How We Approach Reviews

At our publication, we take reviews seriously. Our goal is to provide a fair, balanced, and informative critique, whether we're reviewing a smartphone or a smart home device, and give readers an accurate representation of what they can expect from each product. With no shortage of ways to spend your money on new technology, we want to help readers make informed decisions on the value of each product, at any given price point. This commitment to transparency and rigor is the foundation of everything we do.

We cover a wide range of technology products, with preference given to unique features and emerging technologies. Our reviewers will always cover the latest models from Apple and Samsung, but we also strive to unearth and elevate niche products worthy of consumer attention. For example, we might test a new foldable phone that pushes the boundaries of display technology, or a smart thermostat that promises significant energy savings. We judge each product based on real-world experience, and — except where clearly noted — all our product reviews are based on market-ready products, not pre-release prototypes. Given the speed at which new products are released and existing products updated, it's important to remember that our review is a snapshot and that the competitive landscape could change over time. A smartphone that tops our charts today might be surpassed by a new release next month, which is why we regularly update older reviews with new context.

We provide honest and thorough assessments of every product we review, considering both the good and bad aspects. While the criteria for what makes a successful product will vary — a laptop for gaming requires different metrics than one for professional video editing — our goal is always to indicate its overall quality and value. We do not shy away from pointing out flaws, even in products from popular brands, because our readers deserve the full picture. At the same time, we celebrate innovations that genuinely improve the user experience.

Review Philosophy

Our reviews typically include a mix of quantitative and qualitative testing. We run different benchmarks depending on the type of product we're testing, but we always approach our reviews as consumers because we are consumers. We're early adopters, tinkerers and generally tech-obsessed. And while we definitely spend more time than most with things like smartphones, laptops, and robot vacuums, we still have questions when a new device comes across our desks: Does it deliver on all of its promises? Is it better than the next best thing out right now? Who should buy it or, more importantly, is it worth buying at all?

In order to answer questions like that, we aim to use the products we review as if they were our own. For example, we might carry a smartphone everywhere for days, taking selfies, playing games, and annoying coworkers in Slack; or we'll write a laptop review on that machine to see how the keyboard holds up over extended typing sessions. For things like synths and samplers, we use them for as long as we can so we can judge how usable the device is, both for seasoned creators and novices, and we make note of build quality, versatility and overall value. For a smartwatch, we might track sleep patterns, notifications, and battery life over a full week to gauge real-world endurance. For a wireless earbuds, we test fit during workouts, phone call clarity in noisy environments, and the reliability of touch controls.

We know that gadgets don't exist in a vacuum, so placing them into context is just as important as judging their performance and features. That involves not only comparing a device to its direct competitors, but also thinking critically about who would get the most use out of it and if the value it provides justifies its price. No gadget is perfect, but one might be perfect for your specific needs. That's why we often include comparisons to previous models from the same brand, as well as to the leading alternatives from other companies. For example, when reviewing a mid-range Android phone, we'll compare it to both the budget and flagship tiers to help readers understand the trade-offs.

Different reviewers may have very different opinions about a particular product, depending on personal preferences, experiences, or tastes. It's important to remember that a review reflects just one person's opinion, and one moment in time. To mitigate individual bias, we often have multiple team members test the same product when possible, especially for critical categories like flagship smartphones. We also encourage readers to read multiple reviews and check user forums before making a purchase.

Scoring

We rate products on a 1-100 scale, and the final score is chosen by our editorial team with no outside input. Each product's score is agreed upon by the reviewer and their editor, sometimes with advice from team members that have expertise in the area. This collaborative process ensures that scores are consistent across categories and reflect a consensus of expert opinion. We also publish a detailed breakdown of what each score range means, so readers can quickly grasp the overall quality of a product.

What our scores mean

• 0-29: An awful product that should be avoided. You'll be sorry. These are typically devices with critical flaws, such as a smartphone that overheats constantly or a smart home hub that loses connection every day.
• 30-49: A poor product that's more likely to be frustrating than useful. Examples include a laptop with a terrible keyboard and short battery life, or earbuds that fall out during normal walking.
• 50-54: A disappointing product with a lot of problems. It might have a few good features, but the negatives outweigh the positives. For instance, a smartwatch with great fitness tracking but a buggy interface that crashes repeatedly.
• 55-59: It might work in a pinch, but you wouldn't want to use it regularly. These products are often outdated or poorly implemented. A budget tablet with a sluggish processor and low-resolution screen might fall here.
• 60-64: A forgettable product. It isn't bad, exactly, but also doesn't do anything particularly well. It's the average choice in a crowded market — nothing to write home about.
• 65-69: It has some redeeming qualities, but you could do better. This score suggests that the product is decent but overshadowed by stronger competitors at a similar price.
• 70-74: A dependable product that doesn't stand out from the competition or is very niche in appeal. For example, a ruggedized phone for outdoor workers that performs well in dusty environments but lacks mainstream features.
• 75-79: A very good product that falls just short of greatness, but we can still heartily endorse. These are often products with one or two minor annoyances, like a camera with excellent image quality but a slow autofocus.

Recommended (80-89)

• 80-84: There's a lot to like about this in spite of a few flaws. Easy to recommend to most shoppers. A smartphone with great performance but mediocre battery life might earn this score.
• 85-89: An all-around great product that's among the best in its category. You'll almost certainly be happy. Examples include a laptop with top-tier performance, excellent build quality, and a beautiful display.

Editors' Choice (90-100)

• 90-94: The best in its category. We highly recommend it. These products excel in nearly every area and set new standards for their class.
• 95-99: An important, nearly flawless product that raises the bar for the rest of the tech industry. Think of groundbreaking devices like the first true wireless earbuds with active noise cancellation that changed the market.
• 100: A gadget unicorn. This score is reserved for products that are virtually perfect in design, performance, and value. Such a product is rare, as it must have no meaningful flaws and offer an experience that is unmatched.

Unscored Reviews

Our review scoring system is designed for the products core to our coverage. From time to time, you will see reviews with no score on our site. We do not numerically rate works of art like movies or games; our media reviews instead comprise a mix of opinion, criticism and analysis. When we review software, cars and other products outside of the typical consumer electronics market, we do not apply a score. This is because the criteria for such products are often subjective and cannot be reduced to a single number. For instance, a video game might be masterfully crafted but unappealing to certain audiences, and a car's driving feel is hard to quantify numerically.

Embargoes and Review Units

We choose which products to review independent of our parent company or advertisers. Review units are usually provided by companies to us free of charge. In most cases, at the end of our review period, hardware is returned to the company. Occasionally we may hold onto units for long-term testing, but under no circumstances do they become a reviewer's personal property. Reselling of review units is strictly prohibited. This policy ensures that there is no financial incentive for a reviewer to give a favorable score in hopes of keeping the device.

We believe in transparency. While our reviews are typically based on products supplied by manufacturers, as is the standard practice in the industry, our opinions and conclusions are independent. Where applicable, we accept early products so that we can give as thorough and informative a review as possible. However, we always disclose when a product is provided early or as a pre-release sample. We also maintain a strict firewall between our editorial team and our advertising or business development teams. No advertiser has any influence over which products we review, when we review them, or what score they receive.

To submit your product for review, please use our dedicated contact form. We cannot guarantee coverage of every submission, but we carefully evaluate each product based on its relevance to our audience and its technological merit. For more information about our privacy policies, fact checking, and corrections, please refer to our editorial guidelines. We believe that accountability is key to maintaining trust, and we promptly correct any factual errors that come to our attention.

Source: Engadget News