Let me make it simple for you..
DxO is accommodating one or more of the clients more important to them (e.g., they are 'joined at the hip with Nikon', which you have been arguing against), or DxO are makes foolish business decisions?
1) Explain how DxO is accomodating or more clients more important to them
2) Explain your reasoning behind using the phrase "joined at the hip with Nikon."
Let me try to help you read and comprehend what I originally wrote:
EDIT: or perhaps you're suggesting a third possibility that I intentionally dismissed, namely that Canon is a client but DxO chose to not display the logo of the leading manufacturer of dSLRs among their clients. Possible reasons for that could be to placate other clients more important to theme, i.e. Nikon (which would certainly imply some sort of hip-joining) or simply because DxO is foolish. Is that what you're suggesting?
In other words, I was providing plausible explanations for a possibility that I had already indicated I thought to be so unlikely that I didn't even mention it initially.
Of course it is easy to claim anything after the fact but the fact remains that your initial public attempts to explain something were built around alleging misbehavior by DxO.
Seriously, look into some remedial education. Maybe we can have this discussion someday when you've learned how to comprehend what you read. Until then, it's merely a waste of time.
I love how you pick and choose which questions to answer that are put to you! You'd make a great politician in the way that you evade questions and queries that are put to you.
Look, I'll be easy on you and give you the chance to respond to one request at a time.
* Please explain how DxO is accomodating [f]or more clients more important to them.
Why would you want someone to explain how something is true that he has clearly stated above (I am not privy to whatever history you two have) he believes to be untrue?
Playing Devil's Advocate is a useful tool in learning formal debate, but what exactly are you looking for in this discussion? To improve Neuroanatomist's debate prowess?
In case you haven't noticed, the bit you are asking him to explain "how DxO is accomodating..." wasn't an allegation, it was a possible explanation.
"What can you come up with, besides 'Canon didn't permit it' (which I have already suggested as the most likely possibility), DxO is accommodating one or more of the clients more important to them (e.g., they are 'joined at the hip with Nikon', which you have been arguing against), or DxO are makes foolish business decisions?"
Those are one person's ideas to explain the lack of a logo on a website; they are not presented as certain. Further, as stated, he doesn't even think the "joined at the hip" part is the most likely reason. He thinks Canon didn't permit it. I tend to agree. One possible reason for that possible reason is that Canon doesn't like how its products stand up on the scoring metric, and thus aren't willing to imply approval by permitting their logo. I hope you don't ask for evidence of a possible reason for a possible reason.