Extrapolating long tail effects from single samples
does not yield
accurate results.
Neither does assuming that theory matches reality.
I would argue that todays computer systems are *much*
more reliable
than the systems that were in general use 10-20 (or more) years ago.
On what grounds?
It contradicts tony's experience. It contradicts mine as well. Do you
have experience pointing the other way? (I would tend to assume not,
since if you had I would expect you to have mentioned it by now, but
assumptions don't make for good data either.)
If you want to argue that there are grounds for thinking they ought to
be more reliable, that's a relatively defensible stance. But reality
trumps theory, and so far it's looking as though experience is 2-0 in
the direction of your theory - or any theory that predicts higher
reliability out of today's machines - being an inaccurate description
of reality.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at
rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B