Re: OT? Ode to Word

[Scott Browne <sbrowne -at- UNICOMP -dot- NET>]

Andrew Plato made some points about tools.

Then,

Barry Kieffer wrote:

<snip>
> Tools are tools, the client is not asking you to change your religion
> or gender.

> If it is a tool you love, you are lucky.

> If it is a tool you hate, you have to prove you are a professional, and
> prove that a mere tool can not stop you dead in your tracks.
<snip>


The problem arises when it is not just a matter of using the tool you love
vs. the tool you hate or are not as skilled with.

If I am asked to build a patio/deck, the tools I love are my power
Skilsaw, my cordless Makita drill, and a sack full of screws.

But the client has asked me to use their tools only: a hand axe, a pipe
wrench, and a sack of nails. Use the axe to cut the wood to the right
length, put the deck together with nails, and use a pipe wrench to drive
the nails into the wood (no hammer, please). Why use those tools? Because
those are the same tools the client has around the house so if he ever
needs to make upgrades or repairs or customizations to the deck, he
already has the tools to do it.

It doesn't matter how skilled a carpenter I am, the point remains that the
client is asking me to use the wrong tools for the job.

In the construction world, the builder would tell the client to forget it
and the client would never find a builder who would agree to those terms.

No one would ever tell a builder, "Build this project using this tool
only. If it is a tool you hate [or the wrong tool for the job], you have
to prove you are a professional, and prove that a mere tool cannot stop
you dead in your tracks."

But in our computing world, it happens all the time. And apparently, even
fellow writers seem to accept this as the way it should be.


Scott
sbrowne -at- unicomp -dot- net
-----------------------------------------------------------
"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?"


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=