Breaking News
Engineering Investigations

It always worked before, so you broke it

Tim Fyock
5/18/2011 05:22 PM EDT

 26 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
t.alex
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
t.alex   5/29/2011 1:07:22 PM
NO RATINGS
Isn't it true most of the time the sw guy do the test and debugging instead of the hardware?

zeeglen
User Rank
Blogger
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
zeeglen   5/29/2011 4:53:51 PM
NO RATINGS
Depends on what is being tested and debugged.

jsandjs
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
jsandjs   6/9/2011 11:03:27 PM
NO RATINGS
This is the second story about the hardware induced noise I read here. Since noise mixed in a signal is so common and most of the time it is random, problems happen here and there somehow give a hint, even not strong and clear. A specific software in general will hardly produce random troubles here and there.

DutchUncle
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
DutchUncle   6/10/2011 12:29:50 PM
NO RATINGS
Fresh real-life example: A few weeks ago I released code that worked exactly as expected on prototype hardware. When used on the next board-spin of prototypes, it didn't work, which of course meant it was a software fault. Yesterday it was proven that not only was the circuit changed, but a wrong part had been used on the dozen proto builds, so it wasn't even the proper changed circuit. Put in the right part, and the software works again. Gee, what a concept.

m.cheah
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
m.cheah   11/3/2012 12:35:08 AM
NO RATINGS
The solution seems to be that SW guys need to learn more HW skills and vice versa. It's the ones that are at ease straddling disciplines that bridge the divide and I've certainly seen this in action.

The Gen
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
The Gen   6/16/2013 8:28:11 AM
NO RATINGS
I worked for a company for 12 years designing a range of fibre optic switches. (check out the spelling of fibre!) My bit was the opto-mechanics. I can sympathise deeply with the sentiments in these posts. Guys, I feel your pain. One of the posts earlier mentioned that it is obvious when mechanics isn't working, but not so software and electronics. In the fibre switch, the mechanics was small and delicate, and small mechanical disturbances (thermal, vibration, electrical noise) could make a difference but it wasn't obvious by observation. When there was a problem the blame was assigned thus:- 1. it's a mechanical problem, the mirror is in the wrong place (it was once many years previously but not on the five plus subsequent problems) 2. Right, the mechanics is OK, must be an electrical problem 3. Right the electrics is OK, must be a software problem Usually the 'head in charge would decide on what the root cause was and waste time and money trying to fix something that wasn't broken. The three disciplines had enough respect for each other to get on and sort the problem (eventually when the management "help" had evaporated when the solution was looking intractable) Oh, and I relate to the story above about the saw project that was estimated to take 2 months scheduled to be done in one month and quoted to the customer as 2 weeks. I don't work for that company any more :-)

<<   <   Page 3 / 3
August Cartoon Caption Winner!
August Cartoon Caption Winner!
"All the King's horses and all the KIng's men gave up on Humpty, so they handed the problem off to Engineering."
5 comments
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.