Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.
Despite its name, Moen's Law of Bicycles seems to hit the mark.

In my area, woodshops in schools are used only for adult education; the
kids don't get to touch the stuff. These kids grow up, and either move out
of the area or become engineers, marry someone in marketing, buy a newish,
salmon-colored stucco home, and after a few too many hours watching TLC,
set up a shop in the carhole.

There's nothing wrong with any of that, but it explains the selection of
tools at the big box stores, and increasingly, even at less general-focus
retail establishments.

This isn't merely a case of snootiness, as I'm just one of the bozos I
described*, and I clearly don't get everything I could out of my BT3100,
so I don't need a Powermatic 66. Yet.

Anyway, with that buildup, here's the link to Rick Moen's laws (don't miss
Tactical Stupidity and Moen's Law of Inefficient Immolation). Reprinted
without permission, below the link, is the bulk of the Law of Bicycles.
See what you think.

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.


*My house does have exterior stucco, but it's not a salmon hue. Instead,
it's a nasty blue/gray, perhaps left over from the mothball fleet or one
Keeter's router tables. The nasty gray/blue (mostly) covers nasty yellow,
which is probably not the original paint color, either, based on the other
homes in this late '50s subdivision. Oh, and I've only got basic cable, so
no TLC, and unfortunately, also no Woodwright's Shop. The two local PBS
stations seem to be too busy trying to help us throw "Idea Parties." Maybe
some of us need a Clue Party.

Ahem.

This could be interesting.

But, if you only have basic cable, you are paying too much and still don't
get the DIY (do it yourself) channel, and you aren't getting the best
woodworking show: Wood Works. Run right out and get satellite.

Steve

"Buttonhole McGee" wrote in message
news
Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.
Despite its name, Moen's Law of Bicycles seems to hit the mark.

In my area, woodshops in schools are used only for adult education; the
kids don't get to touch the stuff. These kids grow up, and either move out
of the area or become engineers, marry someone in marketing, buy a newish,
salmon-colored stucco home, and after a few too many hours watching TLC,
set up a shop in the carhole.

There's nothing wrong with any of that, but it explains the selection of
tools at the big box stores, and increasingly, even at less general-focus
retail establishments.

This isn't merely a case of snootiness, as I'm just one of the bozos I
described*, and I clearly don't get everything I could out of my BT3100,
so I don't need a Powermatic 66. Yet.

Anyway, with that buildup, here's the link to Rick Moen's laws (don't miss
Tactical Stupidity and Moen's Law of Inefficient Immolation). Reprinted
without permission, below the link, is the bulk of the Law of Bicycles.
See what you think.

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.


*My house does have exterior stucco, but it's not a salmon hue. Instead,
it's a nasty blue/gray, perhaps left over from the mothball fleet or one
Keeter's router tables. The nasty gray/blue (mostly) covers nasty yellow,
which is probably not the original paint color, either, based on the other
homes in this late '50s subdivision. Oh, and I've only got basic cable, so
no TLC, and unfortunately, also no Woodwright's Shop. The two local PBS
stations seem to be too busy trying to help us throw "Idea Parties." Maybe
some of us need a Clue Party.

Ahem.

"Buttonhole McGee"

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.

I think that's a bit overgeneralized. When people do become familiar,
like with bycicles, they demand better quality. True, the mass market is
for low grade products but even they are better due to technology than
say, the low end bikes just short years ago. Most hobbyists don't want
to pay top dollar for a tool but the top dollar tool is available for those
who want it. The law I believelin effect is the law of supply and demand.

Buttonhole McGee writes:

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.


*My house does have exterior stucco, but it's not a salmon hue. Instead,
it's a nasty blue/gray, perhaps left over from the mothball fleet or one
Keeter's router tables. The nasty gray/blue (mostly) covers nasty yellow,
which is probably not the original paint color, either, based on the other
homes in this late '50s subdivision. Oh, and I've only got basic cable, so
no TLC, and unfortunately, also no Woodwright's Shop. The two local PBS
stations seem to be too busy trying to help us throw "Idea Parties." Maybe
some of us need a Clue Party.

Yes, with a proviso. Someone, somewhere needs to take the responsibility for
educating the general run of customers in any particular area. The only way
you get guaranteed access in such a situation is to be either a manufacturer,
distributor or retailer. Unfortunately, not many start-up woodworkers
(bicyclers, computer users, HDTV users, whatever the hell) even seem able to
get the concept of spending some time in their local library or visually
grazing through a local bookstore/magazine shop.

In an area about which I know little (primarily because I don't give a large
rodent's tuchus), I found a couple funny articles on HDTV and home theater
systems in the local (Raanoke, VA) newspaper this morning. One guy posed
proudly in front of his seven remotes.

