funny thing is he just said that he repeated the official line. so what was
interpreted was from palm. the problem is how it was understood. maybe
palm should be more clear? yes, i think so.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Mathis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Palm Developer Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: New products from Palm, Inc.
>"Bradly J. Barton" wrote:
>
>[...]
>> The difference is that Palm let the rumor mill churn for more than a
month
>> between the ZDNet article and the official release. They told us they
were
>> just rumors and to not worry about it. In short, I feel like I was lied
to
>> by Palm on this .. and in turn, passed that lie on to my clients. From a
>> client's perspective, they don't see that it was Palm's misinformation..
>> they see that I gave them incorrect information, even though all I did
was
>> repeat the official line from Palm. ZDNet got their information from
>> somewhere.. I'm guessing from one of the sales channels that had to have
>> been set up in order to hit the shelves today.. I wish Palm would have
made
>> the public announcement then.
>[...]
>
>Yes, they told us exactly what they could. It was a rumor. I certainly
don't
>remember anyone ever saying "No, those rumors are false". Only, "Yes, we
know
>it's a rumor". Palm never lied. I think in this case you misinterpreted
those
>comments (or, "no comments", as they were), and passed on incorrect
information
>that you inferred from the lack of information.
>
>It's time to admit to yourself that what happened between you and your
clients
>has nothing to do with what anyone at Palm said.
>
>--
>Brian Mathis
>Direct Edge
>http://www.directedge.com
>
>--
>For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe,
please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
>
--
For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see
http://www.palmos.com/dev/tech/support/forums/
