Excel is an extremely poor tool for doing anything other than basic graphs and calculations. For engineering purposes, it's near useless.
Don't know what kind of engineer you are but in the Real World (TM) you will find lots of engineers doing some quick & dirty calculations in Excel.
Sure, you could use Matlab or Mathematica or Maple but have you checked the price of these programs? I managed to get us some licenses of MathCad (and make a point of using them as much as possible) but even this is not for free. Well, Octave is, even free as in beer-drunken speech, but the point I want to make is that for a user whos Windows-based PC came with MS Office installed, Excel is the easiest way. And in combination with SQL and VBA it's often powerful enough...
As long as you don't require graphs with more than 32768 items in one data series or more than 65536 rows on your spread sheet. But for smaller data series (say up to 10000 rows, with 20 columns) Excel is pretty OK.
The one thing I hate about Excel is that it is too easy to just put together some quick & dirty calculations. Regardless with what intention I start, over time my Excel sheets always grow beyond what they intially where planned for. And then it's getting ugly, becuase after some time you lose control over the relationships of the cells and equations. Sure, there are some tools for that, but not enough. And VBA is great, too, but when you just make a print-out for a colleague, you only get the spread sheet, not the connections between the cells and not the VBA-routines in the background. I now try to make up for all my past Excel-crimes by step-wise converting everything important to MathCad. Because there (as in Mathematica or Maple) a print-out shows all the underlying equations and algorithms in a natural and easy-to-understand way.
So, to return to where I started: Excel is not "near-useless for engineering purposes". I consider myself a decent engineer and have done serious work in Excel, and I have some Excel-addicted colleagues, who I really admire (and sometimes envy) for their work.
Yes, it's the sound of enevibility...
Only this time it's the evil agent himself who has his face pressed down to the rail. And there is no sudden backflip-like jump out of it.
But seriously, KDE is looking good, some of the nice features like viewing inside zip files and such will help win over windows users.
Nah, while looking inside zip files is nice, it's nothing that doen't exist in the Windows world. It all but not exists. ? Or something.:)
The one really neat thing is thumbnails for text documents and pdf files, which I have not seen somewhere else (I expect a full flame by MacOS X users any minute though). But as I wrote somewhere else, I really believe it's the applications that make a difference in converting a user to a different OS. To me, the desktop is just a tool to organize the icons of the applications I use to do some real work with. Me with my "Joe User" basecap on couldn't care less whether it's going to be KDE or Gnome.
"After users have learned to use a bunch of different desktops, which one do they find easiest to use, and most useful?" This is a fair questions, and the answer actually matters. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux (Gnome usually) on a daily basis and I think Linux wins this one.
I think, while this may be the case, it's actually the applications we should look on. To me, a desktop on you computer is like the physical desktop at work: Sure, some come with nice drawers and others com with tables that can be lifted electrically, rather than by cranking. But it's the tools you use for work that matter, not how neatly they are sorted. To me, any improvement on Gimp, OpenOffice, (etc) is more important than some new feature in KDE or Gnome. Because the desktop is just a way to get to the applications I do my work in.
Linux has been desktop-ready since 1991, it's just that the majority of users haven't been ready for it.
God, how I hate reading this. It's people like you with arrogant statements like your's above that give the OpenSource community a bad reputation.
Face it: What is revolutionary about GNU/Linux is its model of development and distributuion. Technically speaking, for a typical Joe User there is little or nothing new. Regarding the GUI, we mostly take the best (or what we perceive to be best) from other OS, like Windows, MacOS, Irix, AmigaOS etc. Nothing wrong with this approach, but it's not that the Linux GUI is constantly 5 years ahaed of what users can grasp.
It's become clear that the Linux desktop has all but surpassed proprietary alternatives.
Yeah, hehe, because of this I even thought that linked article containts some rant about KDE's supposedly poor usability. Talking 'bout someone using a phrase without having understood it...
In related news: When I was a very little kid, I used the word "f*ck" sometimes because it seem to have an odd effect on the older kids. I really didn't know what it meant, though.
US is already union of states.
Frankly, this "revolutionary" idea EU is pursuing right now is quite similar to what US adopted 200 years ago.
On the surface, this seems to be true. However, the former colonies in America had not that long a tradition of national goverments than Europe had (has). You can't compare US (young states of quite same culture) with EU (old states, quite different culture). Just my 2 cents (Eurocents that is)...
I can see you sitting in front of your computer and typing into 3D-Google "L-shaped thing with small hollow cylinder on one side and two small holes on the other with a funny angle to it, looking like the alien gun in last weeks X-files, but without the pyramid on top"... and then you press "I'm lucky".
