> benefit of the doubt OP's point was that ZDNet is stooping a bit low here by journalistic standards. In this case, it appears there's not enough evidence to

> benefit of the doubt OP's point was that ZDNet is stooping a bit low here by journalistic standards. In this case, it appears there's not enough evidence to publish a "question headline" -- much less question whether they deserve some benefit of a doubt. We all know MS and others have engaged in questionable behavior - but at least wait until there's something substantive before publishing.