Two Star rating is not based on performance
356042
Two Star rating is not based on performance.
My purchase arrived in a sealed card, but with no mounting base bracket.
As it turns out, these are non-returnable due to a tiny bit of radioactive material imposing a shipping restriction (1 microcurie of Americium 241, a radioactive element).
5 STARS to Amazon for refunding my money :)
1988044
I've read recently that some of these manufacturers are playing fast and loose with the class ratings of their own products so it's best to test them. They do after all have a standard to meet set by the SD Association.

After purchasing a couple of class 10 SDHC's this last week and benchmarking them to see if it met the MINIMUM standard (write 10MB/s) I found that they were about 25% below the class rating.

Now I've had this card since Mar09 and never tested it. But these results certainly got me to wondering. Using the same 5 benchmark programs, my results were as follows: Writing speed: 16-17.8 MB/s, Reading speed: 19-21.2 MB/s. And that is a whooping over the results of the other card.
2206766
Wish I'd paid closer attention to the reviews before purchasing. Write speeds are abysmal for a USB3.0 device.  10MB/s when formatted as FAT32 and ~16-17MB/s when formatted as exFAT or NTFS. Poor performance even when compared to other USB3.0 flash drives I have sitting here to compare with as well as the couple of USB3.0 external hard disks I tested against as well.

Was reasonably cheap though, so not a total loss. Disappointing for sure though.
4511732
I purchased the product a couple of weeks ago and I'm far from happy with it.

I previously owned a 4 years old DELL XPS13, a "poor" dual-core, 7500 rpm HD and 8GB RAM.

I expected the new ultrabook to run circles around the old one but... actually the opposite happened:

* The SSD drive gets much better marks with the hdtune tests I ran (average 270Mb/s compared to 80Mb/s), so I expected much better performance

* BUT: running a dir /s on a big directory tree (same tree on both machines, of course) is 3 times slower on the new machine (3 times!) despite of the supposedly better SSD marks

* CPU is actually slower than the one on the old XPS: yes, 4 threads, but it takes like 3 times as the old one doing some unzip operations... Awful.

Then, trying to downgrade to Windows 7 turned out to be really hard: I was still unable to start it up since the w7 installer hangs when trying to load the disk driver.

Conclusion: don't buy the Windows 8 based one. It is cheaper but you'll waste precious time. I don't know yet whether it is better with W7. So far: it is just a beautiful case with really bad and underperforming hardware inside. I had several laptops before and I never found a new laptop to be slower than the previous one. Really disappointing.
2505212
Apart from the warnings about this being touchy it is not as fast as advertised.  up to 480Mbps?  ha ha.  Not even close.
I plugged in a USB 3.0 Pen drive that runs an average speed of 14.5Mbps write and 99.9 Mbps in.  With THIS 2.0 hub and the same drive I get speeds as high as 12 Mbps / 40 Mbps.  Where is that 480Mbps?  Pure lies.
669977
I bought this card to replace an old MSI 512MB card. I figured it was time to upgrade because most games would lag on me in high detail. After looking around, I found this card. Unfortunately for me, I made the mistake of assuming that 2GB of DDR3 ram would increase my performance.

My old card got a 4.1 on the WEI. This card, to my surprise, only increased by .2 points. I was so upset, mainly because my old card had cost me only 35$.

I would not recommend this card to anyone because for the same price you can get a card that gets a 6.7 on the WEI and costs $60 as well.&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/HIS-Radeon-HD-6570-IceQ-1-GB-128bit-DDR3-HDMI-DVI-D-HDCP-VGA-PCI-Express-X16-2-1-Video-Card-H657QO1G/dp/B005P7XT3I/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">HIS Radeon HD 6570 IceQ 1 GB (128bit) DDR3 HDMI DVI-D (HDCP) VGA PCI Express X16 2.1 Video Card (H657QO1G)</a>

You get MUCH better performance for the same price. I STRONGLY recommend this instead.
237601
I bought this 2nd generation CD/MP3 player from Philips in the hopes they had fixed the problems which reviewers of their EXP103 described, mainly skipping. Don't waste your time -- they didn't.
Each and every MP3 will skip at 7:44 from the start, and every 2-3 minutes after that, even with the unit sitting solidly on a table (none skip when played from this CD-ROM on my computer). If every one of your MP3s is shorter than that then this might well be a fine CD/MP3 player for you.
Its display is strictly numeric, numbering directories on the CDROM as "albums" and files in them as "tracks". It read my Linux-written CDROM just fine, which has 1-level-deep directories and no files in the top-level; I don't know if it can handle more complex file and directory structures, but long filenames with embedded spaces are no problem.
189008
DO NOT TRUST THE RATINGS.  I was impressed by the number of high ratings until I discovered that many of the reviews correspond to COMPLETELY different items.  So it seems an issue of some technical glitch rather than some deliberate attempt to inflate ratings, BUT nevertheless, BE WARY of making a purchase based on the number of high ratings alone, without reading a lot of the reviews, which are NOT for this item AT ALL.  That said, this product may be good, or bad, can't say yet....
4217895
Wow reading the reviews it makes me really disappointed in people. The Camera is awesome, very easy setup and very good performance. Every bad review I am reading is for the following.

