I don't think that is the real intent of the restrictions at all. I think the real intent is to make sure that the vendor has a chance to put their best foot forward in any competitive review. It reminds me of the recent string of NT vs. Linux tests where no experts for Linux were consulted on performance tuning. I think that the restriction that most vendors place is a valid requirement, it's just usually worded too strongly. A more equitable wording would be something like no performance comparisons can be published without a 30 day review period by the vendor.
Erik
--
Erik Huddleston, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chief Architect, eCustomers.com
Microsoft Java MVP
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gaus Kevin D [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 11:29 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: EJB Server Comparison (WebLogic, WebSphere, NetDynamics,
> GemS tone)
>
>
> In other words, the restrictions allow a vendor to prevent
> the results of a
> fair evaluation from being released if the results make them look bad.
>
> Kevin.
>
<snip>
