The most common question about our product launch coverage is whether we actually test products before writing about them, or simply relay company-provided descriptions of new capabilities.
Why this distinction matters
A company's description of what a new product does and what it actually does in practice sometimes diverge, and readers reasonably want to know whether our coverage catches that gap.
Our honest answer
We test what we can access within a reasonable window before or shortly after launch, but not every product launch allows for that - some are announced without immediate public availability, and some genuinely require extended use to evaluate fairly. We try to distinguish clearly, in the piece itself, what we've directly verified from what we're relaying from the company.
Why we don't pretend otherwise
Claiming hands-on testing we haven't actually done would be a form of misrepresentation we're not willing to engage in, even though "we tested this" reads more authoritatively than "the company describes this as."
Why this distinction matters to state clearly
Readers deciding how much weight to put on a product claim deserve to know whether it's been independently verified or simply relayed, and we think that distinction should be visible in the piece, not left ambiguous.