It would still be cheaper and safer to sit a few people down, go over every error code and map them to the correct issue.
Yes, you have to do this for every implementation, but what do you think other businesses do? There are software developers (I got offered a job like that once and declined) who do nothing else than map action x to machine signals y and z. You only have to do this once per machine of course, but it’s still shitty work.
A thousand times more reliable than letting text processing AI try and make a best guess based on the error message (which is honestly insanity).
This is probably marketing crap anyway. Either their solution is brittle and breaks on a real error, or they already hardcoded the most important error codes and the rest is fluff.
Problem is, you don’t always get error codes. An error code is only useful, if you can output it to somewhere, so lots of machine manufacturers or programmers save themselves the trouble.
And error codes are an incredibly limiting interface. You can’t provide dynamic information with them. Or, programmers may choose to include an error into another error code, because it’s “close enough” for them to not want to update the manual.
Meanwhile, text logs get all the detailed information you actually need for debugging, with the downside of being an entirely unstable interface.
I’m not happy about this state of the industry either. I’m just saying, many companies will gladly take 95% accuracy over having to upgrade their machines or investing time to ingest the various signals.
It would still be cheaper and safer to sit a few people down, go over every error code and map them to the correct issue.
Yes, you have to do this for every implementation, but what do you think other businesses do? There are software developers (I got offered a job like that once and declined) who do nothing else than map action x to machine signals y and z. You only have to do this once per machine of course, but it’s still shitty work.
A thousand times more reliable than letting text processing AI try and make a best guess based on the error message (which is honestly insanity).
This is probably marketing crap anyway. Either their solution is brittle and breaks on a real error, or they already hardcoded the most important error codes and the rest is fluff.
Problem is, you don’t always get error codes. An error code is only useful, if you can output it to somewhere, so lots of machine manufacturers or programmers save themselves the trouble.
And error codes are an incredibly limiting interface. You can’t provide dynamic information with them. Or, programmers may choose to include an error into another error code, because it’s “close enough” for them to not want to update the manual.
Meanwhile, text logs get all the detailed information you actually need for debugging, with the downside of being an entirely unstable interface.
I’m not happy about this state of the industry either. I’m just saying, many companies will gladly take 95% accuracy over having to upgrade their machines or investing time to ingest the various signals.