What do you say to the many articles that are along the lines of "3D printers in every home will print anything"? Today's 3D printers have nowhere near that capability. The materials available are quite restrictive and the output is relatively crude. I have read many articles making outrageous claims that home 3D printing will change the face of manufacturing very soon. When I look closely at the claims, such as printing electronics, I see they are impossible. It has gotten to the point that I don't believe anything coming out of the 3D community. They have cried wolf too many times. What do you say on that subject?
A cop who knows his buddy is on the take, or otherwise breaking the rules but goes along with it is still a bad cop
"Otherwise breaking the rules" includes such things a letting a friend off a speeding ticket, accepting a doughnut from a merchant, etc. Most police transgressions fall far below "bribery, battery, murder and the like". There is also a huge difference between "knowing" and "hearing on the grape vine".
Into generalizations much? All police officers are not alike. Sure there are some bad cops but there are also some very god cops. By the way, there is a saying the covers this "two wrongs don't make a right".
Instead, warnings went out at roll-call meetings throughout South Bureau, and new rules were put in place requiring officers to document that both antennas were in place at the beginning and end of each shift. To guard against officers removing the antennas during their shifts, Tingirides said he requires patrol supervisors to make unannounced checks on cars. "We took the situation very seriously. But because the chances of determining who was responsible was so low we elected to move on," Smith said, adding that it cost the department about $1,500 to replace all the antennas. Since the new protocols went into place, only one antenna has been found missing, Smith said.
Police officers share cars. Unless you inspect the vehicle at the beginning and end of every shift there is no way of knowing who ripped the antenna off. I would also bet that there are a fair number of antennas ripped off by non-police officers. Police cars are an easy targets for vandals. I wonder how many other antennas are removed from squad cars. If it is always just the voice antenna it would be an issue. Even then, maybe the voice antenna is just easier to remove and non-police vandals target it more.
I agree that there is some police vandalism but I doubt it is the whole story.
In this case, if you can make a proof of principle speaker, you can make a proof of principle radial motor,
That is a huge leap and a big assumption with no basis in fact. The coil in a linear motor is very different than a coil in a radial motor. The point is that no one has made a 3D printed radial motor. There is a reason for that.
Again, my proof is the Apple organisational tree. CEO is superior to VP. Absolute fact.
A VP has never gone over the CEO's head to the Board to get something done. Right. In every organization there is an official structure and an unofficial structure and sometime the two look very different.
For the conductor, Kiran used a silver ink. For the magnet, he employed the help of Samanvaya Srivastava, graduate student in chemical and biomolecular engineering, to come up with a viscous blend of strontium ferrite.
I see no mention of copper.
Switching from a linear motor (the 3D printed speaker below) to a rotary motor wouldn't be difficult.
I live statements like this; "since we can do A we can do B because they use a similar principle". A linear motor and a radial motor are drastically different. A linear motor is a magnet inside a coil. A few wraps of conductor will do for the coil. For a radial motor you need many more fine conductors wrapped close together to work. Then there is the issue of bearings which have to be smooth enough to handle a few hundred RPM for a significant period of time. A speaker has one moving part suspended by the cone. The tolerances alone make radial motors much more complex than linear motors. A radial motor coil is much harder to print than a speaker.
The problem is Jobs was trying to market them to consumers who were looking for a cheaper computer. Why does every article about NeXT point out the high cost of the hardware as the main reason for it's problems?
Prove it. If he had complete power over product decisions his VPs would never have said "we are going to do it anyway" when Steve said "no". How do you reconcile those two facts.
In the 4th quarter, at the 2 minute warning, the coach lets the quarterback call the shots, thats their respective jobs.
And in the first three quarters the coach sends in the plays. Whether or not to write a Windows app was not a 2 minute warning play as they had been talking about it for months. It was a long term play ie. a Board decision.
I guarantee you the Apple's Board of Directors did not tell Steve Jobs "hey, that new iPod thing you have, make sure it works on windows too".
When the VP of hardware and the VP of software said "we want to make it works on windows too" and Jobs said "No" the Board would side with the VPs. The Board never had to make the decision because Jobs at least knew how to pick his battles the second time around. Jobs could learn.
No, my claim is that the CEO runs the day to day job, and the Board sets the direction
I would see the decision whether or not to make iPod compatible with 97% of the existing personal computers as a "direction" decision and not a day to day decision. Increasing one's market potential by 3200% is a big deal. Jobs did not want it because he wanted iPod to only work on "his" machines. To hell with money. Apple is the biggest walled garden in the computer industry due to Jobs.
Apple's stuff do not have a mandate to be compatible with Windows.
True but they had a mandate to make money and cutting out 97% of the computers on the market being able to use the iPod was a bad decision. Jobs tried to hold to that decision until the VPs said they would do it anyway because they knew the Board would back them.
