lak

makes sense he couldn't use the same name. 
 
he still spelled 'cunt' wrong. 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and frame of mind. I think that Tek Syndicate has delivered heaps of original content, from factory tours with their own twist, to 'frankensteining' PCs into awesome form factors. The food channel was also really cool and peaked my interest. The Twitch streams were also great. The audiophile series was also another good one. They are a small team compared to LTT but have produced some awesome content!
 
But if this channel were to do die, we would lose all of that - particularly the technical knowledge that some of the members possessed along with the unique lens that Tek Syndicate delivered content.
 
From a constructive standpoint, what can Logan and team do to rectify this misinformation? While I can't really comment on this, as nothing really comes to mind, they have brought the community together (LAN Syndicate being a key example) and I think this is completely positive.
 
Logan and team need to re-think their vision and strategy to bounce back, and if they really are passionate about what they are doing, they will. I'm just trying to be constructive about this.

CPU wars in shellnut:

What first came to mind.

More aggressive curve yes... X34 was 3800R, this is 1900R. I've not seen that before in real life, but X34 is perfect to me... hopefully more won't ruin it. 100hz NATIVE though, I don't believe it. This looks like it will be using the same panel as the XR342CK which looks to be an identical 1900R panel and which is 60Hz native. The X34P will almost certainly just be overclocked out the box, with better QC to ensure all models reach that figure. No bad thing, but I don't believe this is 100Hz native panel as no such panel exists. If it can rectify scan lines issue and reduce bleed/glow, will still be a great monitor.

until real world benchmarks are out id take everything they say with a pinch of salt, my money is on it scraping past an overclocked 980 ti by the skin of its teeth.  

lets add "nvidia confidential" to the end of our excel table so it seems more legit....
 
if they seriously call it Geforce X im going polaris,

Well I thought that this nightmare could not get any worse but I was wrong....very wrong. Here's a snippet from the news story:
However, the Labor Party has received 60 complaints from early adopters of the Governments's preferred Fibre to the Node NBN rollout model that they were receiving a poor service and they would prefer to have their original broadband back, one example below:
As an Australian, I'm am quite furious to see not only the Fibre to the Node still uses the ageing and fragile copper wire but the fact that people are complaining that their download speeds can degrade to much worse than if they were still using ADSL2 during peak traffic while being a complete blow-out of an 'infrastructure upgrade'.  Looks like at this rate our broadband network is going to be left behind in measures unseen before and giving the amount that has been blown out, it would be at least years before we would have some kind of chance to meet standards with the rest of the world.

Leave a comment below!

Source: https://delimiter.com.au/2016/02/09/nbn-gridlock-fttn-taken-down/

Simply because many people do more on their computers than just use them as a gaming console for a singular purpose. Especially the type of people that can afford high end components and monitors.

There's a lot more out there than simply gaming or doing print, and for multiple monitor setups good viewing angles are essential.

ASUS chose to buy the panels and put their name on the monitors. They have to deal with RMAs on it and the hit to their reputation for putting out a substandard product. They may be AUO panels but ASUS deemed them acceptable and worthy of a premium price. It's just as much ASUS' fault.

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

What demand? Come on man! Here, we're talking about some ENTHUSIAST-grade monitors, pretty expensive ones also, there is no such big demand for these kind of products you know. I bet that bigger demand is for Dell's Ultrasharp line and then again they have way better QC than those Taiwanese. So all these stories that "Asus buys panels with different grades (READ : C,B) just to meet demand" is pure nonsense.
 
The fact is : They are ultra-cutting all the costs from the start and deliberately ordering cheap-crap panels from AUO, assemble them even crapier, sell them, 300% ROI, bingo! boom! PROFIT!
 
And that's all! There is no "Poor Asus" , "Poor Asus the middleman" , "Panel manufacturers are to blame" no no no, it's just a pure business strategy, greedy one of course.
 
We are the cattle, we who are buying that subpar crap and paying ultra-premium for a poorly made product.

That's not entirely true, in the cases with the LG 34UM95-P, many times people were able to drastically reduce the BLB by loosening the bezel around the points. As they were simply attached too tightly. Even so after it all, LG tightened up their QC and their monitors have rarely had issues now.

