On Thu, 01 May 2008 06:06:15 -0500, Steve Mackay <steve_mackay@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>Cliff wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:47:19 -0500, Steve Mackay
<steve_mackay@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Your jokes are NEARLY as old
>>
>> When it's funny ...
>>
>>> as your jurassic cad/cam knowledge.
>>
>> Knowing what the stuff does (& how) & what it's for
>> helps a bit now & then <G>.
>>
>> The latest & greatest in glossy ads may not always result in
>> much in the way of really new end functionality nor, I suspect,
>> do you get better G01s & G02s with deca-quadruple cores , 200 GB & a
>> 500 gigahertz clock speed on a 1024 bit machine.
>
>Yeah, that couldn't be why we've gotten much faster at what we've done
>in the past couple of decades, now could it?
Faster is not more accurate though today it seems far,
far less skill & knowledge is required.
>Maybe just getting rid of worthless, know it alls, who like to just
>point the finger of blame to others, helped.
Who made the blunders at your shop? Not I.
>But I'm sure the software
>ease of use has dramatically increased productivity.
Faster is not more accurate though today it seems far,
far less skill & knowledge is required.
>> No matter what jb (or you?) sez about how antique developable
>> & non-developable surfaces are. Or NURBS or kernels or trig or
>> basic shop math or reading docs, instructions & manuals, etc.
>
>Yup, stick your fingers in your ears, and your hands over your eyes, and
>keep thinking you're actually knowledgeable on the subject of cad/cam.
Make your own pretty pictures.
--
Cliff
|
