This Is
Gaming Tech, Smartphones, and Consumer Advocacy with a focus on entertainment and commentary.
Nutrition Label
This creator blends high-energy commentary with hands-on experiments, excelling at making tech trends and nostalgia entertaining. While direct product tests offer genuine user perspectives, speculative videos about future tech or 'weird gadgets' often lack technical rigor and evidence.
Strengths
- +
- +
- +
Notes
- !Treat speculative news videos as entertainment rather than confirmed technical analysis.
- !Look for direct hands-on demonstrations to distinguish valid critiques from general commentary.
Rating Breakdown
Breakdown across the key dimensions we rate. Methodology →
Recent Videos
Ditching the iPhone
Is the MacBook Neo Worth It?
This Is a Scam, Right?
Google's WORST Failures
The Xbox Situation is CRAZY
Gaming on Mac Just Got GOOD?!
2016 Tech Was GOOD
Time to Ditch Your iPhone
WORST Game Controllers We Have
Next Xbox is CONFIRMED
Gaming in the 90s was WEIRD
Trying out the CHEAPEST Tech
WEIRDEST Gadgets (That Shouldn't Exist)
The Smartphone is in DANGER
The BEST Tech of 2026 (And the Worst)
Why this rating
Evidence receipts showing why each dimension is rated the way it is.
“Gaming in the 90s was WEIRD”[0:00] →
The video delivers exactly on the premise, showcasing bizarre and nonsensical advertisements (e.g., forks in toasters, nose fluids) that justify the title's claim.
“I bought this with money, I... they didn't send it to us.”[0:59] →
The host explicitly clarifies the provenance of the device, stating it was a personal purchase rather than a review unit.
“It's only my personal calendar... but none of the other ones that are shared with me. So that was dealbreaker number one.”[5:41] →
The host identifies a specific, personal friction point regarding calendar syncing that would only be discovered through actual daily usage.
“Apparently this is for getting the small hairs off hog hides... in the butchering process.”[12:42] →
Information is derived from reading a definition off a screen (Wikipedia/listing) rather than any form of testing or verification.
“It's a watch you idiot, you forgot about hours and minutes.”[11:41] →
Discussion is limited to surface-level identification of the object's function based on a photograph, with no technical breakdown.