The difference of course is that we are speaking of a component and NOT the entire SSD. Pick a component NOT built by Ford in that truck and tell me if you give a crap about that component, so long as the specs DONT change. This is the problem everyone is having; they think that every company is set in a bill of materials for a consumer drive when they are not. They choose to exploit only those that they don’t like, where others have done the same pretty much unscathed.

The performance metric of this drive did not change. The reason for that is because the standard for arriving at these specs is to use programs like ATTO where only compressible data is used for the test. This is the problem and it is systemic; it is not the fault of one manufacturer that follows the pattern. So long as they meet specs, it doesn’t matter what they use. If you dont like this, you have the option to buy an enterprise drive where the materials are guaranteed and listed.

So say you just bought a new truck. Brand spanking new F-350 with the top of the line Triton V-10 option.

You would be completely okay with Ford charging you the 55 grand for that model, and wouldn’t complain at all if they delivered it with the baseline v8, because they both get 23 highway mpg? So because they both meet a single certain performance metric, the fact they are wildly different on a hundred other metric, what? Simply doesn’t matter?

Kingston built an SSD with certain parts, submitted it for reviews, got great reviews because of the parts and supplies that were used, then when it was actually shipped, they built it with inferior part to dupe unwitting customers.

That’s all there is to it. Nothing about it is justified or okay. If you want to support a company that does that, by all means, that’s your choice.

There is a huge difference between a product and a component within a product, and more specifically, a consumer product that does not have a set material spec or BOM as would enterprise SSDs. The drive lives up to everything they say about it, regardless of whether it has one memory or another. We are not trying to say this is ok. We are saying that this is business and done in every corner of every industry, and just because a few guys don’t like it and become vocal, doesn’t make it illegal in any way. Now was it right? If it was wrong, find a way to establish that and bring it to the table. You have no idea when and if NVidia switches internal components in their cards so that arguments it moot I am afraid.

The ONLY reason this is even an argument is because one day, one of us reviewers decided to pop open and start examining the inside of an SSD. If it weren’t for that, you would probably never see a SSD ripped open today, much like many other peripherals. It then wouldn’t be at issue at all would it? Let’s be fortunate that SSDs are looked at with a magnifying glass and, if you don’t like something, move on to the next drive.

That’s a terrible reason to be okay with the bullshit Kingston pulled with this SSD.

They essentially said they were selling caviar while piling the consumers plate full of dog crap, and you’re saying that’s okay because the consumer doesn’t know better? You’re okay that they did great sales at the expense of massively misleading consumers??

I honestly cannot believe you are seriously trying to say this is okay.

If Nvidia started selling gtx 760s rebranded as 780s, in your opinion that would be okay, just as long as the mislead public were happy with what they got and remained blissfully unaware of the performance discrepancies between what they bought and what thought they were buying?