←back to thread

Nintendo Switch 2 Dock USB-C Compatibility

(www.lttlabs.com)
298 points croes | 4 comments | 31 Aug 25 23:21 UTC | HN request time: 0.61s | source
Show context
spartanatreyu ◴[01 Sep 25 02:02 UTC] No.45088770[source]▶
Didn't know LTT's labs was already running.

I'll be curious to see how their testing and data compares to gamersnexus testing and what their first catching a manufacturer's lies event will be.

replies(2): >>45089308 #>>45090622 #
gregoryl ◴[01 Sep 25 03:57 UTC] No.45089308[source]▶
I'm surprised it continues to exist at all. The main content ltt puts out these days is purely mass market entertainment. Physical products are still pretty good!
replies(3): >>45089653 #>>45090952 #>>45092328 #
viraptor ◴[01 Sep 25 05:12 UTC] No.45089653[source]▶
You're surprised they still exist... because they target wider audiences?
replies(1): >>45089731 #
ffsm8 ◴[01 Sep 25 05:28 UTC] No.45089731[source]▶
No, his point was that the lab isn't necessary for the content ltt is producing, so he expected them to stop the lab project to keep the profits higher
replies(5): >>45090145 #>>45090148 #>>45090190 #>>45090412 #>>45091802 #
iamtedd ◴[01 Sep 25 07:36 UTC] No.45090412[source]▶
What? Labs is the source of all benchmark and performance data they show on the main channel productions.

Labs is necessary for their content.

replies(1): >>45091017 #
alpaca128 ◴[01 Sep 25 09:23 UTC] No.45091017[source]▶
They had benchmarks before Labs as well and almost 100% of tech reviewers don't have this kind of equipment, so no, it's not necessary. But it definitely helps.
replies(1): >>45091332 #
viraptor ◴[01 Sep 25 10:16 UTC] No.45091332[source]▶
Now they have automated benchmarks across more test configs. This is something almost no reviewers have available. That's partially from labs investment. They also have destructive benchmarks like they did with the power supplies - again almost nobody does those in public.
replies(1): >>45091484 #
1. alpaca128 ◴[01 Sep 25 10:38 UTC] No.45091484[source]▶
That's true and I agree this is valuable for the audience, but still it is not necessary. Most successful tech reviewers put out good content without these resources.
replies(2): >>45092212 #>>45092227 #
2. avianlyric ◴[01 Sep 25 12:30 UTC] No.45092212[source]▶
I would assume LTT does this to build and retain a clear competitive advantage over their competitors in the same space.

I don’t think LTT goal is just be another commodity YouTube review site whose entire appeal is dependent on a single personality. That not really a scalable or long term sustainable approach.

Large journalist organisations of any kind aren’t built by aiming to be mediocre.

3. iamtedd ◴[01 Sep 25 12:33 UTC] No.45092227[source]▶
"Good" content without data is unsubstantiated content.

Data to provide evidence of performance objectively evaluates products, benefiting everyone. For example, show me who has been verifying the quality and performance claims of computer power supplies without equipment such as LTT labs.

If you want to be reductive about it - technology and their gadgets are valuable for the audience, but not strictly necessary.

replies(1): >>45095516 #
4. alpaca128 ◴[01 Sep 25 18:52 UTC] No.45095516[source]▶
The original point in this thread was that the lab isn't necessary for LTT to produce their content as they successfully appeal to a large audience either way. Which is obviously true, given the lab did not exist for most of the channel's lifetime and growth.

You argue that it's beneficial for informing the consumer. It is, but no one here disagreed with that.