'I feel quite certain Wellborn had it right the first time: reviewers at
ostensibly neutral publications are afraid that reiterating the plain
truth about x86 vs. Apple silicon — that Apple silicon wins handily in
both performance and efficiency — is not going to be popular with a
large segment of their audience. Apple silicon is a profoundly
inconvenient truth for many computer enthusiasts who do not like Macs,
so they’ve gone into denial, like Fox News cultists and climate change.
It’s that simple. There’s no other explanation for omitting MacBooks
from comparisons like Ars Technica’s.'

<https://daringfireball.net/linked/2022/07/23/apple-silicon-inconvenient-truth>

And:

'Not only do I agree with John’s objection about pricing, I’ll add my
own about terminology. In an article titled “The Best Laptops”,
Wirecutter confusingly refers to the “best in show” category as “best
ultrabook“, and describe “ultrabook” as follows:

[Ultrabooks] have great keyboards, screens, and battery life, they
offer enough power to do everything most people need a computer for,
and they’re thin, light, and portable. You should expect to pay
between $900 and $1,300 for a great Windows ultrabook that will last
you three to four years.

Take out the word “Windows” and what the authors describe is the
category of laptop defined by the MacBook Air. In that sense,
“ultrabook” really means “off-brand MacBook Air”. Naming the category
“best ultrabook” instead of “best laptop” feels like a deliberate
cop-out to justify excluding Apple’s MacBooks.'

<https://wormsandviruses.com/2022/07/a-burger-without-heinz/>

On 23 Jul 2022, Alan wrote
(in article <tbid80$brm1$1@dont-email.me>):

> 'I feel quite certain Wellborn had it right the first time: reviewers at
> ostensibly neutral publications are afraid that reiterating the plain
> truth about x86 vs. Apple silicon — that Apple silicon wins handily in
> both performance and efficiency — is not going to be popular with a
> large segment of their audience. Apple silicon is a profoundly
> inconvenient truth for many computer enthusiasts who do not like Macs,
> so they’ve gone into denial, like Fox News cultists and climate change.
> It’s that simple. There’s no other explanation for omitting MacBooks
> from comparisons like Ars Technica’s.'
>
> <https://daringfireball.net/linked/2022/07/23/apple-silicon-inconvenient-truth
>
> And:
>
> 'Not only do I agree with John’s objection about pricing, I’ll add my
> own about terminology. In an article titled “The Best Laptops”,
> Wirecutter confusingly refers to the “best in show” category as “best
> ultrabook“, and describe “ultrabook” as follows:
>
> [Ultrabooks] have great keyboards, screens, and battery life, they
> offer enough power to do everything most people need a computer for,
> and they’re thin, light, and portable. You should expect to pay
> between $900 and $1,300 for a great Windows ultrabook that will last
> you three to four years.
>
> Take out the word “Windows” and what the authors describe is the
> category of laptop defined by the MacBook Air. In that sense,
> “ultrabook” really means “off-brand MacBook Air”. Naming the category
> “best ultrabook” instead of “best laptop” feels like a deliberate
> cop-out to justify excluding Apple’s MacBooks.'
>
> <https://wormsandviruses.com/2022/07/a-burger-without-heinz/>

And that is why. on the rare occasions that I havea look at one of those
‘best’ pages, I skim through to see if Apple products are listed. If not,
and it’s usually not, I look more closely at the criteria upon which the
‘best’ are being judged. If those criteria show no reason why relevant
Apple products should not have been considered, I depart the site. After a
few negative experiences, I stop coming back.

I am the final stop in the approval process for IT gear for the office. We
have Macs, and Windows machines, and Linux machines. We buy a _lot_ of IT
stuff in any given year. By deliberately not covering Apple systems, certain
sites ensure that they have no influence over what we buy. And that we do not
take anything they say, on any subject, seriously, as we _know_ that
they’re biased in at least one way.