Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!abvax!iccgcc!kambic
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (George X. Kambic, Allen-Bradley Inc.)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Art vs. Engineering
Message-ID: <4793.284cf11d@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>
Date: 5 Jun 91 19:11:40 GMT
References: <36650010@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> <1991May16.203518.22420@xstor.com> <4673.283be129@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> <283D7F7E.54A2@tct.com>
Lines: 15

In article <283D7F7E.54A2@tct.com>, chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
> According to kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (George X. Kambic):
>>The F-4 is a work of art, done by engineers who knew these things.  
> The F-4?
> Ha!
> The F-4 is proof that with a couple of J-79s, a barn door can fly.
> What was that you were saying about "good engineering" and "art"?
No change.  The F-4 has had an over 30 year service life.  It does not fly apart
when flying.  This somehow implies (at least to me) good engineering.  Do 
you like it as art?  I do.  The old adage about "if it looks good, it will fly
good" or something like that, applies here.  Barn door?  Old barn wood makes
good art.

GXKambic
standard disclaimer