Comments on: Design and Architecture http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/ experiments in refactored perception Tue, 22 May 2012 18:09:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Is there a mechanical engineering analogue to "Hello World"? (or: What's a good starter project?) - Quora http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-10397 Is there a mechanical engineering analogue to "Hello World"? (or: What's a good starter project?) - Quora Mon, 06 Jun 2011 19:54:44 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-10397 [...] (it should also give you a sense of what design thinking is like in mechanical engineering).http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/0...It's a pretty good basic challenge, and forces you to think about all the different concepts [...] [...] (it should also give you a sense of what design thinking is like in mechanical engineering).http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/0…It's a pretty good basic challenge, and forces you to think about all the different concepts [...]

]]> By: Eep² http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-5446 Eep² Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:54:18 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-5446 Carter didn't invent the nail clipper; there were at least 2 patents by different people years before his. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_clipper Carter didn’t invent the nail clipper; there were at least 2 patents by different people years before his. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nail_clipper

]]> By: nri http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-2254 nri Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:14:04 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-2254 love your pencil lifter. rest of the article is junk. language matters, but nitpicking does not. as a mathematician i am quite annoyed when ppl want to distinguish between theorem, lemma and corollary for instance. if you can prove mean value theorem then rolle's is just corollary. otherwise treat rolle's as the theorem and mean value is just lemma. otherwise treat something bigger like mvt in 2space as your theorem, then mvt and rolle's become lemmas. but why get so cranky about which is which. depending on which book you use, one becomes lemma and other becomes theorem or corollary. btw to claim tcp is architecture and not design when ms is doing design at the level of market timing heh heh quite dodgy. love your pencil lifter. rest of the article is junk. language matters, but nitpicking does not. as a mathematician i am quite annoyed when ppl want to distinguish between theorem, lemma and corollary for instance. if you can prove mean value theorem then rolle’s is just corollary. otherwise treat rolle’s as the theorem and mean value is just lemma. otherwise treat something bigger like mvt in 2space as your theorem, then mvt and rolle’s become lemmas. but why get so cranky about which is which. depending on which book you use, one becomes lemma and other becomes theorem or corollary. btw to claim tcp is architecture and not design when ms is doing design at the level of market timing heh heh quite dodgy.

]]> By: Venkat http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-2241 Venkat Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:34:56 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-2241 @saurabh I may be completely misremembering or mashing up details of different designs that came up, so not sure. I vaguely recall your design too. So yeah, my bad for misremembering winner details of the contest :) Fun times. Last bit of "real" mechanical engineering I ever did. Moved on to controls after that, which is probably the most truly portable engineering subject. @irv No comment. I have no good reason to defend Microsoft, but they must be doing something right to explain their survival. I zoomed in on the much-remarked V 3.0 phenomenon, but possibly I've read that wrong, and their DNA is elsewhere. @saurabh I may be completely misremembering or mashing up details of different designs that came up, so not sure. I vaguely recall your design too. So yeah, my bad for misremembering winner details of the contest :)

Fun times. Last bit of “real” mechanical engineering I ever did. Moved on to controls after that, which is probably the most truly portable engineering subject.

@irv No comment. I have no good reason to defend Microsoft, but they must be doing something right to explain their survival. I zoomed in on the much-remarked V 3.0 phenomenon, but possibly I’ve read that wrong, and their DNA is elsewhere.

]]> By: saurabh http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-2240 saurabh Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:25:08 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-2240 I think there was a shared first prize for that competition, and we were one of them, I guess you're talking about the other team. Our design had a rack affixed to the slider, and the lifter was on a pinion which was mounted on the slider but with a press fit. Blocks stopped the pinion assembly toward the ends of the slider motion which made the rack turn the pinion. This moved the lifter in opposite directions at the two ends (lifting pencil and bottom and releasing it at top). I think there was a shared first prize for that competition, and we were one of them, I guess you’re talking about the other team. Our design had a rack affixed to the slider, and the lifter was on a pinion which was mounted on the slider but with a press fit. Blocks stopped the pinion assembly toward the ends of the slider motion which made the rack turn the pinion. This moved the lifter in opposite directions at the two ends (lifting pencil and bottom and releasing it at top).

]]> By: irv http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/04/08/design-and-architecture/#comment-2239 irv Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:10:45 +0000 http://www.ribbonfarm.com/?p=917#comment-2239 There's plenty of room for debate about where architecture begins and design ends. But "get it right by version 3?" Is not a Microsoft paradigm. It's more like "Finally get it functional by version 3, then screw it up completely in version 4, then spend the next 3 version trying to get customers to calm down and just use it." Examples of version 4 would be MS-DOS 4 and Windows ME. There’s plenty of room for debate about where architecture begins and design ends. But “get it right by version 3?” Is not a Microsoft paradigm. It’s more like “Finally get it functional by version 3, then screw it up completely in version 4, then spend the next 3 version trying to get customers to calm down and just use it.”

Examples of version 4 would be MS-DOS 4 and Windows ME.

]]>