Re:seriously, the problem I don't see an answer to
on
Searching by Shape...
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Dude, don't believe in the AutoDesk propaganda. (Yes, for a design engineer, bashing AutoCAD is like bashing QBasic (or even better: GWBasic) for a professional programmer)
In the *real* world, we model in 3D and derive the 2D drawings automatically. Which means it's exactly the other way around: First you do the 3D, then the systems does the 2D view for you, then you add your dimension and annotations to make it a useful drawing to manufacture after. Nowadays, the model is the driving part, and the drawing is driven. Even annotations etc are more and more done in 3D, because the model can then be sent to manufacturers that program their CNC machines accordingly. CAD-CAM, you remember? Everybody was talking about it in the 80's, now it's boring reality. (OK, almost boring, it's still pretty cool. But not when you do it as a profession 24/7)
Or you use the model for FEM analysis or BEM or MBS or CFD or whatever three-letter-abbreviation you like. Or we do this "Digital Mockup" thing that is hyped everywhere but actually practiced since the Dark Ages of CAD.
So the bottom line is: forget about drawings. They present just one limited view of your design. And today, nobody bothers anymore creating them in the right perspective, it's done automatically by your CAD-system, using your 3D model, which is always the first step. OK, maybe over lunch you do a rough 2D sketch on a napkin first and then a rough 3D sketch, but right thereafter you do some serious 3D modelling.
Re:seriously, the problem I don't see an answer to
on
Searching by Shape...
·
· Score: 1
the sketches have to be 2-d for matching. Think 3D. In Solid Modelling, "sketching" means creating a 3D volume with rough dimensions by either combining volume primitives (spheres, cylinders, cones, blocks etc) or by combining extruded profiles. Have you read the article? They talk about boxes they create around 3D features, so it's quite obvious that the sketch is in 3D, too.
Thank you, Sir or Lady!
Finally someone with a clue, in here. As you and I already pointed out, we are talking 3D sketching here or selecting from a database. This has nothing to do with drawing funny lines in MS Paint (or GIMP for that matter).
Have to wonder why they'd be starting with a mouse interface when webcams are so cheap these days
Please, allow me to scream RTFA!!
Several people in here talk about how poorly one can sketch with a mouse. What mouse??? We are talking about Solid Modeling, folks! 3D, ya know?!
In that context, "sketching" means drawing up some 3D parts with very rough dimesnions by either using solid primitives or protruding/extruding profiles. And most probably we are talking about users who sit in an office environment, far away from actual parts or physical prototypes (in case they even exist yet). Please, read the article completely before posting comments!
...I guess the figure of 80% is over-estimated. Sure, today you can't have all the partnumbers in your head, but that's where your PDM system comes in: You categorize your assemblies/sub-assemblies/parts by chosing from a list of pre-defined designations. Later on, you search with exactly the same list and get your answers. Not pretty, but it works.
Or you use your companies spare parts catalogue (which I do sometimes). Quite handy... Oh, and just for the record: I work for the world's second-biggest truck manufacturer for quite some years now, so I'm not exactly new to this business.
Having said this, I must say that I naturally welcome every piece of research into this. So if the shape-searching guys really produce something useful, I think we will be one of the first to license this technology.
I wrote it already in a reply a little bit higher up in the tree: I think what they didn't realise was how much all the small thing added to the immersive effect:
- having to type in passwords
- having to punch in PINs
- browsing through emails like you would do at you own computer (goddammit you
where at home at you own computer)
- having all conversations, notes, emails, pictures neatly stored in your data vault
- having to drag'n'drop your weapons into the arsenal, fitting them into the available space
- having to take care of type of ammo and the need to change to other weapons when you ran out of a specific type
Warren Spector tried to make us believe that this was non-essential rubbish, that could easily be taken away without damaging the game itself. He was utterly wrong. The original game played (almost) in our time and the things we had to deal with felt like contemporary items (email, PINs, passwords...) and so the whole had an huge immersive effect. As in contrast to DX2:IW, where you feel you play a character in a far future, to which you have no connection to and where everything happens just by right-clicking your mouse on the appropriate item. How sad...
Warren S called it "streamlined experience". I would call it "greatly reduced depth". Others may call it "fiasco brought about by fools tinkering with something they didn't understand".
We may have played different games, then. DE was great, because it actually dared to bother you with such stuff as to type in passwords, punch in PINs and read through emails. All that stuff had an immersive effect and added greatly to the other things like sneaking around, overhearing conversations etc. And you got this wonderful archiving system, where a notbook would record all conversations and all notes ever received.