Astounding.

Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:47:13 +0000, Steven and Gail Peterson wrote:

But, if you only have basic cable, you are paying too much and still
don't get the DIY (do it yourself) channel, and you aren't getting the
best woodworking show: Wood Works. Run right out and get satellite.



Hmmm. That $16 per month I'm paying isn't getting me much, but it's as
much as I'm willing to pay.

To put it another way, there's no chance I'll get satellite. There is a
chance I'll just cancel cable.

Maybe someday I'll need a redwood-n-copper front gate, and I'll wish I had
this opportunity again. But I doubt it.

"Buttonhole McGee" skrev i melding
news
Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.

There is a simpler one, - a tiny bit cynical, though, but to the point.
I read it somewhere already in the 70'es:

"There's a fool born every minute.
If I can sell my tin chisel to one in ten
only once,
I'm still a millionaire."

Bjarte

I wondered where those extra cans of Rustoleum wandered off
to.

UA100

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:09:31 -0600, Unisaw A100 wrote:

I wondered where those extra cans of Rustoleum wandered off to.

UA100

Well, I have to say that shade looks a far sight better on a router table,
or a battleship, than peeling off my house.

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:20:06 GMT, Buttonhole McGee
wrote:

Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.
Despite its name, Moen's Law of Bicycles seems to hit the mark.

SNIP

Thats a pretty fair explanation and with woodworking it seemed to
happen right after the New Yankee Workshop started airing on PBS.

Norm made it all look so easy and suddenly woodworking went from
professional to hobbyist status. Prices on everything related started
taking major upward jumps, catalogs appeared from no where, tool
quality took a dive and a whole shopping cart full of useless gadgets
appeared.

So much for the value of television.

On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:52:57 -0800, "Fletis Humplebacker" ! wrote:


"Buttonhole McGee"

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.

Sucks, doesn't it. I've been wanting a combination head square for a
while now, and I was drooling over the Starret LV sells for around
$150- but I don't *need* something that accurate. So, I dug around
for forever and a day, and found that the only other version available
to me (that I could find) was a "Tool Shop" one for $10. I knew it
was going to suck. I came back to look at it at least three times,
and finally thought to myself "it can't be $140 worse" and brought the
sucker home. Turns out I was wrong. It's not only thin enough to
read the paper through, but the inner ring of the protractor is
powder-coated (guess how long that lasted before it started to grind)
and the screw that attaches it to the ruler actually falls right out
if the the head is removed for some reason. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!!!
Where in the %^&* are the reasonable-quality $60 tools? Guess they're
too expensive for the DiY/Walmart crowd, but not flashy enough for
*pros*. Dammit.


Aut inveniam viam aut faciam

Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.
Despite its name, Moen's Law of Bicycles seems to hit the mark.

In my area, woodshops in schools are used only for adult education; the
kids don't get to touch the stuff. These kids grow up, and either move out
of the area or become engineers, marry someone in marketing, buy a newish,
salmon-colored stucco home, and after a few too many hours watching TLC,
set up a shop in the carhole.

There's nothing wrong with any of that, but it explains the selection of
tools at the big box stores, and increasingly, even at less general-focus
retail establishments.

This isn't merely a case of snootiness, as I'm just one of the bozos I
described*, and I clearly don't get everything I could out of my BT3100,
so I don't need a Powermatic 66. Yet.

Anyway, with that buildup, here's the link to Rick Moen's laws (don't miss
Tactical Stupidity and Moen's Law of Inefficient Immolation). Reprinted
without permission, below the link, is the bulk of the Law of Bicycles.
See what you think.

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.


*My house does have exterior stucco, but it's not a salmon hue. Instead,
it's a nasty blue/gray, perhaps left over from the mothball fleet or one
Keeter's router tables. The nasty gray/blue (mostly) covers nasty yellow,
which is probably not the original paint color, either, based on the other
homes in this late '50s subdivision. Oh, and I've only got basic cable, so
no TLC, and unfortunately, also no Woodwright's Shop. The two local PBS
stations seem to be too busy trying to help us throw "Idea Parties." Maybe
some of us need a Clue Party.

Ahem.

On the other hand, if you just want a bicycle to tool around with the grandkids
for the few years that they will allow themselves to be seen with you, do you
really need a $3,000 2 lb aluminum specialty whizzit italian 47 speed grand
touring bicycle with corinthian leather saddlebags, or will a K-Mart 5 speed
suffice? Just like if you are tooling up to make tomato stakes do you really
need a PM66 and a couple dozen different LN planes? If you are a serious biker,
shop at a bike specialty store, spend the $3,000 and expect all the best in
bells and whistles. If a serious woodworker don't buy your serious tools at
K-Mart.

