From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 20 13:41:42 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0AC516A4CF for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 13:41:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.84]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCB143D2D for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 13:41:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153]) by smtpout.mac.com (8.12.6/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id j2KDfai1008528; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 05:41:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.6] (pool-68-161-53-96.ny325.east.verizon.net [68.161.53.96]) (authenticated bits=0)j2KDfYdq004245; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 05:41:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <4b92be18094f69f731f15c4872428459@mac.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Charles Swiger Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:41:33 -0500 To: Ted Mittelstaedt X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) cc: misc@openbsd.org cc: freebsd list cc: Theo de Raadt Subject: Re: Adaptec AAC raid support X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 13:41:42 -0000 On Mar 20, 2005, at 2:24 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: [ ... ] > In that case Dell is a customer of Adaptec, not the other way around, > so any NDA that Dell might require for Adaptec to sign would not > have restricted Adaptec's use of it's own programming documentation. And you know this, because...? You've read that NDA and you know just what it says and what it covers? Prove it! >> You've failed to address the point. Do you claim that Adaptec is in a >> position to ignore an NDA they have with a company like Intel or Dell? > > The point is they obviously don't have an NDA with Intel since the > programming docs for the i860 are open already. (at least the don't > have an NDA that covers this aspect of their relationship, which is all > we care about) Have you read the NDA between Adaptec and Intel? If not, how do you know just what it does or does not cover? Once again, you're making claims of fact about a document that you've probably never seen. I think you are making wild assertions and have not even a shred of evidence to justify them. As for your comments about my ethics, we can resume that discussion after you provide some evidence to show that your words are based in fact rather than empty claims made up on the spot to suit your argument. If you cannot or will not provide proof, Ted, attacking the credibility of others is rank hypocrisy. -- -Chuck PS: While I haven't seen Adaptec's NDA agreements, I'd bet a stack of nickels they exist and limit the information Adaptec is able to make public. You and others have asked why Adaptec isn't free to give you all of their internal documentation, and you've gotten an answer. If you don't like it or if you refuse to understand the circumstances, that's your problem, not mine.