More binary thinking preventing discussion. If having a single bug means something is overwhelmingly buggy then there does exist any non-buggy software of significant complexity on the planet. The requirement that there be zero bugs is an oddly chosen bar.
DCS certainly is pass/fail based on your memory meeting requirements. I assume Weiss has 8GB and not 16.
I know you're smarter than this Frederf. I don't understand why you stick to single bug = overwhelmingly buggy even after I retracted that exaggerated example in my last post. Besides, my original statement was of bugs, plural and not singular. Is it because if you drop this strawman, you have no other argument? So how many bugs are needed before a software is considered buggy? 5? 10? 100? If it's just one bug but it causes CTDs for 90% of the users, because it's a single bug, we cannot call it overwhelmingly buggy? I'm not saying this is the case with ED, I'm just poking a big hole in your silly example. Anyway, doesn't really matter as there are pages and pages of bugs/issues/complaints on the ED forums and those are just the ones that survive the moderator's purges. So you don't even have to take my word for it that 2.5 is buggy; go and peruse the ED forums and take note of threads and posts prior to 20th/28th of April.
As for memory requirements, I suggest you familiarize yourself a bit more with the issue as it is not a pass/fail affair at all. Besides, the memory leak/allocation issue was discovered **THEN** the minimum requirement specs were changed **AFTERWARDS**, again evidence that ED does not know its own product.
