Invisible wrote:
> 

> every 15 minutes. If they go outside a preset range, an alarm goes off. 
> How much would *you* suggest such a system costs?

A freaking *lot* if it's calibrated so it can for sure measure up to 
0,1C and not just show that way and the service contract includes yearly 
(oslt) re-calibrations.

> Apparently all the suppliers we could find were charging 5 figures for 
> something that will do what we want. Seems absurd to me, but... mission 
> critical, gotta have one, gotta be up and running before date X...

Mission critical: you take 5 UPS's, 5 PC's, 5 sensors and wire them up 
separately. If all five from even the cheapest hardware break down 
simultaneously enough, you're having the worst luck of the world 
already. OTOH, then you won't have A) service contract, B) scheduled 
re-calibrations, C) calibration at the first place.

> Well, you'd hope so... but as I say, I wasn't really involved in the 
> process. I believe the hardware was all much the same, so they went with 
> the cheapest option from a supplier who could actually supply on time.

You weren't involved -> it's not your call -> you shouldn't stress about it.


-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

>> somebody has to check it won't break or something when it gets that 
>> damn cold.
> 
> Exactly - someone has to check - and that costs money.

Well that at least makes sense. You're paying money *for* something.

>> Why? Do they actually *do* something different with it?
> 
> Yes, it is designed to be more reliable, and they test it to prove this 
> so they can write it in the specification of the device.

This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

>> Does the hardware itself have any actual physical differences to a 
>> cheap model?
> 
> Probably, if you're lucky you could get a *really* reliable one from 
> Maplin that lasted for 1000 years without any problems.  *Lucky* being 
> the key word here, try explaining to someone's family that they died 
> because some monitor failed, you can't say "we were unlucky".

I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all 
for the extra money, that's all.


it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within 12 

hours. And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do 
anything different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?

On the other hand, consider the printers example. Clearly something *is* 
actually different, because the printers really do perform differently. 
So in this case, you *are* getting something for your money.

I'm not sure which category this temparature monitor falls into.

>> Well, you're the engineer. But I wonder - if a mass spectrometer that 

>> HELL does one you *can* use for diagnostic procedures cost?! o_O
> 
> Medical equipment is extremely expensive, precisely because there is so 
> much at risk when things go wrong.  The companies that make this stuff 
> need to do a huge amount of testing and robust design, way above what 
> most other industries require.  It all costs money.

Heh. And I thought a device that costs more than my house (!!) was 
already expensive. ;-)

[Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just an 
empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is my 
TV! Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV doesn't 
cost more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]

BTW, wasn't there some famous disaster with a device for radiotherapy 
that accidentally overdosed a few people?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:

> You weren't involved -> it's not your call -> you shouldn't stress about 
> it.

Oh, hey, I'm not *stressing* about this! I couldn't care less. ;-) I'm 
merely curios about the design of it...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 15 May 2008 22:10:07 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull>
wrote:

>
>>> Why? Do they actually *do* something different with it?
>> 
>> Yes, it is designed to be more reliable, and they test it to prove this 
>> so they can write it in the specification of the device.
>
>This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

Of course it is, everything has a designed lifetime, even the on/off button 
on the front of your computer.  Why put a switch that is guaranteed to have 

situations call for this sort of reliability though, and you pay for it.

The tiny plugs/sockets that are used inside laptops and mobile phones etc 
often have a designed lifetime of just *ONE* operation!  It means everything 
can be made much smaller and thinner and hence cheaper, but of course you 
wouldn't use one of these if you were expecting to actually use the plug 
regularly.

> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all for 
> the extra money, that's all.

Well they must have done if they are guaranteeing it for critical use.  If 
they didn't they risk being in a lot of trouble when things do fail (or 
maybe there is even some law that is relevant, I don't know).  Are they ISO 
9000 accredited?


> it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within 12 

> And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do anything 
> different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?

Again, paying extra is guaranteeing next day delivery, it means more work 
for them, more work for the delivery company, and hence is more expensive. 
Of course if they happen to have space on the truck they'll probably fill it 
up with non-next-day orders - but it's not guaranteed.  If the truck is full 
and they still have next day orders to ship, they get another truck over, 
which isn't free.

> [Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just an 
> empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is my TV! 
> Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV doesn't cost 
> more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]

How many TVs do you think have been made in total?  How many mass 
spectrometers?

What do you think is the tolerance on TVs?  Would you care if the green on 
the UK weather map looks a slightly different shade to your neighbour?

