QED

[ivconic]

Sorry ivconic,

but you don't seem to understand the real issue.
You are still upset with the "trial & error"-engineer statement by myself. Ain't it?

But I can assure you, that I'm a pure "trial & error"-engineer.
Aziz

Noooo!
Not upset by nothing, just joking!
Seriously speaking; i think Carl's most important points are "1. Grossly underestimating the complete picture..." and "2. Ego gets in the way...".
The rest of points are very true but less significant.
Patents!? Who cares about patents! Certainly not people from China!!!
Take it easy!
Cheers!

[moodz]

Of course the QED is real! There's no question that it exists, and I would assume it even performs decently. The only question is, WHEN?

Quite some time ago I was asked to describe the independent development efforts being made with gold detectors. My employers had gotten wind of a couple of "killer designs" and naturally wanted to know if they were real. I labeled my report "Promised Ultimate Detectors," or PUDs for short. (Ironically, sometime after my report another PUD came along, advertised as the "Ultimate Detector." Is that funny or what?)

The problem with PUDs isn't with the U or the D, it's with the P. History shows, over & over, that they never happen. They get massively hyped, then fade away. My analysis as to why this keeps happening is:

1. Grossly underestimating the complete picture. An impressive result on the lab bench doesn't equate to impressive results in Australian dirt. Or any dirt. Once you've got good results on the bench, you're 5% of way there.

2. Ego gets in the way. Wanting to prove yourself before the proof is ready to serve is the part that really damages the effort. Bold performance claims naturally produce skepticism with folks who want to see the evidence. When the evidence doesn't happen, skepticism turns to disdain. And as this process stretches out over years, disdain becomes outright ridicule. The designer then spends an inordinate amount of time responding to the doubts and ridicule. This problem is massively amplified if the hype is coupled with contempt for the competition.

3. Wanting complete control. This is a combination of 1 & 2. The development of a new metal detector is not a one-man job, especially if it's your first one. Think you want to also manufacture the detector? This is a purt-near-guaranteed failing proposition. The turf is littered with dead metal detector companies.

Despite the fact that I work for a major manufacturer of beepers, I'm personally a proponent for independent efforts. Heck, that's why this web site exists! I'd love to see a Titan, Pulse Devil, QED, Goldsweeper, or Ultimate Detector released. But in every case so far, the developers have taken horribly wrong paths. Here are a few suggestions for a better path:

1. KEEP YER TRAP SHUT. Unless the project is a public effort, as many are here on Geotech. While premature public hyping doesn't necessarily break a project, it does incredible damage to the reputations of the design and the designer when things don't work out, as is the case 95% of the time.

2. Get help. Competent help. Preferably by someone who's been there done that. You can't do it all alone.

3. A day in the field is worth a month in the lab. Get it off the bench ASAP, you will quickly see whether that great idea is worth a crap.

4. Focus on the things that matter the most. Performance is #1. A talking detector is #1000. When you have the level of performance that will definitely sell, STOP THE DESIGN PROCESS and move on to making it producible. You'll get to implement that Next Great Idea in Version 2.

5. Forget about building detectors. Ain't gonna happen, at least on a scale that will pay the rent. Find someone else to do that. Again, someone who knows how. Also lets you move on to Version 2, which is more fun than potting coils all day.

6. Forget about patents. Unless you get the Partner Production Company (#5) to deal with them. That $5,000 patent ain't worth squat unless you've got the $100,000 to back it up.

7. Respect the competition. Like it or not, they are already successful, have lots of satisfied users, and are making lots of money. Focus on beating them with a better product, not with public displays of contempt. And never ever ever criticize a user of a competitor's product. That's one lost sale, or more.

.... If you add the first three points to the next seven you have The 10 Commandments ......

[ivconic]

.... If you add the first three points to the next seven you have The 10 Commandments ......

Exactly!

[Aziz]

Noooo!
Not upset by nothing, just joking!
Seriously speaking; i think Carl's most important points are "1. Grossly underestimating the complete picture..." and "2. Ego gets in the way...".
The rest of points are very true but less significant.
Patents!? Who cares about patents! Certainly not people from China!!!
Take it easy!
Cheers!

"1. Grossly underestimating the complete picture..."
That's really true. A lot of peaple underestimating it.

"2. Ego gets in the way...".
No ego. True science based of facts & natural laws.

I'm taking it easy.
Aziz

[ivconic]

"1. Grossly underestimating the complete picture..."
That's really true. A lot of peaple underestimating it.

