Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpfcso!rrd From: rrd@hpfcso.HP.COM (Ray Depew) Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds Subject: Re: Version D to E upgrades... Message-ID: <7360062@hpfcso.HP.COM> Date: 4 Feb 91 21:04:04 GMT References: Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA Lines: 74 Good to see this notestring is still alive and kicking... >>"Use some common sense before you jump on the bandwagon and bombard >>Corvallis with used calculators." >My sole defense for wanting an unflawed ROM is this: >I want to keep the resale value of my calculator as high as possible. What I told zimmer@calvin.stanford.edu (Andrew Zimmerman): >>5. Even if you don't use the advanced features that have the bugs, get an >>upgrade. How easy is it going to be sell a Rev A on the second hand >>market? >Answer #1: WHAAAT? You *SELL* your HP calculators when they get old? Sacrilege! (and smileys) >Answer #2: Ask EduCalc, or all the "HP28S for sale" posters here. Back to more serious matters: >As a side-line, HP should have tested their ROMs more thoroughly... If they ^^^^^^ ^^^^ >didn't even try to invert a matrix larger than 8x8, they deserve the penalty >of replacing every flawed calculator. Well, they did a pretty thorough job, from what I saw. Obviously, you don't know HP. Their reputation for high quality is well-deserved, but even HP can't be perfect all the time. If you knew how much testing actually did go into the 48, you probably wouldn't have said this. Like I said in an earlier posting, even Rev.F will probably have bugs. (No, I don't know what they will be. I'm speaking from a statistical point of view.) The question is, will you ever notice them? >It is not OUR fault that the entire >calculator must be replaced. ^^^^ I don't understand the relevance of the "It's not OUR fault..." line. I'm not arguing that HP should refuse to continue their current upgrade policy. I challenge you to find that point of view anywhere in my posting. I'm arguing that users shouldn't send their 48s in for revision just because there's a later ROM out there. "MUST be replaced" ain't necessarily so, especially at this point in time, when the remaining bugs are in esoteric operations that you have to reread the manual to use, anyway. >... If I bought >a car and the 2nd gear position on my automatic transmission control didn't >work, I'd sure have it fixed even if I didn't use it! I've got a problem with this analogy, and I'm not sure what it is. I think that most of the bugs we're talking about are more on the line of defective trunk lid lights or loose ashtrays. The only one I can think of that's as universally important as whether you can put your auto tranny in 2nd on purpose would be the ARCHIVE-with-clock bug. And even then,... >Anyway, I believe that companies (especially in America) are getting far to >relaxed about quality control. HP should strive for ZERO DEFECTS and that >means rigorous testing of the software they put into their calculators. $CAUSTIC MODE ON$ You obviously don't know much about HP, except that they make calculators with bugs in them. Maybe somebody else on the net would like to fill you in on HP, quality control and "rigorous testing." $CAUSTIC MODE OFF$ Regards Ray Depew IC's by Bill and Dave rrd@hpfitst1.hp.com DISCLAIMER: Hey, I'm taking a late lunch. Besides, nobody at HP talks this way. This whole posting is a figment of your imagination. ADDENDUM: Spelling errors are forgiven. It's all vi's fault, anyway. PERSONAL TO ZIMMER: Hey, is "Mixed Company" still performing on campus?