[wwtrv]

> Canary offers more bang for the buck

I'm not sure that justifies potentially bricking the devices of hundreds(?) of your clients by shipping untested updates to them. Of course it depends... and would require deeper financial analysis.

[tehlike]

They won't be able to test exhaustively every failure mode that could lead to such issues.

That's why canaries are easier and more "economical" to implement and gives better value per unit effort.

[wwtrv]

> They won't be able to test exhaustively every failure mode that could lead to such issues.

That might be acceptable. My point is that if you are incapable of having even absolutely basic automated tests (that would take a few minutes at most) for extremely impactful software like this starting with something more complex seems like a waste of time (clearly the company is run by incompetent people so they'd just mess it up)

[Capricorn2481]

But they can test obvious failure modes like this one. You need both.