Re: Realsecure
From: Stover, S.f. (sstover@enterasys.com)Date: 10/12/01
- Previous message: Kevin Brown: "RE: Realsecure"
- In reply to: Kevin Brown: "RE: Realsecure"
- Next in thread: virtualphil: "Re: Realsecure"
- Reply: virtualphil: "Re: Realsecure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: "Stover, S.f." <sstover@enterasys.com> To: "Kevin Brown" <kbrownfox@home.com>, <bwalder@nss.co.uk>, "'Greg Shipley'" <gshipley@neohapsis.com>, <focus-ids@securityfocus.com> Subject: Re: Realsecure Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 09:21:58 -0500 Message-Id: <01101209215802.00370@maul.ctron.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ok, ok, I really didn't want to do this, but I'm stepping out. So here goes:
Disclaimer: I WORK FOR THE VENDOR THAT PLACED 2ND/3RD IN THIS "TEST". I'M
SURE SOME OF YOU EXPECT ME TO BE PISSY BECAUSE WE DIDN'T PLACE FIRST, SO I'LL
KEEP THAT IN MIND AS I POST.
On Thursday 11 October 2001 21:49, Kevin Brown wrote:
> I agree with Bob. Testing IS a bleepin' nightmare, especially when you
> only have a few weeks to test several products.
Who set up those limitations on the test? Other companies take more time for
their tests, why couldn't you? As I understand it, you only had a couple of
days per product - why not stretch it out? Complaining about self-imposed
strictures??
> Personally, I'd love to
> have each product for several weeks and test under a dozen or more
> different scenarios. Unfortunately, vendors aren't willing to pay for this
> type of testing :-)
Not sure what you mean by this? We pay for testing all the time. Also,
there are other companies that test for months and we are willing to give
them what they need to accurately test our product. Why wouldn't we? If we
help you test our product, then we look good. Have you actually asked
vendors to work with you on long-term "bake-off" testing? I'm not talking
about the Intrusion.com test you guys did where you create marketing
literature for one product - I mean a REAL multi-vendor bake-off.
Ok, so now I have those questions asked, I would like to ask a question of
the good citizens/customers out there. How do you feel about the 2 top
market-share products tying for first place? Do you think that's as
ridiculous as I do? Just for the record, I'm defying their ranking and I
take it that Dragon placed 3rd. You just don't tie for things like the
Stanley Cup, Super Bowl, ad infinitum. Why is this any different? Like I
said before, I expect that some of you will think that I'm just being a
sore-loser. Fine. Define sore loser.
Do I think Dragon is better than 3rd? Yes.
Am I losing sleep over this test? No.
Have I been mean to small children since these results came out? No.
Have I attacked the 1st place finisher(s)? No.
All I can say is that if there wasn't a tie, I wouldn't be bitching.
Peace, out.
- --
Samuel f. Stover
Director of IDS QA
Enterasys Networks/NSW
sstover@enterasys.com
GPG Key Fingerprint: 768E C80E 4AAD 63A3 DA0D B2F2 8529 52E3 3F91 2AA5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE7xvyLhSlS4z+RKqURAjDnAJ9unzAgtlxmP4QuZikVKdLsuvt/3gCfZh/+
+9F85SbTZMevYSHZAOVSE9w=
=xP9A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message: Kevin Brown: "RE: Realsecure"
- In reply to: Kevin Brown: "RE: Realsecure"
- Next in thread: virtualphil: "Re: Realsecure"
- Reply: virtualphil: "Re: Realsecure"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|