add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Comments

Comments

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 2 days ago
  • 3 points

Severe discrimination and racism still exists today, it just isn't always as overt.

Comment reply on TarzTarxiel2019's Completed Build: Corsair Black Knight

  • 5 days ago
  • 1 point

Please keep feedback polite and constructive.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 6 days ago
  • 1 point

I'm deleting this portion of the comment thread - not to oppress or censor, but because I feel like it is not related to the original topic. And I don't want that getting derailed by something posted that is known to be controversial. Root_User, if you actually want to discuss what you posted above, feel free to make it a separate topic post.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Please change the motherboard compatibility warning"

  • 6 days ago
  • 4 points

I understand what you're proposing, but here's a bit of the counterpoint: Just recently we had someone carry their build into our office so we could flash their BIOS using an older CPU. It is not uncommon. Even if updated BIOS versions are shipping from the manufacturer, there's no way of knowing how old various motherboard stock is at each retailer.

If we downgrade the warning to a note, we'll get absolutely hammered by first time builders who think our compatibility checking is broken when their builds don't boot. Getting a substitute CPU and going through a BIOS update process is fine for experienced builders, but not for first-timers.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 7 days ago
  • 2 points

You said:

That said, however, the more I look at it, the more I seem to realize that the general viewpoint amongst liberal people is that conservatism is the scum of the earth and that they are all violent idiots.

That's a pretty big generalization to make about liberal people, no? To quote you also:

You are free to disagree, but to me this seems to be a really big generalization.

(And)

calling out all conservatives for being stuck in the past is somewhat ignorant.

I think making broad generalizations about anyones beliefs, or lumping together a diverse demographic into one label, whether it is conservative or liberal, is pretty ignorant.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 9 days ago
  • 4 points

There's an attempt at meaningful conversation in this topic. Don't come in and try to be inflammatory - that's not welcome here.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Price history graphics get broken by excessive values"

  • 9 days ago
  • 1 point

To follow up, I've rolled out a change that price graphs will now cap out the y-axis max if there are prices exceeding three standard deviations from the mean. That should fix the graph you listed plus several others that were exhibiting similar behavior. When the x-axis gets capped though the hover legend will still show the actual outlier prices.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 9 days ago
  • 4 points

It's not about victory, it's about discussion. If you want to discuss, where here that means engaging in understanding and empathy in addition to polite discourse, then please do.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 9 days ago
  • 4 points

What's your definition of rich? Does hard work entitle you to be rich? Are taxes punishment?

I ask because I'm interested in your take on those questions and not because I have any particular agenda. But it kinda feels like your questions presuppose a position that isn't yet established here.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Is conservatism inherently bad?"

  • 9 days ago
  • 6 points

It may be a commonly used word in the communities that you participate in, but it also may be perceived differently among the group it targets. Don't minimize the opinions or feelings of others - that's not going to lead to fruitful conversation. If you really want to engage in authentic talk, seek first to understand, then tell your side. Avoid telling any group what their beliefs are and which of those are valid or not, especially if it is a group you are not part of. Speak for yourself, not for others. It'll lend to a much more productive discussion.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Price history graphics get broken by excessive values"

  • 9 days ago
  • 1 point

Yep, we've seen this in some other situations too. At first we would just remove the price history around that time window. But it's been prevalent enough across other retailers too that that's probably not a viable long-term strategy. I'll see if we can come up with a better min/max y-axis value approach.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What is reCAPTCHA?"

  • 9 days ago
  • 5 points

The reCAPTCHA makes it harder to automate various things on the site, such as registrations and logins. It checks various aspects of your IP, browser, how you click the button, etc, to determine the risk level of you being a bot instead of a human.

The main reason we use it on our login page is to counter credential stuffing. That's where someone goes through a list of username/password pairs they got from a breach of another site, and tries to log into this site using those credentials. If someone used the same username/password on a different site, then the attacker would be able to log in here as well. It's pretty common these days to see automated login attempts at very high rates iterating through a list of stolen username/password pairs. You can do a few things to mitigate that kind of attack:

  • You can block or rate limit based on IP. But that's broken if the attacker uses a large selection of IPs (think 10,000+) and distributes the login attempts across a huge swath of them.
  • You can rate limit based on username. But that's broken if the attacker is only doing one unique username/password pair per attempt.
  • You can put reCAPTCHA on the login page. That doesn't prevent someone logging in with stolen credentials, but it does typically block rapid automated attempts.

We also implement it on registration to prevent automated account generation by spammers.

Comment reply on yejosheph's Completed Build: my parents beat me over this

  • 9 days ago
  • 1 point

Please keep feedback polite and constructive.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "How Do You LOCK Prices In a list?"

