why can retailers not understand engineering integrity ?

[Joe]

shit, there was a beer tasting today... I am far to drunk to understand logic like:

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Joe

shit, there was a beer tasting today... I am far to drunk to understand logic like:

Hell I am sober. It sounds like Liquid3D to me.

[Brians256]

Joe, either that's perfectly sensible explaination of the scientific method, or I'm too tired to tell the difference. Yeah, there's a lot of high fallutin words in there, but they are all necessary if you want to be precise about it. Looks like he's quoting a textbook, but I don't think hypothesis has "an" before it instead of "a". So, it could be from memory.

[Nugit]

Search in google of point 1-4 turns out about 900 results, top one being http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/ph...AppendixE.html

I believe it is perfectly grammatically correct to write an hypothesis and the proper way to pronounce it is then an'ypothesis. It is though, a bit old fasioned.

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Brians256

Joe, either that's perfectly sensible explaination of the scientific method, or I'm too tired to tell the difference. Yeah, there's a lot of high fallutin words in there, but they are all necessary if you want to be precise about it. Looks like he's quoting a textbook, but I don't think hypothesis has "an" before it instead of "a". So, it could be from memory.

Sure, problem I see is it doesn't relate to what Bruce was saying. Big words to side step the real answer... In fact a lot of stuff brought up by Bruce has gone ignored and only a few sniplets answered....

[Brians256]

Well, Jaydee, I'm not sure what to make of it all, truthfully. I still don't think that Bill is a liar. I also don't think that Bruce's points are incorrect when they are quotes. Basically, Bill made some statements that could be construed as aspersions on another company's products without the data to back it up. But, I'm not believing that Bill wanted to be in the middle of PR activity. I think he was just stating some rather vague principles (e.g. single flow doesn't always help a lot). Then, Bruce basically states that "Bill is a competitor of those products, so take his statements with a grain of salt" and Bill gets upset.

Sounds like they just are communicating badly rather than either being the total villain.

But, I'm not a great judge of human motives, nor have I researched it as well as you have, Jaydee. Can't we all get along? Man, the 60's have been gone too long.

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Brians256

Well, Jaydee, I'm not sure what to make of it all, truthfully. I still don't think that Bill is a liar. I also don't think that Bruce's points are incorrect when they are quotes. Basically, Bill made some statements that could be construed as aspersions on another company's products without the data to back it up. But, I'm not believing that Bill wanted to be in the middle of PR activity. I think he was just stating some rather vague principles (e.g. single flow doesn't always help a lot). Then, Bruce basically states that "Bill is a competitor of those products, so take his statements with a grain of salt" and Bill gets upset.

Sounds like they just are communicating badly rather than either being the total villain.

But, I'm not a great judge of human motives, nor have I researched it as well as you have, Jaydee. Can't we all get along? Man, the 60's have been gone too long.

I don't think Bill is a liar either nor do I think Bruce is dishonest. Bill can be very vague at times. Maybe to use to people just believing everything he says or simply would rather see people figure it out for them selfs or just doesn't feel like getting into it. I have not followed Bruce around any other forums but here and have not seen anything to question his honesty.

Seems to me the commercial aspect of it all is the problem here. If Bruce and Bill were still just enthusiasts as opposed to having commercial interests and being enthusiasts things may be otherwise. I have a lot of respect for both. Sure competition is good for end users but not always for fellow enthusiasts.

[flatline]

imo its time for ither....

1. groop hug

or

2. illegal use of dogdo on a stick

[Lothar5150]

I posted the scientific method because it is what Bill employs. What ever findings Bill sites can be independently verified. If you want to be critical of testing methods, as Cathar's statements where, that is fine in fact that is constructive to the process. However, attacking Bill's integrity is out of line.

As to his comment on the single pass radiator performance...As you may or may not know, Bill was working on a white paper on radiator performance for his previous employer. The white paper was completed but never published by the previous employer. Having personally surveyed every major radiator and radiator configuration available, Bill clearly has insight into radiator performance no one else has. Perhaps the reason Bill has not posted data is because those data belong to his previous employer.

Further, don't you think Bill would have looked at various configurations of radiators prior to producing the new Swiftech line of radiators? Certainly, there is no cost difference between in producing single vs. dual pass radiators. Why not separate yourself from the pack further? I can only surmise that there was no applicable performance difference found in testing.

[maxSaleen]

I stopped reading about 15 posts it. Fun stuff. I got to admit I enjoyed reading it....up until Bill and Cath got into it about the intel TTV. That's when I got a headache

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

I posted the scientific method because it is what Bill employs. What ever findings Bill sites can be independently verified. If you want to be critical of testing methods, as Cathar's statements where, that is fine in fact that is constructive to the process. However, attacking Bill's integrity is out of line.

