Talk:1741: Work - Revision history

Flymousechiu at 22:00, 26 September 2022

2022-09-26T22:00:36Z

Davidy22 at 21:19, 11 January 2017

2017-01-11T21:19:02Z

Papayaman1000 at 14:46, 11 January 2017

2017-01-11T14:46:48Z

162.158.83.108 at 10:52, 29 October 2016

2016-10-29T10:52:57Z

162.158.2.54 at 10:16, 11 October 2016

2016-10-11T10:16:01Z

Arctother at 18:56, 9 October 2016

2016-10-09T18:56:38Z

RoyT at 07:37, 5 October 2016

2016-10-05T07:37:09Z

Jeudi Violist at 03:57, 5 October 2016

2016-10-05T03:57:47Z

108.162.215.235 at 00:42, 5 October 2016

2016-10-05T00:42:34Z

Davidy22: Fixing vandalism.

2016-10-04T18:42:03Z

Fixing vandalism.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:00, 26 September 2022
Line 37:		Line 37:
	All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)		All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
	:Huh? How so? I can buy all of those products in a store today, and while yes, the general products were in existence before/around the '50s, the Korean company that made my el-cheapo dollar store versions had to make the designs from scratch. Yes, they had a general idea on how to make it, that only goes so far into what's discussed. {{unsigned\|Papayaman1000}}		:Huh? How so? I can buy all of those products in a store today, and while yes, the general products were in existence before/around the '50s, the Korean company that made my el-cheapo dollar store versions had to make the designs from scratch. Yes, they had a general idea on how to make it, that only goes so far into what's discussed. {{unsigned\|Papayaman1000}}
		+
		+	Not saying that I've ever done that, but some of the curves might have been drawn with one hand while the engineer is scratching the butt-cheek with the other ;) [[User:Flymousechiu\|Flymousechiu]] ([[User talk:Flymousechiu\|talk]]) 22:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 11 January 2017
Line 36:		Line 36:

	All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)		All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
−	:Huh? How so? I can buy all of those products in a store today, and while yes, the general products were in existence before/around the '50s, the Korean company that made my el-cheapo dollar store versions had to make the designs from scratch. Yes, they had a general idea on how to make it, that only goes so far into what's discussed.	+	:Huh? How so? I can buy all of those products in a store today, and while yes, the general products were in existence before/around the '50s, the Korean company that made my el-cheapo dollar store versions had to make the designs from scratch. Yes, they had a general idea on how to make it, that only goes so far into what's discussed. {{unsigned\|Papayaman1000}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:46, 11 January 2017
Line 36:		Line 36:

	All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)		All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
		+	:Huh? How so? I can buy all of those products in a store today, and while yes, the general products were in existence before/around the '50s, the Korean company that made my el-cheapo dollar store versions had to make the designs from scratch. Yes, they had a general idea on how to make it, that only goes so far into what's discussed.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:52, 29 October 2016
Line 34:		Line 34:

	An engineer worked into the night? Maybe if the engineer had let a draftsman do the job for him all that time could have been saved. Mind you, ACAD is a drawing package. Modelling up that lamp assembly in any quarter decent 3D package is a tutorial exercise. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.54\|162.158.2.54]] 10:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)		An engineer worked into the night? Maybe if the engineer had let a draftsman do the job for him all that time could have been saved. Mind you, ACAD is a drawing package. Modelling up that lamp assembly in any quarter decent 3D package is a tutorial exercise. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.54\|162.158.2.54]] 10:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	All of these objects look like they were designed <= 1950. So no AutoCAD involved.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.108\|162.158.83.108]] 10:52, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:16, 11 October 2016
Line 32:		Line 32:

	It's a bit strange to emphasize the work that went into designing these things, but to completely fail to mention to work that went in to actually making them. Shades of Marx and the table's wooden brain? [[User:Arctother\|Arctother]] ([[User talk:Arctother\|talk]]) 18:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)		It's a bit strange to emphasize the work that went into designing these things, but to completely fail to mention to work that went in to actually making them. Shades of Marx and the table's wooden brain? [[User:Arctother\|Arctother]] ([[User talk:Arctother\|talk]]) 18:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	An engineer worked into the night? Maybe if the engineer had let a draftsman do the job for him all that time could have been saved. Mind you, ACAD is a drawing package. Modelling up that lamp assembly in any quarter decent 3D package is a tutorial exercise. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.54\|162.158.2.54]] 10:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 9 October 2016
Line 30:		Line 30:

