6 ms·

It's a bit of a platitude, IMO. You can find plenty pros that obsess over tools. Like look at Adam Savage's Tested youtube channel, in which he makes videos su

It's a bit of a platitude, IMO. You can find plenty pros that obsess over tools. Like look at Adam Savage's Tested youtube channel, in which he makes videos surrounded by a vast mountain of tools, many of which he made or customized himself. Recently he geeked all over the fractal vise. The difference I'd say is that pros have a better understanding of what they need, don't expect tools to magically solve problems, and often customize or even make something from scratch.

izelnakri 3y ago
I think you’re 100% on point here.
galangalalgol 3y ago
As an amateur my experience is that having the exact right tool for a job is way better than having the very best quality of the almost right tool. Also for tools with consumables, the quality of the consumables matters way more than the tool that you put them in.
- DavidPeiffer 3y ago
  >Also for tools with consumables, the quality of the consumables matters way more than the tool that you put them in. I fully agree. I wasted hours dealing with brad nails that didn't go in all the way, only to bend over when I tried to nail set them. Paying more for Brad nails fixed the issue almost entirely.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  I'm not sure I agree. Eventually your garage is totally full of exactly the right tool for some job or other and you can't find anything because there's tools in the way. It applies to software too. If all of the complexity in your project is placing the perfect tools and configuring them correctly, you end up with a codebase that's 90% tool-specific and even coders that think they're fluent in your language of choice have a steep learning curve if they're gonna work on your project because the complexity is no longer in the project's alleged language, it's now in 15 separate DSL's that they've never heard of. There's a balance to be struck here. I see this especially often in python projects with complex pre-commit configurations. It's like we secretly need that compilation step, even if our language doesn't strictly require it, and it just becomes a rug to hide overspecialized complexity under.
  - eropple 3y ago
    > I'm not sure I agree. Eventually your garage is totally full of exactly the right tool for some job or other and you can't find anything because there's tools in the way. Frequently it means you can do the thing at all. I will not use my snap ring pliers again this year. Or probably next. But I am never throwing those goddamn things out because trying to do tasks that require them, without them, is impossible. And I will not get a lot of forewarning when my planer decides it's time to blow a bearing. But they're $10 snap ring pliers from Harbor Freight, not $50 Knipex ones. Get the tool to do the job, worry about the nicest tool if you do it every day.
    - comfypotato 3y ago
      Having a cluttered garage and having the right tool for the job are completely unrelated. I’m not 100% following the discussion, though. Most software work can be done with vi and nothing else. Working with your hands, on the other hand, requires snap-ring-plier specific tools.
      - __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
        If your garage has room for 100 tools, and you do 101 jobs, each which requires a niche tool, they become related on the 101st job. That is, unless you start finding other garages for your tools, but even then you're paying a too-many-tools overhead cost. With hand tools it's a little harder to sell people on a tool that only does one job, so you'll reach that point more slowly. Maybe it's the 201st job. But if you look at the explosion of languages, libraries, an SaaS offerings for everything under the sun, it seems that the tech world is more than capable of overcomplicating your stack with a 1:1 tool/task mapping.
  - c22 3y ago
    My solution to this problem was to join a makerspace collective. Now if I lack the perfect tool for a job there's a good chance the makerspace has it. If not, I buy the tool and leave it at the makerspace and my garage contains only the tools I use all the time.
- coldtea 3y ago
  I'd say an expert is the one knowing how to use a tool for multiple jobs, and do wonders with a minimal toolset - not needing "the exact right tool for each job".
  - cutler 3y ago
    Agreed. Pick 4 languages, 1 each for: - Front-end (JS) - Scritping (Python, Ruby, Perl, PHP) - Applications (Java, C#, Kotlin, Scala, Clojure) - System (C, C++, Rust) That is all you need. A true master can do a lot with the 2 "worst" languages - JS and PHP.
    - dgacmu 3y ago
      Languages are turing-complete. Tools are not. Example: there are some shapes you cannot physically create as a single unit with a milling machine; they can only be created by additive deposition methods. Or more simply, while you _can_ screw in a star drive screw with a very improperly used hex driver, you probably shouldn't.
      - midoridensha 3y ago
        Even more simply than that: if you need to unscrew a screw, using a hammer probably won't work well. Which is why that saying about a poor craftsman blaming his tools is BS: if you're given the wrong tool, you're not going to be able to do a good job.
        OJFord 3y ago
        I've never heard that saying used in a wrong way like that, about a tool that is just wrong; it's not BS if it's about someone claiming their nails are wonky and the surrounding surface marred because of the 'crap' hammer they used, for example.
        midoridensha 3y ago
        Sure, but that's not what the saying literally says. It says "only a poor craftsman blames his tools". It makes no mention of the tools being actually fit for the purpose. They should have specified that. And even if it is the "right" tool (a hammer for a nail), what if the hammer is a plastic kid's toy? I think this saying makes far too many implicit assumptions about the type and quality of the craftsman's tools.