In DX2-IW you still receive passwords and PINs, but you never needed to actually type in them. And the emails are vmails, giving you no possibility to read/hear them again for later reference. The interface is much too streamlined - it shows that the game was aimed for console play, where a keyboard is non-existent. I was very disappointed when playing the demo, and after having finished the complete game I was still somewhat disappointed about all the lost depth. Sure, the DX2-IW story was nice (however not that outrageous cool as in DE), but it couldnt save the game from being mediocre.
Then what is it that holds you there? I didn't want to work in a place full of false work mates with their small and bigger intriques, full of control-fixated and title-and-hierachy-obsessed bosses, etc. So I left 6 years ago. Probably for good, but I decide that on a per-year basis.
In Germany you can buy these chips and even buy kids
On behalf of the German people I strongly deny that you can buy babies, kids, teenagers or children of any kind over here. In fact, we always lease them, since this reduces your risk and is deductable on your income tax. Oh, and about this chip tuning - we simply reprogram their amnesia helmets via bluetooth.
... but I just can't resist plugging hostip.info which attempts to geolocate IP addresses to a latitude / longitude map (and give a nice zoom-in if you're located or (if you're unknown) once you have put in your details...
Yeah right, exactly what we need: A service that can map your IP to a physical/geological address. And you guys cry about spam, RFID tags, [insert your least favorite type of invasion of privacy here].
In Sweden there is an analogon to this service: Urkund. They offer the possibility to the student exclude your file from public access. Only your home school//college/university will have access (this is regulated by the law).
They also mention that your copyright is not affected.
Well, I must admit that I welcome that my university has begun to use the service more frequently. For me, there is no excuse for cheating sutdents.
To the world outside, especially to someone who wants to hire you, a degree is a proof of your knowledge. So they don't have to check with you in person, whether you know anything at all (often, they don't have the knowledge themselves).
It's like certificates for commercial websites: Do you accept their pledge to be trustworthy, or do you want to see a valid certificate?
Dr.Blob's Organism ("...a fast-paced shooter in which you blast gelatinous one-celled organisms as they try to escape from a Petri dish.")
I must be ill-conditioned somehow, because I read "Dr. Blob's Orgasm", which made perfectly sense with "in which you blast gelatinous one-celled organisms"
Slashdot Mirror
- Excel is an extremely poor tool for doing anything other than basic graphs and calculations. For engineering purposes, it's near useless.
Don't know what kind of engineer you are but in the Real World (TM) you will find lots of engineers doing some quick & dirty calculations in Excel.Sure, you could use Matlab or Mathematica or Maple but have you checked the price of these programs? I managed to get us some licenses of MathCad (and make a point of using them as much as possible) but even this is not for free. Well, Octave is, even free as in beer-drunken speech, but the point I want to make is that for a user whos Windows-based PC came with MS Office installed, Excel is the easiest way. And in combination with SQL and VBA it's often powerful enough...
As long as you don't require graphs with more than 32768 items in one data series or more than 65536 rows on your spread sheet. But for smaller data series (say up to 10000 rows, with 20 columns) Excel is pretty OK.
The one thing I hate about Excel is that it is too easy to just put together some quick & dirty calculations. Regardless with what intention I start, over time my Excel sheets always grow beyond what they intially where planned for. And then it's getting ugly, becuase after some time you lose control over the relationships of the cells and equations. Sure, there are some tools for that, but not enough.
And VBA is great, too, but when you just make a print-out for a colleague, you only get the spread sheet, not the connections between the cells and not the VBA-routines in the background. I now try to make up for all my past Excel-crimes by step-wise converting everything important to MathCad. Because there (as in Mathematica or Maple) a print-out shows all the underlying equations and algorithms in a natural and easy-to-understand way.
So, to return to where I started: Excel is not "near-useless for engineering purposes". I consider myself a decent engineer and have done serious work in Excel, and I have some Excel-addicted colleagues, who I really admire (and sometimes envy) for their work.
Yes, it's the sound of enevibility...
Only this time it's the evil agent himself who has his face pressed down to the rail. And there is no sudden backflip-like jump out of it.
I still get shot by Waffen SS guys, but the dogs are always fun to shoot!
Even more fun is to knife the dogs.
What, exactly, does f*ck mean? How do you pronounce *?
.-)
Maybe that's why the older kids laughed... Thanks for finally giving me an explanation, after all these years...
But seriously, KDE is looking good, some of the nice features like viewing inside zip files and such will help win over windows users.
:)
Nah, while looking inside zip files is nice, it's nothing that doen't exist in the Windows world. It all but not exists. ? Or something.
