John Korb writes:

> It sure sounds like those consultants are (to put it as kindly as possible)
>  incredibly uninformed and either were completely unsuccessful in
>  researching the HP3000 or (shudder at the thought) failed to perform ANY
>  research.

They may not be as uninformed as everyone is making them out to be.
Consultants almost always have an agenda (like almost everyone else). Their
"badmouthing" one product or another may be nothing more than a part of their
gentle tutelage to get their clients to move in some pre-determined direction.

I really don't believe that anyone says anything (including me) without some
form of deep bias being involved. That bias may come from many years or
experience or it may come from mere prejudice, but in either case, it's wholly
the client's responsibility to determine what the speaker's agenda is
[Accurately determining this form of agenda is what every scientist has to do,
and it's why it's so important to learn the word "bullshit" early in one's
career. In scientific pursuits, this form of agenda is called the
"hypothesis", where "hypo" = underlying and "thesis" = [to put forward an]
idea, in Anglicized Greek].

Being wrong is no sin, if it's done honestly. At least I hope so. I seem to be
doomed to making one really good mistake per hour, but I feel the Gates of
Heaven are still open to me. Indeed, being wrong may be no sin even if it's
done dishonestly. In the latter case, it's merely called salesmanship :-). If
you were dumb enough to buy into the line of **** that you were being sold,
that's more your fault than it was the salesman's.

And it's why obtaining a second and third independent opinion is so very
important.

Wirt Atmar