Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
> [snips]
>
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 07:36:05 -0700, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
> >> | Diebold Election Systems quietly replaced flawed components in
> >> | several thousand Maryland voting machines in 2005 to fix a
> >> | "screen-freeze" problem the company had discovered three years
> >> | earlier, according to published reports Thursday.
> >> `----
> >>
> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061027/ap_on_hi_te/voting_machines
> >>
> >>
> >> Sounds like Windows' handling of motherboard interrupts.
> >
> > Sounds more like you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
> >
> > <hint>
> > ---> Diebold Election Systems quietly replaced flawed components in...
> > </hint>
> >
> > What part of "faulty hardware components" is too difficult to
> > understand?
>
> The part where you insert "hardware" which doesn't exist in the original
> article? Nor in the sentence fragment you quote above.
The article states they are replacing faulty motherboards. Last time I
checked "motherboards" were hardware. Nowhere does the article even
remotely imply Roy's statement of "Sounds like Windows' handling of
motherboard interrupts."
> The part where, if there are in fact known issues between Windows and some
> motherboards, Diebold should never have used those mobos - or affected
> versions of Windows - in the first place?
Unless the motherboards were faulty... you know, just like the article
says.
> The part where, if there are in fact known issues between Windows and some
> motherboards, the question is why?
>
> Just for starters...
|
|