Post a reply to this message

> A women approaches a company that make bespoke wooden doors for a new 
> front door. She can't buy an off-the-rack for £100 because they're two 
> inches too narrow, they quote her a price of £250. She blows her top 
> shouting "You're charging me £150 for those two extra inches" and storms 
> off never to return.
>
> The moral, of course, is that she wasn't be charged an extra £150 she was 
> being charged £250 to have workmen create for her a uniquely sized door 
> from scratch.

Hehe, or a more extreme example would be wandering into PC World and saying 
you want a 1921x1200 resolution monitor custom made.  Ermm, that will be 
several million pounds sir.

Post a reply to this message

> The tiny plugs/sockets that are used inside laptops and mobile phones 
> etc often have a designed lifetime of just *ONE* operation!  It means 
> everything can be made much smaller and thinner and hence cheaper, but 
> of course you wouldn't use one of these if you were expecting to 
> actually use the plug regularly.

I think my grandparents have used up the one connection on their mobile 
phone. It is simply no longer possible to get a reliable USB connection. 
You have to try about 8 or 9 times. The connector is just useless...

>> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all 
>> for the extra money, that's all.
> 
> Well they must have done if they are guaranteeing it for critical use.  
> If they didn't they risk being in a lot of trouble when things do fail 
> (or maybe there is even some law that is relevant, I don't know).  Are 
> they ISO 9000 accredited?

That's the thing. I don't *think* the company in question is actually 
guaranteeing it will work. They're just charging lots of money. We're 
the ones who do all the calibration checking and so forth.

>> [Seriously - WTF does a mass spectrometer even have in it? It's just 
>> an empty tube, some vacuum pumps, an electrode and some magnets. So is 
>> my TV! Well, apart from the vacuum pumps anyway... And yet, my TV 
>> doesn't cost more than a small housing estate. Wuh??]
> 
> How many TVs do you think have been made in total?  How many mass 
> spectrometers?

If you were asking "particle accelerators", it would be a different 
story. ;-) Mass spectrometers are fairly rare, but not all that rare. 
Although obviously rarer than TVs.

> What do you think is the tolerance on TVs?  Would you care if the green 
> on the UK weather map looks a slightly different shade to your neighbour?

That might have something to do with it...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?

Yeah.

Did you know 10% resistors show a curios bimodel distribution?

Wanna guess where the 5% resistors come from? ;-)

[And they charge you more for that stuff...]

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:19:07 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> He said "more" reliable. Have you heard of tolerances?
>
>Yeah.
>
>Did you know 10% resistors show a curios bimodel distribution?
>
>Wanna guess where the 5% resistors come from? ;-)
>
>[And they charge you more for that stuff...]

When I worked in the semiconductor industry (CMOS chips) the sorting
was done by individual sampling after the ICs were encapsulated.
Resistors and caps were by materials used in manufacturing. But that
was when the Ark was new :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> This somewhat implies that normal stuff is designed to be UNreliable. ;-)

Kind of, but not exactly.  It might be reliable, it might not be. 
Really it all comes down to luck - which, in the end, makes it unreliable :)

But it's not like a bunch of guys in suits sat down and said, "Now we 
need to design a version that's going to fail really soon."

> I'm just wondering whether they actually did anything different at all 
> for the extra money, that's all.

Yeah, they guaranteed that it won't fail within certain tolerances. 
Those tolerances are *much* stricter than for the cheap version.


> it'll take up to 15 days to arrive. But actually it arrives within 12 

> hours. And it still arrives within 12 hours. Do they actually do 
> anything different? Or is it just a tax on stupidity?

It's a guarantee.  Sure, you order something online and you could get it 
in 12 hours.  Or, you could get it in 2 weeks.  I've had both occur.

When you pay extra for shipping, you're paying for a guarantee that it 
will arrive within a certain timeframe.  If you're ordering a gift for 
someone's birthday, for instance, and their birthday is 3 days from now, 
do you want to gamble that the gift won't arrive on time?  Or do you 
want to know *for a fact* that it will arrive within 3 days?

> On the other hand, consider the printers example. Clearly something *is* 
> actually different, because the printers really do perform differently. 
> So in this case, you *are* getting something for your money.

As trite as the old saying is, "You get what you pay for".  A lot of the 
time, people decide that the quality really is worth the extra money 
(like your printer).  The trick is knowing when to pay for quality, and 
when to go cheap.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message