Could it be that if "windows" crashes every couple of days you just reboot
it,
if a 747 crashes one single time, +400 persons die. (Who does reboot them)
could it be that the industry don't know the difference between ignorance
and apathy (hint: it's "i don't know and i don't care").
the problem is that, as far as the public knows, all "evidence" about
computers interfering with aircraft systems is anecdotal. we have yet to see
a study reported.
why? probably a lack of money and a fear of liability. it costs serious
bucks to fund a comprehensive study. and if it's wrong, then there's
liability. and all for what, so some business traveller's can get 10 more
minutes of productivity on each flight? (hint: providing a productive
environment for passengers isn't something the industry gets objectively
graded on.) far better to simply mumble about unspecified safety hazards
than having something definitive.
a rationale reason for asking folks to turn the things off is because the
airlines don't want people to be distracted during take-off and landing,
when most things tend to go wrong. if they'd just come out and say this,
most people would probably accept it.
instead, the industry prefers to play this "we know better than you" game,
when in fact there is a lack of publically-available scientific evidence to
support the claims of either side.
this is, of course, just one small part of what's wrong with the industry.
frankly, i'd be happier if they could manage to get the planes to take off
and land on schedule, not lose luggage, etc., etc.
/mtr