home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Amiga Plus 1995 #5 & #6
/
Amiga Plus CD - 1995 - No. 5 and 6.iso
/
pd
/
grafik
/
lightwave
/
lightwave-jan95
/
000261_owner-lightwave-l _Mon Jan 23 19:29:01 1995.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1995-02-04
|
2KB
Return-Path: <owner-lightwave-l>
Received: by netcom2.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id OAA24818; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 14:51:25 -0800
Received: from csn.net by netcom2.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id OAA24782; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 14:51:16 -0800
Received: from msgate.aspsys.com by csn.net with SMTP id AA25285
(5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Mon, 23 Jan 1995 15:51:40 -0700
Received: by msgate.aspsys.com with Microsoft Mail
id <2F258483@msgate.aspsys.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:51:47 MST
From: "Alan B. Kahn" <alank@aspsys.com>
To: lightwave-l <lightwave-l@netcom.com>,
owner-lightwave-l <owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Real specs on rendering - Call NSTL
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 08:50:00 MST
Message-Id: <2F258483@msgate.aspsys.com>
Encoding: 33 TEXT
X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
It is my understanding that Digital Equipment Corp. paid for the testing.
The testing was done so that DEC could have a benchmark at this past
Comdex. I could be wrong, but I believe this is how it was played out. The
point is, the "check" wasn't sent by Carrera, Aspen, Deskstation, ALR,
Compaq, etc.
----------
From: owner-lightwave-l
To: lightwave-l
Subject: Re: Real specs on rendering - Call NSTL
Date: Friday, January 20, 1995 8:15AM
CARRERA1@delphi.com writes:
>Get the facts straight from the source. Call National Software
>Testing Laboratory (NSTL) at (619-941-9600
>) 941-9600. Ask for Volume 8,
>Number 14 - November 1994. You will receive a twenty page report
>that indicates how well ALR, Aspen, Carrera, Compaq and Deskstation
>performed.
>
>NSTL is a division of McGraw-Hill Inc.
No disrespect intend for anyone's products, but
I had an experience with NSTL that turned my stomach. In short, when
a large company I knew went to them to get a comparison report of
their program versus the competitors', and the results didn't turn out
the way they wanted, NSTL was eager to stick their hand out to get
more cash to spin-control the test criteria and to re-test to make the
numbers
more favorable for the payer's product. So what I want to know is,
who sent the last check? :-)