  • 15 days ago
  • 1 point

When browsing a product category, you can add a parametric selection in one of two ways:

You can filter by different criteria you want (i.e. at least 1TB capacity for an SSD, only GTX 2070 video cards, etc). Then at the top right of the list of products there's an "Add From Filter" link. That'll add a parametric to your part list that will always track the lowest priced item matching the filter criteria you had set.

Or, you can click the checkboxes on the left side of each product row and the "Add From Filter" link will change to "Add From Selection". That'll add a parametric to your part list that will always track the lowest priced item from the selection of products you set the checkmark on. People commonly use this mode for when they want to use one of a handful of specifically picked items, like power supplies.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "How Do You LOCK Prices In a list?"

  • 15 days ago
  • 1 point

In the part list view, right to the left of the product price you'll see either a lock icon or a gear icon.

For parametric selections you'll see a lock icon. That lets you lock in that parametric selection to what product it currently has picked out.

For regular product listings you'll see a gear icon. If you click that, that will let you customize the price options for that product in your part list. You can specify a merchant of your choice, or enter a custom price of your choice.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "charity: water Completion Report #11"

  • 17 days ago
  • 1 point

The cost varies significantly depending on the type and scope of project.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Laptops Added to PCPartPicker"

  • 19 days ago
  • 0 points

Certainly. I got some XPS 13 models in this morning. I’ll check to see if there are more of those and then add in the 15 too.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Laptops Added to PCPartPicker"

  • 19 days ago
  • 0 points

I’ll get that refresh rate filter in later tonight - my mistake on that. Only gotcha is some manufacturers don’t list that spec so the filter for that may not be comprehensive.

On the battery life value we’re just pulling from manufacturer specs right now. I know there’s little consistency there but I figure it’s better than nothing. If laptop category usage is high enough, one day I could see us doing performance testing on them (including a battery life test across models using some consistent criteria).

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Laptops Added to PCPartPicker"

  • 19 days ago
  • 1 point

Yeah we do that to make the part list a little cleaner looking. Basically we prune the available options based on what is in your part list. If you add a laptop, then a bunch of other stuff gets hidden like motherboards, cases, etc. You can still browse and add them via their category page though (from the products drop down menu).

Comment reply on legendarypoet's Completed Build: Lucid Visions ft. 5700XT Liquid Devil (My First Custom Loop)

  • 20 days ago
  • 1 point

Keep it polite or don't comment on the site. If you don't agree with the part selection, that's fine. But there's no need to be snarky about it or bring in personal attacks.

If you'd prefer to offer alternate part choices, I'd recommend spending time in our part list opinions wanted forum instead.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Laptop category added"

  • 21 days ago
  • 6 points

Sure. We can add those too.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Laptops Added to PCPartPicker"

  • 22 days ago
  • 0 points

Yeah I debated whether it should go into a SQ1 cpu series or not. I may rename that at some point depending on what happens with it in the future. But I think if the microarchitecture stays the same, then that'll stay on Qualcomm 8cx.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Laptops Added to PCPartPicker"

  • 22 days ago
  • 2 points

Thanks for the feedback! Both of those should be fixed and the updates should show up in the next cache refresh (< 15 min). The CPU name stayed SQ1 but I changed both the series and microarchitecture to Qualcomm 8cx.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Announcing Cycling Builder"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

I don't unfortunately. Pretty much all the builds in my completed builds section have been parted out and repurposed to other things. The only build I have remaining is my dreamhack build that I did a youtube video for but never created a completed build page for it..

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Announcing Cycling Builder"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

Yep. Filter by CPU type, GPU type, storage, RAM, etc.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Comment karma"

  • 1 month ago
  • 2 points

(Edited.)

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Part reviews in completed builds"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

I think we can add a "all reviews" page that shows reviews for all completed builds that have reviews for a given part. It's really just a matter of creating pagination for the reviews and a template to show just those. We've got a bit of craziness going on with pre-Black Friday/Cyber Monday, but once that's settled I'll look into review pagination.

As for magic, though, I'll just say we currently order the reviews for a part from the highest rated completed builds that review it. There's really no intent to deceive or manipulate there.

Comment reply on PCPartPicker Blog Post "Announcing Cycling Builder"

  • 1 month ago
  • 2 points

We're adding an up-to-date laptop section here on PCPartPicker. Hope to have it up late next week though it may take time to flesh out the product category (we're focusing on most recent/popular laptops first).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What percent of purchases through pcpp go to charity:water?"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

For one, I don't like to disclose company financials. We're not a public company, and we have plenty of people who have cloned our site and tried to compete with us over the years.

