As a hiring manager / lead for technical positions, this is fine, and often proposed by the 'resume experts'. Where I get incensed is these statements where the original design/architecture that this individual was responsible for was the problem, and they are just bringing something back to baseline where it should have started. I see this ALL THE TIME. And this is with grace towards changing requirements etc. And not just on resumes, I see this on internal corp. accomplishments, and typically the higher the level the more the savings and more the unnecessary waste was to start. For example, CFO once claimed like $20mm in savings because he decommed a financial module that they bought and NEVER used and NEVER needed - this guy crushed is bonus this year.
At the time, NT being able to run on multiple architectures (e.g Alpha), was rather impressive esp. at the time. Believe this was based from a lot of the knowledge of the former DEC team working on NT. Reading the comments here, esp. about drivers, it makes me now think how much engineering went towards this and perhaps the limitations around the driver architecture, that could have been put towards a stronger driver design AND hot add of certain SW, as I probably lost a year of my life waiting on NT reboots.
Again, justice is served for a small, very small, subset of the white collar criminals. Bring the real crooks (e.g. insider traders etc.) in for justice.