Bleed and IPS Glow are not the same, and the 34UM95-P I owned had nothing compared to the Asus panels shown in the article. Actually none of the IPS monitors I've ever owned have looked so bad before where easily 1/3 or more of the panel is affected. I would never accept a panel of such low quality.

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

Of all my Dell monitors I've ever owned - none of them have had backlight issues at all.  It's been very even.  Asus quality itself seems to have just depleted with time, and Acer never really had high quality.  Dell and BenQ IPS are always solid offerings.  Dell more so due to their Ultrasharp line and the policies surrounding it.  Never have had a dead pixel or backlight issue yet with Dell.  Well, that's not true - an old Dell CRT died a year after getting it, but all the ultrasharps are flawless.

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

Actually that M7E sample looks pretty good in my books but the rest 19 of them are.....well not that good and surely not worth 850€ !!!!!!!!! 
 
It's very strange for them not having some kind of policy or contract clause for that QC with panel manufacturers like AU Optronics, Samsung etc. There must be some kind of QC policy when you're releasing "high quality" panel on the market for a damn 850€ OR they are ordering super-cheap panels from AUO  and margins are theirs, oh well....
 
Either way, this kind of behavior must be regulated by the law 100%. Law action suits must apply in most cases where a Company deliberately selling BAD product for a premium price and all that under the umbrella of FALSE ADVERTISING in this case because this is NOT A PREMIUM MONITOR.
 

 
 

Honestly this is what acceptable BLB looks like; and that's on an Ultrawide where bleed and even IPS glow is more pronounced. Anyone paying even close to $1000 should never accept those clearly faulty panels from Asus.

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

Damn that is pretty bad back-light issues. I know that you will experience some back-light issues on IPS - no matter the brand or panel maker, but if I bought this monitor and it had that level of back-light bleed, I would be returning it in a heart beat. 

except for routers; their routers are really good
 
----
 
 
 

Dell just needs to produce IPS panel version of S2716DG  and that's it! They will own the market, game over. 

Computer Lounge, an NZ retailer has performed brief testing on 20 samples of Asus' ROG Swift PG279Q and has reinforced the sentiment expressed by many owners of this monitor concerning poor quality control. While many owners of this monitor have been engaging in 'panel roulette', this exercise is unacceptable for a monitor with specifications and a retail price that would lead one to assume it is a top tier monitor. The testing performed by Computer Lounge is the final nail in the coffin for the PG279Q and it is advised that customers stay away. With the anticipated release of the PG348Q, customers should tread lightly, as it has become apparent that Asus' ROG monitor quality control practices are non-existent.
 
 
Due to the seriousness of the issue, Computer Lounge has also gone as far as placing a disclaimer on their product page outlining that the product quality of the PG279Q may not reflect its retail price:
 
All of Computer Lounge's evidence reinforcing Asus' poor quality control can be found here, along with supporting community polling for the PG279Q:
 
I have purchased many Asus products in the past and wouldn't hesitate to purchase one of their graphics cards or motherboards. However, this debacle is disgusting and should have been avoided by putting the correct quality control practices in place - I thought Asus regarded themselves as the 'gold standard'. Consumers shouldn't need to go through the process of returning monitors and trying their luck with a replacement.The Asus PG279Q is a top tier monitor and consumers are not getting what they are paying for, which is clearly evident in Computer Lounge's testing. Many thanks to Computer Lounge for performing this investigation and creating awareness among the community, regarding Asus' poor ROG monitor quality control.
 
Should Asus initiate a product recall on the PG279Q? Have you purchased a PG279Q and does your experience reflect what is mentioned above?
 
Source 1: http://www.gpforums.com.au/threads/507416-Back-light-bleed-tests-20-high-end-monitors-tested-Need-GP-s-opinions
Source 2: http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=25747

Our prayers have been answered!
 
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/LCD-Hardware-154105/Videos/Computex-2015-Asus-Swift-ROG-PG279Q-1160799/
 
http://www.kitguru.net/peripherals/monitors/anton-shilov/asustek-demos-worlds-first-ips-gaming-display-with-165hz-refresh-rate/