If you're suspicious of how much we've donated, some basic research can provide you a ballpark amount. Charity Water lists on their site "Give $30 and you can give one person clean water." Look at the blog post and you can see how many people our donations have provided clean water to - and that's not factoring that it takes roughly 18 months from donation to completion report. So there have been another year and a half worth of donations in addition to what is listed.

Given that it's easy to determine the raw donation amount, if I tell you the percentage then you've now got a good guideline on our revenue (which I do not disclose).

EDIT: to add, your FTC link regards requests to donate to charity and what percentage actually goes to the cause. We're not requesting you donate. We're donating. But if you did choose to donate, know that 100% of donations go to work in the field. Charity Water handles their operational costs through private donors.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "What percent of purchases through pcpp go to charity:water?"

  • 1 month ago
  • 2 points

I don't usually disclose that publicly, because I want the focus to be on the impact. That's why I highlight the completion reports and not the donation amount or what percentage revenue we allocate. Hopefully you'll trust me when I say the contribution percentage is non-trivial.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "[Feature Request]"

  • 1 month ago
  • 1 point

And what if you don’t select a type?

Comment reply on Forum Topic "[Feature Request]"

  • 1 month ago
  • 2 points

The issue with a slider is what to do with the different versions - DDR2, DDR3, DDR4, etc.

If you browse RAM with an empty part list, there's no context to determine which type you want that slider to apply to.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Parametric Price E-mail Alert triggered by incorrect entries"

  • 2 months ago
  • 3 points

I think we can add something like that.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Parametric Price E-mail Alert triggered by incorrect entries"

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

My sincere apologies for the bogus price alert spam. We had some cache nodes go down today, and the code that handles that failure had a bug. That resulted in incorrect filtering for product category browsing and all things parametric (part list items and parametric price alerts).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "$4000 Budget PC"

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

Don't troll.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "PC Part Picker Password Recovery"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

That sounds fishy. We don't store plaintext passwords.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

You've made several false statements characterizing things I said or my justifications for doing so. Stop.

You make insinuations that I would adopt this policy to profit off it. You're flat out wrong, and if you want to keep that up you will not be on this site any longer. I can handle your little snipes about moral character or hypocrisy, but that's taking it too far. We've had affiliate offers from key resellers. We could have profited off of it substantially. We declined their offers.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

You may not view protecting apple as worthwhile, but that does mean that the rule is a double standard.

I'm not out to protect Apple. I'm out to protect new builders from being told something is ok when the license terms say otherwise. The reason I asked the questions that you ignored is that unlicensed windows vs hackintosh is, in reality, very different. Seriously, find me all the cases where people recommend hackintosh to a new user on a budget build as a viable free operating system. The people who go down the hackintosh route know exactly what they're doing and the pains and workarounds they'll have to deal with long-term to maintain it. What I take issue with is when people recommend unlicensed windows as legal, and then because it just works, new users think that's a viable legal path for them. If that became prevalent on hackintosh, I'd start moderating that too. But it isn't prevalent, so I don't.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Does hackintosh work out of the box, with full third-party driver support like Windows?

Do users have to jump through various hoops on Windows to run their unactivated Windows like they do with hackintosh?

Can you point me to the hundreds of similar comments on this site where people are recommending hackintosh as a viable budget solution instead of purchasing a license key or hardware?

I address the larger issues. When hackintosh software licensing becomes a large enough issue to warrant devoting staff time to, we'll address it. Until then, we spend our time addressing Windows (like your comment we addressed a month ago on unlicensed windows, or your comment 29 months ago on using as you called them, "grey market" key resellers).

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

I think we're going to continue to talk past each other at this point.

I've stated our policy several times now. It's not as black and white as you'd like. Either you can accept it or not. If not, I suggest you find a community that better fits your moderation preferences.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

I expect you to abide by your standard.

I don't think you understand our standard. It's pretty simple: Don't encourage others to steal software or to violate license agreements.

Who are you warning when you delete posts that mentions it, and what are you warning them of?

We warn the person who posted it. And we're warning that "Use of Windows must be done with a legitimate product key", quoting the relevant part of the license agreement, and linking the full license agreement.

A deleted post is of little use to the OP, and a notification that it violates windows TOS is of no use to the poster.

I disagree.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Here are the relevant bits from the license (emphasis mine):

The software is licensed, not sold. Under this agreement, we grant you the right to install and run one instance of the software on your device (the licensed device), for use by one person at a time, so long as you comply with all the terms of this agreement.

