Digital Click Here!
| Navigational map -- for text only please go to the bottom of the page ||Forums|
Readers' Choice Awards (siteadm) Fri, 13 Jun
Resistance is Futile-you Will be Assim.. (bob_zielazinski) Mon, 16 Jun
Amen (rparker) Mon, 16 Jun
Well.... (cjoffe) Mon, 16 Jun
Judge by the actual coverage (rparker) Mon, 16 Jun

Critical coverage is still a coverage

Posted by: FatBrother
Date posted: Tue Jun 17 3:04:01 PDT 1997

You seem to avoid one thing: critical coverage of Microsoft products is still a coverage. I.e. when reader sees 10 raving articles on NT, 3 critical on NT and only one (no matter raving, critical or neutral) on Linux, he/she thinks "OK, NT has some faults, but there is no alternative".

Look at "Top news stories" page of your site:
Microsoft 5 times
NT 3 times
[Windows]95 1 time
Office1 time
Overall Microsoft10 times
Sun3 times
Java5 times
Solaris0 times
SPARC0 times
Overall Sun 8 times
Apple0 times
Mac3 times
Overall Apple3 times
IBM3 times
Lotus1 times
OS/20 times
Other IBM OSes0 times
Overall IBM4 times
Linux0 times
Unix0 times
If I'd counted number of articles, not the number of text hits, the difference would be even more impressive. You call it fair coverage? I definitely wouldn't.


Fair in numbers? (rparker) Tue, 17 Jun

Respond | Search | Help


For questions or comments, email the Forums Editor

kristin_kueter@infoworld.com