I agree: ad hominem attacks are rarely fair, asserting a level of generality rarely supported by the facts.

Their business behavior is unacceptable, however, and that's a different matter. It might be due to the drug wars going on in Guatemala (all those weapons the U.S. left down there, having armed the death squads); it might be due to severe personal issues. It could be due to a depression brought on annually by a seasonal flareup of severe rheumatoid arthritis combined with other personal factors. We don't know what's causing the behavior.

What we do know is that the result of whatever cause is organizational behavior inconsistent with use of the product in a business environment. And that's a darned shame, considering the truly great (everyone I talked to in MS said it couldn't be done) technical achievement.

In any case, I think most people understand that taking potshots at ability or character on the basis of observed behavior reflects on the potshooter, not the potshootee.

Hank

>>>>The etecnologia site has added a March 2010 update.
>>>
>>>How did you find out? I own the product but did not receive and email as they have in the past.
>>
>>This guy couldn't run a lemonade stand. He may have some good technical ideas but he has the business sense of a gnat.
>
>Mike and Scott, it's uncalled and unfair to put the guys down.