Not true. I pointed out only one of the definitions mention EEPROMS or the lack of a read-only requirement. BTW: EPROMs are not equatable to EEPROMs. EEPROMs can be written to within you computer - EPROMs can not so they are pretty much read-only in this context.
My position has nothing to do with read-only aspect of the definition of firmware - other than nearly all definitions have a read-only requirement.
My point is firmware is software and you have already admitted my position is correct.
Give it up - changing the subject will not help.
You were wrong: Compaq did not reverse-engineer the hardware and firmware is not hardware.
You can't see the forest through the trees. A guy who straight-out proclaims that "EPROM's are PROM's" [sic] is getting on me for some sloppy typing. Rediculous.
BTW, are you going to respond to that one?