Vista Conversations And Mandatory Crash Testing
- 5
- Add a Comment
It is not very often that my father and I get into a discussion concerning computers. What I mean to say is that he is still amazed that when you move the mouse, a pointer on the screen moves.
However, today it came up in discussion what happened to Chris and Windows Vista. He then went on to make an observation that is uncharacteristically brilliant. He commented that, in a world that is so dependent on technology especially the computer, why don’t we have universal standards for stability and usability? He compared the tech industry to the automobile industry. He said “If you get a defective car that has as many problems as Vista does it is considered a lemon.” He continued to point out that we (the United States) requires crash testing of all cars made to ensure safety; if it does not pass, that car never sees the light of day.
It seems that the least we could do is have mandatory “crash testing” for our computers. So many of us depend on our machines for our livelihood and it is apparent that you cannot always depend on backups to save you as Chris found out. I think we need an independent organization like Underwriters Laboratory or the NHTSA for software and hardware. An organization that has the power to kill a product in its tracks if it does not make the cut. I can guarantee you this: if we had something like that, none of us would have ever seen Vista.
Spencer Nick a.k.a. TachyonXero
Tags: conversations, crash, vista, windows, microsoft, accountability
5 Comments
Barry
September 28th, 2007
at 6:56pm
You buy a car; you license software.
Read the license agreement. The vendor knows the products has defects and tell you to use at your own risk. I think the auto industry would love to have the license agreement arrangement instead of the current warranty arrangement.
Defect free software will not happen until the license agreement is scraped for a true consume warranty. Then the software vendors will have to cleanup their defects.
Until then, live with the defects. That is what you agreed to when you ‘click accept license terms’
Kawa
October 1st, 2007
at 3:23am
Very good idea indeed. Up until now we have the license agreement but so what? Improvement depends on people who do not like things the way they are.
Craig Robinett
October 1st, 2007
at 6:39am
Yet another thing we put on the government to regulate for us?
Geez! I cannot understand why so many would rather pay high taxes, just so they don’t have to take responsibility for themselves. How ’bout we just give the government our money, and they dole it out to us as they see our needs require. I for one, feel I have the ability to take time, look into the products I purchase and use for me and my family with enough time, effort and intelligence to make proper and informed decisions. We as Americans need to quite being so lazy and dependent on govenrment to do our personal work for us such as consumer awareness.
Think about it.
tachyonxero
October 1st, 2007
at 7:13am
When I said “Independent” I meant a private organization, not the government.
tachyonxero.com » Mandatory crash testing for software and hardware
October 2nd, 2007
at 8:46pm
[…] Should we crash test software and hardware the way we crash test cars?read more | digg story […]