On Wednesday, 1 January 2020 18:28:18 UTC, Bret Cahill  wrote:   
      
   > There are other factors at work here.  In the late 19th Century and much of   
   the 20th Century they didn't always have the money or tools for more   
   sophisticated designs requiring more components so mechanical design relying   
   on dove tails, i.e, using the    
   rims of a bicycle wheel for the brakes instead of a dedicated disk rotor,   
   seemed justified.   
      
   business is competitive. Things were far tighter in the past   
      
      
   > This is in stark contrast to the way electronic design has always been:    
   Most every component has always been for a single purpose.   
      
   Someone never heard of reflex receivers. I couldn't even begin to count the   
   number of circuits using bits for more than 1 purpose.   
      
      
   > As the electronics industry has mushroomed and taken over a lot of the tasks   
   of of machinery, i.e., electric motors vs engines -- there isn't much out   
   there more multi duty than crankcase oil    
      
   what does it do other than lubricate an engine & carry debris away?   
      
      
   > --, etc., it may have induced a psychological "follow the leader/winner"   
   effect on mechanical design as well.   
   >    
   > Using hot radiator water to heat your motor vehicle may be one great   
   exception, but it now seems ignorant/backwards to not go with dedicated   
   solutions, certainly when they are cost effective.    
      
   I don't think a blanket approach is really justified. Some products/markets   
   are best served with dedicated subsystems, some best served with older style   
   cost cutting designs. What has changed is the shift in the percentages of the   
   2.   
      
      
   > The emphasis last century on clever double duty solutions now seems to be an   
   almost rinky dink low brow distraction than something that really served the   
   needs of society.   
      
   It may be less used now in electronics, but that doesn't change its importance   
   in the past century, and it is still used.   
      
      
   > Even the usefulness of cleverness in _any_ field now seems to be in doubt.   
      
   that's an unusually foolish statement   
      
      
   > I mention this because there are a lot of low-hanging-fruit innovations in   
   many fields that were overlooked until now that should have been successful   
   decades ago.  Why?    
      
   An interesting topic that deserves more than a quick reply. As a society we do   
   seem slow to embrace a fair percentage of technological progress. Often the   
   reasons why are sound, not always.   
      
      
   > Obviously design mentality has changed.    
      
   to some extent, inevitably.   
      
   > Engineering is more arbitrary and psychological than many think.   
      
   some is. Much isn't. I'm not sure that tells us much.   
      
   > Some of this may be fallout from electronic design relying exclusively on   
   dedicated components.   
   >    
   >    
   > Bret Cahill   
      
   ...which it hasn't. The changes are more due to much lower costs, much greater   
   disposable wealth and the consequent rise of greater pressure for products to   
   [appear to] be better than the competition.   
      
      
   NT   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)