JD on EP

There is also a case for the idea that a company that tries to restrict its employees' speech is itself dishonest. Not that this abstract notion will ever gain traction in an environment where, in the absence of criminal conduct, the corporation's business interests are assumed to inevitably supercede the employee's right to free speech. Someday, if we are very lucky, product-activation DRM (discussed in the linked article) may qualify as such criminal conduct...

My takeaway from this story is not that someone lied, but that someone told the truth. As an individual I find it incredibly valuable, in thinking about developing my skillset for personal and professional development, to know what's coming down the pike in planning software purchases, the hardware I'll need to run it on, and how much time it's going to take me to become proficient. Your own efforts in this department are much appreciated but I don't think that mostpeople who happily scarf down your feeds everyday (including availability of alpha and beta software) would dream of limiting their information source to the official corporate (in this case Adobe) line, esp. concerning the timing of when the information appears. I read the article you linked to and can't imagine that its effect would be anything other than benign (nor did I see it the effort of journalists. rumor-sites writers are NOT reporters, puh-leeze!)