On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 07:57:02 -0400
Bryan Phinney disseminated the following:

> > FUD is FUD..even when published in Forbes.
> 
> FUD is the only thing that Forbes DOES publish.  No serious technical person 
> reads Forbes, or even a serious non-technical person for that matter, it is 
> written by, published for, and read by only the most PHB of PHB's, and even 
> they don't take it seriously.  Forbes has been described as "corporate 
> pornography" and is mostly read by middle managers.  Even they don't take 
> advice in Forbes seriously.  That would be like reading a tabloid story about 
> a woman having Elvis' alien baby and taking it seriously.  It is 
> entertainment value only.

Just saw this (from Groklaw), and I thought of you:

"The creativity award goes to CBSMarketwatch for finding a way to report SCO's
results as positive news, as Forbes did yesterday. Imagine if you only got your
news from those two. Why, you'd probably go out and buy SCO stock or
something."

Link:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040901145513600

There's no link that I can see to the Forbes analysis of SCO's 'success', if
anyone can find it I'd like to see it.

-- 
JoeHill RLU #282046 /  www.freeyourmachine.org
19:55:44 up 29 days, 19:40, 5 users, load average: 0.21, 0.26, 0.22
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There are literally several levels of SCO being wrong. And even if we were to
live in that alternate universe where SCO would be right, they'd still be wrong.
-- Linus Torvalds

____________________________________________________
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com
____________________________________________________

Reply via email to