<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Imagine you're trying to sell a bundle of Mac applications that includes Parallels. It's an obviously appealing deal for anyone in the market for Windows virtualization, since the bundle is priced below the retail cost of Parallels alone. Might you choose to place a teensy promotion of your bundle someplace that would-be virtualization customers would see it? Someplace, I dunno, associated with a Parallels alternative? Hey, waitasec -- you've got this handy site where people come to see updated and reviewed Mac software... now you've got something going!Sorry, MacUpdate Promo team, but this kind of internal cross-promotion strikes me as being more than a little disingenuous, especially in the wake of a recent VMware update that is bound to drive readers to the VMware page. Lose the sales pitch and regain some editorial dignity.Update: To clarify for our commenters, I couldn't care less if MacUpdate advertises the bundle at the top of every page on the site (as they do), including the VMware page. The issue here, however, is the specific contextual ad right next to the update listing for VMware (and ONLY there). You can call it valuable consumer information for someone who might otherwise purchase VMware at full price; I call it advertising/promotional interference with the editorial content of the site. Having it say \"Editor Note\" implies that the editors of MacUpdate judge the value and worth of applications by whether or not they choose to participate in a promotional bundle; so much for editorial judgement and independence. Tomato, tomahto.Thanks to J. Carlos de Pinho for the heads-up."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/25/calling-shenanigans-on-macupdate-parallels-vs-vmware-link/>