 

Authorized Software and Activation. You are authorized to use this software only if you are properly licensed and the software has been properly activated with a genuine product key or by other authorized method.

A lot of people will counter that it runs fine without licensing, so it must be legal. Here's why I think they allow it - it converts more people to paid licenses without piracy. Piracy is going to happen no matter what, and no amount of license checks are going to prevent someone from decompiling your code and writing an activator to null out the checks. If Microsoft doesn't make it work out of the box with limited functionality, the people who pirate will never seek a license. If you make it work out of the box with watermarks, limited features, and other things that annoy people, well, you've made it easy enough for the low-effort pirates to just use that instead of pirating it via unscrupulous means. And then of those that are running it unlicensed, you at least have the chance to convert them to paid licenses. Ultimately, I think it converts better, understanding that you'll never eliminate piracy.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Here's the thing - people going the hackintosh approach already know that they're skirting the rules. You don't find people here advocating running hackintosh as a viable free operating system option. You do with windows, and windows represents a near monopoly of OS recommendations here.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Rules are created for a reason.

Rules are indeed created for a reason. The rules here are meant to be concise and general, not a legal document. Say I enforce the hackintosh aspect - then you could still call it a double standard if I didn't delist hardware or custom parts entered from manufacturers that violate the GPL. And if I did that too, I'm sure there'd be something else to claim. Black and white rules sound great in theory, but in practice it's not so easy. Windows software represents the vast majority of discussion here. I can pull up hundreds of instances of people recommending unlicensed windows, key resellers, or flat out piracy. But you will rarely if ever see someone recommending a hackintosh setup as a viable operating system for someone with a $200 budget build and no ability to afford an OS. If it helps, I've been asked many times to implement hackintosh compatibility here. I didn't, because of the license terms issue. That's why Windows shows up as an option in the OS list with compatibility checking, but not OS X.

If you have zero interest in resolving that double standard, thats on you.

You can have your standard, and if I violate your standard, ok? I mean, not to be rude, but I created this site. It's my house, and I get to set the rules here. If you don't like it, well, you can leave. That's what I mean when I say I'm not going to back down from my "moral viewpoint" to make it easier for you to give what you call quality answers. The rule on piracy and key resellers will remain, just as the warnings on advocating running unlicensed windows will remain too.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

We don't constrain discussion on valid ways of getting Windows, such as through educational licenses when someone is a student. But we're not ok with encouraging people to get their licenses illegally or via enterprises that promote fraud.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 3 points

I would say it is a stretch to call running windows un-activated a act of piracy

I'm not saying it's piracy. But we warn people that it's against their license terms. Just because I take a stand on a couple issues, notably piracy, key resellers, and unlicensed windows, doesn't mean that I have to take a stand on every issue. We can't realistically enforce every license term on this site - it's not really our job and it'd be impossible anyway. I do pick the ones that I think are important for us and the kind of community I want to encourage here.

This is your platform, and you can require us to abide by your moral viewpoint, but it does make giving quality answers more difficult.

I'm not going to relax my moral viewpoint to make it easier for you to give what you call quality answers. There are plenty of other communities that have no such moral restrictions. Yes, $200-$500 builds are difficult. If you're on a $200 budget, run Linux. That's what I did in college when I could barely afford to piece together a build from second-hand parts and couldn't afford to buy windows.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "The Apparent Double Standards of PC Part Picker"

  • 2 months ago
  • 6 points

I think you're positioning us in ways that aren't quite accurate and then developing your argument about our double standard around that. Let me clarify our stance on the areas you called out.

On piracy, we are against it and also advocating it. Most people advocate running windows unlicensed not as a stopgap measure until they buy a license, but as a means to run windows for free and bypass licensing completely. Saying that extends to bios flashing, overclocking, case modding, etc is absurd.

On key resellers, you're taking our position and stretching it unreasonably. We're primarily against key resellers because there's ample evidence of widespread fraud in resold keys, and we'd prefer not to encourage that ecosystem.

If you feel that our stance on running unlicensed windows or key resellers "make(s) it more difficult" to help other users, then perhaps this is not the best fit community-wise. I find your view of consistent to be overzealous to make a point.

Now that I said my bit, what are the odds that this post gets moderated for violating said rules?

Apparently none! Though you seem to have a pretty polarized opinion of our position.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Drop down menus crash Safari browser"

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Ok, should be fixed now.

Comment reply on Forum Topic "Drop down menus crash Safari browser"

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

Looks to be a Safari bug with select inputs and the css style "text-rendering: optimizeLegibility". I reproduced it on 13.0.1. Now that we've identified the culprit, we're going to look into how to work around it or (if necessary) remove that statement entirely.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube