To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
PresentIt,
I suspect products fail due to a bad design much more often than manufacturers will admit. As the owner of many thing which have broken in normal use, it's very frustrating to pay to replace them. If it's broken for one person, it's very likely to have broken for others too, unless it was actually misused. The question becomes how many units are affected and what is an acceptable rate of failure: 0.1%, 1%, 5%, 10%, 20%?
Regardless of the answer, I'm rather baffled about why you continue to use the car analogy despite having said that the car comparison fails. I guess I'm not sure what you're ultimately trying to say because it's muddied up by the car comparison, can you say what you mean about the smart phone software without resorting to an analogy?




Member since:
2011-01-28
PresentIt,
"While people expect bugs in software they also expect bug fixes. On the other hand, people expect cars to work properly without updates.
So the car comparison fails."
Many cars require unplanned maintenance, so I'm not so sure about the first statement. However without a doubt I agree that car analogies have little place in computing, comparisons like that are bound to fail at a serious level of detail.