How to contradict yourself in two easy steps
How to contradict yourself in two easy steps:
Step 1. Dare Obasajno (a PM at Microsoft) argues that anyone comparing Adobe's Apollo and Microsoft's Silverlight by mentioning them in "the same sentence as if they are similar products" is proof that ["popular technology blog pundits"] don't "do much research and in many cases aren't technical enough to do the research anyway."
Step 2. In the same post, Dare (remember- a PM at Microsoft) provides his own comparison of Adobe's Apollo and Microsoft's Silverlight by mentioning them in the same sentence as if they were similar products, arguably validating comparisons by the aforementioned, apparently unresearched, popular technology blog pundits that in his view are not technical enough to do the research anyway:
"Apollo is Adobe's Flash based
knock off competitor to the .NET Framework while Silverlight is Microsoft's .NET Framework based knock off competitor to the Flash platform."
In this response to Dare's
nonsense post, Harry Pierson (an architect at Microsoft) deftly avoids being labelled as an unresearched-popular-technology-blog-pundit-that-isn't-technical-enough-to-do-the-research-anyway by not comparing the products in the same sentence, but by instead comparing the companies Adobe and Microsoft:
"The upshot is that both companies are trying to deliver a unified "client" platform that spans desktop, devices and browser. That sounds like "platform competition" to me."