IT Failures Titbit

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 11, 2008.

  1. A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read the
    context rightly.

    I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were more
    reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was wrong...
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 11, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Your Name Guest

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:gfb6i3$5l1$...
    > A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    > that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    > problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read the
    > context rightly.
    >
    > I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were

    more
    > reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was wrong...


    Just one of the MANY reasons that cars will not be driving themselves any
    time soon. :)
    (Another one is that Microsloth want in on car computer systems ... then
    you'll get real blue screens of death!)
    Your Name, Nov 11, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    aspir8or Guest

    On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:06:37 +1300, Your Name propped his eyelids open
    with toothpicks and wrote:

    > "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in
    > message news:gfb6i3$5l1$...
    >> A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    >> <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    >> that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    >> problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read
    >> the context rightly.
    >>
    >> I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were

    > more
    >> reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was
    >> wrong...

    >
    > Just one of the MANY reasons that cars will not be driving themselves
    > any time soon. :)
    > (Another one is that Microsloth want in on car computer systems ... then
    > you'll get real blue screens of death!)


    Dial-a-car via Vodafone

    http://www.cellular-news.com/story/28170.php



    --
    Rob
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Ever notice how fast Windows runs? Neither did I...
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    aspir8or, Nov 11, 2008
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    > that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    > problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read the
    > context rightly.
    >
    > I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were more
    > reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was wrong...
    >

    There are various 'computer systems' in cars, ranging from the fancy
    screens that provide trip information to the 'computer system' that
    controls the ignition system. It would be interesting to know *which*
    systems gave problems.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Tax is not theft.
    Enkidu, Nov 11, 2008
    #4
  5. On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:46:25 +1300, Enkidu <>
    wrote:

    >Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    >> <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    >> that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    >> problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read the
    >> context rightly.
    >>
    >> I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were more
    >> reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was wrong...
    > >

    >There are various 'computer systems' in cars, ranging from the fancy
    >screens that provide trip information to the 'computer system' that
    >controls the ignition system. It would be interesting to know *which*
    >systems gave problems.
    >
    >Cheers,
    >
    >Cliff


    The proper embedded stuff that actually runs the car (and could kill
    you) is much better tested and does not run on Windows. It normally
    has self checking and failure modes that allow "limp home" if
    something goes wrong. But there will still be bugs. I used to write
    software for traffic lights, and there were occasionally bugs there
    too. But much more often there were hardware failures - you would be
    surprised how often traffic lights need servicing. So all traffic
    lights have a "conflict monitor", which is normally a diode array that
    checks to see if conflicting green lights have been turned on. If
    that happens, the traffic light gets turned off or put into flashing
    amber mode (controlled by some very simple hardware). Things that are
    dangerous and have software usually are designed with fail safes like
    that.
    Stephen Worthington, Nov 11, 2008
    #5
  6. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    KiwiBrian Guest

    <pedant mode>
    Tidbit not titbit.
    </pedant mode>

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:gfb6i3$5l1$...
    >A throwaway remark in this list of memorable IT failures
    > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/?p=1132> just casually mentions
    > that the car industry spends 2-3 billion dollars a year fixing software
    > problems. That would be problems in cars' onboard systems, if I read the
    > context rightly.
    >
    > I thought embedded systems had more stringent testing regimes, and were
    > more
    > reliable than ordinary PC software as a result. Looks like I was wrong...
    KiwiBrian, Nov 12, 2008
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=

    WLAN driver failures after re-install

    =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=, Aug 24, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    411
    =?Utf-8?B?Sm9uIEdyZWVu?=
    Aug 24, 2005
  2. McSpreader

    Belkin Wireless Router PSU failures

    McSpreader, Sep 29, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,349
    James Gockel
    Mar 12, 2006
  3. Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq.

    Ddhelp failures

    Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq., Jul 20, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    426
    Rocky_T_Squirrel, Esq.
    Jul 20, 2004
  4. Geert Nijs

    Detecting ISDN call failures

    Geert Nijs, Nov 26, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    384
    Geert Nijs
    Nov 26, 2003
  5. Andy
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,998
    Chris Marva
    May 20, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page