Re: gEDA-user: Re: Flame about XML

[Dave McGuire <mcguire@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 14, 2007, at 8:16 PM, Andy Peters wrote:
> >   Seriously.  There is some grand assumption that just because the  
> > capabilities we have now are good that the capabilities we had  
> > twenty years ago sucked.  That is not always the case.
>
> I have a Sun SparcStation 10 at home.  It sits, unused.  Every once  
> in a while, I talk about it, and I say, "You know, I used to do  
> Real Work on that machine."

  It's a shame...it'd make a good mail server or firewall for a home  
network.  Damn things are bulletproof.

  Sure, one could use a recent PC for such a task...but it'd be  
larger, louder, run hotter, burn more power, be less reliable, need a  
keyboard and monitor to boot, sit idle most of the time, and be  
expensive to replace if it fails.  Not so with an SS10.

> I used to do Real Work on Apollo workstations (before HP bought 'em  
> and dissolved 'em), running Mentor Graphics (which shipped on  
> cartridge tapes).  It was a Big Deal upgrading from the 68030  
> processor to the 68040, and the upgrade was Not Cheap.
>
> The company I used to work for (the one with the unused Data I/O  
> 2900) got its start doing PCB CAD machines based on 68000  
> processors and custom graphics boards, all on VME backplanes.  (The  
> guys who founded the company told me that they ate their own dog  
> food, in a very real way.)  I got the chance to fire one up, and it  
> worked, but the PC on my desk running PCAD ate it for breakfast.
>
> So, yeah, we used to do Real Work with these old hunks-o-junk ("...  
> and we were happy to have the tools!"), but the sad fact is that  
> the $500 Mac mini sitting next to my TV set runs circles around all  
> of them, and part of being a Smart Engineer is choosing the right  
> tool for the job.  Sticking with archaic hardware because of some  
> romantic notion about computing purity strikes me as fucking  
> stupid, pardon my New Jersey.

  Huh?  Data I/O UniFamily, which is a currently supported product  
line that can program current devices, is somehow "archaic hardware"?

  I choose the best tools for the job, regardless of cost, brand  
name, or age.  This hasn't a damn thing to do with "purity"...this  
has to do with getting work done, and getting it done right the first  
time.

  Not that you care (or even should), but your credibility on the  
topic of device programming is just about nonexistent with me.  And  
that's coming from someone who actually *uses* the stuff rather than  
bitching about having looked at it sitting on a shelf, or having  
worked for a company that's naive enough to pay someone (even the  
manufacturer) any more than twenty bucks to replace a bog-standard  
floppy drive.  "Smart engineer" indeed.  The clue phone is ringing,  
and it's for you.

  I have provided verifiable information from first-hand, real-world  
professional experiences.  Either provide real reasons why my  
recommendation was a poor one, or prove that what we're talking about  
is "archaic" despite being a current top-of-the-line product, or drop  
it.

  In other words...Put up, or shut up.

            -Dave

--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL




_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user