It’s not a bunch of a large number. It is a set number of phones from well known providers from a few countries.
Basically no one wanted to pay for one Business Analyst to read documentation and make phone calls to providers. For a program that has years and millions in it.
Or worse, cause it is out of scope
Or the worst, so they could sell the “buy from the provider” bullshit
Regulatory compliance of hardware is not, and should not be, the responsibility of the service provider. It’s the responsibility of the manufacturer to have their hardware certified basically everywhere.
Frankly, the rules shouldn’t even allow providers to make that determination. They should either be certified to meet the requirements by an independent agency, or have providers be prohibited from allowing them.
I did read the article. Checking is not and should not be their responsibility.
The only legitimate way to check is to do actual, intensive, independent testing of every device in question, specific to your country’s regulations. Spec sheets are not a valid approach to verifying that a device will work.
How do you think spec sheets work? Engineers rely on data a d there are industry standards. That is the whole point of documentation. Even little motors and resistors have documentation that is relied on. You really think this is not documented accurately?
You really think that Optus is intensely checking and verify every device they sell? They rely on the documentation! They are a retailer of phones.
The way that Aussies think is always interesting. I find a lot of people bend over backwards to justify the reasons for companies. Instead of standing up for customers these arguments seem to look like a shining example of “out of scope” decisions. I have seen in too many corporate meetings and decision makers.
It’s not a bunch of a large number. It is a set number of phones from well known providers from a few countries.
Basically no one wanted to pay for one Business Analyst to read documentation and make phone calls to providers. For a program that has years and millions in it.
Or worse, cause it is out of scope
Or the worst, so they could sell the “buy from the provider” bullshit
Regulatory compliance of hardware is not, and should not be, the responsibility of the service provider. It’s the responsibility of the manufacturer to have their hardware certified basically everywhere.
Frankly, the rules shouldn’t even allow providers to make that determination. They should either be certified to meet the requirements by an independent agency, or have providers be prohibited from allowing them.
Read the article. Optus is not bothering checking. Just closing stuff off.
I did read the article. Checking is not and should not be their responsibility.
The only legitimate way to check is to do actual, intensive, independent testing of every device in question, specific to your country’s regulations. Spec sheets are not a valid approach to verifying that a device will work.
How do you think spec sheets work? Engineers rely on data a d there are industry standards. That is the whole point of documentation. Even little motors and resistors have documentation that is relied on. You really think this is not documented accurately?
You really think that Optus is intensely checking and verify every device they sell? They rely on the documentation! They are a retailer of phones.
The way that Aussies think is always interesting. I find a lot of people bend over backwards to justify the reasons for companies. Instead of standing up for customers these arguments seem to look like a shining example of “out of scope” decisions. I have seen in too many corporate meetings and decision makers.