2008/6/2 Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > --- In [email protected], "Steve Jones" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> 2008/5/29 Gregg Wonderly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > Gervas Douglas wrote: >> >> The difference between boats and cars is more fundamental than >> >> architecture. An example of the application of the concept of >> >> architecture to cars might be the difference between a Porsche 911 >> >> Turbo and the new Nissan GTR. The 911's architecture is identifiable >> >> to an engineer not so much because of its styling as the layout > of its >> >> platform and principal mechanical components. The fact that it has >> >> its engine slung out behind its rear transaxle brings certain > benefits >> >> (e.g. traction and cabin space) but also certain inherent >> >> disadvantages to do with weight distribution and high polar moment of >> >> inertia. >> > >> > If you know how to take advantage of the other attributes of a > porche, the >> > inertia is an advantage. When you press down the accelerator, the car >> > "squats" >> > on the pavement, force the wheels to have additional down force > and pressure >> > which will restore traction. My brother has a great story about > being 30mph >> > too >> > fast into a 20mph hairpin on a mountain side in his 930 and > comming around >> > the >> > corner in fine fashion, although his wife's hand print on his leg > lasted for >> > a >> > few hours. > > Best to try these experiments alone. With a 911, particularly one of > the early ones with those treacherous swinging halfshafts at the back, > the rule is don't panic and brake going into the bend. Better to go > in at a sensible speed and carefully open up the throttle so as to > make the rear end squat and grip. This is an example of a workaround in an > instance of defective architecture/design! > >> > >> >> The Nissan's more conventional layout combined with superb >> >> engineering features (design) is showing up the Porsche's age when it >> >> comes to a direct driving comparison. Notice I have not referred to >> >> styling or other aesthetic elements which are important to >> >> architectural styles applicable to buildings. But then how > important are >> >> aesthetics to software architecture?? >> > >> > This is a really funny parallel to a bunch of old time programmers > talking >> > about >> > the power of C, and some young kids trying to convince them how > much nicer >> > it is >> > to program in C#. No difference in real capabilities, it's just > that C# has >> > a >> > softer bounce when you hit the ruts. >> >> They are both ugly, horrible languages that we must use. In some >> senses much like the Porsche or Nissan. >> >> Now myself I prefer a Bentley or an Aston Martin of a language, Ada, >> Eiffel, that sort of thing. Its got the power but its also got that >> refinement that turns driving into a pleasure ;) > > Steve, I think you might have put your finger on the nub of an > important concept - Elegance. In my youth I learnt that elegance was > an inherently desirable property in Maths and Physics. German and > Japanese cars might be designed with technical greatness but they > often lack elegance. The Porsche 911 Turbo could do with more elegance in > layout and execution. This is catching up with it.. Would you say that the > architecture of Windows demonstrates elegance??
Yup... in the same way that the Edsel or Delorian did ;) MQSeries.... now THAT is software elegance. Steve > > Gervas > >> >> Steve >> >> > >> > Gregg Wonderly >> > >> > >
