After reading the article again, I think I was a little harsh in my criticism. Also, I understand that no matter what you ask, they will always give you a "marketing approved" answer.

I still think you could have been a bit more aggressive in your questioning. But the questions you included were relevant. Calling it a bad article was an exaggeration on my end.

Specifically regarding the server merge question, it was a good question, but they gave a very bad answer. Many in the community believe the issue of server merges are not even a question of if, but rather when, will mergers be needed.