Re: [SI-LIST] : Evaluation of Vendor tools on SI list

Richard A. Schumacher ([email protected])
Thu, 11 Dec 1997 17:11:17 CST

> Just a comment based on the last month`s or so email. Particuliar
> responses on various vendor tools should be sent privately to the
> originator of the particuliar question. Although its nice to know that
> my competitors tools has bugs as well, I'm very sure that if
> the shoe was on the other foot it would be uncomforatble. Since this
> is primarily a technical forum we (software vendors) are not supposed
> to advertize the merits of our tools. Except for some most notable
> exceptions (sometimes we software vendors get exited) I can say that
> we tend to comply. I don't mind users asking for particuliar models,
> and merits of particuliar vendor tools. However broadcasting the
> responses on the SI deflector is in my humble opinion not appropriate
> and in some cases not fair.

On the contrary! One of the prime purposes of the list is for
_users_ to discuss the merits and shortcomings of various tools.
If the criticism is based on a mis-understanding, it may be a
common mis-understanding in which case a public discussion is
a fast way to educate all users. Aggrieved harping or invalid
ignorant criticisms will be quickly recognized and discounted.

I agree that it's inappropriate for _vendors_ to bad-mouth the
competition or hype their own offerings. But any vendor should
accept honest user criticism as constructive feedback. If they
can't take it, tough beans; maybe they should be in another business.

Richard Schumacher
Hewlett Packard
High Performance Systems Division