[Daniel_Newby]

> Other options besides a stronger seal are technically possible, but not economically feasible.

It would have cost next to nothing to attach slabs of foam rubber or gentle spring plates to the sealer. As the two sides move together, the air is gently squeezed out of the bag first. Sheer incompetence.

[oasisbob]

Wouldn't evacuating the air from the packaging make the chips inside the container crush and break easier?

It's always been my understanding that the head room inside the package helps protect the contents.

[lbo]

I'm not sure if I exactly understand your solution. Would you be lightly squishing the contents of the bag with the spring plates while sealing the front?

It also seems possible that manufacturers wouldn't want chip bags to look comparatively "deflated" when sold in a same-pressure environment (and thus stand out less on the shelf compared to competitors'). Also, maybe bags rupture for reasons other than pressure change and thus a stronger seal is still desirable. Just guesses, though I know the article didn't make mention of any of those reasons.

[Arelius]

But it's not until the chips settle that this will be effective, unless you are ok with crushing chips to get the air out.

[batista]

And who said they wanted to squeeze the air out --and have the deflated look, easy crushing and all?

When one talks about the "sheer incompetence" of a group of industry experts set to find a solution to a problem in an internet comment thread, while putting out an inane "solution" of his own that doesn't take all facts into account --and when he never knew all the constraints in the first place--, well, the Dunning–Kruger effect springs to mind...