[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

# RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems

- To: <rcr@dieboldes.com>
- Subject: RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- From: "Ian S. Piper" <ian@dieboldes.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 18:39:08 -0600
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <3AC4FB15.FDA3D3BB@dieboldes.com>

I would like to have more solid stats as well. But we don't have them. Seminole County, FL gets six (6) memory card corruptions out of 150 units and yet three other accounts in Minnesota with similar quantities of units don't get any corruptions. To dismiss that fact by saying that they must have had them but just didn't tell Barry and Cathi, is ludicrous. Dakota and Washington are not that well experienced. You can discuss it with Barry and Cathi yourself if you don't believe me. If the account managers are okay with it, you can contact the customers directly as well.
For my meeting next week, one of the items I need are the hardware specs that outline the limits of the current hardware design or original design (they aren't that far off of each other). If you have them in Vancouver, please let me know, so I can forward the EE's address to you and have the specs shipped direct or emailed if they're in electronic format. I need an answer by Monday.
I'll ask the EE's what kind of a statistical measurement they would deem as "solid". Although the EE's definition may not be appealing either.
Guy, don't discount anything at this point. Even if the EE's come up with something hardware related, that doesn't mean that Global can keep on pushing this design into another marginal conditions. We should be using the specs for this design as a limit to what it can do. If we want it to do more, then we should come up with a design that can do more and then some.
Your turn to be defensive.
Ian
PS. This is starting to feel like a Star Trek episode. <Shields Up>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rcr@dieboldes.com [mailto:owner-rcr@dieboldes.com]On Behalf Of Guy Lancaster
> Sent: March 30, 2001 3:31 PM
> To: rcr@dieboldes.com
> Subject: Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
> "Ian S. Piper" wrote:

> > I'd like to have this discrepancy explained before we start retrofitting 15,000 AccuVote-OS units in the field.

> I'd like to see some more solid stats before we propose that 1.95e does not suffer memory card corruptions. It would be very nice if this were true but the differences between 1.94 and 1.95 are minimal. I agree that our people should have been notified of at least some corruptions but we do find that experienced customers often quietly deal with the problem and get on with their day. Sorry but my gut feeling is that there is something more to this story.

> Perhaps the EE study can propose some test methods that can be used to know when we've solved the problem(s).

> Guy

- Follow-Ups:
  - Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    - From: "Talbot Iredale" <tiredale@dieboldes.com>

- References:
  - Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
    - From: Guy Lancaster <glanca@dieboldes.com>

- Prev by Date: Re: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- Next by Date: RE: Memory Card Corruption Problems
- Index(es):
  - Chronological
  - Thread