RK had an article testing Phoenix 14k over 24 months. ...something like 75% output at a year and 69-70% at 24 months... most output loss was in the first few months. I am going off of memory, but the article should be easy to find. I used to give my old bulbs to folks who used them for another year... spectrum was good, but output was down.
Whether anybody likes it or not, we live in a world where people get judged and judge themselves. This "there is no such thing as better, just different" type of argument is the online equivalent of giving out participation trophies. Some people are OK with this. Some are not. For the people who want more out of their tanks, they can tell the difference in lighting types. The ultimate example of this are all of the people who are adding T5s to their LEDs and wishing that they did it sooner. Has anybody ever heard of a person who regretted adding T5s? If so, have you heard of a second case? They saw a deficiency and wanted to get better. I think that all of the arguments are just between people who cannot see the difference yet... or just don't care, but most of the whom do not care do not argue that much.
This whole argument about "it is not the tech's fault, it is the implementation" is stupid too. I don't care if we could have hydrogen cars that get 100 miles per gallon, where are they? I don't live in a dreamworld. LEDs that "could" have perfect spectrum and "could" have total coverage are just as useful as the JetPacks and Hovercraft that were supposed to be mainstream by the year 2000 (this was a real thing). Rainbows, butterflies and dreams don't make my coral thrive.
With a quantum (photon is a quantum) being infinite and mostly theoretical, how does anybody know that there is no magic ones. Seems that somewhere in infinity there could be some magic. Seems like somebody could have a theory that magic exists. Maybe this is where people are going wrong in assuming that there are no magic photons... time to assume that there are.
Whether anybody likes it or not, we live in a world where people get judged and judge themselves. This "there is no such thing as better, just different" type of argument is the online equivalent of giving out participation trophies. Some people are OK with this. Some are not. For the people who want more out of their tanks, they can tell the difference in lighting types. The ultimate example of this are all of the people who are adding T5s to their LEDs and wishing that they did it sooner. Has anybody ever heard of a person who regretted adding T5s? If so, have you heard of a second case? They saw a deficiency and wanted to get better. I think that all of the arguments are just between people who cannot see the difference yet... or just don't care, but most of the whom do not care do not argue that much.
This whole argument about "it is not the tech's fault, it is the implementation" is stupid too. I don't care if we could have hydrogen cars that get 100 miles per gallon, where are they? I don't live in a dreamworld. LEDs that "could" have perfect spectrum and "could" have total coverage are just as useful as the JetPacks and Hovercraft that were supposed to be mainstream by the year 2000 (this was a real thing). Rainbows, butterflies and dreams don't make my coral thrive.
With a quantum (photon is a quantum) being infinite and mostly theoretical, how does anybody know that there is no magic ones. Seems that somewhere in infinity there could be some magic. Seems like somebody could have a theory that magic exists. Maybe this is where people are going wrong in assuming that there are no magic photons... time to assume that there are.