reynt0 wrote: > Are there refined answers available to the question Yes.
When giving a software evaluation, you always specify sources and methods. Each and every assertion needs a source and a method: who is your source, and how does your source know this? With proprietary software, you're mostly stuck relying on your vendor for information. Compare "Microsoft says that IIS will scale up to our server load with our current server configuration" to "the Apache Foundation isn't making any promises, but I've had Apache running for the last month on a test server and it's performing flawlessly." The first statement's source is Microsoft. Their method is presumably their own internal testing. The second statement's source is you-the-engineer. Your method is your own internal testing. Neither evaluation is necessarily better or worse than the other. Management might trust Microsoft more than you, or you more than Microsoft. You're not responsible for making sure Management makes the right choices--you're only responsible for giving Management accurate information with which to make their choices. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
