http://blogs.msdn.com/b/steverowe/archive/2010/03/17/pass-rates-don-t-matter.aspxIt seems obvious that test pass rates are important.&#160; The higher the pass rate, the better quality the product.&#160; The lower the pass rate, the more known issues there are and the worse the quality of the product.&#160; It then follows that teamsen-USTelligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)http://blogs.msdn.com/b/steverowe/archive/2010/03/17/pass-rates-don-t-matter.aspx#9983271Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:44:05 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9983271Maurits [MSFT]<p>&quot;Failing cases can mask real failures&quot;</p> <p>I love that sentence.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9983271" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/steverowe/archive/2010/03/17/pass-rates-don-t-matter.aspx#9983200Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:22:13 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9983200Andrew<p>Indeed. Too many people forget that the reason why we test software is to gain knowledge about the state of the product. The purpose of testing isn't to find bugs or even to raise the quality of the product, it's to obtain information about the product. What we do with that information can affect the quality of a product but in and of itself testing has no bearing on product quality.</p> <p>With that frame of mind pass rates are only of interest if, as you say, failures are masking the ability to obtain accurate information about the product (i.e. preventing other tests from running).</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9983200" width="1" height="1">