I don't know about standards being _deeply_ flawed. They all give _some_ objective, repeatable information. I think the flaw is in misinterpreting and putting too much weight or breadth to the results. Same for the in-house tests - they are generally sound, but you're right that a company that has been designing to THAT test is probably going to perform best in THAT test, which doesn't encapsulate all aspects of real world performance. But it IS still real data, which is better than none or pure marketing drivel.
July 9, 2024, 9:28 a.m. - ohio
I don't know about standards being _deeply_ flawed. They all give _some_ objective, repeatable information. I think the flaw is in misinterpreting and putting too much weight or breadth to the results. Same for the in-house tests - they are generally sound, but you're right that a company that has been designing to THAT test is probably going to perform best in THAT test, which doesn't encapsulate all aspects of real world performance. But it IS still real data, which is better than none or pure marketing drivel.