Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 5 Jun 2005 13:55:03 +0000 (UTC)
From:      naddy@mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
To:        freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Negative Review of FreeBSD 5.4
Message-ID:  <d7v07n$1ui1$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
References:  <429EF96E.16172.33600ABA@localhost> <20050602180147.GA790@anarion> <d7pl0g$2f8f$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <2fd864e05060308544bc66225@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> wrote:

> If you aren't familier enough with something to evaluate it, you
> shouldn't review it.

On the other hand, the reviewer should be neutral, which in this
area is strongly at odds with familiarity of the review subject.

> I've done plenty of evaluations of software for customers of mine,
> and I certainly don't just go through the install process, say "This
> sucks" and move on to the next product.

I'm sorry, but you are not in a position to judge your own review
process.  For that we need a third party observer.  And for all I
know, the producers of the software you evaluated might be aghast
at your process.

> I'm aware writing a review is incredibly difficult, however, I would
> suggest that one simply not write a review, if they are unwilling, or
> unable to meet the standard required by the technical audience their
> review is targeted at.

Which is why reviews are written by those who don't have these
qualms.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy@mips.inka.de




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d7v07n$1ui1$1>