Re: SP3 sucess/Failure Stats
- From: Anteaus <Anteaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:17:00 -0700
Having had some experience in the retail industry before branching into IT, I
think this highlights an issue for anyone working on a helpdesk or repair
facility, which sometimes gives a distorted impression of the reliability of
products.
Firstly, it is a truism that you tend not to hear of the good products, only
the ones that go wrong.
Secondly, you are bound to see more examples of popular products that have
gone wrong than of niche-market products that have gone wrong. Yet, the
percentage of popular products which fail may actually be less, even though
the numbers are higher. This may give the false impression that the popular
products are less reliable than the niche-market ones.
This may certainly have some effect on perceived reliability of Windows,
Linux and Mac computers. Macs in particular are such a small market that the
total number of support-incidents must be far less. This may create an
impression that they are more reliable than is actually the case.
Another factor which biases reliability-stats is the question of whether the
user thinks a product is worth repairing. You may see more new, quality-brand
stuff coming in for repair than older or budget stuff. This does not
necessarily mean that the new quality stuff is less reliable, it may instead
relate to whether the owner thinks it worthwhile to pay a repair charge.
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:
Hardly anyone posts to a newsgroup or forum to say they installed WinXP SP3
and haven't had a lick of problems since.
.
- References:
- Re: SP3 sucess/Failure Stats
- From: PA Bear [MS MVP]
- Re: SP3 sucess/Failure Stats
- Prev by Date: Re: Trying to make room on the system disk
- Next by Date: Re: missing HAL.DLL - but that's not it - more issues pls help!
- Previous by thread: Re: SP3 sucess/Failure Stats
- Next by thread: Can not sign-in!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