SantalBlush 3y ago
A lot of pros also enjoy Project Farm's YouTube videos, which compare and rate tools from popular brands.
reaperducer 3y ago
look at Adam Savage's Tested youtube channel, in which he makes videos surrounded by a vast mountain of tools, many of which he made or customized himself. While I don't dispute Mr. Savage's acumen, I wonder what the number and complexity of his tools would look like if he worked in private, instead of the glare of internet fandom.
- photonerd 3y ago
  Most of the tools in his shop he had before opening it up to the fandom at large. Remember: he’d been a pro at this stuff for years even before Mythbusters & the Tested stuff was (mostly) after that ended. He had 25-30 years of professional AND professionally-informed hpbbyist experience to build that collection
Brian_K_White 3y ago
youtube is probably not a strong argument but the recent fireball tools video about his welding table and jigs was pretty comvincing, even though it was an undisguised promotional work designed to convince. (He submits a basic job to 3 diffferent class of pro fabricator shops, and has one of his video producers do the same job with no help (supposedly) but with his tools, and that one is the only one that adhered to the specs.) I would like to see that same experiment reproduced by other people because if it's true I think that is a very important thing to know which would change how you approach things your whole life. You could obviously chase after awesome tools right now anyway, but it would be huge to know that it's proven to be essentially 'best practice' to do so rather than just your unfounded feeling that no one else, like your boss, is obligated to consider.
gizmo686 3y ago
I'd say there are two different types of "obsession" here. One is the attitude that that you need to use the best tools possible and by doing that you will get a good result. The other type is old fashion geakery. If you look at Adam, he is two things: a maker, and a tool geek. These aspects certainly intersect, but when he is making things, you do not see him reach for the most sophisticated tool in his toolbox. A great example of this is this video [0] where he geeks outs over his new measurement tool: guage blocks (and corresponding guage). The thing is, I don't think I have ever seen him do a build where he uses them, because they are simply beyond what his work demands. I'm a similar way with programming languages. I'm a PL geek, and enjoy geeking out about the fine details of various programming languages, and pointing out flaws in langauges. But, at the end of the day, when it comes time to pick a language for a project, I typically reach for a combination of Java/C++/python/m4. There is nothing to geek out about those languages (except for how bad they are), but pragmatically speaking, they are typically the best tool available for very boring reasons. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE7dYhpI_bI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE7dYhpI_bI
- postmodest 3y ago
  Meanwhile if you look at someone like Ken Parker ( https://kenparkerarchtops.com/archtoppery#new-page-1 https://kenparkerarchtops.com/archtoppery#new-page-1 ) you see someone who does obsess over the best tools _and_ the best process. Now, admittedly, Ken Parker is a lightning rod for disagreement, but you can't deny that he makes a well-made product.
  - pixelatedindex 3y ago
    For the uninitiated, could you please tell me more about him being a lightning rod for disagreement? I hadn’t heard of him before.
    - jononomo 3y ago
      I had not heard of him either.
- 3y ago
jstummbillig 3y ago
While I do not disagree in general – things not being black or white is probably correct – I think in Mr Savages case you could argue that knowing how to geek with/over tools is the mastery part.
shrimpx 3y ago
I think there are two ways to "obsess over tools". One is to obsessively research and build your collection and sort of superficially admire your collection. Another is to bring in and master the tools one by one, driven by the needs of your process, and find meaningful places for each in your process. In essence, the former is cargo-culting the latter and they look similar from a distance.
SkyPuncher 3y ago
For me, tools capture the experience of someone else in a way that typically expands my own skills. They include little features/details that I wouldn't think of on my own. That's particularly true with software tools where non-obvious edge cases are abundant. I want tools that carry mental load for me, so I can focus on delivering maximum value.
chrisweekly 3y ago
This reminds me of a fascinating interview with Trey Anastasio (an absolute master of electric guitar tone and effects and loop pedals). His take was, while quality matters, you don't need the "best" gear -- but it's essential to really truly deeply know the gear you do have inside and out, so it can get out of the way and simply be an extension of your instrument.
QuantumGood 3y ago
I have found Gall's law to be a corollary of "mastery before tools": "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system."
didntknowya 3y ago
i think the main difference is a pro can grab a cheap tool or make one from scratch to complete a task, whereas an amateur will hesitate to do a task unless he has the "best" branded tool

izelnakri 3y ago

I think you’re 100% on point here.

galangalalgol 3y ago

As an amateur my experience is that having the exact right tool for a job is way better than having the very best quality of the almost right tool. Also for tools with consumables, the quality of the consumables matters way more than the tool that you put them in.

