[Xperia Z1 General] jonmorris:
Much like car magazines that automatically assume a new BMW or Porsche on test must be good because of its heritage. Well, maybe it is, but the point of a review is to look at it in its own right and give a fair and impartial review.

As I think I've said elsewhere on here, in the tech world there is a lot of bias depending on what phone(s) the staff use. Until fairly recently, most would have an iPhone (I think that's still the case in the majority of cases) but now there's a good chance that they're getting more used to Android - and already we can see a swing in opinions on sites that might have been pro-iOS and ignored many things on Android.

It's as if some writers hadn't actually used Android, but were quite happy to just keep saying about lack of app choice, fragmentation, the ease to hack, viruses etc and other exaggerated nonsense.

Now they're more pro-Android, they are of course now going to end up being pro one manufacturer over another. Which handset did they get given at the last press party? What phone did they upgrade to themselves? Which PR company is nicest to them or their title in terms of invites to press trips and exclusive press parties and gigs?

Some sites out there do proper in-depth reviews and understand a lot about the whole industry. They can make comparisons with other handsets and platforms because they use them all.

And some sites actually source their own review kit, so they're not in any way influenced by PR companies or the bribing of a free handset to keep. Or even the threat of not getting a phone to review next time around if giving a bad review.

Apple is the best at this. Give a bad review and forget about being invited to the next event (whether flown to Cupertino or a local venue streaming it). That means no hands-ons and people wondering where the hell your story is. The big tech sites can't afford to miss out and that's why I disregard a lot of what I read - and, to be honest, even when someone might say great things about a product you really do think is good and worthy of a high rating, you should still be aware of this fact.

Edit: finally, when it comes to the screen comparisons - I do think some people are forgetting that even the worst panel on the Xperia Z wasn't bad. I mean, yes we can make those comparisons between the GS4 and HTC One (do we know that every HTC One has the same panel?) but we're talking about a range of screens that are all still excellent and way above what a lot of people are using.

If you went out to buy a cheap, affordable, phone as a spare or whatever - you'd get something far, far worse and even that would be seen by most as perfectly usable. I struggle to think of any phone on sale today that has a terrible screen and would need to back a year or two to think of some Acer devices that had screens that went negative when tilted. Now those were bad screens.

An Xperia Z or Z1 tilted that changes the shade of the colours slightly but is still sharp and viewable is NOT a bad screen. 99% of consumers won't even notice, let alone comment or make comparisons. I'm surprised some online reviews have really slated the old Z for its screen when it's just not an issue. By all means mention it, as any good reviewer should, but that's about it.

Of course, in the world of fanboys on forums, I guess it's seen as the perfect weapon to attack Sony. It's really rather childish. I dare you to name one person in your family or friends that aren't so into tech to look at any of the high-end phones on sale and say 'oh, I think that screen is terrible'.