The one really neat thing is thumbnails for text documents and pdf files, which I have not seen somewhere else (I expect a full flame by MacOS X users any minute though). But as I wrote somewhere else, I really believe it's the applications that make a difference in converting a user to a different OS. To me, the desktop is just a tool to organize the icons of the applications I use to do some real work with. Me with my "Joe User" basecap on couldn't care less whether it's going to be KDE or Gnome.
"I didn't do it!"
(Fellow moderators: please try to learn that ancient craft of RTFA before modding something up in the sky)
"After users have learned to use a bunch of different desktops, which one do they find easiest to use, and most useful?" This is a fair questions, and the answer actually matters. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux (Gnome usually) on a daily basis and I think Linux wins this one.
I think, while this may be the case, it's actually the applications we should look on. To me, a desktop on you computer is like the physical desktop at work: Sure, some come with nice drawers and others com with tables that can be lifted electrically, rather than by cranking. But it's the tools you use for work that matter, not how neatly they are sorted.
To me, any improvement on Gimp, OpenOffice, (etc) is more important than some new feature in KDE or Gnome. Because the desktop is just a way to get to the applications I do my work in.
Linux has been desktop-ready since 1991, it's just that the majority of users haven't been ready for it.
God, how I hate reading this. It's people like you with arrogant statements like your's above that give the OpenSource community a bad reputation.
Face it: What is revolutionary about GNU/Linux is its model of development and distributuion. Technically speaking, for a typical Joe User there is little or nothing new. Regarding the GUI, we mostly take the best (or what we perceive to be best) from other OS, like Windows, MacOS, Irix, AmigaOS etc. Nothing wrong with this approach, but it's not that the Linux GUI is constantly 5 years ahaed of what users can grasp.
It's become clear that the Linux desktop has all but surpassed proprietary alternatives.
Yeah, hehe, because of this I even thought that linked article containts some rant about KDE's supposedly poor usability. Talking 'bout someone using a phrase without having understood it...
In related news: When I was a very little kid, I used the word "f*ck" sometimes because it seem to have an odd effect on the older kids. I really didn't know what it meant, though.
US is already union of states. Frankly, this "revolutionary" idea EU is pursuing right now is quite similar to what US adopted 200 years ago.
On the surface, this seems to be true. However, the former colonies in America had not that long a tradition of national goverments than Europe had (has). You can't compare US (young states of quite same culture) with EU (old states, quite different culture). Just my 2 cents (Eurocents that is)...
Searching by shape is a bit of a nutty idea, if you ask me... words can describe shapes quite well.
... and then you press "I'm lucky".
Yeah right, try to describe these.
I can see you sitting in front of your computer and typing into 3D-Google "L-shaped thing with small hollow cylinder on one side and two small holes on the other with a funny angle to it, looking like the alien gun in last weeks X-files, but without the pyramid on top"
Dude, don't believe in the AutoDesk propaganda. (Yes, for a design engineer, bashing AutoCAD is like bashing QBasic (or even better: GWBasic) for a professional programmer)
In the *real* world, we model in 3D and derive the 2D drawings automatically. Which means it's exactly the other way around: First you do the 3D, then the systems does the 2D view for you, then you add your dimension and annotations to make it a useful drawing to manufacture after. Nowadays, the model is the driving part, and the drawing is driven. Even annotations etc are more and more done in 3D, because the model can then be sent to manufacturers that program their CNC machines accordingly. CAD-CAM, you remember? Everybody was talking about it in the 80's, now it's boring reality. (OK, almost boring, it's still pretty cool. But not when you do it as a profession 24/7)
Or you use the model for FEM analysis or BEM or MBS or CFD or whatever three-letter-abbreviation you like. Or we do this "Digital Mockup" thing that is hyped everywhere but actually practiced since the Dark Ages of CAD.
So the bottom line is: forget about drawings. They present just one limited view of your design. And today, nobody bothers anymore creating them in the right perspective, it's done automatically by your CAD-system, using your 3D model, which is always the first step. OK, maybe over lunch you do a rough 2D sketch on a napkin first and then a rough 3D sketch, but right thereafter you do some serious 3D modelling.
the sketches have to be 2-d for matching.
Think 3D. In Solid Modelling, "sketching" means creating a 3D volume with rough dimensions by either combining volume primitives (spheres, cylinders, cones, blocks etc) or by combining extruded profiles. Have you read the article? They talk about boxes they create around 3D features, so it's quite obvious that the sketch is in 3D, too.
Thank you, Sir or Lady!
Finally someone with a clue, in here. As you and I already pointed out, we are talking 3D sketching here or selecting from a database. This has nothing to do with drawing funny lines in MS Paint (or GIMP for that matter).
