From: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 )
Subject: Re: Vendor Claims - To Believe or Not to Believe ...
Date: 18 Nov 89 19:30:55 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7116@hubcap.clemson.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 8911171513.AA16049@fa.sei.cmu.edu
From article <8911171513.AA16049@fa.sei.cmu.edu>, by Judy.Bamberger@SEI.CMU.EDU:
> BUT - When was the last time one accepted any tool vendor's word
> about their own product without serious questioning and justifying
> thereof? And reproducing such a statement out of such context -
> to my naive view, anyway - is a bit irresponsible.
Forgive me, Judy... obviously you are aware of comparisons which
were not supplied by vendors, which scientifically control every
conceivable variable, and which are completely unassailable.
Since I am clearly citing comparisons which are less valuable,
please contribute the results of these more valuable comparisons
to the discussion so that all of us can increase our understanding.
Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
prev parent reply other threads:[~1989-11-18 19:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1989-11-17 15:13 Vendor Claims - To Believe or Not to Believe Judy.Bamberger
1989-11-18 19:30 ` William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox