From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:13:05 -0500 > Damian Wiest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sorry, I didn't mean to apologize for them. Just making > some guesses > > at how Intel is rationalizing the decision to not release > information. > > Personally, I don't buy their products. > > I'm speaking to everyone here. Rationalizing their decisions > is probably a good thing. If you can put yourself in their > shoes then you can probably devise some better reasons why > they should help us.
Bunk. Rationalizing their decisions openly does nothing more than reinforce that their decisions are right and logical. It does nothing to change behavior. It reinforces behavior. The best reason, which has been given, is that in not doing so, Intel will realize a financial impact for their decision. At their size, it is insignificant; but the great thing about a public corporation is that even insignificant financial losses are noticed by boards of directors and shareholders; if it's not maximizing profits, it's a bad thing, and loss of support from a formidable and growing open source sector is not maximizing profits. Especially when it is obvious that the small sector in question has further-reaching influence that you'd originally realized, it is in your best interest to cooperate and "be open" (remember? They said that's what they already said they were doing). Quit playing officer friendly for Intel; they don't need it, and it's not helping matters. DS
