<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Why do we test?</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/b/industry_insiders/archive/2005/04/12/why-test.aspx</link><description>Andy Taylor 
 
 A few years ago I was working for a major UK outsourcing company and I was involved with a key account within large UK organisations. I was given a project to upgrade a customers McAfee virus scanner to CA’s eTrust version 6 (like I</description><dc:language>en-GB</dc:language><generator>Telligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)</generator><item><title>re: Why do we test?</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/b/industry_insiders/archive/2005/04/12/why-test.aspx#403635</link><pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:35:24 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:403635</guid><dc:creator>Fraser Dickson</dc:creator><description>A great story - certainly goes to show that you can't test too much. I've got to admit I wouldn't have thought about the network bandwidth saturation issue either!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Glad you managed to troubleshoot it though!&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=403635" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>