As is the custom of most Corporations, showing forth their public face, I think it matters not what any of us do; their only goal with those would suggest something other than what they thought up themselves, is to try to make the opposition go away as quickly as they can, anyway they can. If that means making promises they never intend to keep, so be it.

>>> Cortlandt Wilson <[log in to unmask]> 08/21 12:55 PM >>>
Doug,

Does this mean that you too are uncomfortable with with these
unqualified claims to greatness?

<HP3000 isn't any worse than other systems wouldn't benefit anyone
either.>

I agree.   So what do we do?

Take a look at HP ads such as at:
http://www.businessservers.hp.com/products/index.html 

HP calls the HP e3000  interoperable, scalable, reliable, high
availablily, worry-free business computing.

"Scalable - the e3000 has a low-end to high-end performance increase
of 3000%"

"Worry-free business computing means you get up and running fast. As a
mature platform with over 25 years of success, hundreds of experienced
partners, and tens-of-thousands of satisfied customers, the HP e3000
gets the job done -- and gets it done quickly."

Lets take some clues from CSY marketing!

Cortlandt Wilson
Cortlandt Software
Mountain View, CA
(650) 966-8555
http://www.cortsoft.com    (MANMAN Resources Guide)

"Doug Becker" <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message
news:39a13eea_2@skycache-news.fidnet.com...
> Although I could see where the message that the HP3000 isn't any
worse than other systems wouldn't benefit anyone either.
>
> >>> Cortlandt Wilson <[log in to unmask]> 08/18 7:06 PM >>>
> Ken,
>
> In reference to:   http://www.editcorp.com/wsj/kens-ad-1.html 
>
> My major guiding principle for communicating about difficult issues
is
> to structure the message so that 'the other guy' can make up his own
> mind as a free and informed choice.    (I get this from Prof. Chris
> Argris of Harvard who is considered one of the top men in the
field.)
> A informed choice requires, obviously, information - specifically
> valid information that others can verify for themselves.
>
> I bring up valid information because I believe that statements to
the
> effect that MPE is the best operating system doesn't pass muster.
> If anyone else claimed that their favorite operating system or
> programming language was the "best" we would surly counter with
> questions like:
>   o best for what purpose or use?
>   o best by what criteria?
>   o How is that measured?
>   o What evidence do you have for your claims?
>
> Claims to unqualified greatness frankly "gets my back up".
>
> If we make such a statement we must stand ready to answer such
> questions but I don't see how we can in one ad.   Also claims to
> unqualified greatness activates my defenses.   It is wise to be
> minimally objectionable unless the message is worth the initial
upset
> and defensiveness that the message would predictably invoke.
> IMO the claim to be "the best" opens up a real "snake pit" with more
> downside than upside.
>
> Furthermore, the bald claim, without extensive supporting
> documentation, that MPE is the best looses credibility with me --
and
> I'm a 3k "bigot"!   That thought applies more so to the Image DBMS
> which has, in my opinion, some noteworthy shortcomings.
>
> There are many good things to be said about MPE/iX but the statement
> that MPE/iX is flat out THE best OS should not be allowed to stand.
>
> We can avoid a lot of the difficulty if, for instance, we say that
MPE
> is reliable, stable, open, and relatively easy to use.    In this
way
> we make public our criteria of "goodness" and each claim can be
fairly
> quickly supported to a first approximation.
>
> With gratitude for your excellent contributions to MPE and the 3000L
> - Cortlandt
>