While a $20k workstation might be more powerful than your wintel box,
Who designed the $20K box when others were designing much less expensive boxes? Steve Jobs. He didn't care about cost or market viability; all he wanted was the "perfect" box.
Additionally, the other competitors feared Jobs, so they did everything they could to block him.
So every success was due to Steve Jobs and every failure was due to other people. Just wow.
The product itself is successful and lives on as MacOS.
The software still lives on. The hardware is long dead.
Except if he know that the VPs could go to the Board and get it approved. The VP saying "We are going to do it" indicates that Jobs' opinion would have been ignored. The decision to do it was made by the VPs and not Jobs.
For someone who is supposed to be that much of a control freak, nothing could have gone through without his permission.
That is the difference in Apple between the time before Jobs left and after he returned. Up until the Board that ousted Jobs, Jobs' word was law. After Jobs returned the Board had much more power and used it. Before the ouster Jobs was a control freak. After he came back he was a control freak on a leash.
You might want to learn how to quote and preview. It make your posts easier to read.
No, that wasn't my post.
You didn't write that quote but that is what I and talking about. Please stay on topic.
And it's a fact that Jobs heard whet they said, and allowed them to do it, delegating the responsibility for it's success to them. The actual words used is just an anecdote.
Sorry but your "reality distortion field" does not work as well as jobs'. Jobs thought they would fail and take the blame. The VPs knew they could go to the Board and get permission.
He hadn't had that power in the time before he was pushed out, and wouldn't have accepted the CEO offer without that power.
You have no idea what Steve Jobs would have done. Maybe he saw that NeXT was going nowhere and there were things he could do at Apple even without complete control.
Before hist departure to NeXT I definitely believe that. Jobs was the creator of Apple and in complete control. You did what Jobs said or you were gone. They finally got a board in that could oust him and did,
What a massive failure, being bought and utilized to this day.
The hardware was a complete disaster. It was much to expensive for what it did. The software, after many years of further development, became OSX. I am not saying Jobs was always wrong but when he is completely in charge things can go very wrong. I don't think NeXT ever made back the money invested in it's eleven years. I would call that a failure.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you say to the many articles that are along the lines of "3D printers in every home will print anything"? Today's 3D printers have nowhere near that capability. The materials available are quite restrictive and the output is relatively crude. I have read many articles making outrageous claims that home 3D printing will change the face of manufacturing very soon. When I look closely at the claims, such as printing electronics, I see they are impossible. It has gotten to the point that I don't believe anything coming out of the 3D community. They have cried wolf too many times. What do you say on that subject?
A cop who knows his buddy is on the take, or otherwise breaking the rules but goes along with it is still a bad cop
"Otherwise breaking the rules" includes such things a letting a friend off a speeding ticket, accepting a doughnut from a merchant, etc. Most police transgressions fall far below "bribery, battery, murder and the like". There is also a huge difference between "knowing" and "hearing on the grape vine".
Are you perfect?
Into generalizations much? All police officers are not alike. Sure there are some bad cops but there are also some very god cops. By the way, there is a saying the covers this "two wrongs don't make a right".
It seems to have been fixed:
Instead, warnings went out at roll-call meetings throughout South Bureau, and new rules were put in place requiring officers to document that both antennas were in place at the beginning and end of each shift. To guard against officers removing the antennas during their shifts, Tingirides said he requires patrol supervisors to make unannounced checks on cars.
"We took the situation very seriously. But because the chances of determining who was responsible was so low we elected to move on," Smith said, adding that it cost the department about $1,500 to replace all the antennas.
Since the new protocols went into place, only one antenna has been found missing, Smith said.
Police officers share cars. Unless you inspect the vehicle at the beginning and end of every shift there is no way of knowing who ripped the antenna off. I would also bet that there are a fair number of antennas ripped off by non-police officers. Police cars are an easy targets for vandals. I wonder how many other antennas are removed from squad cars. If it is always just the voice antenna it would be an issue. Even then, maybe the voice antenna is just easier to remove and non-police vandals target it more.
I agree that there is some police vandalism but I doubt it is the whole story.
In this case, if you can make a proof of principle speaker, you can make a proof of principle radial motor,
That is a huge leap and a big assumption with no basis in fact. The coil in a linear motor is very different than a coil in a radial motor. The point is that no one has made a 3D printed radial motor. There is a reason for that.
Clearly you have nothing more to add.
Neither do you.
Every company airs their dirty laundry in public. Another fallacy. The evidence I have is the statement by the VP saying "We will do it anyway".
You're just hanging on to the dumb thing you said in the first place.
You're just hanging onto the idea that Jobs was in absolute control over products.
Again, my proof is the Apple organisational tree. CEO is superior to VP. Absolute fact.
A VP has never gone over the CEO's head to the Board to get something done. Right. In every organization there is an official structure and an unofficial structure and sometime the two look very different.
