Originally Posted By: rjundi
Using corporate as the excuse or crutch for not producing the best design within the limits is lame.
Emphasis is mine above. "Within the limits". I think that was Hootbro's point; corporate sets those limits (with a budget) and you have to stay within those constraints. You can tell when a lot of R&D was spent on a design and when very little R&D was spent on the design. This isn't an engineer's fault; they are given a time and dollar budget and have to stay within that.
This is no different than software engineering, with which I think you are likely familiar. Every software engineer I know has a million different ways he or she can make the software better given the time. There's simply no time in the budget to do it.
Everybody does the best they can do with the time they are given, but very often, the time given is such that a good vetting process for different implementations of something just isn't possible.
Using corporate as the excuse or crutch for not producing the best design within the limits is lame.
Emphasis is mine above. "Within the limits". I think that was Hootbro's point; corporate sets those limits (with a budget) and you have to stay within those constraints. You can tell when a lot of R&D was spent on a design and when very little R&D was spent on the design. This isn't an engineer's fault; they are given a time and dollar budget and have to stay within that.
This is no different than software engineering, with which I think you are likely familiar. Every software engineer I know has a million different ways he or she can make the software better given the time. There's simply no time in the budget to do it.
Everybody does the best they can do with the time they are given, but very often, the time given is such that a good vetting process for different implementations of something just isn't possible.