As to his comment on the single pass radiator performance...As you may or may not know, Bill was working on a white paper on radiator performance for his previous employer. The white paper was completed but never published by the previous employer. Having personally surveyed every major radiator and radiator configuration available, Bill clearly has insight into radiator performance no one else has. Perhaps the reason Bill has not posted data is because those data belong to his previous employer.

Further, don't you think Bill would have looked at various configurations of radiators prior to producing the new Swiftech line of radiators? Certainly, there is no cost difference between in producing single vs. dual pass radiators. Why not separate yourself from the pack further? I can only surmise that there was no applicable performance difference found in testing.

I think it was Bill that also hammered Bruce for picking parts of other blocks and putting them together for his own block. I don't see that as any different than reverse engineering a rad and improving it for your own product..... Bruce did give credit were it was due aswell.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by jaydee

I think it was Bill that also hammered Bruce for picking parts of other blocks and putting them together for his own block. I don't see that as any different than reverse engineering a rad and improving it for your own product..... Bruce did give credit were it was due aswell.

I agree I don’t think it is much different nor do I think that it is a major foul provided you don’t infringe on any patents

[BillA]

a man sees what he wants to see, . . . . .
my complaint was as described, and that is/was my interest
the subsequent fol de rol, and Bruce's bowel dumps, are not the issue - unless to you or others

maxracer joined the fray by saying that (some part of ?) Bruce's non-objectivity assertion he knew to be true,
and then deleted my post asking him to substantiate his statement
this deletion then "solved the problem" for MR he stated
- how to deal with troublesome test data ? hey, just pretend it does not exist
if this is how he solves problems, I have no interest in his work product (but I am really picky about some things)

if you want to analyze something jd, read Bruce's posts here and list each statement he has made, each single one eh ?
now for each ck probably true or false - and the facts necessary to know to validate each assertion
-> ?? does Bruce have that info/is it true ??
if not, if some of those claims are false . . . Bruce, your friend, has delivered himself into my hands

you want to give odds ?
to see the dots is not to understand their connection, I am hoping Bruce is wealthy

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by maxSaleen

I stopped reading about 15 posts it. Fun stuff. I got to admit I enjoyed reading it....up until Bill and Cath got into it about the intel TTV. That's when I got a headache

It only persisted for 4 posts or so. My apologies. Consider it a momentary interruption of service before the regular schedule was re-instated, somewhat like a BBC news bulletin in the middle of some WWF "theatre".

As for the rest of the thread, I find it morbidly fascinating in the same vein of flipping through the TV channels and accidentally landing on Jerry Springer during some particularly vituperous tirade. No winners there or here.

Times must be tough. Everyone for whom the food that gets put onto their dinner table at night comes from cooling sales is paid for by sales of cooling products is "in it for the money". That's not a crime. Pretty silly business model to expect of anyone to put hours in for nothing. I only do so because I am very happily funded in my real job. Over the last 4 years waterblocks have accounted for 0.8% of my effective income, and that 0.8% gets fed back into R&D. If it were not for my real job income, I would never have been able to be as involved in cooling as I am. It is rather unfair though to use me as an example to club people involved in the cooling industry with. If the cooling industry puts food on your table, you're in it for the money too, and are in no position to level this accusation at others. It's only natural that people would seek to make money in the industry, otherwise what's the point?

Nobody is truly clean in business, that's the nature of the beast, otherwise you will go out business in fairly short order. True integrity and altruism is a liability when in competition. No company or person is going to publish performance results from their own independent testing if such testing finds that a competing product is superior, or equal but cheaper. They'll just sit on the data instead until they can come up with a superior solution, or they'll omit certain data and present only the angle in which their product is superior.

As for marketing, every business stands on its own two feet. It's more honorable for businesses to acknowledge the derivations and forebears of their products, and market their products as independent items on their own merit. In a conflicted world, this is the best that we can hope for.

Making competitive performance statements for/against competing products of the ilk for which one derives life-style sustaining income from, without presenting a full and open test procedure and published test data is always going to be fraught with peril and will always generate much angst, regardless of the actual intentions, honesty and integrity of the persons involved. In short, almost this entire thread has been one huge bun-fight, causing tremendous amounts of public profile damage for all of the main antagonists.

C'mon lads, lets put the egos and pride away before more damage is done and focus on doing what you guys all do best, which is designing better products for everyone, and cast them into the breeze of public opinion to succeed or fail as the public is wont. Engaging in self-destructive competitive battles in public forums just makes losers of everyone involved. If people are calling people liars, then the best way to answer is with open verifiable proof, rather than open destructive indignation.

Can we get some professionalism here?