They can print copper
from the article;
For the conductor, Kiran used a silver ink. For the magnet, he employed the help of Samanvaya Srivastava, graduate student in chemical and biomolecular engineering, to come up with a viscous blend of strontium ferrite.
I see no mention of copper.
Switching from a linear motor (the 3D printed speaker below) to a rotary motor wouldn't be difficult.
I live statements like this; "since we can do A we can do B because they use a similar principle". A linear motor and a radial motor are drastically different. A linear motor is a magnet inside a coil. A few wraps of conductor will do for the coil. For a radial motor you need many more fine conductors wrapped close together to work. Then there is the issue of bearings which have to be smooth enough to handle a few hundred RPM for a significant period of time. A speaker has one moving part suspended by the cone. The tolerances alone make radial motors much more complex than linear motors. A radial motor coil is much harder to print than a speaker.
The problem is Jobs was trying to market them to consumers who were looking for a cheaper computer. Why does every article about NeXT point out the high cost of the hardware as the main reason for it's problems?
He didn't allow it until the VPs said we are going to do it no matter what Jobs said. Jobs had the power until the VPs got fed up and went ahead.
He had complete power over product decisions.
Prove it. If he had complete power over product decisions his VPs would never have said "we are going to do it anyway" when Steve said "no". How do you reconcile those two facts.
In the 4th quarter, at the 2 minute warning, the coach lets the quarterback call the shots, thats their respective jobs.
And in the first three quarters the coach sends in the plays. Whether or not to write a Windows app was not a 2 minute warning play as they had been talking about it for months. It was a long term play ie. a Board decision.
I guarantee you the Apple's Board of Directors did not tell Steve Jobs "hey, that new iPod thing you have, make sure it works on windows too".
When the VP of hardware and the VP of software said "we want to make it works on windows too" and Jobs said "No" the Board would side with the VPs. The Board never had to make the decision because Jobs at least knew how to pick his battles the second time around. Jobs could learn.
No, my claim is that the CEO runs the day to day job, and the Board sets the direction
I would see the decision whether or not to make iPod compatible with 97% of the existing personal computers as a "direction" decision and not a day to day decision. Increasing one's market potential by 3200% is a big deal. Jobs did not want it because he wanted iPod to only work on "his" machines. To hell with money. Apple is the biggest walled garden in the computer industry due to Jobs.
Apple's stuff do not have a mandate to be compatible with Windows.
True but they had a mandate to make money and cutting out 97% of the computers on the market being able to use the iPod was a bad decision. Jobs tried to hold to that decision until the VPs said they would do it anyway because they knew the Board would back them.
While a $20k workstation might be more powerful than your wintel box,
Who designed the $20K box when others were designing much less expensive boxes? Steve Jobs. He didn't care about cost or market viability; all he wanted was the "perfect" box.
Additionally, the other competitors feared Jobs, so they did everything they could to block him.
So every success was due to Steve Jobs and every failure was due to other people. Just wow.
The product itself is successful and lives on as MacOS.
The software still lives on. The hardware is long dead.
You might want to read how Boards and CEO's actually work. The CEO works for the Board not the other way around.
Except if he know that the VPs could go to the Board and get it approved. The VP saying "We are going to do it" indicates that Jobs' opinion would have been ignored. The decision to do it was made by the VPs and not Jobs.
For someone who is supposed to be that much of a control freak, nothing could have gone through without his permission.
That is the difference in Apple between the time before Jobs left and after he returned. Up until the Board that ousted Jobs, Jobs' word was law. After Jobs returned the Board had much more power and used it. Before the ouster Jobs was a control freak. After he came back he was a control freak on a leash.
You might want to read the whole thread before replying.
Though of the rounds where there is a winner the odds are 50/50.
You might want to learn how to quote and preview. It make your posts easier to read.
No, that wasn't my post.
You didn't write that quote but that is what I and talking about. Please stay on topic.
And it's a fact that Jobs heard whet they said, and allowed them to do it, delegating the responsibility for it's success to them. The actual words used is just an anecdote.
Sorry but your "reality distortion field" does not work as well as jobs'. Jobs thought they would fail and take the blame. The VPs knew they could go to the Board and get permission.
He hadn't had that power in the time before he was pushed out, and wouldn't have accepted the CEO offer without that power.
You have no idea what Steve Jobs would have done. Maybe he saw that NeXT was going nowhere and there were things he could do at Apple even without complete control.
Before hist departure to NeXT I definitely believe that. Jobs was the creator of Apple and in complete control. You did what Jobs said or you were gone. They finally got a board in that could oust him and did,
What a massive failure, being bought and utilized to this day.
The hardware was a complete disaster. It was much to expensive for what it did. The software, after many years of further development, became OSX. I am not saying Jobs was always wrong but when he is completely in charge things can go very wrong. I don't think NeXT ever made back the money invested in it's eleven years. I would call that a failure.
Sorry, Apple bought NeXT not the other way around.