<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- name="generator" content="blosxom/2.0" -->
<!DOCTYPE rss PUBLIC "-//Netscape Communications//DTD RSS 0.91//EN" "http://my.netscape.com/publish/formats/rss-0.91.dtd">

<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>Synthetic Sheep   </title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi</link>
    <description>Synthetic Sheep Web Log.</description>
    <language>en</language>

  <item>
    <title>Traditional?</title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/2007/04/12#traditional</link>
    <description>
&lt;p&gt;
I'm also tired of hearing ATE 
&lt;A href=&quot;http://www.reed-electronics.com/tmworld/article/CA6428548.html?section=Market+Trends&amp;subsection=Synthetic+Instrumentation&quot;&gt;pundits&lt;/a&gt; talk about &quot;traditional instruments&quot; in opposition to
SI. The phrase is inappropriate. What tradition? Who's tradition? It brings to mind
some kind of ceremonial process handed down from on high -- a memory stick with 
a read only text file that decrees &quot;Let there always be VXI modules and ATLAS code&quot;.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
The correct word to use in opposition to Synthetic is &lt;i&gt;Natural&lt;/i&gt;. Talk
about Natural Instruments as opposed to Synthetic. This phrasing makes
sense as it focuses on the particular distinction being made. A
synthetic is something that was synthesized out of generic components
to be something specific. A natural is something &lt;i&gt;a priori&lt;/i&gt;
specific as a consequence of its essential nature. 
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
The phrase &quot;Natural Instrument&quot; is a &lt;A
HREF=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retronym&gt;retronym&lt;/a&gt;. A retronym is
a new name for something that had an old name made ambiguous because
of advances in technology. Acoustic guitar, cloth diaper, and opaque
aluminum are retronyms. Before there were synthetic instruments (and
virtual instruments) we could just point at something and call it an
'instrument' with no qualification. Now we have to say 'Natural
Instrument' when describing, say, a mercury bulb thermometer,' as
opposed to a synthetic thermometer -- software for making temperature
measurements by means of conditioning, digitizing, and processing the
output of a sensor.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>The Proper Subset</title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/2007/04/07#subset</link>
    <description>
&lt;p&gt;
Of late, various ATE industry &lt;A HREF=http://digital.ni.com/worldwide/bwcontent.nsf/web/all/98FB820FC5A01362862572890061702C&gt;pundits&lt;/a&gt; and marketeers have been
yaaaakking about how the &quot;software &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; the instrument&quot; and
pointing out how Virtual Instruments are a superset of Synthetic
Instruments and how they knew this paradigm shift was coming all all
along.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
I do agree with them -- to a point.   
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/subset.html?seemore=y&quot; class=&quot;seemore&quot;&gt;See more ...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>The Fallacy of End User Software</title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/2006/04/07#software</link>
    <description>
&lt;p&gt;
Having disposed of the misconception that synthetic instruments are
slow, let me knock down the mistaken idea that synthetic instruments
lead to a &quot;more significant software task for the end user or system
integrator&quot;.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/software.html?seemore=y&quot; class=&quot;seemore&quot;&gt;See more ...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Synthetic Instruments are Not Slow</title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/2006/03/22#slow</link>
    <description>
&lt;p&gt;
For some reason, people have been taking exception to the fact that 
synthetic instruments are the fastest possible instrument. I'm hearing
objections  to this point from several different directions. 
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/slow.html?seemore=y&quot; class=&quot;seemore&quot;&gt;See more ...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>A Synthetic Instrument Blaaaahg</title>
    <link>http://www.syntheticsheep.com/index.cgi/2006/03/21#welcome</link>
    <description>
&lt;p&gt;
I thought that I got all the pundit-baaabel and electric daydreams
out of my system when I wrote &lt;A
HREF=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/gp/associates/link-types/marketplace.html?t=syntheticinst-20&amp;asin=075067783X&quot;&gt;Synthetic
Instruments: Concepts and Applications&lt;/A&gt;. Apparently not. Somehow, I
still feel the need to continue in this bombastic wool gathering
enterprise. So be it. The world now has yet another blog. 
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
My intent here is to post my ideas relative to the concept of
Synthetic Instruments, as well as to comment on new developments in
the field that I happen to see.  It's hard for me to judge my own
biases, but I hope my point of view is basically objective. I have no
corporate god directing me to re-conceive their market legacy in a new
way &amp;#150; as a golden fleece, for instance. Rather, I hope I'm a
synthetic instrument and software-defined-widget idealist. If this
view doesn't map well with the wolves in sheep's clothing that lurk in
the ATE industry, my baaaad.
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;
 
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>