So often people review technology on the basis of improvements in specs (CPUs, RAM, benchmarks, etc) rather than by examining the use of a device.
For example, compare Mills Baker's thoughts and John Gruber's thoughts on the latest iPad.
Gruber focuses on quantitative, iterative improvements to the iPad's components. He goes on and on about weight, thickness, Geekbench scores, etc.
Baker focuses on the user's experience: how do people use this thing? What problems does the iPad solve that aren't solved on other devices? How are these problems being solved -- or ignored -- by the latest update?
I could be wrong. But I seem to remember that a lot of the Apple side of the "Apple vs PC" arguments of yore focused on "how is it used" rather than "who has the fastest CPU".