Re: A brief introduction and some questions. Follow up.

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed May 05 2004 - 13:17:42 CDT

At 10:34 AM -0700 5/5/04, Alan Dechert wrote:
>Arthur,
>
>> At 10:05 AM -0700 5/5/04, Alan Dechert wrote:
>> >In fact, they thought it would be easier than most
>> >because it was all COTS hardware, which they wouldn't have to test.
>>
>> Please explain why they would not need to test COTS hardware as part
>> of any complete system testing. Doug's Windows GUI widget example
>> illustrates why the particular hardware/software/operating
>> system/firmware configuration needs to be certified.
>>
>There is no need for me to explain to you why they do what they do. Why
>don't you ask them?
>
>We can easily see that they need to do more thorough testing. Are you going
>to force them to do more thorough testing?

There is an inconsistency between your claim that COTS hardware does
not need to be tested, and Doug Jones' examples. It's not the
hardware that needs to be tested separately, but the complete system
incorporating the hardware that needs to be tested.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:16 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:15 CDT