars for this. Before purchasing, ensure that the maximum recommended weight allowance for each shelf will meet your needs: top, 125 lbs.; middle, 50 lbs.; bottom, 75 lbs. | ||
| © 2009 GoSale.com (S2) |