Dave Hall

Good woodworkers don't blame their tools. Yes it's nice to have good
tools... I have over $30,000 worth in my shop - and it's only my hobby
shop. I work at someone else's shop during the day. But to be honest I can
do all that I need on a Dewalt cheapo table saw as I can on a powermatic 66
for a hell of a lot less. If I'm a pro then of course I want good tools but
if I only turn the saw on once a month or less as an amateur then no. I see
nothing wrong with cheap (crap) tools. It allows those who don't have much
to do a lot for a price they can afford. If you have an obscene amount of
money then you buy what ever the hell you want regardless of your skill
level, which I see a lot at the local guild. There a lot of rich guys with
the best tools money can buy doing some increadibly ****ty work out there.


"Buttonhole McGee" wrote in message
news
Greetings, fellow ruminators, timber-trimmers, and cast-ahrn consumers.
While following some links related to my day job, I came across a very
nice explanation for the poor quality of woodworking tools and supplies.
Despite its name, Moen's Law of Bicycles seems to hit the mark.

In my area, woodshops in schools are used only for adult education; the
kids don't get to touch the stuff. These kids grow up, and either move out
of the area or become engineers, marry someone in marketing, buy a newish,
salmon-colored stucco home, and after a few too many hours watching TLC,
set up a shop in the carhole.

There's nothing wrong with any of that, but it explains the selection of
tools at the big box stores, and increasingly, even at less general-focus
retail establishments.

This isn't merely a case of snootiness, as I'm just one of the bozos I
described*, and I clearly don't get everything I could out of my BT3100,
so I don't need a Powermatic 66. Yet.

Anyway, with that buildup, here's the link to Rick Moen's laws (don't miss
Tactical Stupidity and Moen's Law of Inefficient Immolation). Reprinted
without permission, below the link, is the bulk of the Law of Bicycles.
See what you think.

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/lexicon.html#moenslaw-bicycles

Moen's Law of Bicycles

"Good customers make for good products". This is my explanation for
why an ignorant customer base causes merchandise quality to decline,
on account of unhealthy market dynamics, e.g., in retail computer
hardware and software. In the mid-1970s, bicycles suddenly became very
popular in the USA. The masses suddenly entered the market, few
knowing anything about bicycles. Many could distinguish poorly if at
all between good equipment and bad; good customer service and bad.
Consequently, poorly made bicycles (which cost less to make) undercut
well made ones (and poor customer service out-earned the good
variety), because their superior value ceased to be perceived. Over
time, overall quality of available bicycles declined considerably,
almost entirely because of this dynamic with customers, recovering
only after the fad ended, years later.

Quality thrives only when people can tell the difference. When they
haven't a clue about products and how they work, schlock merchandise
prevails. One can see this process at work in retail computing gear
and softwa People who know least about computing always insist most
on achieving bottom dollar. In a way, this is understandable: You want
to exercise control over the process, and, if you're dirt-ignorant
about computing, the only place to exercise control is over price.
Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.


*My house does have exterior stucco, but it's not a salmon hue. Instead,
it's a nasty blue/gray, perhaps left over from the mothball fleet or one
Keeter's router tables. The nasty gray/blue (mostly) covers nasty yellow,
which is probably not the original paint color, either, based on the other
homes in this late '50s subdivision. Oh, and I've only got basic cable, so
no TLC, and unfortunately, also no Woodwright's Shop. The two local PBS
stations seem to be too busy trying to help us throw "Idea Parties." Maybe
some of us need a Clue Party.

Ahem.

Prometheus asks:

knew it
was going to suck. I came back to look at it at least three times,
and finally thought to myself "it can't be $140 worse" and brought the
sucker home. Turns out I was wrong. It's not only thin enough to
read the paper through, but the inner ring of the protractor is
powder-coated (guess how long that lasted before it started to grind)
and the screw that attaches it to the ruler actually falls right out
if the the head is removed for some reason. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!!!
Where in the %^&* are the reasonable-quality $60 tools? Guess they're
too expensive for the DiY/Walmart crowd, but not flashy enough for
*pros*. Dammit.

Highland Hardware has a square for $40 that might fit your needs. I've got a
similar one, same price, and it serves decently, but is not as good as my
Craftsman American made...but that costs, IIRC, about $120.

Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...

snip

Sucks, doesn't it. I've been wanting a combination head square for a
while now, and I was drooling over the Starret LV sells for around
$150- but I don't *need* something that accurate. So, I dug around
for forever and a day, and found that the only other version available
to me (that I could find) was a "Tool Shop" one for $10. I knew it
was going to suck. I came back to look at it at least three times,
and finally thought to myself "it can't be $140 worse" and brought the
sucker home. Turns out I was wrong. It's not only thin enough to
read the paper through, but the inner ring of the protractor is
powder-coated (guess how long that lasted before it started to grind)
and the screw that attaches it to the ruler actually falls right out
if the the head is removed for some reason. ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGH!!!
Where in the %^&* are the reasonable-quality $60 tools? Guess they're
too expensive for the DiY/Walmart crowd, but not flashy enough for
*pros*. Dammit.

I've had a couple different combination squares over the years, and although
I can't speak for the Starrett, every one I've ever used the spring & screw
would fall out if removed from the ruler. This includes the combo head,
center finder head and the protractor head.

--
Nahmie
The law of intelligent tinkering: save all the parts.

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:12:08 GMT, "johnny rotten"
wrote:

Good woodworkers don't blame their tools. Yes it's nice to have good
tools... I have over $30,000 worth in my shop - and it's only my hobby
shop. I work at someone else's shop during the day. But to be honest I can
do all that I need on a Dewalt cheapo table saw as I can on a powermatic 66
for a hell of a lot less. If I'm a pro then of course I want good tools but
if I only turn the saw on once a month or less as an amateur then no.

Actually it's almost exactly the opposite. A professional's skill and
experience allows him/her to comprensate for the failings of his/her
tools. An inexperienced worker can't do that nearly as well and needs
good tools.

(The issue of productivity for the professional is another matter.)


--RC


Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?

Buttonhole McGee wrote:

Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.

Oh, I dunno. I have a $200 computer that's got a 40 gig hard drive, a 2 gig
processor, half a gig of ram... Sure, I got crap video and crap audio, a
crap mobo with only two slots, a comparatively small drive, no DVD stuff,
but damn, I got a ripping fast, perfectly functional computer for $200.

It wasn't all that long ago that I paid $800 for a CPU. Not that much
longer ago that $1/megabyte was a steal for hard drives. (That's really
scary when you think that the average low spec drive today in 2004 is
probably 80 gigs. By the old standard, it's an $81,920 drive. For $75.
Damn.)

I just don't think it's quite a fair comparison. How much do people NEED a
computer to do? My cheap computer does everything the dual 5 GHz 10
terabyte 4 gigabyte mega ultra hoo flutzy of my dreams could do, only
slower, and maybe a little less of it. It spends 90% of its time with a
CPU load average of near 0%.

I think the fact that super el-crappo low budget Wal-Mart consumer computers
today are a lot faster than the one I'm using now is really great.

That's not at all the same thing as saying I love HF tools and I'm happy to
own my Suckmeister 3000 TS with extra sloppy arbor, double decibel, ultra
anemic motor, and extra flexible fence.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/

Silvan responds:


Oh, I dunno. I have a $200 computer that's got a 40 gig hard drive, a 2 gig
processor, half a gig of ram... Sure, I got crap video and crap audio, a
crap mobo with only two slots, a comparatively small drive, no DVD stuff,
but damn, I got a ripping fast, perfectly functional computer for $200.

It wasn't all that long ago that I paid $800 for a CPU. Not that much
longer ago that $1/megabyte was a steal for hard drives. (That's really
scary when you think that the average low spec drive today in 2004 is
probably 80 gigs. By the old standard, it's an $81,920 drive. For $75.
Damn.)

Computers are probably a special case. My first PC (not my first computer) cost
me about $2800, 20 meg hard drive, 640K RAM, 5-1/4" floppy, 12" amber screen,
and that was IT. I wanted to fill out the RAM (IIRC, to I gig), and was quoted
a price of $1100. Hard drive went belly up, and it cost me about $300 to
replace it with a 32MB version.

About a year ago, I bought a second hard drive for this computer: a 120 gig USB
portable that also works on my laptop. The laptop has only a 15 gig hard drive,
while this desktop came from Dell with a 120 gig (now considered fairly small,
since a buddy of mine got a 250 gig for about the same price, but that's what
18 months in computerland does: my hot 3 gig Pentium IV, with a gig of RAM is
now fairly slow [yeah, right], but only in comparison to some of the new
stuff).

I wonder what computers will change to when they finally switch over to 64 bit
paths and write some programs for that.

It should make keeping track of CAD woodworking drawings a lot easier.

Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx

My first response to Silvan went off too soon when I hit the wrong button.

Computers and tools both are more widely available in a profusion of types and
styles never before seen on the mass market. It's a good idea to remember that
when you can't buy a really good Stanley plane any more, you can now buy
Veritas and Lie Nielsen and Steve Knight planes. And when a lot of crap table
saws are on the market, a lot of imported table saws are effectively reaching
for the stars by providing lower cost cabinet saws of good, if not always
excellent, quality to a wider range of buyers than ever before.

