@wil007 and other Nemex'ers Thanks for the update Wil and...

@wil007 and other Nemex'ers

Thanks for the update Wil and explanation of what was described to you. I too have spoken to various people trying to get different lines of thinking and also to some friends who are more Tech savvy than I to garner their thoughts.

Is funny how the mkt so often deals in rumour, innuendo, smoke signals etc etc but one thing it doesn't like is straight unknowns or in the Ann word - "inconclusive". This just throws doubt in peoples minds and rightly so I suppose.

Wil - I take this bit of your post and will try to present another theory or take on it:

"I've spoken to a lot of people over the 24 hours - my conversation with Patrick was the most concerning! He tried to explain and paint a vivid image as to what further deeper software analysis means as per our results and explained it as the back-end code element of our software was not compatible with the commercial setting and testing that happen at the lab, as result we failed to capture actual results?"

The wording bold by me seems to be the key points. There is an incompatibility issue and a failure to capture results. Doesn't say the tech failed...just says "failed to capture" results to obtain something to meet whatever benchmarks they wanted to test against - suggest FAR, FTE, EER etc.

So, on that here is an example presented to me by a friend on incompatible software problems that can arise.

You have file extensions on files that you have on your PC and certain software or programs on your PC that can open these files or extract data if you will. Extensions like, MP3, WMA, MKV, AVI, H.264 etc etc - you get the picture.

Now, these files and the code used to write them or compress them etc are always evolving (people will understand if say, they ever download torrent files ) and as such, if you don't have the most up to date relevant software or as they are called "codecs" in particular, you may not be able to open a particular file because essentially it "fails to capture" or read the data.

Another simpler example was - you have a DVD player which reads CD's, DVD's etc but stick in a Blu Ray disc and no go...why?...cause it won't read the later developed Blu Ray data but quite often put a DVD or CD in a Blu Ray player and will it read it...most likely as it is backward compatible to earlier software / coding.

So, did the tech fail...the wording used by PF to Wil and also "inconclusive" on the Ann, suggests to me no...just appears from what has been said to Wil that it wasn't compatible between WBT tech & existing tech at Purdue because they didn't talk to each other during testing.

Is it at all viable that given WBT tech is supposedly cutting edge and a newer way of doing things regarding reading or capturing biometric data that maybe it has evolved to another level that Purdue's current equipment does not understand or read?

Does Purdue have the relevant "codecs" if you will, to be able to capture WBT tech data output? Does WBT need to tweak their software / code etc to allow Purdue to be able to read it? Would appear possible on both.

I note Wil, that you say SD appeared more upbeat or less concerned maybe, about the issue....do I think she has a better tech understanding than PF...yep.

Anyway, just my thoughts and a different view...take it as "preconceived" if you like or take it as just another possible way of looking at it.

Have a good one all.