Dan, I sauntered on over to Slate and checked out "The Case Against The Case Against Microsoft." The good thing about it is that it's not full of all those irritating "click here for . . ." links that plagued the original Nader piece this one is replying to.
I think this is just another sub-plot in Chairman Bill's ongoing plot to discredit the opposition. While Nader's piece reads like "carp" (your word), this one, stylistically, reads fairly smoothly. It looks like Kinsey is capable of good editing after all, at least when he wants to be.
Now, for the bad news: it reads like Rick Rule copied most of it straight out of Microsoft's brief. I wonder if he downloaded the Word version of the brief off their website, then gussied it up a little and submitted it. That's certainly what the aritcle reads like. I expected a little more originality from the "intellectuals" at Slate.
And, who the hell is this Rick Rule, anyway? Who does he work for? Who butters his toast? What axe does he have to grind? The bio at the end of the piece is singularly uninformative.
I'd post the link here, but I've lost it and can't find it, and, frankly, it's not worth it. If you want Microsoft's position, just go read Microsoft's brief, of which Rick Rule's article is nothing more than a warmed-over summary. |