There are certainly plenty of crappy tools on the market, but they are
generally easy to avoid. Buy from reputable dealers/distributors with good
return policies and don't expect to get something for nothing. If a type of
tool that has until recently cost $200 is now selling for $39.95, only a fool
would expect it to be the same quality as the $200 tool unless there's a major
change in the technology.

In other words, don't be a fool.



Charlie Self
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity
has made them good." H. L. Mencken

There is a reason for so many bad tools. Supply and demand. People want to
pay a very low price, so the supplier meets that price by cutting quality.
There are still a lot of good quality tools around, but I don't think the
demand is there as much. Also we are a throw away society, so people would
rather buy something cheep, use it up then buy another. We used to buy good
quality, and "if" it broke, we would repair it.

Charlie Self writes:

I wanted to fill out the RAM (IIRC, to I gig), and was quoted
a price of $1100.

Wouldja believe ONE MEG!

Jeez. Early morning fingers.

Charlie Self
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity
has made them good." H. L. Mencken

"Silvan" wrote in message

I just don't think it's quite a fair comparison. How much do people NEED
a
computer to do? My cheap computer does everything the dual 5 GHz 10
terabyte 4 gigabyte mega ultra hoo flutzy of my dreams could do, only
slower, and maybe a little less of it. It spends 90% of its time with a
CPU load average of near 0%.

Do the math and you can jusify the faster machine. Your computer may take
1.5 seconds to open a program. The new hot models can open that program in
1.1 seconds, saving you 0.4 seconds every time. Three times a day you save
1.2 seconds, times about 350 days in a typical years. For only a few
hundred dollars more, you can save an extra seven seconds a year. That is
time you can spend with your family instead of waiting for a computer. It is
not about the money, we're talking major quality of life issues here.

On 25 Nov 2004 13:31:38 GMT, (ToolMiser) wrote:

There is a reason for so many bad tools. Supply and demand. People want to
pay a very low price, so the supplier meets that price by cutting quality.
There are still a lot of good quality tools around, but I don't think the
demand is there as much. Also we are a throw away society, so people would
rather buy something cheep, use it up then buy another. We used to buy good
quality, and "if" it broke, we would repair it.


I agree. At the time you usually do not believe the tool is bad, but
will do specific job well. For some tools I buy the best I can find
and these tools are the ones I heavily rely on. Last month I spent
$185 on Starrett measuring tools--that's a lot of money compared to
buying the equivalent Stanley tools at about $24. Maybe I'll be more
likely to take care of expensive tools than throw-away tools. But if
you think about it, have there been times in the middle of a project
and an important tool broke? Recalling those times makes me buy the
best I can find, and if I can't afford it I'll wait or not buy it at
all.

Charlie,

I know you have been around long enough for this. I think tools--at least
the better ones--have been getting better and are more affordable. The
price you pay for a shop of better tools today is less, in terms of what
your paycheck will buy, than it was 30 years ago. The 12v Dewalt drill I
bought in June of 1993 cost $159 which is about what I would pay for a
BETTER grandson of that 12 volt drill today over 11 years later. My
craftsman wood lathe cost about $300 in 1973 and the same one (probably off
the same tooling but better components) was selling at Home Depot for $300
before it went on closeout this year for $199!!! My large bench drill press
cost $135.15 (Taiwanese, of course) in December of 1978. The same thing
would cost about the same today (and also Taiwanese or Chinese, of course).
I have a Milwaukee 3 v screwdriver that cost about $100 in the latter 80's
and is selling for about the same price today--in fact, I think I might be
able to get the 2 speed model for about that price or maybe a hair more
today.

Tools may not be dropping like the computers, but they are sure a good value
today. Twenty or 30 years ago I would not have given the Porter Cables or
Milwaukees a second look, because they were out of my price range. That is
not true today and not even true for people my kid's age.


"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Charlie Self writes:

I wanted to fill out the RAM (IIRC, to I gig), and was quoted
a price of $1100.

Wouldja believe ONE MEG!

Jeez. Early morning fingers.

Charlie Self
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than
Christianity
has made them good." H. L. Mencken

On 25 Nov 2004 13:31:38 GMT, (ToolMiser) wrote:

There is a reason for so many bad tools. Supply and demand. People want to
pay a very low price, so the supplier meets that price by cutting quality.
There are still a lot of good quality tools around, but I don't think the
demand is there as much. Also we are a throw away society, so people would
rather buy something cheep, use it up then buy another. We used to buy good
quality, and "if" it broke, we would repair it.

