Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://physics.about.com/b/a/007549.htm
From Andrew Zimmerman Jones, Happy Birthday, Relativity!
"By assuming that the speed of light is a constant, he [Einstein]
therefore eliminated any need for the aether description. His previous
work (also in 1905) in explaining the photoelectric effect had already
proposed the photon theory of light, which allowed light to move as a
particle instead of a wave."

Andrew Zimmerman Jones should have written:

"By assuming that the speed of light is a constant, he [Einstein]
therefore remained faithful to the aether description. His previous
work (also in 1905) in explaining the photoelectric effect had already
proposed the photon theory of light, which allowed light to move as a
particle instead of a wave, with variable speed c'=c+v, where v is the
relative speed of the light source and the observer."

If Andrew Zimmerman Jones had written so, he would have been
consistent with Banesh Hoffmann:

http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its.../dp/0486406768
"Relativity and Its Roots" by Banesh Hoffmann:
(I do not have the text in English so I am giving it in French)
Banesh Hoffmann, "La relativite, histoire d'une grande idee", Pour la
Science, Paris, 1999, p. 112:
"De plus, si l'on admet que la lumiere est constituee de particules,
comme Einstein l'avait suggere dans son premier article, 13 semaines
plus tot, le second principe parait absurde: une pierre jetee d'un
train qui roule tres vite fait bien plus de degats que si on la jette
d'un train a l'arret. Or, d'apres Einstein, la vitesse d'une certaine
particule ne serait pas independante du mouvement du corps qui l'emet!
Si nous considerons que la lumiere est composee de particules qui
obeissent aux lois de Newton, ces particules se conformeront a la
relativite newtonienne. Dans ce cas, il n'est pas necessaire de
recourir a la contraction des longueurs, au temps local ou a la
transformation de Lorentz pour expliquer l'echec de l'experience de
Michelson-Morley. Einstein, comme nous l'avons vu, resista cependant a
la tentation d'expliquer ces echecs a l'aide des idees newtoniennes,
simples et familieres. Il introduisit son second postulat, plus ou
moins evident lorsqu'on pensait en termes d'ondes dans l'ether."

One can easily choose between Einstein's aether theory and the
emission theory of light by answering the following question:

Is there a valid argument leading from the PREMISE:

The speed of light varies with the gravitational potential in
accordance with Einstein's equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)

towards the CONCLUSION:

In the absence of a gravitational field, the speed of light varies
with v, the relative speed of the light source and the observer, in
accordance with the equation c'=c+v.

The following textbook analysis, although somewhat confusing, could be
helpful:

http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~...tbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4

Pentcho Valev