<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: As good as it gets?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gabijack.com/2008/11/as-good-as-it-gets/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gabijack.com/2008/11/as-good-as-it-gets/</link>
	<description>Gabi&#039;s Blog on solid modeling, design and engineering</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 19:25:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=7943</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Phil Sluder</title>
		<link>http://gabijack.com/2008/11/as-good-as-it-gets/comment-page-1/#comment-357</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil Sluder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gabijack.com/?p=147#comment-357</guid>
		<description>This topic is very interesting to me lately too, but from a different viewpoint.

Do you think the same person that is experienced and able to see the better ways to model a part, should also be able to know when it is unproductive to spend the additional time to make it happen (think fixed bid)? How do you think is the best way to communicate and differentiate what is required for the part  to function (without cutting corners), from what is best modeling practice(s).

I am not sure if those two though processes always go together, but it is a big deal when it comes to meeting the budget. You may need to also think about such thing as the future of the model (concept for marketing of production part), or who will be changing it next.

I guess this warants deeper thought and discussion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This topic is very interesting to me lately too, but from a different viewpoint.</p>
<p>Do you think the same person that is experienced and able to see the better ways to model a part, should also be able to know when it is unproductive to spend the additional time to make it happen (think fixed bid)? How do you think is the best way to communicate and differentiate what is required for the part  to function (without cutting corners), from what is best modeling practice(s).</p>
<p>I am not sure if those two though processes always go together, but it is a big deal when it comes to meeting the budget. You may need to also think about such thing as the future of the model (concept for marketing of production part), or who will be changing it next.</p>
<p>I guess this warants deeper thought and discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Shope</title>
		<link>http://gabijack.com/2008/11/as-good-as-it-gets/comment-page-1/#comment-356</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Shope</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 07:45:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gabijack.com/?p=147#comment-356</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve actually had this discussion several times in the past year. So no, you&#039;re not alone! For me it was learning about machines and stresses, where things fail and how they get fatigued. It really started affecting my personal work because I would worry that my design wouldn&#039;t be sufficient later on, or there would be a failure I hadn&#039;t anticipated. I guess it&#039;s the whole -- with great power comes great responsibility thing, except in this case it&#039;s with knowledge comes the need for how to properly control and use it.

As engineers we are so intrigued by how things work and how to make them better it&#039;s easy to get wrapped up in what we are doing and become so involved that we get burnt out. I think it&#039;s good to just step back sometimes, take a break, and make sure that I&#039;m   learning for the sake of fun and enjoyment, not just improvement. Improvement is all well and good, but you can really develop that complex if you always know something could be better!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve actually had this discussion several times in the past year. So no, you&#8217;re not alone! For me it was learning about machines and stresses, where things fail and how they get fatigued. It really started affecting my personal work because I would worry that my design wouldn&#8217;t be sufficient later on, or there would be a failure I hadn&#8217;t anticipated. I guess it&#8217;s the whole &#8212; with great power comes great responsibility thing, except in this case it&#8217;s with knowledge comes the need for how to properly control and use it.</p>
<p>As engineers we are so intrigued by how things work and how to make them better it&#8217;s easy to get wrapped up in what we are doing and become so involved that we get burnt out. I think it&#8217;s good to just step back sometimes, take a break, and make sure that I&#8217;m   learning for the sake of fun and enjoyment, not just improvement. Improvement is all well and good, but you can really develop that complex if you always know something could be better!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
