I don't get the grief over losing a 4-year old list of links to 40 other 4-year old threads that still exist and can still be found via Search.
Isn't it time to UPDATE THE CASE? There are CURRENT reasons to recommend other options over WL. Why stay stuck in 2010?
CURRENT: WL prices are not competitive. Their 2W 445nm is $600. Recent reviews suggest they are spec (or a bit overspec), but a JetLasers 2W 445nm is currently $290. And you can build a ~3W 445nm in a nice host for around $275. So unless you really, really want the WL host, save some cash.
CURRENT: WL's referral-based marketing is sleazy. As with most referral-based web marketing, it leads to thousands of greedy imbeciles, stumbling over each other to create phony web sites, blogs, youtube videos, and Facebook posts that contain glowing, fake, pseudo-reviews filled with personal referral links. Essentially tons of prostitutes shilling for WL, hoping to get free swag by posting marketing material disguised as reviews. This junk clogs up the internet like a triple quarter-pounder clogs up my arteries. (EDIT: I certainly don't mean to imply there aren't any valid reviews or honest reviewers, just that the marketing volume makes finding those valid reviews difficult.)
CURRENT: Their lasershades are... Well, who knows what they are? No published specifications, not even approximations.
See, I didn't have to go back to 2010, or 2011, or even 2012 for any of that. Nobody can point to any of those three reasons and say "Well, sure, but that was a long time ago and they have changed." Nope, these are all things they are verifiably doing TODAY, in 2014.
On balance... I have three WL products, selected and purchased as gifts for me in 2013 without looking at any alternatives. The shipments arrived on time, the build quality is good, and the Arctic LPM'd well overspec. That coincides with what I have read from others' 2013/2014 experiences. I think WL has improved in those areas since 2010 (and I suspect the pressure brought from LPF had something to do with that improvement). So I am happy with the products themselves, but my subsequent purchases have gone elsewhere for the CURRENT reasons stated above.
When advising someone where to buy in 2014, wouldn't it be better to cite WL's current behavior and recent examples (like say 2013) instead of continuing to reach all the way back to 2010? Seems like there should be plenty of current reasons and recent examples to convince most people that they will find better alternatives elsewhere without always turning the clock back 4 years -- hopefully the three I provided above are a start.