DavidPeiffer 3y ago
>Also for tools with consumables, the quality of the consumables matters way more than the tool that you put them in. I fully agree. I wasted hours dealing with brad nails that didn't go in all the way, only to bend over when I tried to nail set them. Paying more for Brad nails fixed the issue almost entirely.
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
I'm not sure I agree. Eventually your garage is totally full of exactly the right tool for some job or other and you can't find anything because there's tools in the way. It applies to software too. If all of the complexity in your project is placing the perfect tools and configuring them correctly, you end up with a codebase that's 90% tool-specific and even coders that think they're fluent in your language of choice have a steep learning curve if they're gonna work on your project because the complexity is no longer in the project's alleged language, it's now in 15 separate DSL's that they've never heard of. There's a balance to be struck here. I see this especially often in python projects with complex pre-commit configurations. It's like we secretly need that compilation step, even if our language doesn't strictly require it, and it just becomes a rug to hide overspecialized complexity under.
- eropple 3y ago
  > I'm not sure I agree. Eventually your garage is totally full of exactly the right tool for some job or other and you can't find anything because there's tools in the way. Frequently it means you can do the thing at all. I will not use my snap ring pliers again this year. Or probably next. But I am never throwing those goddamn things out because trying to do tasks that require them, without them, is impossible. And I will not get a lot of forewarning when my planer decides it's time to blow a bearing. But they're $10 snap ring pliers from Harbor Freight, not $50 Knipex ones. Get the tool to do the job, worry about the nicest tool if you do it every day.
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    Having a cluttered garage and having the right tool for the job are completely unrelated. I’m not 100% following the discussion, though. Most software work can be done with vi and nothing else. Working with your hands, on the other hand, requires snap-ring-plier specific tools.
    - __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
      If your garage has room for 100 tools, and you do 101 jobs, each which requires a niche tool, they become related on the 101st job. That is, unless you start finding other garages for your tools, but even then you're paying a too-many-tools overhead cost. With hand tools it's a little harder to sell people on a tool that only does one job, so you'll reach that point more slowly. Maybe it's the 201st job. But if you look at the explosion of languages, libraries, an SaaS offerings for everything under the sun, it seems that the tech world is more than capable of overcomplicating your stack with a 1:1 tool/task mapping.
- c22 3y ago
  My solution to this problem was to join a makerspace collective. Now if I lack the perfect tool for a job there's a good chance the makerspace has it. If not, I buy the tool and leave it at the makerspace and my garage contains only the tools I use all the time.
coldtea 3y ago
I'd say an expert is the one knowing how to use a tool for multiple jobs, and do wonders with a minimal toolset - not needing "the exact right tool for each job".
- cutler 3y ago
  Agreed. Pick 4 languages, 1 each for: - Front-end (JS) - Scritping (Python, Ruby, Perl, PHP) - Applications (Java, C#, Kotlin, Scala, Clojure) - System (C, C++, Rust) That is all you need. A true master can do a lot with the 2 "worst" languages - JS and PHP.
  - dgacmu 3y ago
    Languages are turing-complete. Tools are not. Example: there are some shapes you cannot physically create as a single unit with a milling machine; they can only be created by additive deposition methods. Or more simply, while you _can_ screw in a star drive screw with a very improperly used hex driver, you probably shouldn't.
    - midoridensha 3y ago
      Even more simply than that: if you need to unscrew a screw, using a hammer probably won't work well. Which is why that saying about a poor craftsman blaming his tools is BS: if you're given the wrong tool, you're not going to be able to do a good job.
      - OJFord 3y ago
        I've never heard that saying used in a wrong way like that, about a tool that is just wrong; it's not BS if it's about someone claiming their nails are wonky and the surrounding surface marred because of the 'crap' hammer they used, for example.
        midoridensha 3y ago
        Sure, but that's not what the saying literally says. It says "only a poor craftsman blames his tools". It makes no mention of the tools being actually fit for the purpose. They should have specified that. And even if it is the "right" tool (a hammer for a nail), what if the hammer is a plastic kid's toy? I think this saying makes far too many implicit assumptions about the type and quality of the craftsman's tools.

