5 ms·

Southwest Airlines, just this past winter. Multiple factors were involved, but chief among these appears to have been a series of deficiencies in its "outdated

Southwest Airlines, just this past winter. Multiple factors were involved, but chief among these appears to have been a series of deficiencies in its "outdated" scheduling system (which upper management was well aware of, but it didn't want to foot the bill for a proper fix). https://www.npr.org/2022/12/27/1145616523/southwest-airlines-flight-cancellations-2022 https://www.npr.org/2022/12/27/1145616523/southwest-airlines... And from the WSJ: https://archive.is/3ujIL https://archive.is/3ujIL What about a lack of tests, or bad coding standards? We don't know the particulars, but one can reasonably infer that the root causes were broader and more systemic than that (i.e. a mix of technical and organizational issues).

warrenm 4y ago
SWA hasn't exactly "failed"
- lisasays 4y ago
  It didn't collapse entirely - but by all accounts, it was a major failure.
  - warrenm 4y ago
    They're still going pretty strong, from what I see and hear ... IOW, they handled that failure relatively well
    - lisasays 4y ago
      You can spin it that way if you want. It was a good chunk of money out the door for them, in any case.
      - warrenm 4y ago
        it's not "spin" :) they're haven't gone out of business, and show no signs of doing so for the foreseeable future :)
        lisasays 4y ago
        You keep dialing back the definition of "fail" to mean "to go out of business." In common usage its meaning is far broader -- it can also mean e.g. "to screw up spectacularly" (in a way that cost the company very significantly, even if it isn't forced out of business as a result).
        warrenm 4y ago
        OP asked about a "company failing" You're the one twisting that into a "a failure which may or may not have been recovered from" :)
        lisasays 4y ago
        You can read it however you want. But in that context, the meaning was clearly open-ended.
        warrenm 4y ago
        I read it the way it's written: "have any notable companies failed" Not "have any notable companies had a failure" Big difference there, friend :)

warrenm 4y ago

SWA hasn't exactly "failed"

lisasays 4y ago
It didn't collapse entirely - but by all accounts, it was a major failure.
- warrenm 4y ago
  They're still going pretty strong, from what I see and hear ... IOW, they handled that failure relatively well
  - lisasays 4y ago
    You can spin it that way if you want. It was a good chunk of money out the door for them, in any case.
    - warrenm 4y ago
      it's not "spin" :) they're haven't gone out of business, and show no signs of doing so for the foreseeable future :)
      - lisasays 4y ago
        You keep dialing back the definition of "fail" to mean "to go out of business." In common usage its meaning is far broader -- it can also mean e.g. "to screw up spectacularly" (in a way that cost the company very significantly, even if it isn't forced out of business as a result).
        warrenm 4y ago
        OP asked about a "company failing" You're the one twisting that into a "a failure which may or may not have been recovered from" :)
        lisasays 4y ago
        You can read it however you want. But in that context, the meaning was clearly open-ended.
        warrenm 4y ago
        I read it the way it's written: "have any notable companies failed" Not "have any notable companies had a failure" Big difference there, friend :)