nanog mailing list archives
RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..')
From: "Gary E. Miller" <gem () rellim com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
Yo Chance! Oh really? Then what about the Avrotec primary flight control system and the Avidyne nav system? They run NT and they are FAA certified for their purpose. So maybe _every_ piece, except a few? Here is an article on WinNT powering the Avrotech in the new Lancair 400. It is being used as the PRIMARY flight control system on an FAA certified plane: http://www.avweb.com/articles/colum400/ RGDS GARY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Ave, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701 gem () rellim com Tel:+1(541)382-8588 Fax: +1(541)382-8676 On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Chance Whaley wrote:
on MS platforms (and there are quite a few). From the license on _every_ piece of MS software: High Risk Activities. The Software is not fault-tolerant and is not designed or intended for use in hazardous environments requiring fail-safe performance, including without limitation, in the operation of nuclear facilities, aircraft navigation or communication systems, air traffic control, weapons systems, direct life-support machines, or any other application in which the failure of the Software could lead directly to death, personal injury, or severe physical or property damage (collectively, "High Risk Activities"). Microsoft expressly disclaims any express or implied warranty of fitness for High Risk Activities.
Current thread:
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..'), (continued)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dan Hollis (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dave Stewart (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Matt Levine (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dan Hollis (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Adam McKenna (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Joseph T. Klein (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Gary E. Miller (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Chance Whaley (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dan Hollis (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Chance Whaley (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Gary E. Miller (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dave Stewart (Jul 25)
- RE: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Gary E. Miller (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Owen DeLong (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dan Hollis (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Henry Yen (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Dan Hollis (Jul 25)
- Re: product liability (was 'we should all be uncomfortable with the extent to which luck..') Michael Airhart (Jul 25)