I think you've pin pointed it...
Also, put that together with the "Instant Gratification" generation,
and you have the demand for inexpensive and cheap tools. (I do think
there is a difference)

On 25 Nov 2004 10:56:03 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
calmly ranted:

My first response to Silvan went off too soon when I hit the wrong button.

Hey, premature newsgroupulation happens when you get older, Charlie.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Life is full of little surprises. * Comprehensive Website Development
--Pandora * http://www.diversify.com

I think people buy cheaper, lower quality tools when they need them, more
expensive, longer-lasting tools when they want them.

With a job in progress, completion is the major concern. When the job's
still a plan, we plan our purchases.

"mac davis" wrote in message
...
On 25 Nov 2004 13:31:38 GMT, (ToolMiser) wrote:

There are still a lot of good quality tools around, but I don't think the
demand is there as much.

I think you've pin pointed it...
Also, put that together with the "Instant Gratification" generation,
and you have the demand for inexpensive and cheap tools. (I do think
there is a difference)

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote in message
. com...

"Silvan" wrote in message

I just don't think it's quite a fair comparison. How much do people
NEED
a
computer to do? My cheap computer does everything the dual 5 GHz 10
terabyte 4 gigabyte mega ultra hoo flutzy of my dreams could do, only
slower, and maybe a little less of it. It spends 90% of its time with a
CPU load average of near 0%.

Do the math and you can jusify the faster machine. Your computer may take
1.5 seconds to open a program. The new hot models can open that program
in
1.1 seconds, saving you 0.4 seconds every time. Three times a day you
save
1.2 seconds, times about 350 days in a typical years. For only a few
hundred dollars more, you can save an extra seven seconds a year. That is
time you can spend with your family instead of waiting for a computer. It
is
not about the money, we're talking major quality of life issues here.

Eric Anderson writes:

I know you have been around long enough for this. I think tools--at least
the better ones--have been getting better and are more affordable. The
price you pay for a shop of better tools today is less, in terms of what
your paycheck will buy, than it was 30 years ago. The 12v Dewalt drill I
bought in June of 1993 cost $159 which is about what I would pay for a
BETTER grandson of that 12 volt drill today over 11 years later. My
craftsman wood lathe cost about $300 in 1973 and the same one (probably off
the same tooling but better components) was selling at Home Depot for $300
before it went on closeout this year for $199!!!

Yes. The powered tools have dropped. IIRC, I paid about $20 for a single speed
non-reversing, ungrounded, aluminum cased drill back around '56 or '57. It was
a wonder then, but a POS, and dangerous, by today's standards.

An equivalent drill today might run $25-35, but will add a variable speed
reversing feature, and quite possibly a hand operated chuck, with grounding and
a plastic case. That plastic case may not sound like much, but the first time
you drill into a live wire in a wall, you'll appreciate it.

Tools may not be dropping like the computers, but they are sure a good value
today. Twenty or 30 years ago I would not have given the Porter Cables or
Milwaukees a second look, because they were out of my price range. That is
not true today and not even true for people my kid's age.

There is a lot of complaining going on about cheap tools these days. That's
generally easily corrected. Avoid the cheap tools. As you note, today's costly
tools are much cheaper than the costly tools of 30 or so years ago, and are
generally better engineered. And today's costly tools, checked for inflation,
don't appear to cost quite so much after all.

Given time, even the cheesy stuff improves. I can remember my first view of a
Jet tool, a couple decades or so ago. There is almost no comparison with
today's Jet tools in terms of quality. The same is true of Grizzly and a couple
of others. Today's tools are far better than those from 20 years ago. Part of
that is simple development. Part is a learning process on the part of the
distributors who deal with the actual overseas factories. Part of it is a
learning process at those factories. And, so far, most of it is a benefit to
the tool user.



Charlie Self
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity
has made them good." H. L. Mencken

Charlie Self wrote:

Silvan responds:


Oh, I dunno. I have a $200 computer that's got a 40 gig hard drive, a 2
gig
processor, half a gig of ram... Sure, I got crap video and crap audio, a
crap mobo with only two slots, a comparatively small drive, no DVD stuff,
but damn, I got a ripping fast, perfectly functional computer for $200.

It wasn't all that long ago that I paid $800 for a CPU. Not that much
longer ago that $1/megabyte was a steal for hard drives. (That's really
scary when you think that the average low spec drive today in 2004 is
probably 80 gigs. By the old standard, it's an $81,920 drive. For $75.
Damn.)

