11-01-20, 08:20 PM
(10-01-20, 09:59 PM)VNA link Wrote:Quote:Probably more reliable in the short term, but 6 years down the line will the gadgets still be 100% reliable and performing as the day the machine was new?Probably. This kinda reminds me of the first digital camera I bought. It was a Canon 5D back in 2005, and it cost me 1900 quid. Up until that point I had used film, slide, colour print and b&w developed and printed in my own darkroom. Loads of folks told me that my camera would be obsolete in a couple of years time – of no use at all – fit only for the bin. Well it was 2009 before the replacement model came out, which I also purchased and is still working flawlessly. The 2005 model had one major repair, oh and the battery grip went in the bin. The camera has seen a lot of use, it’s looks pretty shabby, indeed the grip got binned cos it took one knock to many – oh there’s a few marks on the sensor that cannot be removed. But it still works, it’s still a good camera and I still use it now and again. Impressive reliability.
You had better luck with them than I. Both my digital cameras were dead after 3 years. Hardly a direct comparison is it though. A £159 camera, a £15k motorcycle on British roadsQuote:I would hazard a guess that one of the root causes is cost cutting.
Yeah I agree. But its gotta be more than that. It’s a total quality control, engineering and cultural failure – and it is costing Boeing dear. I think the most interesting factor is cultural – sadly these plane crashes would not have come as a complete surprise to all – how come those people couldn’t get their message across. Human behaviour is fascinating – and depressing.
Yes, according to one report regarding the release of internal company messages, the company seriously curtailed the testing programme, citing cost as the major factor