[BillA]

regretfully Cathar, I suggest the same exercise I outlined for jd
you and I know each other so I suspect you will see some of Bruce's problems right off

"open destructive indignation", lol - nice
the slur was non-specific, and the specifics of Bruce's plaint (limiting such to his rad comments) are totally outside of that upon which I MAY comment; not my info in any manner so I have no way to substantiate - though none of this was anticipated when the passing comments were made by me months ago

don't be concerned with professionalisim here, everything gets sorted with the tools appropriate

this thread is the pits, restart your new C/W calculating conditions in a new thread
it is a timely topic but I think your testing is implausable outside perhaps of a funded Uni lab or BIG co budget
can't get to the air side mass flow rate easily, can't do a heat balance w/o it

[Cathar]

Bill, the above was levelled at everyone and no-one in particular.

I know everyone involved and I think you're all misbehaving badly and equally, to the detriment of yourselves, regardless of who I think may be right or wrong, and regardless of how right or wrong any of you think each other is.

Heck, I know I go off the rails and need a quick reminder of where the ground is at times, so consider the above purely as that service from me. I'm out (of this thread) now.

[dacooltech]

Originally Posted by Brians256

Well, Jaydee, I'm not sure what to make of it all, truthfully. I still don't think that Bill is a liar. I also don't think that Bruce's points are incorrect when they are quotes. Basically, Bill made some statements that could be construed as aspersions on another company's products without the data to back it up. But, I'm not believing that Bill wanted to be in the middle of PR activity. I think he was just stating some rather vague principles (e.g. single flow doesn't always help a lot).

Brian, I never called BillA a liar, and stated so even in my 1st post.

Then, Bruce basically states that "Bill is a competitor of those products, so take his statements with a grain of salt" and Bill gets upset.

That was basically all... and I don't think it is right to make vague references, and/or performance statements for/against other products, when you are a competitor of those products.

[dacooltech]

Originally Posted by unregistered

maxracer joined the fray by saying that (some part of ?) Bruce's non-objectivity assertion he knew to be true,
and then deleted my post asking him to substantiate his statement
this deletion then "solved the problem" for MR he stated

It was Erick that asked from MR to delete the posts including mine. In case you missed it here it is:

Lothar5150: Bruce I have said my peace and I am attempting to turn over a new leaf and be more tactful in my responses to people like you. Bill and I are working very hard to build a great company. We have better things to do that get into a flame war with you. It’s basically this simple you have assets; if you libel or slander one of my employees or my company you will get a call from the company’s lawyer. You got a freebee up to this point. Now you are warned I would be very careful about what you say from now on.

Max I think it would be best if you delete all three of us from this thread...not seperate but delete

Link to the copy of the thread, which was deleted

[dacooltech]

Originally Posted by Cathar

It only persisted for 4 posts or so. My apologies. Consider it a momentary interruption of service before the regular schedule was re-instated, somewhat like a BBC news bulletin in the middle of some WWF "theatre".

As for the rest of the thread, I find it morbidly fascinating in the same vein of flipping through the TV channels and accidentally landing on Jerry Springer during some particularly vituperous tirade. No winners there or here.

Times must be tough. Everyone for whom the food that gets put onto their dinner table at night comes from cooling sales is paid for by sales of cooling products is "in it for the money". That's not a crime. Pretty silly business model to expect of anyone to put hours in for nothing. I only do so because I am very happily funded in my real job. Over the last 4 years waterblocks have accounted for 0.8% of my effective income, and that 0.8% gets fed back into R&D. If it were not for my real job income, I would never have been able to be as involved in cooling as I am. It is rather unfair though to use me as an example to club people involved in the cooling industry with. If the cooling industry puts food on your table, you're in it for the money too, and are in no position to level this accusation at others. It's only natural that people would seek to make money in the industry, otherwise what's the point?

Nobody is truly clean in business, that's the nature of the beast, otherwise you will go out business in fairly short order. True integrity and altruism is a liability when in competition. No company or person is going to publish performance results from their own independent testing if such testing finds that a competing product is superior, or equal but cheaper. They'll just sit on the data instead until they can come up with a superior solution, or they'll omit certain data and present only the angle in which their product is superior.

As for marketing, every business stands on its own two feet. It's more honorable for businesses to acknowledge the derivations and forebears of their products, and market their products as independent items on their own merit. In a conflicted world, this is the best that we can hope for.

Making competitive performance statements for/against competing products of the ilk for which one derives life-style sustaining income from, without presenting a full and open test procedure and published test data is always going to be fraught with peril and will always generate much angst, regardless of the actual intentions, honesty and integrity of the persons involved. In short, almost this entire thread has been one huge bun-fight, causing tremendous amounts of public profile damage for all of the main antagonists.