SantalBlush 3y ago

A lot of pros also enjoy Project Farm's YouTube videos, which compare and rate tools from popular brands.

reaperducer 3y ago

look at Adam Savage's Tested youtube channel, in which he makes videos surrounded by a vast mountain of tools, many of which he made or customized himself. While I don't dispute Mr. Savage's acumen, I wonder what the number and complexity of his tools would look like if he worked in private, instead of the glare of internet fandom.

photonerd 3y ago
Most of the tools in his shop he had before opening it up to the fandom at large. Remember: he’d been a pro at this stuff for years even before Mythbusters & the Tested stuff was (mostly) after that ended. He had 25-30 years of professional AND professionally-informed hpbbyist experience to build that collection

Brian_K_White 3y ago

youtube is probably not a strong argument but the recent fireball tools video about his welding table and jigs was pretty comvincing, even though it was an undisguised promotional work designed to convince. (He submits a basic job to 3 diffferent class of pro fabricator shops, and has one of his video producers do the same job with no help (supposedly) but with his tools, and that one is the only one that adhered to the specs.) I would like to see that same experiment reproduced by other people because if it's true I think that is a very important thing to know which would change how you approach things your whole life. You could obviously chase after awesome tools right now anyway, but it would be huge to know that it's proven to be essentially 'best practice' to do so rather than just your unfounded feeling that no one else, like your boss, is obligated to consider.

gizmo686 3y ago

I'd say there are two different types of "obsession" here. One is the attitude that that you need to use the best tools possible and by doing that you will get a good result. The other type is old fashion geakery. If you look at Adam, he is two things: a maker, and a tool geek. These aspects certainly intersect, but when he is making things, you do not see him reach for the most sophisticated tool in his toolbox. A great example of this is this video [0] where he geeks outs over his new measurement tool: guage blocks (and corresponding guage). The thing is, I don't think I have ever seen him do a build where he uses them, because they are simply beyond what his work demands. I'm a similar way with programming languages. I'm a PL geek, and enjoy geeking out about the fine details of various programming languages, and pointing out flaws in langauges. But, at the end of the day, when it comes time to pick a language for a project, I typically reach for a combination of Java/C++/python/m4. There is nothing to geek out about those languages (except for how bad they are), but pragmatically speaking, they are typically the best tool available for very boring reasons. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE7dYhpI_bI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE7dYhpI_bI

postmodest 3y ago
Meanwhile if you look at someone like Ken Parker ( https://kenparkerarchtops.com/archtoppery#new-page-1 https://kenparkerarchtops.com/archtoppery#new-page-1 ) you see someone who does obsess over the best tools _and_ the best process. Now, admittedly, Ken Parker is a lightning rod for disagreement, but you can't deny that he makes a well-made product.
- pixelatedindex 3y ago
  For the uninitiated, could you please tell me more about him being a lightning rod for disagreement? I hadn’t heard of him before.
  - jononomo 3y ago
    I had not heard of him either.
3y ago

jstummbillig 3y ago

While I do not disagree in general – things not being black or white is probably correct – I think in Mr Savages case you could argue that knowing how to geek with/over tools is the mastery part.

shrimpx 3y ago

I think there are two ways to "obsess over tools". One is to obsessively research and build your collection and sort of superficially admire your collection. Another is to bring in and master the tools one by one, driven by the needs of your process, and find meaningful places for each in your process. In essence, the former is cargo-culting the latter and they look similar from a distance.

SkyPuncher 3y ago

For me, tools capture the experience of someone else in a way that typically expands my own skills. They include little features/details that I wouldn't think of on my own. That's particularly true with software tools where non-obvious edge cases are abundant. I want tools that carry mental load for me, so I can focus on delivering maximum value.

chrisweekly 3y ago

This reminds me of a fascinating interview with Trey Anastasio (an absolute master of electric guitar tone and effects and loop pedals). His take was, while quality matters, you don't need the "best" gear -- but it's essential to really truly deeply know the gear you do have inside and out, so it can get out of the way and simply be an extension of your instrument.

QuantumGood 3y ago

I have found Gall's law to be a corollary of "mastery before tools": "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system."

didntknowya 3y ago

i think the main difference is a pro can grab a cheap tool or make one from scratch to complete a task, whereas an amateur will hesitate to do a task unless he has the "best" branded tool