Have we been here before?

Featured Guest Blogger: Robert Mote

Motagg’s Blog by Robert Mote

Let’s connect on LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/robertmote

In my last post, I demonstrated how calculations are prepared using MS Word 2003. I get many engineers saying they would prefer to learn with Word 2007 or claim it is a better product. I am astounded to hear that they believe this but I also understand why they think that. I have gone through the process of learning to achieve the same result with Word 2007 and I would never claim Word 2007 is a better product. It is more problematic with graphic handling, the defaults are worse and there is more clicking action of the mouse button. Do not believe the hype.

Anyone who has gone through the computer age from the mid-1990’s is aware of the endless cycle of MS Office upgrading. It is looking stale now. We can expect a future of it too. The constant revision of MS Office products has strained credibility. Succeeding generations of engineers have given up on MS Word with each upgrade. “Upgrade” is not equal to “improved” or “better”. Upgrading to 2007 is fundamentally different to anything you have used before. Do you think you will get training from your company? I doubt it. Do you think it will be intuitive enough to learn on your own? Good luck!

Let’s rewind the clock and consider the selfish perspective of an engineering user, stuck in a time warp. [Read more...]

Are you Conventional?

Featured Guest Blogger: Robert Mote

Motagg’s Blog by Robert Mote

Let’s connect on LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/robertmote

The engineering analysis is always a hot topic, in any drawing office, on any project. Applying national standards, to the letter, and increasing levels of sophistication into the analysis to prove the design is adequate, is often revisited and debated throughout the project life. However, the process of preparing the engineering calculations is an unspoken subject almost anywhere in the world. Proving your design, on paper, to the same degree as the analysis, is  often in the way and a matter of faith. The engineer is only concerned with proving to themselves, rather than the reader, that the design is fit-for-purpose.

Engineers doing conventional calculations, often have to number the pages themselves, add titles, collect and arrange different software outputs.  These reports are often long on quantity, time-consuming to handle and short on quality. [Read more...]