It’s not that we are going to receive the two versions of M2 to analyze them like the other testers, but that we are offered the possibility of receiving our rewards at the end of this month if we want to analyze them.
We think they are not ways of doing things.
It is not to generate controversy, but to express what we think. We are not interested in getting involved in any discussion, so I’ll leave the topic closed and I’ll try not to reply trolls.
Our interest was to help the developers to craft the best possible hardware before it was mass produced, as responsible people and representatives of the backers that we are and recipients of the product.
In any case, this hardware is already the definitive one, from now on only the software will be modified. If Pimax have only made the changes foreseen in the M2, we cannot give them the green light; it’s not that we ask them for the impossible or that we are “unreasonable”, neither that we have said that it’s a bad product: we believe that, as a whole, gives a better result than whatever other existing headset of similar price; so no, it’s not a bad product and, hopefully, will force the others companys to change to a really hight resolution and wider FOV, that’s very good.
I know that people think we are “begging” for one M2; it would have been interesting to do a public analysis together with the others testers, but if we can’t do it at the same time, and not mention that have changed, why should we be interested?
It seems that we are now only in the group of testers to take the blame for any filtration. Any tester with sense should understand that with the information that has passed through our hands it is evident that we are not the ones who filter. With the backers, that don’t know anything, I could understand it, but still not too much: they should also deduce that it is weird to filter old things only then they are fixed. There seems to be an interest in discrediting those of us who are critical and isolating us, or to generate a sense of fear to talk between testers. We have had more than one disappointment and unpleasant surprises and have our own obligations and more profitable things to do.
I’m not accusing someone in particular; it could be anyone with access to the data, even a hacker.
I think the Berlin presentation has achieved its goal: a reasonable product has been presented to backers. I suppose that people presented it with the best intention, thinking that they were doing a great favor to the backers and ensure the products release to market. But thanks to that, all backers are going to get a product inferior to what they should, I don’t see the favor even for Pimax, with the other competitor products that will come.
If at least we had seen a certain interest in the backers wanting something better and not conforming, maybe we would have tried to accomplish it, but I think we have finished our work. I have proposed to my group our exit from the Closed Beta testers group (if only one continues, people will always say that he pass data to the others) but some are curious to continue to see first hand how things develop and try to help (I don’t know how) and I have to respect it, so we will continue, unless I can make them change their minds or Pimax remove us.
What we do have clear is that from now on we will consider ourselves normal backers; like any other, any of us will share his observations if he wish to do so, or will keep or sell his chosen reward, analyzing it or without unsealing it.
It is not good to leave the analysis to the “buyers”: people do not usually criticize their choices and even less to lower their value.