Sometimes people do indeed get carried away by emotion. What *is* relevant about my response posting (look at the subject:) is that Exchange doesn't and won't support NAS. This effects customers of NetApp, but also EMC, Microsoft, MTI, Compaq, IBM, H-P, etc.... That I happen to work for EMC was NOT relevant with respect to my initial response. But, hey, some people judge one's posting on where the poster gets it's salary and not what experience, knowledge the poster can contribute. So you have to work for a non-vendor or hide your personality with some fake email address and ip address in order to be taken seriously. Interesting, never looked at it that way. So much for this list being in spirit with the good ol' net.
Peter
--- Pete Ehlke pde@ehlke.net wrote:
Peter Bodifee (bodif36772@yahoo.com) said, on [001114 20:13]:
BTW, you are also an "expert" in hiding your
employer's identity (AT&T
Canada) by using some obscure domain (risc.org), so what are you busting me for?
For giving my personal
opinion to serve the IT user community without showing who pays my
salary? Have a life....
The fact that I admin for shockwave.com, and used to admin for Sony, is not relevant to my postings here, and is not relevant to my occasional tweaking of netapp themselves. Nor is Brian's employment at AT&T.
Your employment at EMC is a different matter entirely, and falls completely within the pattern we've seen from EMC employees on this list. If you can't tell the difference, then you've got fewer ethics than you do clues.
*plonk*
-Pete
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays! http://calendar.yahoo.com/
-
Peter Bodifee