Re: Pietenpol-List: Lindbegh and flying his "time off".......
Posted: Wed May 15, 2002 6:58 pm
Original Posted By: del magsam
Among other comments, Kevin Holcomb said:> Today we have fancy computers, CAD and an army of specialist. Yet ittakes> us years to design a product. Our tools have clearly not made us any more> efficient.My first impulse is to point out that many of the things we design thesedaysare a whole lot more complicated than the equivalent products of the 1920s,where equivalents even existed back then.My second thought is about a piece of stock-market software I use. Thecompetition is prettier--at the moment; the one I now use (and I've usedboth of the most popular competitors in the past) is due for a major upgradeof the interface in another month or two. But the one I now use is far moreversatile than the big boys, is much better thought-out in its basicfunctions,and is capable of doing simple arithmetic accurately, something neither ofthemajor competitors can say. Furthermore, where their customer support ismediocre to lousy, and their bugs and design flaws have survived for years,this company usually fixes bugs within a day or two after customers noticethemand more than once has added features less than a week after I asked forthem.The competition consists of multi-million-dollar corporations; one is ownedbyReuters, which surely ought to be able to afford the best. The company nowbeating their socks off consists of one man. In a small industrial city inPoland!Maybe you're right after all. Something isn't working here.Owen Davies________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:12:49 -0700 (PDT)
Among other comments, Kevin Holcomb said:> Today we have fancy computers, CAD and an army of specialist. Yet ittakes> us years to design a product. Our tools have clearly not made us any more> efficient.My first impulse is to point out that many of the things we design thesedaysare a whole lot more complicated than the equivalent products of the 1920s,where equivalents even existed back then.My second thought is about a piece of stock-market software I use. Thecompetition is prettier--at the moment; the one I now use (and I've usedboth of the most popular competitors in the past) is due for a major upgradeof the interface in another month or two. But the one I now use is far moreversatile than the big boys, is much better thought-out in its basicfunctions,and is capable of doing simple arithmetic accurately, something neither ofthemajor competitors can say. Furthermore, where their customer support ismediocre to lousy, and their bugs and design flaws have survived for years,this company usually fixes bugs within a day or two after customers noticethemand more than once has added features less than a week after I asked forthem.The competition consists of multi-million-dollar corporations; one is ownedbyReuters, which surely ought to be able to afford the best. The company nowbeating their socks off consists of one man. In a small industrial city inPoland!Maybe you're right after all. Something isn't working here.Owen Davies________________________________________________________________________________Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 19:12:49 -0700 (PDT)