Originally Posted by LycosV
I've seen the article but to be perfectly honest this seems like a hindsight is 20/20 issue to me. No company would knowingly launch faulty hardware. With more testing they probably could've detected that it was going to become a problem, but that can be said of any hardware failure.
You test untill you think you've got it "good enough" then you release. Microsoft just rolled a critical failure on this one, there wasn't any malice.
I don't think there was any malice. The article seems to make out that they thought "we'll get away with it!". They didn't. Not doing proper R&D before release to get it out early was the problem and now they are suffering the consequences.
As the guy said, they were desperate to get out to market quickly so badly that they thought they could sacrifice some money due to a slightly higher fail rate to get the foothold in the market. Seems reasonable for some small company to think like this, however for a company like MS they should know by now that these sorts of tactics don't work.