Comment by tapoxi
5 days ago
> I have very strong, probably controversial, feeling on arstechnica, but I believe the acquisition from Condé Nast has been a tragedy.
For the curious, this acquisition was 18 years ago.
5 days ago
> I have very strong, probably controversial, feeling on arstechnica, but I believe the acquisition from Condé Nast has been a tragedy.
For the curious, this acquisition was 18 years ago.
I read ars technica during undergrad over 20 years ago now. It complemented my learning in cpu architecture quite well. While in class we learned old stuff, they covered the modern Intel things. And also, who could forget the fantastically detailed and expert macOS reviews. I’ve never seen any reviews of any kind like that since.
I dropped ars from my rss sometime around covid when they basically dropped their journalism levels to reddit quality. Same hive mind and covering lots of non technical (political) topics. No longer representing its namesake!
What blogs do you subscribe to for tech stuff in your RSS feed? I still have Ars but I have to weed through a lot of stuff like the political articles. Really like just pure tech like how it used to be with the old Anandtech.
If you find a nice pure tech feed I would jump for joy. Too many places have been overtaken with nonsense.
I do find a few smaller special interest open source ones like the dolphin emulator blog which still maintains high standards. I too am stuck with finding new high quality new sources for more professional purposes. Things have changed a lot. Open source is now just corporate shareware and most that is written is marketing.
I subscribe to some news site for hackers... "Hacker News" I think it's called. Not RSS, but I've never used that anyway. Google should be able to find it for you.
God, I didn't need to know that
How do I report online harassment? There's probably a button but I can't find it because I misplaced my reading glasses.
Isn't arstechnica that new site that replaced slashdot?
Oddly enough it's not the first time I've seen their perceived recent drop in quality blamed on this. Just weird that it's happened twice - wonder where this narrative is coming from.
No, their quality has been dropping since the acquisition; it's just now gotten to the point where it cannot be explained away.
It's not just gotten to the point it can't be explained away. The best technical articles on the site have been the bio-horror shock material they pump out every month, and it's been that way for years.
When they started doing car reviews where "GM didn't pay for this car review, they just paid for a car review." everyone should've clued in.
I checked and was also expecting something different based on parent's comment.
Happened 18 years ago.
This is a hot take that has become room temp.
Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas almost 30 years ago, but that's still a major reason they suck today.
Bad comparison.
I don't think many would say Ars Technica fell off dramatically circa 2010.
Buying a news property is also not comparable to a merger of near equals.
The transformation has been very slow I believe. They didn't really intrude too much the first few years. But maybe I remember wrong.