Fair enough. Since the last example you sent is fine, and you've never had problems before, I doubt there's anything inherently wrong with your workflow. It seems more likely be some odd glitch with this particular project.
Distributors can indeed be difficult but in my limited experience there is usually something concrete that they are upset about (even if it is of little consequence).
Failed Tech QC
Re: Failed Tech QC
One of the issues I have with proprietary QC workflows is that they are often opaque. They complain about something, but are not specific. We had similar issues like this here and elsewhere.
That saic - it may indeed be that the measured datarate is considered unnecessary low by their qc tool. And I would indeed say, unless there is a specific reason (broadband delivery, very long run time, etc.), choose a higher bitrate, like e.g. 200MBit/s.
The problem is, they may throw out an issue, but are not clear wether it's a straight error, a hint, a warning, etc.
- Carsten
That saic - it may indeed be that the measured datarate is considered unnecessary low by their qc tool. And I would indeed say, unless there is a specific reason (broadband delivery, very long run time, etc.), choose a higher bitrate, like e.g. 200MBit/s.
The problem is, they may throw out an issue, but are not clear wether it's a straight error, a hint, a warning, etc.
- Carsten