> I think the blame is being placed incorrectly. It seems that > the code in question was part of a library licensed/purchased > by MS to develop the Zune? That library functionality didn't > have enough unit tests to test for correct functionality. I > don't see any reason to believe that MS should conduct > additional unit tests on a purchased library. This is poor > code QA from the original developer, not MS.
Wayne, it wasn't even a purchased library, it was an off-the-shelf hardware component. In any event, I can only agree with your statement to an extent (although Tom won't agree at all). I say "to an extent" because I do think that MS had a responsibility to do some testing, and they probably did. Where I disagree with Tom is that he apparently feels that they should have tested everything on the chip, and I think that's neither feasible nor industry standard practice. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
