This is a Weaken question, as it asks for a choice that "discredits the reasoning" in an argument. The correct choice will make it less likely that the conclusion follows from the stated evidence.

The company representative claims that the critics who say Vista has slow and outdated computer systems are wrong. His evidence is that Vista spent more money last year per factory upgrading its computer systems than any of its competitors did.

The representative is assuming that spending money to upgrade slow, outdated systems automatically means having fast and modern systems. The correct choice will point out that it does not.

(C) shows that the representative's evidence suggests the opposite of what he claims. The fact that Vista spent more per factory upgrading its computers than any of its competitors is not something to brag about, (C) says, because it indicates that the computers were so slow and outdated that they can't be made sufficiently modern or efficient. Thus, (C) weakens the representative's reasoning and is correct.

(A) compares Vista's industry to other industries, which are irrelevant to the argument in the stimulus. The representative's argument is only concerned with companies within Vista's industry.

(B) is about profits, which have nothing to do with whether the spending has resulted in computers that are fast and modern enough.

(D) hints that the analysts may not be as well informed about the company as possible, but this is not a reason to believe that the Vista representative is incorrect in his argument about the spending and up-to-date computer systems.

(E) is irrelevant because the stimulus is only concerned with computer systems, not other measures of operational quality.