True, but for somewhat different reasons. For the OP, they take this approach because they simply don't know yet what the problem is, and it would take some time to track it down and fix it and they don't want to bother.

For Boeing, it's probably something fairly simple actually, but they don't want to fix it because their software has to go through a strict development process based on requirements and needing certification and testing, so fixing even a trivial bug is extremely time-consuming and expensive, so it's easier to just put a directive in the manual saying the equipment needs to be power-cycled every so often and let the users deal with it. The OP isn't dealing with this kind of situation.

"worked"

(not that i don't get the sarcasm)