I have seen his posts for several years on the Keil forum, so I think I do have some idea what they look like.

One cornerstone seems to be that "best" is something completely different between people.

Best is really something you factor out from analysing a very complex hypercube.

- Best cost?
- Best performance?
- Best power consumption?
- Best quality?
- Best form factor?
- "Right" features?
- "Right" interfaces?
- "Right" rugging?
- Fastest to market?
- Legal in all intended countries?
- Known to ship with good documentation and support?
- Experience of previous products/solutions from same supplier?
- Future extendability?
- Availability of samples instantly?
- Availability of production quantities at required production start?
- Availability 10 years from now?
- Availability of firmware updates?
- Required cost to certify product?
- Warranty conditions?
- ...

That is why people on forums spends time asking follow-up questions to try to establish which factores that are important to the requester.

And that is also why forum answers normally supply suggestions, together with motivations to the strength of the suggested products/solutions, allowing the requester to match these strenghts to the real requirements.

I have at times spent extreme amounts of time trying to figure out all relevant factors for selecting a specific solution or product, just to later find out that I did miss something critical. It really isn't easy to find the "best" solution. And to do it based on an almost total lack of feedback in a web forum is almost impossible.

You tend to be a bit impatient. As soon as you see one solution, you push that solution as "good" or possibly even "best", instead of suggesting it as one possible solution, while telling the requester why you thinks the solution is to be recommended, or should be considered.

If you qualify your answers with: "If you intended xxx then I would recommend that you do yyy because of zzz" then you will not get any conflicting responses from Andy. Possibly addendums.