Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <8oCdnaknJYNZiYPVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> Some of us like to know about *impending* failures before a tow truck is
>>> necessary. It seems somehow more convenient.
>>>
>> some of you may need it because you drive shit cars and you don't
>> maintain them properly. i otoh drive honda. and when i have a car with
>> 306k on the clock, that runs perfectly, and looks set to run another
>> 300k, i read all this inane bleating and wonder how you guys ever get up
>> in the mornings.
>
> These are the same types as people who own computers for the sake of
> owning computers. They love to fiddle and measure clock speeds and
> broadband speeds and know the cpu temperature and how it measures on
> benchmarks, and then fiddle some more to see if they can beat their
> benchmarks.
>
> You don't want those people making strategical decisions on how to
> deploy a technology infrastructure within a corporation.
>
> Same with the cars: you don't want the engineers who have to know the
> temperature at the top of the piston ("just in case, to avoid failure")
> to be involved in managing the money pump that is an auto manufacturer.
>

you'd certainly want to know in the r&d phase to see whether the cheapo
pistons you're trying to use will melt at w.o.t. but once you've
determined that relative to design life, then it's completely over. all
attention then turns to q.c. and cost management.