From: Charles Overy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 25 2003 - 00:14:35 EET
I'm for making RP technology EASIER to use, not supporting unnecessarily
complex systems with certification.
(And of course protecting those obtuse systems with a monopoly. I have
never hired a MCSE as they tend to be more expensive and not very good at
creative, low cost, adaptable solutions that might include success stories
like Linux, PHP, POSTGRES, HTML, JAVA, 802.11b etc).
Ease of use is driven by an open, competitive, customer drive marketplace
with lots of user to vendor feedback, worldwide innovation and a broad and
diverse customer base.
That being said, I do think that, right now, with current technologies,
process education is a very good idea. I worry that particularly RP Service
bureaus, as well as vendors need to be careful not to over promise the
technologies particularly in niche markets. Different markets have
different input demands, jargon, and knowledge bases. We do architecture
and do it well, we don't do castings, jewelry, 5 axis machining, or product
development. Some end users are skilled enough to develop files that can be
run on any machine by most technicians. However, right now that is
unfortunately not the norm.
My RP "user friendly" to do list includes:
More technologies, (not certification for a few vendors products or
Further diversification into other marketplaces
Industry validation of product/ process niches
More open source standards including things like slicing algorithms
Burry STL below the user interface level.
Interface with parametric CAD modelers to create seamless "print drivers"
The most important things that I think could be accomplished as a group or
industry are things like marketing, and communication to CAD vendors and CAD
IMHO, RP needs to become a pervasive output paradigm NOT an arcane craft.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
Behalf Of Bathsheba Grossman
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:12 PM
Subject: RE: Complete RP certification
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Blasch, Larry wrote:
> I therefore amend my classifications to:
> Novice... I made a part once...
> Journeyman... I have the keys/password to the machine/lab... (Sorry, I
> think of politically correct term so flame away)
> Master... Not only do I know how to use the $#@! machines, but I
> get them to sing and dance...
> Consultant... I read an article on the subject, so now I can charge
> someone loads of money...
RP Certified Whiner - I have not less than 100 complaints about why
your technology and business model are wrong, but I don't want to do
any work or invest any money.
But maybe this is the same as "User".
> I repeat my original suggestion which was:
> "If we as a group could create a certification process similar to the MCSE
> test, It might benefit us all."
Is there a large enough body of generic knowledge for this to make
sense? This industry seems very brand-linked at present, and I'm not
sure to what extent knowledge and expertise transfer between systems.
-- Bathsheba Grossman phone (831)429-8224, fax (831)460-1242 Sculpting geometry bathsheba.com Solidscape prototyping protoshape.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Jan 17 2004 - 15:17:09 EET