I see they don't want a "thing", but that hardly seems to be a reason to not name names. Is there some special status of companies that the non-conformant status of their devices should be private?
It turning into a "thing" sounds like a net win for consumers.
Perhaps, it's the author does not want to name vendors which fail giving them time to contact him with some attractive suggestions. Or I am too suspicious? :)
What drives did you test?
In the Twitter thread it's explained they don't want to name the vendors who failed the test ATM.
I see they don't want a "thing", but that hardly seems to be a reason to not name names. Is there some special status of companies that the non-conformant status of their devices should be private?
It turning into a "thing" sounds like a net win for consumers.
3 replies →
Perhaps, it's the author does not want to name vendors which fail giving them time to contact him with some attractive suggestions. Or I am too suspicious? :)