I think he believes you worked for Apple, Sony et al. since you apparently had to interface with the back end of their software. Stupid assumption, sure, but at least it makes some sense if you look at it through DB-shaped glasses.
Of course even if you did, we'd need some form of proof of shown bias for the claim to have any merit, and somehow I think he'd have a hard time finding that too.
If you ask - and even though you didn't - both Sony and Apples' setups are a bit of a state. Sonys' XML was a horribly huge and unweildy mess (50+ pages for the spec!), and Apples reporting was a shocking shambles (no XML spec for their video store, no reporting the results of their internal validation of what we uploaded, and no confirmation when something went live on iTunes - XML was quite nice & clean, though). But for any of that to be valid, I'd have to have praised either companies music service to the high heavens.
Does it matter? And if it really does, why?
And FYI, I'm a power conservation consultant for local schools (geothermal heating (through glycol state-change), active/passive solar, etc.).
It let's me assess whether or not there is some motive in this seemingly rampant and inexplicable crusade of advertising, and why you get so het up, complain, and then repeat the feat a few days later. And also because I remember you talking of access to the MS internal store, vis-a-vis 360 peripheral licensing fees and the resultant prices.
But thank you, I
was curious. Sounds an interesting job.
What?
No. The point is that it IS a stupid claim of bias.
And would I have a hard time? In almost every thread that relates to consoles Aldo has shown clear distrust for Microsoft. Now, could I not use that as a claim for bias if my personal distrust of Sony makes me a corporate shill?
It's an illogical argument either way.
I have a nasty habit, actually. Every time someone presents an obviously biased viewpoint, I tend to place myself in a diametrically opposed position to counter it as best I can. Now, it is true i don't like MS; I think they're a monopolistic company built on shoddy business practices that damages the software industry. And I do dislike the sort of 'xtreme' americanised brand they've brought to gaming, and their general arrogance in a lot of the public statements they made. That's a fair point, although equally surely it's not bias if I've looked at them and decided they're a bit ****? It's just a conclusion. And the distrust conclusion is fair well grounded in historical evidence.
However, I've never just 'attacked' MS, nor have I ever just praised a competitor against them. I've always tried to present an objective viewpoint, with caveats. If you're interested, just last night I was talking to my (older-27) brother about the 360/PS3, and trying to explain to him why I was interested in neither (weirdly, my brother wants a Revolution yet failed to understand why I don't care about better graphics).
Y'see, if I was truly biased, I'd be the one posting big screenshots off-topic in threads and saying 'look how **** hot this is'. but I don't. You do.
