TWAIN-L Archives

Mark Twain Forum

TWAIN-L@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 19:29:13 -0400
Reply-To: Mark Twain Forum <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
From: Tony Verhulst <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (11 lines)
> I gather the technological issue was a design that was over-complex for =
> the degree of precision possible for production at that time.

 From the reading that I've done on the subject, it's more like the
machine was over-complex in that it had too many moving parts. When the
number of moving parts goes up, the reliability goes down. This is what
did the machine "in" - as exhibited during the tests against the
Linotype machine in a production environment.

Tony V.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2