Computers are probably a special case. My first PC (not my first computer)
cost me about $2800, 20 meg hard drive, 640K RAM, 5-1/4" floppy, 12" amber
screen, and that was IT. I wanted to fill out the RAM (IIRC, to I gig),
and was quoted a price of $1100. Hard drive went belly up, and it cost me
about $300 to replace it with a 32MB version.

About a year ago, I bought a second hard drive for this computer: a 120
gig USB portable that also works on my laptop. The laptop has only a 15
gig hard drive, while this desktop came from Dell with a 120 gig (now
considered fairly small, since a buddy of mine got a 250 gig for about the
same price, but that's what 18 months in computerland does: my hot 3 gig
Pentium IV, with a gig of RAM is now fairly slow [yeah, right], but only
in comparison to some of the new stuff).

I wonder what computers will change to when they finally switch over to 64
bit paths and write some programs for that.

That actually happened years ago. The DEC Alpha was a 64-bit processor and
had a 64-bit OS, Windows NT. Right now you can buy 64-bit machines off the
shelf at Best Buy and install 64-bit Linux on them (or you could download
the Windows Beta, but it's time-bombed for a year and still has a lot of 32
bit code).

It should make keeping track of CAD woodworking drawings a lot easier.

Not likely--that's really more of a programming issue and unless you have a
truly vast quantity of them (like Library of Congress vast) 32 vs 64 bit
isn't going to make much difference.

Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Silvan wrote:

Buttonhole McGee wrote:

Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.

Oh, I dunno. I have a $200 computer that's got a 40 gig hard drive, a 2
gig
processor, half a gig of ram... Sure, I got crap video and crap audio, a
crap mobo with only two slots, a comparatively small drive, no DVD stuff,
but damn, I got a ripping fast, perfectly functional computer for $200.

It wasn't all that long ago that I paid $800 for a CPU. Not that much
longer ago that $1/megabyte was a steal for hard drives. (That's really
scary when you think that the average low spec drive today in 2004 is
probably 80 gigs. By the old standard, it's an $81,920 drive. For $75.
Damn.)

I remember when there wasn't 80 gig of magnetic or electronic storage on the
entire planet. I remember when a 1 gig shop filled a couple of floors of a
large building.

My new laptop outperforms supercomputers that cost tens of millions of
dollars 20 years ago.

I just don't think it's quite a fair comparison. How much do people NEED
a
computer to do? My cheap computer does everything the dual 5 GHz 10
terabyte 4 gigabyte mega ultra hoo flutzy of my dreams could do, only
slower, and maybe a little less of it. It spends 90% of its time with a
CPU load average of near 0%.

I think the fact that super el-crappo low budget Wal-Mart consumer
computers today are a lot faster than the one I'm using now is really
great.

Moore's Law at work. Eventually they'll start hitting hard limits and the
pace of performance improvement will slow or stop. Right now development
is in the rapid-growth phase of the curve, kind of like aerospace was
between around 1920 to 1970, during which time they went from wooden
biplanes to footprints on the Moon, and even figured out one way to build a
starship. Since 1970 flight performance hasn't changed a great deal.
Stealth and so on are new, but they are peripheral to flight performance.

That's not at all the same thing as saying I love HF tools and I'm happy
to own my Suckmeister 3000 TS with extra sloppy arbor, double decibel,
ultra anemic motor, and extra flexible fence.


--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On 25 Nov 2004 23:54:24 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
wrote:


There is a lot of complaining going on about cheap tools these days. That's
generally easily corrected. Avoid the cheap tools. As you note, today's costly
tools are much cheaper than the costly tools of 30 or so years ago, and are
generally better engineered. And today's costly tools, checked for inflation,
don't appear to cost quite so much after all.

The PC router - 890 series - I just bought cost a bit under $200.
It's replacing a 28 yr old Craftsman that cost $50+ with single
speed, smaller motor, rougher adjustment, and a tendency to
go out of adjustment. That $50 has to be in the neighborhood
of $150 today.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:32:06 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski"
wrote:


Do the math and you can jusify the faster machine. Your computer may take
1.5 seconds to open a program. The new hot models can open that program in
1.1 seconds, saving you 0.4 seconds every time. Three times a day you save
1.2 seconds, times about 350 days in a typical years. For only a few
hundred dollars more, you can save an extra seven seconds a year. That is
time you can spend with your family instead of waiting for a computer. It is
not about the money, we're talking major quality of life issues here.


... and if you're running a virus checker in the background
that checks each file before it's opened, the difference is
more significant.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:02:56 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:


Moore's Law at work. Eventually they'll start hitting hard limits and the
pace of performance improvement will slow or stop. ...

Right now they're hitting hard temperature limits.

