I think eventually everything will have to be open source otherwise we'll just end up going in circles ad infinitum (not that MS, ACAD et al wouldn't love this). Software eventually reaches the "good enough" milestone and there just isn't a compelling reason to upgrade (except for file exchange compatibility and support issues, of course).
Paul
> Hi Paul
>
> you have hit one of my bare nerves with this.
> And it concerns PLCs which for some strange reason are still used in
> process plants.
> Years ago we automated one string of power stations using a commonly
> available PLC brand. The majors drivers for our choice were "no
> brainers"; good logic, good transmission interfaces and plenty of
> programmers familiar with the more common PLC languages.
> Then the generation competitors came along. They wanted us to do the
> work but using a more obscure PLC/DCS language package. We explained
the
> pitfalls, but they were adamant, so we did it. They ripped it all out
a
> few years ago because they could no longer find programmers who could
> write the code. For what its worth, the hardware was marginally
> superior, but nobody could quickly understand the programming
language.
> In my opinion, it's the same with applications; go for the ubiquitous,
> even if its crap. Stay with the big names if you have mouths to feed.
I
> hate it.
> Two or three good competitive codes, challenged every 5 or so years
is,
> in my opinion, all we need in any application.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Bowers [mailto:pbowers@pipingdesign.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 11:16 PM
> To: PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [PipingDesign] Software Narrows Employment Options
>
>
> Here's a pretty good article about the proliferation of software, cost
> of training, the seemingly endless upgrade cycle and more:
>
>
http://garysworld.blogspot.com/2004/07/incredible-shrinking-job-market-h
> ow.html
>
> "As each company has diverged from the rest of the pack, it has
become,
> over a short period of time, dependent upon workers who know how to
use
> the software the firm has chosen to use. This effectively narrows, not
> only the employer's selection of qualified applicants, but the number
of
> employers that any CAD technician can hope to be hired by. If you have
> fifteen years of Autocad experience and you've never learned anything
> about Pro-E, ArchiCad, DataCad or TurboCad, you will find yourself
> effectively barred from being hired by employers looking for workers
> skilled in those applications."
Received on Tue Jul 27 08:56:00 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 27 2008 - 20:24:04 EDT