"2. Ego gets in the way...".
No ego. True science based of facts & natural laws.

I'm taking it easy.
Aziz

Come again!?

[Aziz]

Yeah, Aziz, but you can't prevent some overzealous engineer invest his money and his time into something as useless and harmful for his idea as a stupid patent !?!

There is a joke about pointlessness of confrontation with dumb people: if you play dumb they beat you because of their vast experience at being dumb. Patents are just dumb, and there are lots of dumb people hovering patent offices. Trolls as well. So you patent - you lose.

Yep,

don't fu$k with the dumb. They will win everytime.

Aziz

[Aziz]

Come again!?

"Yep,

don't fu$k with the dumb. They will win everytime.

Aziz"

Should that tell you what?

Aziz

So who is going to f$ with me?
Aziz

[ivconic]

Yep,

don't fu$k with the dumb. They will win everytime.

Aziz

So it is easy "formula"; if you wanna win: be dumber than dumbs you are debating with!
Can you check that formula with your simulator?
...
As i said; Carl made indeed true and smart points.
As i also said; very few people will indeed understand and obey those points...
Whatever...

[Aziz]

So it is easy "formula"; if you wanna win: be dumber than dumbs you are debating with!
Can you check that formula with your simulator?
...
As i said; Carl made indeed true and smart points.
As i also said; very few people will indeed understand and obey those points...
Whatever...

Ivconic, you underestimate the "formulas" and the "natural laws".
The whole world is based on it.
But this is beyond the scope of a "trial & error" engineer. That's for sure.
Aziz
PS: I've never seen you using a "formula". Did you?
You are getting too personal. Get over it.

[ivconic]

Somehow i missed to point this one:

"1. KEEP YER TRAP SHUT...."

Very true!
And somehow correlates with "2. Ego gets in the way...." !
Magic circle indeed!

[Aziz]

Ivconic, get over it.

[ivconic]

Ivconic, you underestimate the "formulas" and the "natural laws".
The whole world is based on it.
But this is beyond the scope of a "trial & error" engineer. That's for sure.
Aziz
PS: I've never seen you using a "formula". Did you?
You are getting too personal. Get over it.

For your information, dear forum friend: i live by natural laws of Physics, therefore i don't need to accentuate them each time i want to make a single forum post.
You don't need to be "overthechnical" each time you want to tell simple thing in your life.
It is much better and more "human" to talk simple and easy; so majority of listeners and readers can follow you easy without much of brainstorming.
In my "village" such "smart" and "conversant experts" are usually named "nerds".
Whole my life i am running away from nerds, that's why i don't like such behavior.
I think Carl pointed on that too, but with his pretty refined sense of understanding such things in life. I can only applaude on his way of speaking here.
Let me tell you what is the "real expert" for me. And i mean really real expert!
Real expert for me is the man who is talking very easy and simple, trying to be easy understandable by huge majority of very different people in auditorium.
You know how to recognize real expert?
Simply; take several technical articles which are explaining one and same issue, by different authors, and read them.
Article which is most easy to understand and follow - (by the rule) is written by REAL EXPERT.
And contra; article which is very tiresome to read and follow - (by the rule) is written by some nerd who is suffering from severe ego problems.
Carl also pointed on that too!
Why i always like to refer to George Payne, for example? Read some of his articles and you will recognize ultimate expert in those words.
Not because this is his forum; but also i do enjoy much reading Carl's articles too.
Easy to understand and follow, lot of to learn from those. What else man can expect and ask?
...
Again; Aziz, nothing personal. You are making mistake on that.
Cheers!

[PATCHES JUNIOR]

Aziz, you been hanging out with Doug too long. Your starting to get caught up in his ways of being arrogant. Stop while your ahead. You are just digging a deep hole here and do not see it my friend. Relax and stop with the arrogance!

Ivconic, bklein, Davor, Carl and I are just trying to be friendly, why the attitude??

[Aziz]

Ivconic,

you are really upset with the "trial & error"-engineer statement. Take it easy my friend. I'm a "trial & error"-engineer.
Aziz

[Aziz]

Aziz, you been hanging out with Doug too long. Your starting to get caught up in his ways of being arrogant. Stop while your ahead. You are just digging a deep hole here and do not see it my friend. Relax and stop with the arrogance!

Ivconic, bklein, Davor, Carl and I are just trying to be friendly, why the attitude??

PJ,

sorry for being arrogant. I love provocation.

But is the statement "World's best metal detecting technology" arrogant too?
I just use the same tools of being arrogant.

Cheers,
Aziz