I don't think I turn a blind eye. The first graph is mobility, and I have thusfar never needed a mobility part so I don't read reviews at all ... except to have a good laugh at a 100W TDP GTX480. Vendor preference or not, that's kinda giggly. But like I said, I don't think I've ever commented on bar graphs from either side, I know how to read them and without knowledge of testing conditions they're useless for anything other than a first approximation.

As for the pricing strategy, as a 'value minded' consumer all I see is this: "my budget is ideally under 200 or around there. What can I get, and will it be worth it?" I have never really been bothered about pricing on flagships (and I don't think I've ever contradicted myself) because I simply don't care. If the card isn't worth it at my budget, I just won't buy it. Judging future pricing strategy based upon projected flagship pricing doesn't really help.

As for heat and power, I don't really get into a knot over it. What I'm worried about is the acoustics that accompany the heat a certain power draw produces. The 4850 was fine because even at high temps that heat generated was low, the heatsink could be small and quiet. But the GTX480 simply nearly overwhelms its cooler (and goes into turbine mode). Acoustics acoustics acoustics. I would never ever use a 5970 or a GTX480, and I probably wouldn't go for a 5870 or GTX470 either.

Midrange, where regular income people like me sit, is the pit of compromise.

I do eagerly await the next gen, and while I might post more in nvidia threads about how they aren't cutting it, the fact that my GFX has not changed reflects that I don't think ATI is really cutting it either. ; )