M
Mike Williams
That was not the question I asked you. Will you please answer the question I
asked. For ease of reference, here it is again:
Mike
That was not the question I asked you. Will you please answer the question I
asked. For ease of reference, here it is again:
Mike
V
vanderghast
Yes, assuming this person is likely aware that you will ***continue*** to
buy, from him/her, in two years, that person is unlikely to boldly lie to
you. Eh, by the way, is making money a sin?
Sure, sure, there are sales person having no kind of remorse to lie to you,
that does not mean any sales person is.
If not possibly the best kind of person, who would it be? a religious
extremist? and why?
And before you resort to an "independant analyst", let me ask you, what that
analyst is really trying to sell you?, what his/here real goal? Are you LESS
on the defensive when you listen to that analyst than when you listen to a
salesman? if so, you are more vulnerable toward a sales person presenting
himself as an analyst.
So, yes. Else, who, and why's that?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
buy, from him/her, in two years, that person is unlikely to boldly lie to
you. Eh, by the way, is making money a sin?
Sure, sure, there are sales person having no kind of remorse to lie to you,
that does not mean any sales person is.
If not possibly the best kind of person, who would it be? a religious
extremist? and why?
And before you resort to an "independant analyst", let me ask you, what that
analyst is really trying to sell you?, what his/here real goal? Are you LESS
on the defensive when you listen to that analyst than when you listen to a
salesman? if so, you are more vulnerable toward a sales person presenting
himself as an analyst.
So, yes. Else, who, and why's that?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
M
Mike Williams
You're such a pussy.
Mike
V
vanderghast
"That was not the question I asked you. Will you please answer the question
I
asked. For ease of reference, here it is again:"
If not, who would, and why?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
I
asked. For ease of reference, here it is again:"
If not, who would, and why?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
M
mayayana
And before you resort to an "independant analyst", let me ask
Independent analysts are often nothing more
than shills. All sorts of official experts have
"done studies". A famous one was done by a
company that came out of nowhere, called Asset
Metrix. They flooded the online media with a
"study" when Win98 was being "end-of-lifed".
Their study found that Win98 was less safe
than WinXP. Why? Because it was going off
support.
Asset Metrix was in the business of
helping companies update to XP. Their study was
sheer nonsense. But the online tech. media were
only too happy to trumpet it for a headline, so
that anyone who didn't actually download the PDF
and read it was likely to assume that Asset Metrix
was a "going concern" and that their statement
was true, backed by coherent research.
Asset Metrix was later bought by Microsoft.
(I wonder why?)
You don't have to go to so-called analysts.
You could listen to people who use the product,
who also use other products, and who have a
future interest. You can ask people who know
more than you do. (Isn't that what newsgroups
are for, after all?)
Hopefully you don't have an order in for a new
Pontiac. Then again: "Eh, by the way, is making
money a sin?"
Independent analysts are often nothing more
than shills. All sorts of official experts have
"done studies". A famous one was done by a
company that came out of nowhere, called Asset
Metrix. They flooded the online media with a
"study" when Win98 was being "end-of-lifed".
Their study found that Win98 was less safe
than WinXP. Why? Because it was going off
support.
Asset Metrix was in the business ofhelping companies update to XP. Their study was
sheer nonsense. But the online tech. media were
only too happy to trumpet it for a headline, so
that anyone who didn't actually download the PDF
and read it was likely to assume that Asset Metrix
was a "going concern" and that their statement
was true, backed by coherent research.
Asset Metrix was later bought by Microsoft.
(I wonder why?)
You don't have to go to so-called analysts.
You could listen to people who use the product,
who also use other products, and who have a
future interest. You can ask people who know
more than you do. (Isn't that what newsgroups
are for, after all?)
Hopefully you don't have an order in for a new
Pontiac. Then again: "Eh, by the way, is making
money a sin?"
M
Mike Williams
That's just answering one question with another. If you don't know the
answer to my question then just say so.
Mike
M
Mike Williams
Depends on how you make it.
Mike
V
vanderghast
I answered your question with a Yes.
If you can only accept one answer to your question, that is not a question.
Vanderghast, Access MVP
If you can only accept one answer to your question, that is not a question.
Vanderghast, Access MVP
M
Mike Williams
Well actually it was a qualified "Yes", but you now appear to have
unqualified it I will assume an unqualified "Yes" as your answer. Just to
recap, here is my question and your answer again:
My question: Are you really suggesting that the best
person to ask about the longevity of a product is
the person who wants to sell it to you?
Your answer: Yes.
You really are a little pussy, aren't you. A salesman's wet dream . . .
.. . . Oh, I've just realised, you are a Micro$oft MVP. That explains it all.
Your answers to questions relating to Micro$oft and its products are almost
certainly heavily biased in Micro$oft's favour and hence highly unreliable.
