Do I understand correctly: you seem to be saying that the original (NYT) article is "more insightful about the complexity and reality of making chips", and "covers more of the complexities", while the summary (Tom's Hardware) article "focuses more on personality clashes, losing some of the nuanced details" — and therefore you prefer the TH article (less insightful about the complexity and nuance), because "it sets a clearer tone"?

It seems you're questioning my preference, but I'm simply pointing out that I find the tone and emphasis in the TH article clearer, even though it's less detailed. I'm free to prefer the presentation of one article over another, regardless of complexity.

The personal preference is fine, just trying to make sure I understood correctly the discussion between you and the root poster. As a reader, it was a bit confusing to read something that starts with “Sorry, but I think the original article is more insightful…” and have it turn out that this (being more insightful) was intended as a problem.

Both of the first two comments you posted seemed to be positive about the NYT article over the TH one — I had not previously encountered “insightful” used negatively, or “losing nuance” used positively — so perhaps a different choice of words would have made it clearer (to me).

Now reading again, than you for pointing it out, I reversed the NYT by the TH article. My mistake while writing on the mobile phone. I basically said that I preferred the TH article over the NYT one.