For me, there are too many issues with Excel. I prefer Lotus 3-2-1.... the spreadsheet for dyslexics. It's a good thing Excel doesn't make cars because they would crash at least two or three times a day for no apparent reason. The driver would often be hurt but the car would have no permanent damage. The driver would have to accept that's just how it is, restart the car, and begin the trip all over again. Sometimes the car would fail to restart after a crash, and the engine would have to be reinstalled. This would have to be accepted as well. The car owner would be forced to buy a new model every 18 months, and the old model would have no resale value. Each new model would be bigger than the previous one, require more gas, and would operate differently. Furthermore, parts on the old car would not be interchangeable with parts on the new car. You could call a special phone number and talk to product support if you have a problem, but the support would be staffed by people who know less about the car than you do. You could opt for a special Macintosh model that's powered by the sun, but it would only run on 5% of the roads you use and require different driving skills.
Quite frankly, I have never understood the lack of appeal of these programs, I managed, by myself, 1000's of welders over a nation, including shut downs, turn around's and new builds. Night shifts, day shifts and continental shifts. All procedures and continuity, welding on alloys in all positions, thickness's and with 9 major fusion processes for boiler code, pressure piping and nuclear, EN,ASME,API and AWS, and with so much trouble that I don't know how you cope without one of these programs! Standardization and homogenization is the key.
I think sometimes we ignore the fact how computer programs can make our lives easier when the old ways just take up time and effort and don't work as well.
js55, it is 2014 you really need to drag yourself out of the 80's and modernise! :)
46,
Good stuff. You made me laugh. Thanks. I always appreciate good sarcasm. Its an art.
In any case, perhaps I'll drag myself out of the 80's when something of a more recent vintage proves its worth. Seems that robotics, pulsing, the early short circuit machines, etc. made similar technological promises only to prove of limited value. The fancy short circuit machines and non synergic pulsers are but dinosaurs now gathering dust in some corner of the shop, a testament to slick salesmanship and a gullible procurement manager.
Somehow I suspect true standardization and homogenization, ideas of much more hoary vintage, have stood the test of time, whereas these programs have not.
If necessity is the mother of invention, or procurement, I have just not seen the necessity as yet. Its just too easy otherwise.
I will grant this however, for those not well versed in Code requirements the fail safe elements of these programs could be valuable. However, with a working knowledge of the code they seem but a crutch. I may walk with a limp but I have long since tossed aside my crutches. And since you don't know how I cope without these programs I will just have to conclude some will always need their crutches. :)
Thank you sir!, it is far better to make a man laugh than angry! If I could make one person laugh every day for the rest of my life, I would die a happy man.