Mustn't bite the hand that feeds you, eh
Mike
V
vanderghast
My answer to your question was: Yes, if that someone would likely to still
be in business in two years and would need decent credibility to make deal
with you.
The statement has no need to be a Microsoft case to hold, it holds for any
business. No need to be a MVP to understand it.
In fact, you did not attack the argument, but you decided to attack (if we
can qualify your objections as an attack) the one who brougth the argument.
Unfortunately for you, my argument does not require to have faith in my
word, or on my reputation, since it only realy on every day experience of
EVERYONE reading these lines.
Since you seems to insist, tell me, how is it so hard, for you, to have the
upper hand over a 'pussy' ?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
The day before the battle of Issus:
Darius: Return back home, I don't fight with children.
Alexender the Great: Tomorrow, if you win, your prestige won't be much
greater thant oday, you would only have defeated a child. But if you lose,
the world would consider that you worth less than a child.
be in business in two years and would need decent credibility to make deal
with you.
The statement has no need to be a Microsoft case to hold, it holds for any
business. No need to be a MVP to understand it.
In fact, you did not attack the argument, but you decided to attack (if we
can qualify your objections as an attack) the one who brougth the argument.
Unfortunately for you, my argument does not require to have faith in my
word, or on my reputation, since it only realy on every day experience of
EVERYONE reading these lines.
Since you seems to insist, tell me, how is it so hard, for you, to have the
upper hand over a 'pussy' ?
Vanderghast, Access MVP
The day before the battle of Issus:
Darius: Return back home, I don't fight with children.
Alexender the Great: Tomorrow, if you win, your prestige won't be much
greater thant oday, you would only have defeated a child. But if you lose,
the world would consider that you worth less than a child.
M
Mike Williams
I don't agree with you. In fact the last person I would listen to regarding
the quality or suitability or longevity of a product would be a
representative of the company that manufactured it or is trying to sell it
to me. If for example I was thinking about buying a specific model of motor
car I would listen to the views of /independent/ people who had driven and
or tested it and who had personally compared it to other models they had
driven or tested. I would correctly assume that the manufacturer of that
particular model of car, or one of his representatives or salesmen, would
not tell me the truth, and certainly not the whole truth, and so I would not
take their views into consideration. For that reason I would be very
suspicious of the views of Micro$oft and of the views of a Micro$oft MVP
such as yourself when deciding whether to purchase one of their products,
and I would not believe what they told me, just as I do not believe you.
Mike
T
Timothy Casey
vanderghast said:
I fired two ISPs in a row before winding up with my present service - and
and I fired them both for the same reason. Their call centre technicians
*boldly* and brazenly lied to me thinking I'd never bother to check. I
always check, and because lying doesn't fix any real world problems, that
put them in breach of contract which I successfully terminated out of court,
in both instances.
Many people really *are* stupid enough to lie to you about well known and
easily verifiable facts - especially when you are only a customer of their
customer. Enough to make it highly likely.
Always check the facts for yourself. After all,
It is only human nature to make all kinds of misteaks!
And no, making money is _not_ a "sin" - it is exclusively *how*
you treat others in the process of making your money, that counts.
M
Mike Williams
No, not all salesmen will lie to you, but many of them will. The fact that
they are trying to sell you something makes it more likely that they will
lie to you than somebody who is not trying to sell you something. If you
don't understand that, which by your statements you clearly don't, then you
don't understand very much at all about human nature and you are a
salesman's wet dream, which is why I called you a little pussy.
That depends on how you make it. Making money is not in itself a sin, but
the act of making it often can be. There are people and companies who will
sink to very low depths in order to increase their profits and who are
prepared to do almost anything today in order to increase their power
tomorrow. In fact some companies, or at the very least some of their top
level employees, appear to be quite happy to behave like corporate gangsters
in their lust for power and profit.
http://www.computerworlduk.com/mana...public-sector/news/index.cfm?newsid=6124&pn=1
Mike
S
Sanders Kaufman
Mike said:
You're looking at it from the perspective of a victim.
If you eschew the victim mentality, you won't feel the need to cower behind
Internet anonymity before.
..
M
Mike
Sanders said:
I'm sure there are people who don't mind spam, in fact, desire it for
whatever reason. I've been involved in telecommunications since early
80s. I don't need to directly expose my contact addresses to "bad
guys", further watering them down, making it less trustworthy. In
additional, there is something about cyberspace that brings out the
"best" (sarcastic) in us, its makes the shy more vocal, more ignorant,
more rude, when in real face to face, the irony they might be the
nicest people. I have learned it is best (for me, for who I am and
represent in the near 30 years of telecommunications work) to remain
anonymous as much as possible when you are having public exchanges
with people, especially in one that has gone global where you can be
much greatly "victimized" in many ways.
--