CPUs are generally idle more than they are busy when people are doing office work, so it would have been better to measure battery life under such conditions.

...a point which I thought was well made in the article when it was pointed out that the CPU was hammered in testing and you could probably double the battery life figures for less intense use.

More pertinent might be to wonder who on Earth would shell out the thick end of two grand on a gaming laptop to run office apps on though?

Who would shell out that much cash for a gaming laptop at all? For that much you could get an exceptionally ridiculous amount of gaming desktop. Have you ever tried loading levels off a raid 1+0 of 15krpm SAS drives on a really high end controller? You could get that kind of hardware, plus all the crazy video cards and a quad core for the price of this laptop.

Or you could pay probably 1/4 the amount of the laptop to get a desktop with similar specs.

Portables and games just don't go together. Doesn't make any sense.