Which is more likely: 1. Manufacturers, vendors and operators of life-critical equipment know that it could fail simply because someone uses a cell phone in the vicinity. They are content to rely on signs and voluntary forbearance by patients and visitors who are already stressed out and seek information and comfort by communicating with other human beings. The staggering legal liability doesn't worry them.
2. Manufacturers, vendors and operators of life-critical equipment take care to shield their products from interference by any signals that might be present and exercise due diligence by testing explicitly-named issues like cell-phone interference. Hospital staff, recognizing that cell-phone users are often loud and inconsiderate, use interference as a pretext to cut down on the annoyance to patients and staff. 3. The people who put up the signs simply haven't thought this through and are acting on good, though ill-informed, intentions. Ted (I incline toward 2) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
