| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to Bose's noise-masking Sleepbuds occurred again within the same organization. Despite initially believing that software and firmware updates could fix the issues, Bose General Manager John Roselli mentioned that the failures continued and even increased, leading them to closely examine each piece of hardware [90562]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is evident in the article. Bose mentioned that they initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds. However, despite their efforts, the failures continued and even increased. This indicates that there were issues introduced during the system development or updates that were not effectively addressed by the software and firmware updates [90562].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is also highlighted in the article. Bose mentioned that the battery chosen for the Sleepbuds did not work as consistently or predictably as it should to meet their standards. This suggests that there were contributing factors introduced by the operation or use of the system, specifically related to the battery performance, which led to the unexpected powering down of the Sleepbuds [90562]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident with Bose's noise-masking Sleepbuds was primarily within the system. The article mentions that Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds, indicating that the problems were related to the internal functioning of the device. Additionally, the General Manager of Bose mentioned that failures continued despite their attempts to address them through updates, leading them to investigate the hardware components more closely [90562]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the article is primarily attributed to non-human actions. Bose mentioned that they initially believed software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds, but the failures persisted and increased. Upon closer inspection, they discovered that the battery chosen for the Sleepbuds did not function consistently or predictably, leading to the software failure incident [90562]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware:
The article mentions that Bose discovered that the battery chosen for the Sleepbuds functions safely but doesn't work as consistently or predictably as it should to meet their standards. This indicates that the failure was due to a hardware issue [90562].
(b) The software failure incident related to software:
The article states that Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds. However, despite these updates, the failures continued and even increased, leading them to look more closely at each piece of hardware. This suggests that the failure was not primarily due to software issues but rather hardware-related [90562]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Bose Sleepbuds was non-malicious. The failure was attributed to issues with the hardware, specifically the battery, which did not function consistently or predictably to meet the company's standards. Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues, but the problems persisted and even increased, leading them to investigate the hardware components [90562]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
unknown |
The software failure incident related to Bose's discontinuation of its noise-masking Sleepbuds was not explicitly attributed to poor decisions or accidental decisions in the articles provided [90562]. The failure was primarily linked to issues with the hardware components, specifically the battery, which did not function consistently or predictably enough to meet the company's standards. Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could resolve the problems, but the failures persisted and even increased over time, leading to the decision to discontinue the product. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the article does not directly point to development incompetence as the cause. Instead, it mentions that Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds. However, the failures persisted and were later attributed to inconsistencies in the battery's performance, not necessarily linked to development incompetence [90562].
(b) The software failure incident in the article is more aligned with an accidental failure. The article mentions that Bose discovered that the battery chosen for the Sleepbuds did not work consistently or predictably to meet their standards, leading to the unexpected powering down of the earbuds. This indicates that the failure was accidental rather than a result of intentional incompetence [90562]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident related to Bose's noise-masking Sleepbuds was more of a temporary nature. The article mentions that Bose initially believed that software and firmware updates could fix the issues with the Sleepbuds. However, despite their efforts, the failures continued and even increased, leading them to investigate the hardware components more closely. This indicates that the failure was not permanent but rather temporary, as it was caused by specific circumstances related to the battery's inconsistent performance rather than being inherent to the entire product design [90562]. |
| Behaviour |
value |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the article is not described as a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. [90562]
(b) omission: The software failure incident in the article is not described as an omission where the system omits to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). [90562]
(c) timing: The software failure incident in the article is not described as a timing issue where the system performs its intended functions correctly, but too late or too early. [90562]
(d) value: The software failure incident in the article is described as a value issue where the system performs its intended functions incorrectly. The failure was due to the battery not working consistently or predictably to meet the company's standards. [90562]
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident in the article is not described as a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. [90562]
(f) other: The software failure incident in the article is not described as any other specific behavior beyond the value issue mentioned. [90562] |