On Tue, 14 Mar 1995, Todd Leonard wrote: > Someone at tek pointed out that the redundancy that could be > attained by having two of these devices would address the risks > I described. I don't agree -- bringing two (or more) is a good > way to address "random" infrequent failures of a component, but > it would still leave one open to deterministic (though uncommon) > failure modes present in each of the identical devices. One can > envision a situation where exceeding a certain depth or time > would cause a program to overwrite an array bound, for example. A related question to the readers: at what tank pressure did the first Suunto Eons experience memory problems? Answer: 256 bar...... /Sten Meyer m87stme@mt*.ch*.se*
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]