Have to wonder why they'd be starting with a mouse interface when webcams are so cheap these days
Please, allow me to scream RTFA!!
Several people in here talk about how poorly one can sketch with a mouse. What mouse??? We are talking about Solid Modeling, folks! 3D, ya know?!
In that context, "sketching" means drawing up some 3D parts with very rough dimesnions by either using solid primitives or protruding/extruding profiles.
And most probably we are talking about users who sit in an office environment, far away from actual parts or physical prototypes (in case they even exist yet).
Please, read the article completely before posting comments!
...I guess the figure of 80% is over-estimated. Sure, today you can't have all the partnumbers in your head, but that's where your PDM system comes in: You categorize your assemblies/sub-assemblies/parts by chosing from a list of pre-defined designations. Later on, you search with exactly the same list and get your answers. Not pretty, but it works.
Or you use your companies spare parts catalogue (which I do sometimes). Quite handy...
Oh, and just for the record: I work for the world's second-biggest truck manufacturer for quite some years now, so I'm not exactly new to this business.
Having said this, I must say that I naturally welcome every piece of research into this. So if the shape-searching guys really produce something useful, I think we will be one of the first to license this technology.
- - having to take care of type of ammo and the need to change to other weapons when you ran out of a specific type
Warren Spector tried to make us believe that this was non-essential rubbish, that could easily be taken away without damaging the game itself. He was utterly wrong.The original game played (almost) in our time and the things we had to deal with felt like contemporary items (email, PINs, passwords...) and so the whole had an huge immersive effect. As in contrast to DX2:IW, where you feel you play a character in a far future, to which you have no connection to and where everything happens just by right-clicking your mouse on the appropriate item. How sad...
Warren S called it "streamlined experience". I would call it "greatly reduced depth". Others may call it "fiasco brought about by fools tinkering with something they didn't understand".
We may have played different games, then. DE was great, because it actually dared to bother you with such stuff as to type in passwords, punch in PINs and read through emails. All that stuff had an immersive effect and added greatly to the other things like sneaking around, overhearing conversations etc. And you got this wonderful archiving system, where a notbook would record all conversations and all notes ever received.
In DX2-IW you still receive passwords and PINs, but you never needed to actually type in them. And the emails are vmails, giving you no possibility to read/hear them again for later reference. The interface is much too streamlined - it shows that the game was aimed for console play, where a keyboard is non-existent. I was very disappointed when playing the demo, and after having finished the complete game I was still somewhat disappointed about all the lost depth. Sure, the DX2-IW story was nice (however not that outrageous cool as in DE), but it couldnt save the game from being mediocre.
Then what is it that holds you there? I didn't want to work in a place full of false work mates with their small and bigger intriques, full of control-fixated and title-and-hierachy-obsessed bosses, etc. So I left 6 years ago. Probably for good, but I decide that on a per-year basis.
In Germany you can buy these chips and even buy kids
On behalf of the German people I strongly deny that you can buy babies, kids, teenagers or children of any kind over here. In fact, we always lease them, since this reduces your risk and is deductable on your income tax. Oh, and about this chip tuning - we simply reprogram their amnesia helmets via bluetooth.
The Delta Force series from Novalogic has some rooms servers especially for newbies.
... but I just can't resist plugging hostip.info which attempts to geolocate IP addresses to a latitude / longitude map (and give a nice zoom-in if you're located or (if you're unknown) once you have put in your details...
Yeah right, exactly what we need: A service that can map your IP to a physical/geological address. And you guys cry about spam, RFID tags, [insert your least favorite type of invasion of privacy here] .
In Sweden there is an analogon to this service: Urkund. They offer the possibility to the student exclude your file from public access. Only your home school//college/university will have access (this is regulated by the law). They also mention that your copyright is not affected.
Well, I must admit that I welcome that my university has begun to use the service more frequently. For me, there is no excuse for cheating sutdents.
To the world outside, especially to someone who wants to hire you, a degree is a proof of your knowledge. So they don't have to check with you in person, whether you know anything at all (often, they don't have the knowledge themselves).
It's like certificates for commercial websites: Do you accept their pledge to be trustworthy, or do you want to see a valid certificate?
Dr.Blob's Organism ("...a fast-paced shooter in which you blast gelatinous one-celled organisms as they try to escape from a Petri dish.")
I must be ill-conditioned somehow, because I read "Dr. Blob's Orgasm", which made perfectly sense with "in which you blast gelatinous one-celled organisms"
Comments unnecessary. Instead, check this out: http://www.the-brights.net/