the relevant question is the validity of the message, or lack thereof, not the credentials of the messenger.
That may be, but nobody brought up credentials except you. Of course, I am extremely familiar with ad hominem attacks, having received plenty myself in this forum. If you want to argue the validity of the message I quoted in 14577, be my guest, it sure looks like nonsense to me.
ACSA's OFFICE OF PUBLIC ADVOCACY stated: "The Gang of Five's Network Computer is based on the X-Station developed originally in 1971 as a Telex-like or IBM 3270-like terminal.
Want to take a crack at that one? Do you consider this message valid? I never heard of ACSA until it came up in the Microsoft antitrust context. There are no names listed on their web site except a lawyer, a PR guy, and a bunch of extremely dubious sounding researchers. And, the only current occupation of the organization seems to be the defense of Microsoft, undertaken in an embarassingly looney tunes style. If they'd brought in the Queen of England, I'd think it was the next incarnation of Lyndon LaRouche.
Is this really the best you Microphiles can do? I doubt Charles "Rick" Rule would stoop to this level of exposition.
Cheers, Dan.
P.S. As far as I can tell, NOISE was a derisive acronym created by Microsoft, so if you think "Gang of Five" is more resonant, perhaps you should email Bill. |