"GregP" wrote in message
The PC router - 890 series - I just bought cost a bit under $200.
It's replacing a 28 yr old Craftsman that cost $50+ with single
speed, smaller motor, rougher adjustment, and a tendency to
go out of adjustment. That $50 has to be in the neighborhood
of $150 today.

Probably quite a bit more. Isn't invested money generally supposed to double
every ten years or better? 28 years ago almost means that it would have
quadrupled. $50 x 2 x 2 x 2 = $400.00.

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 02:24:42 -0500, "Upscale"
wrote:

"GregP" wrote in message
The PC router - 890 series - I just bought cost a bit under $200.
It's replacing a 28 yr old Craftsman that cost $50+ with single
speed, smaller motor, rougher adjustment, and a tendency to
go out of adjustment. That $50 has to be in the neighborhood
of $150 today.

Probably quite a bit more. Isn't invested money generally supposed to double
every ten years or better? 28 years ago almost means that it would have
quadrupled. $50 x 2 x 2 x 2 = $400.00.


From the point of view of investment, yes, but I what I
was referring to was the value of the dollar: I'm guessing
that $50 28 yrs ago would be roughly equivalent to $150
now. And if our deficits keep going the way they are,
it will be $1,000 in 3-4 years....

In article ,
Silvan wrote:
Buttonhole McGee wrote:

Gradually, this effect tends to drive good merchandise out of the
market entirely, leaving a generous selection of cheap crud.

Oh, I dunno. I have a $200 computer that's got a 40 gig hard drive, a 2 gig
processor, half a gig of ram... Sure, I got crap video and crap audio, a
crap mobo with only two slots, a comparatively small drive, no DVD stuff,
but damn, I got a ripping fast, perfectly functional computer for $200.

It wasn't all that long ago that I paid $800 for a CPU. Not that much
longer ago that $1/megabyte was a steal for hard drives. (That's really
scary when you think that the average low spec drive today in 2004 is
probably 80 gigs. By the old standard, it's an $81,920 drive. For $75.
Damn.)

*Newbie*!! 'Way back when' $10/megabyte was a _good_ price. I shopped
long and hard, before laying out US$400 for a 40mb drive (ST 251-1).

grin

"Robert Bonomi" wrote in message

*Newbie*!! 'Way back when' $10/megabyte was a _good_ price. I shopped
long and hard, before laying out US$400 for a 40mb drive (ST 251-1).

Ha! You sound like you're just about my era. 1989, the hard drive in my
first computer was an 80 megger and it cost me $800.00. First time I
upgraded my ram, I went from one megabyte onboard to 4 megs. Cost me
$500.00.

Soon as I find a way to send all my four year old defunct hardware back
10-15 years, I'm gonna retire on the profit that I would have sold it for.
Of course, that hardware will include a note to invest in that stupid new
computer company called Microsoft.

GregP notes:


The PC router - 890 series - I just bought cost a bit under $200.
It's replacing a 28 yr old Craftsman that cost $50+ with single
speed, smaller motor, rougher adjustment, and a tendency to
go out of adjustment. That $50 has to be in the neighborhood
of $150 today.

You're probably close. And the changes in technology, whether in manufacturing
or in the item itself, tend to show up everwhere. My first new car was a '57
Chevy convertible, 283 V8 with the Duntov package (3/4 race cam, 11 or 11.5
compression ratio, dual 4 barrels, no suspension changes). It was a rocket in a
straight line, deadly in curves and didn't stop for ****. But it cost under 3
grand.

Of course, I was making about 55 bucks a week when I traded a '50 Studebaker on
the Chevy.

A car with similar speed today would probably cost 20 grand, maybe 25, but
additional features would include excellent handling, much (much, much, much)
better brakes and tires, and interior padding and belts and other features that
would give driver and passengers at least a chance of surviving a low to medium
speed crash, and some hope of making it out of a really bad mess. The '57 Chevy
interior was a killer all by itself. But, jeez, I loved that car!

Charlie Self
"Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity
has made them good." H. L. Mencken

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
My first new car was a '57
Chevy convertible, 283 V8 with the Duntov package (3/4 race cam, 11 or
11.5
compression ratio, dual 4 barrels, no suspension changes). It was a rocket
in a
straight line,

If you are over 50, this description makes you wet yourself. Those under
40 can go back to debating the best CD player for your car.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Charlie Self" wrote in message
My first new car was a '57
Chevy convertible, 283 V8 with the Duntov package (3/4 race cam, 11
or
11.5
compression ratio, dual 4 barrels, no suspension changes). It was a
rocket in a
straight line,

If you are over 50, this description makes you wet yourself. Those
under 40 can go back to debating the best CD player for your car.

.... and those of us in our 40's will talk about 8-tracks. ;-)

-- Mark