	I think about design a lot and however many hours are spent on some products it never ceases to amaze me how the primary feature can fail so terribly, like pouring a liquid without the liquid spilling. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.235\|108.162.215.235]] 00:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)		I think about design a lot and however many hours are spent on some products it never ceases to amaze me how the primary feature can fail so terribly, like pouring a liquid without the liquid spilling. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.235\|108.162.215.235]] 00:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	It's a bit strange to emphasize the work that went into designing these things, but to completely fail to mention to work that went in to actually making them. Shades of Marx and the table's wooden brain? [[User:Arctother\|Arctother]] ([[User talk:Arctother\|talk]]) 18:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 :I'm no expert, but if impurities gets into the glass the color or refraction may change or the strength. And if it is a drinking glass there may be any kind of toxic products that may be used in creating window glass etc. that could not be allowed to enter the production. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 ::I wouldn't call myself an expert on glass in cups, either, but I've learned about FDA guidelines, studied manufacturing processes, and visited a glass production company once. The FDA has [http://www.nytimes.com/1991/02/20/garden/fda-issues-warnings-on-using-lead-crystal.html issued a warning] on lead crystal glass cups, and lead has been found in regular glass, and as you said there are many contaminants that can be present during manufacturing from any material but if the material comes in contact with food or drink (such as cups) special care has to be taken to avoid those toxins. I am not 100% sure this is done with drinking glass, but it makes sense. Even if nobody cares about getting toxins in drinking glasses, this comic is about "imaging the work that went into design" and not "knowing exactly what went into design". [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 03:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 Randall may, indeed, be annoyed about the cord switch, but there is nothing in the comic or the title text to suggest that. He does, however, have a strong opinion on the "cord switch _firing_ incident". Perhaps that bit of the explanation should be amended? [[User:RoyT|RoyT]] ([[User talk:RoyT|talk]]) 06:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:42, 5 October 2016
Line 26:		Line 26:

