[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
A McDonald's hamburger is relatively cheap, easily reproducible and well
marketed. I'm not really sure if all of its success has anything to do
with "good design" except for the easily reproducible part.
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Reality's the only obstacle to happiness..
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maciejewski, Thomas [mailto:Thomas.Maciejewski@lehman.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:08 AM
> To: Dare Obasanjo; Elliotte Rusty Harold; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>
> this has to do with quality.
> I think demming or one of those quality people have a bunch
> to say about this.
>
> what is a better hamburger McDonalds or the one at the sparks
> steak house in NYC.
>
> One may be better but the McDonalds hamburger is known world
> wide. It is pretty consistent also. When you go to a
> McDonalds you know what you are getting for the most part.
>
> Which is designed better ???
>
> depends whose perspective you are looking at it from. Ray
> Crock has benefited from the McDonalds burger
>
> people seem to purchase more McDonalds burgers
>
> I think it was designed just right
> and probably close to the spec with reproducible results
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dare Obasanjo [mailto:dareo@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 11:56 AM
> To: Elliotte Rusty Harold; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You
>
>
> A Buick is not better designed than a Mercedes unless your
> only criteria for better design is cheaper.
>
> --
> PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
> Reality's the only obstacle to happiness..
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> confers no rights.
>
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:27 AM
> > To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> >
> >
> > If it's both cheaper and easier to drive, then I think the Buick is
> > better designed. This assumes the use case for both cars
> are standard
> > American highways and city roads and not the Indy 500. The
> only other
> > factor that might argue in favor of the Mercedes design would be
> > repair history and tendency to break down, but ease of use
> is a real
> > concern, and one all too often overlooked in design.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org
> <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS
> <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
> The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
> This message is intended only for the personal and
> confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
> hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution
> or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. This
> communication is for information purposes only and should not
> be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an
> offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation
> of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman
> Brothers. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be
> secure or error-free. Therefore, we do not represent that
> this information is complete or accurate and it should not be
> relied upon as such. All information is subject to change
> without notice.
>
>
>
|
