Technical knock out

March 9 2006

One week later, and there is no response from anyone at Microsoft to Paul Mooney's evaluation of the Application Analyzer 2006 for Lotus Notes.  This despite the fact that guys like Peter, Paul, and Eric specifically asked for Paul to wait for the shipping version and then re-test.

I think we can declare Mr. Mooney the winner by TKO -- or maybe they simply couldn't get up off the mat after the beta.  One of my colleagues asked me today whether we should expect any press articles that point out that the released code doesn't work, since MS's defense of Paul's initial review was "it's just beta and should never have been public".  It would be nice.

Ed Brill | Kolbotn, Norge Category:  Microsoft  Add/View Comments [9]

Post a Comment

  1. 1  Gerco Wolfswinkel http://www.domino-weblog.nl | 3/9/2006 7:02:47 AM

    I blogged about Paul's efforts last week; yesterday, Peter de Haas, Dutch Microsoftie and blogger, responded to my blogpost. He tried to cast doubt on Paul's credibility by questioning his motives, and level of knowledge about Microsoft products. Peter says the tool is ok and that he has used it with great success, but goes on to say he can't divulge any details because of confidentiality issues.

    For those of you that do read Dutch, the thread containing Peters' original comments is here:

    { Link }

  1. 2  Paul Mooney http://www.pmooney.net | 3/9/2006 7:21:37 AM

    If Peter is willing to comment here or on my site, I would be happy to respond.

    P.

  1. 3  Ben Langhinrichs http://www.GeniiSoft.com/showcase.nsf/GeniiBlog | 3/9/2006 7:40:59 AM

    I guess they don't want to attract any more attention to the evaluation than necessary, and don't have enough to rebut to make it worth it. Sad, really.

  1. 4  Patrik  | 3/9/2006 9:05:41 AM

    I just went to { Link } and posted a question on their blog under the App Analyzer Q&A section, asking why they have not commented on Pauls review. I had to register, but then I got this after doing submit:

    "Your comment or rating has been received. However, due to caching and moderation, it may not be displayed right away."

    Comments are not posted online!?...Geezz

    I guees the M$ guys have discovered that blogging has it's disadvantages...

    It also think it is very dishonest to have a blog with a Comment function that does not work online and that does not inform you about that beforehand. I gives the impression of free speech but in reality it's one way biased "information"

    These people are really starting to get embarrassaing...

    /Patrik

  1. 5  Bill Brown  | 3/9/2006 12:11:30 PM

    Patrik - Looks like your comment was approved by the the moderators and responded to with a non-answer. They refer you to some other posts, but none address the most glaring error of "When was the database last used."

  1. 6  patrik  | 3/9/2006 1:42:26 PM

    Well, I did not find my initial comment/question (Why they have not commented on Pauls review). Only the one I posted afterwards to confirm that comments where indeed not posted online. I guess my first question was to offensive to make it through their moderation filter.

    Anyway this is getting uninteresting. It is a technical knockout, as Ed say. The only ones left to realize this is Karl an his crew. Go on guys, stop writing pointless comments on your blog. You need to return to the basement with your whiteboards and Visual Studio. Don't worry guys, we will still be here when you get back. If at first you don't succeed... ;-)

  1. 7  Mike McGarel  | 3/9/2006 1:52:50 PM

    Why wait for an update from M$? IBM should send out a release detailing the truth about the Analyzer. I read an item about this product on several sources (both print and online) and would love to see a rebuttal.

    C'mon you IBM marketers! Get the gloves off and start typing!

  1. 8  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 3/9/2006 2:07:51 PM

    @5 that was a definite non-answer :)

    It's not really IBM's style to issue a press release about a competitor's activity. Let me see if I can get something else going.

  1. 9  david racicot  | 3/9/2006 3:13:43 PM

    I think that the "journalist" are missing the real story. Are they afraid? I agree with Ed @8, plus IBM whining about it would not carry as eye opening a message as would an article about the ethical issues. As I mentioned in another blog, Sony got sued and lost for their antics. Years ago it was not legal for advertizers to mention a competitors product (probably because of this mess which does no one any good). Slimy sales people have no ethics and the law should there to protect us from them. So, now they tell lies and misrepresent a competitors product and journalists get fooled, and companies (and governments) get sold a lie and we end up paying for it (higher prices on goods and services and more taxes). So, let's see a nice big fat article on some front pages.