	Removed an abusive and trolling "disclaimer" asking us to evaluate our life choices and our support of the comic. Trolling is unwelcome. [[User:Enfield\|Enfield]] ([[User talk:Enfield\|talk]]) 17:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)		Removed an abusive and trolling "disclaimer" asking us to evaluate our life choices and our support of the comic. Trolling is unwelcome. [[User:Enfield\|Enfield]] ([[User talk:Enfield\|talk]]) 17:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	I think about design a lot and however many hours are spent on some products it never ceases to amaze me how the primary feature can fail so terribly, like pouring a liquid without the liquid spilling. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.215.235\|108.162.215.235]] 00:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :To 173.245.50.82, please remember to sign your posts. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 13:21, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-I wrote the transcript. Feel free to suck it so it's not so bare and write the explanation. Thanks. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 13:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
+I wrote the transcript. Feel free to change it so it's not so bare and write the explanation. Thanks. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 13:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 :Done ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 To prevent fire hazards, objects in California are not allowed to surpass a certain temperature, 140 °C if I'm correct . Can't find the actual law quick. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.230|162.158.114.230]] 18:01, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-I think Randall is an idiot when it comes to the problem.  I used to work for the research arm of the electronics multinational, Philips.  When a product design was "finished", it had to go to a special committee who decided where, exactly, on the product did the word "PHILIPS" and their little shield logo go - and (rarely) whether these things should be done in black or white.  It was VERY frequently the case that the committee would screw around before coming to come to a conclusion than the product took to design. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 20:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
+I think Randall underestimates the problem.  I used to work for the research arm of the electronics multinational, Philips.  When a product design was "finished", it had to go to a special committee who decided where, exactly, on the product did the word "PHILIPS" and their little shield logo go - and (rarely) whether these things should be done in black or white.  It was VERY frequently the case that the committee would take longer to come to a conclusion than the product took to design. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 20:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-I never wonder about those tiny, cheap plastic toys that come in Xmas crackers (UK) or the 25 cent toy vending machines (USA).  They are completely crappy things - but thinking that someone thought about what kind of toy should be made - then designed the shape of it, thought about the color of plastic to use, spent tens of thousands of dollars machining an injection mold for it - and STILL turned out a complete piece of junk... that's just sad.  I know it costs around $40,000 to make a mold like that - but those toys look like someone who was being paid very, very little, spent no more than an afternoon designing each one! I hope they don't have a family.  [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 20:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
+I often wonder about those tiny, cheap plastic toys that come in Xmas crackers (UK) or the 25 cent toy vending machines (USA).  They are completely crappy things - but thinking that someone thought about what kind of toy should be made - then designed the shape of it, thought about the color of plastic to use, spent tens of thousands of dollars machining an injection mold for it - and STILL turned out a complete piece of junk...it's anyone's guess what effort that took.  I know it costs around $40,000 to make a mold like that - but those toys look like someone who was being paid very, very little, spent no more than an afternoon designing each one!  [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 20:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-What a piece of shit. I just got out of my Product Development class. I remember having to deal with so many of these things that it's complete baloney. Product dev is nothing like this. [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 21:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
+What a coincidence. I just got out of my Product Development class. I remember having to deal with so many of these things that it's completely relatable. [[User:Jeudi Violist|Jeudi Violist]] ([[User talk:Jeudi Violist|talk]]) 21:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-Wow, that curve would be a bitch to draw in Photoshop. I still shudder... [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 21:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
+Wow, that curve would be a bitch to draw in AutoCAD. I still shudder... [[User:Papayaman1000|Papayaman1000]] ([[User talk:Papayaman1000|talk]]) 21:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
-If anything, I'll bet the memes listed are shorter than they really took (only months of tip-over tests? only 9 hours of meetings on the arm?? David Lang
+If anything, I'll bet the timeframes listed are shorter than they really took (only months of tip-over tests? only 9 hours of meetings on the arm?? David Lang {{unsigned ip|173.245.48.105}}
-I don't know anything about ass production, but is it true that "what compounds are allowed around the glass during production" matters?   It sounds like those martini recipes where one waves a bottle of vermouth towards the glass.   [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 05:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
+I don't know anything about glass production, but is it true that "what compounds are allowed around the glass during production" matters?   It sounds like those martini recipes where one waves a bottle of vermouth towards the glass.   [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 05:47, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 :I'm no expert, but if impurities gets into the glass the color or refraction may change or the strength. And if it is a drinking glass there may be any kind of toxic products that may be used in creating window glass etc. that could not be allowed to enter the production. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
-Randall may, indeed, be a whiny cunt about the cord switch, but there is nothing in the comic or the title text to suggest that. He does, however, have a strong opinion on the "cord switch _firing_ incident". Perhaps that bit of the explanation should be amended? [[User:RoyT|RoyT]] ([[User talk:RoyT|talk]]) 06:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
+Randall may, indeed, be annoyed about the cord switch, but there is nothing in the comic or the title text to suggest that. He does, however, have a strong opinion on the "cord switch _firing_ incident". Perhaps that bit of the explanation should be amended? [[User:RoyT|RoyT]] ([[User talk:RoyT|talk]]) 06:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 :I think they say that because he implied in the title text of a previous comic that having the switch on the cord is worse than having your dog possessed by a demon. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.218.136|108.162.218.136]] 11:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 ::Both are true. I have corrected the explanation to say that he is upset about the firing. And then by referring to the old comic makes sense of why he might have such a strong op--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)inion.
-Removed an abusive and trolling "disclaimer" asking us to evaluate our life choices and our support of the comic. Trolling is unwelcome. [[User:Enfield|Enfield]] ([[User talk:Faggot|talk]]) 17:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
+Removed an abusive and trolling "disclaimer" asking us to evaluate our life choices and our support of the comic. Trolling is unwelcome. [[User:Enfield|Enfield]] ([[User talk:Enfield|talk]]) 17:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)