Rick,
On 04/13/2015 11:03 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
On 4/13/2015 12:14 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
Oh yes. Some people say that you should not overcomplex things. My
experience is that oversimplifying them can cause a long stretch of
complex problems and complex workarounds making the total solution more
expensive in development, customer relations and more complex than
starting with a more advanced solution, that actually attempts to
address the design issues. Ah well.
This is extremely good advice. The ultimate example of the
oversimplified design is the Muntz TV set, where few parts are
used, but they all interact with each other in mysterious
ways that depend on unknown unspecified parameters. The ultimate
example of the overcomplicated design is the Japanese VCR, circa 1980.
Schematic looks like it was designed by committee. The parts
count has become bloated to the point of redundancy. Neither
is desirable.
Having seen such a spectra, I learned to enjoy the simplicity of designs
actually addressing complex issues just right with a handful of
components. Some designs is more cleverly done than meets the eye at
first sight.
Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