A. people are inexperienced with technology and blaming the device and not themselves.
B. people are assuming its their camera when I found its generally your ISP's crap modem router.

I really wish people would check themselves before just hanging a product out to try. The bad reviews are a sad example of peoples frustration.

--- Ignore the bad reviews, try it for your self. Return it if you hate it, whatever, just don't give a bad review because you lack the proper knowledge to set the device up.
1690460
I bought this product based on reviews.  There were a few that said the speed wasn't near what it should be and they were right.  I returned the first one because the speed was awful.  The replacement gave me over 250mps for a very brief time.  Now its back to 15mps in the same room as the router.  Xfinity has been out several times confirming it's not their signal it's the router.  VERY diappointed in this product!
2061310
I have used this N900 for 2 years (secondary router for the bedroom) , it is simply terrible, very very low performance, don't buy it at all. One of the worst equipment I have bought in decades. Connection drop all time.

Some evaluation here are not what this router provide in terms of performance and reliability.

Don't buy it.

Renato
2092932
While I had high hopes for this product, I was sorely disappointed by performance. The first Power Bank I received showed full bars and took a charge, however it would not charge any of my devices. After contacting the seller and receiving a replacement, ran an experiment (methodology below) and found that I could only get about 7,840mAh or 39.2% of advertised capacity. That's not good! For those who are new to the power bank market, it is normal for power banks to only provide about 60-80% of the advertised capacity, as energy is lost through heat, powering the circuitry,etc. For real-world usage, I performed the following experiment (twice) to test usable capacity:

(1) Deplete my 4,000mAh Galaxy Tab down to 5%
(2) Power Tablet Down
(3) Use Power bank to charge to 100%
(4) Repeat until power bank is drained.

Like I mentioned above, I only got 7,840mAh or 39.2% of advertised capacity. For this reason I would not recommend this product to anyone, as the&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Bastex-15-600mAh/dp/B01EIOR0S8/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Bastex 15,600mAh</a>&nbsp;provides more advertised power for slightly more money. Or, if you don't mind investing more in a quality product, Anker tends to make good stuff:&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Anker-20000mAh-Portable-Charger/dp/B00X5RV14Y/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Anker 20000mAh Portable Charger</a>.

Disclaimer: I received this item at a discount in exchange for a fair, honest review (obviously).

P.S. This is a fairly heavy power bank, which would have been ok, had the power bank performed better, but you might want to keep this in mind.
1208474
The converter performs acceptably but could be better.  Most often, when connecting it, the order in which power is connected is critical.  I have found that if the signal is not getting through, experiment with un-plugging the power supply and re-connecting everything - most times that resolves the issue.  In short, the performance of this equipment is acceptable, but not perfect.  I do now have the ability to view some VHS tapes that I thought had been lost to technology.  If the company develops an improved version that they claim will perform better, I will probably try it.
4945959
Seriously disappointing performance. I was hoping to replace two range extenders with this one WiFi router but results were dismal. I used two different WiFi Analyzers and both showed almost identical results. The TP-Link AC1900 performance barely exceeded the Comcast WiFi router and did not perform as well as one of the range extenders! I tried moving the antennae but that made little to no difference and never worked as well as claimed. The other even more worrying issue is that the TP-Link AC1900 got really hot, almost too hot to touch. Even if the performance had been as claimed, I do not think I would have kept it because of how hot it was getting. Just to clarify, it was not in any enclosed space, not near anything that was getting warm and in a 72 degree ambient temperature with plenty of air around the unit.
4839354
Wow, I got this laptop and it performed wonderfully.  I still think it performs wonderfully unless you want to use external monitors.  After countless hours (40+) of working with technical support I still can't use two external monitors.  As a matter a fact, I can only use one external monitor in 'duplicate desktop' mode.  It will not work in 'extended desktop' with only one external monitor.  Technical support finally admitted that weren't positive it would work the way I wanted it to work.  They want me to give it up for a week while they determine if it actually can support dual monitors.  I can't surrender it for a week while I have work to do.
It was advertised as a 'multi media powerhouse'.  The sound is poor and I wasn't concerned about it.  However, the other half of 'multi media', which is video, turned out to be a big disappointment.
Asus makes a solid machine of good quality and their customer support is superlative.  However, their marketing department failed them by not specifying better video requirements to their engineers.  And now that's my problem.  Instead of returning the machine immediately, I worked for a while to remedy the situation and now Amazon or Asus will not accept a return.
2852788
This product does not perform as advertised. Spend your money somewhere else.
204782
I typically do not review products, but this one is a bit of a special case for me; the read and write speeds are horribly misadvertised, as I'm getting less than half of the advertised 'up to 100 mb/s'. Then again, it was "Up to", meaning that sandisk could lie and weasel their way out of a disappointing product.

The reason I'm giving this 2 stars, even with my disappointment, is that it at least works for what I want, at least, so far.