C'mon lads, lets put the egos and pride away before more damage is done and focus on doing what you guys all do best, which is designing better products for everyone, and cast them into the breeze of public opinion to succeed or fail as the public is wont. Engaging in self-destructive competitive battles in public forums just makes losers of everyone involved. If people are calling people liars, then the best way to answer is with open verifiable proof, rather than open destructive indignation.

Can we get some professionalism here?

well said... and thanks for taking the time to write this

I have better things to focus on, so I'm done here...

[Lothar5150]

Bruce it is this simple, you call in to question Bill's integrity there by implying that he would lie about performance and or data. Now you are trying to soft peddle and say I did not call him a liar. It’s like saying “the guy sometimes takes things that don’t belong to him, but I’m not saying he is a thief”

Yes, I did ask MR to delete ALL OF US from the thread. I thought it was best given that the thread was getting jacked. Again, I am trying to turn over a new leaf and be more tactful and professional. As it stands CoolingWorks has everything to loose and nothing to gain from a flame war with an online merchant. So if you have an issue with this company, one of its officers or employees I suggest you give me a call or email me. If you want to make a professional intelligent critique on testing procedure (as Cathar did) then I welcome it.

[dacooltech]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Bruce it is this simple, you call in to question Bill's integrity there by implying that he would lie about performance and or data. Now you are trying to soft peddle and say I did call him a liar. It’s like saying “the guy sometimes takes things that don’t belong to him, but I’m not saying he is a thief”

Erick i'm not sure if you're trying to turn over a new leaf, or add more fuel to the fire...
I suggest you to re-read my posts starting with the first one...

and like i said i'm done here, and this is my last post in this thread

[Joe]

hey this is america, isnt about time someone threatened to sue someone else? This thread is pointless without legal action! hehe

[AngryAlpaca]

Okay, I can't find where Bill called the X-flow BIP3 bad. Can anyone quote it, as something other than "you will see that single pass is not necessairly better, it all depends . . . ." (which doesn't say anything - HWLabs' info showed that it isn't better)

[snowwie]

AA, some guy in the other forum said that billa said that its performance was worse

it has neither been confirmed nor refuted

edit: but in general, I've been getting the impression from other posters that while it depends on setup, in most cases there is no performance gain

[Marci]

Not having seen the x-flow firsthand, it's advantage and disadvantages were summarised suitably by Cathar on [H] not so long ago...

As the flow rate (and hence water velocity in the tubes) goes down, so does the radiator performance start to fall away. With a single-pass you've gone and halved the water velocity in one hit. This is offset somewhat by the temperature delta benefit of single-pass, but it is by no means a sure thing that single pass will be better.

Looking at that graph, if we made the HE120.1 into a single pass radiator and our flow rate was 5LPM, then by halving the water velocity with some moderate fans we can see that we'll lose up to 20% convectional efficiency performance. Sure, we gained a bit by going single pass, but we lost a lot due to the per-tube velocity drop.

If our flow rate was 12lpm though, then we only lose ~10%, and maybe (just maybe) single pass might be a better option. Don't know too many people with 12lpm running through their loops though. The HE120.1 is a dual-core radiator too, so this example highlights how turning the HE120.1 into a single pass radiator would quite likely be a bad idea.

And thus the same applies to most dual rads out on the PC Watercooling market. Pop it's caps off and swap for singlepass tanks and there's a tradeoff. The spec of the rest of the system determines the worth of moving from one to the other. Other changes need to be made to make singlepass worth it in current scenarios imo. AFAIK, those changes are in the pipeline already at HWLabs anyways. Performance of current x-flow is a m00t point.

So logic dictates BiPro dual vs BiProX-Flow dual with a flow rate reflective of today's avg watercooling system, the original should beat the x-flow. Are the public aware? In the minority.

I have no data to prove or disprove. Bill's data is not his to share. Data collected whilst contracted by Swiftech, the data remains Swiftech's to release not bills. His hands are tied. He spills, he's legally liable for theft of data.

We're at a point where from a quick glance, no-one is impartial. Problems ahead...
Now trust and ethics become a major factor before decisions can be made and data believed. Some of us trust each other whole-heartedly. Some of us don't.

The fallout was inevitable. Unavoidable perhaps.

Whilst Bill's personal ethic is shown as against the "Chinese invasion", manufacturing decisions by Swiftech aren't necessarily Bill's preference or choice. That again is down to Swiftech. Attribute choices to the correct places. A companies economics and an individual's opinion are two different things.

Dirty laundry back in the closet. Public don't wanna see the stains on display.

*sprays some rosey air freshener about and hands out the chocolate biscuits*

play nice...