At the same time, just like in any group, there are "bad" researchers and "good" researchers, and the ones performing due diligence and trying to be upstanding can still have a bad day.
The primary focus was to point out that even a scientific journal is not without fault, and there are even some that have been known to accept and promote complete drivel that was created intentionally to point out how flawed the scientific journal system can be in some places.
The general idea is not to make the researchers seem malicious. The intent is to point out that just because it's published doesn't mean it's true, and in this case it's taking it even further than the prior shows of failure that occurred with "Pay to be published" journals.
It wasn't just published on the internet, it was published in a scientific journal!
Silly researchers. You're not supposed to publish science fiction just because a company paid you to write a story that matches their agenda.
First, a correction:
the company's fourth personal computer iteration
True only if you ignore the Apple I and Apple
Now, the Apple ][c came out during a brief time when I was trying to ignore computers, so I didn't pay much attention to it at the time, but this from the summary caught me by surprise:
first attempt at creating a portable computer
How can anything requiring an external CRT be considered portable? I mean, even by Compaq and Kaypro standards? Looking at Wikipedia, there was apparently a 1-bit LCD display available, but even that was external with no fixed mount. I mean, yeah, they shrunk the form factor, which I would hope they could do after seven years, but portable? No, regardless of their claims.
Did Guistra get the contracts?