[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: New Generation AccuVote - AT Improvements


My question would be "Who had real input to the first three versions of this product?" My advice would be to establish a advisory group and have real input before we commit $$$$ into a unit. As everyone is aware all "wish list items" can't be included however serious design defects could be caught before the die is cast so to speak.

"Ian S. Piper" wrote:

  -----Original Message-----
From: SKGLOBAL@aol.com <SKGLOBAL@aol.com>
To: salestalk@dieboldes.com <salestalk@dieboldes.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: New Generation AccuVote - AT Improvements
 >In a message dated 4/21/99 2:33:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>mmglobal@earthlink.net writes:
><< but we're in this boat right now because we didn't allow enough time to
>design the first product to meet everybody's specifications. >>
>Let's see, two years isn't enough time? I don't think time is the issue. We've gone through three iterations of the AccuVote TS in the last two years.  Hmmm, let's see now, that works out to about 8 months average per product.  Now let's take a look at what we got at for each product.   A Zycronix wedge, a Touch Systems wedge, and the current unit. Anybody happy with what we got so far for each 8 month iteration?  The last two years have been the perfect example of what I described before as the PIT.  Rushing each new product to market and ending up each time with something that we're not all happy with. Is two years enough time? Yes, it is enough time for this new product to become completely finished and polished.  Probably 1 -1/2 years is enough time.  Is 8 months enough time?  Doesn't look that way from our previous experience.  My guess is that we have one more shot at this product.  Let's get it right this time. Ian