5 ms·

> Blackmagic just hack it together and make it work. This isn't even remotely true. Nobody at that scale just hacks it together. That sort of approach works

> Blackmagic just hack it together and make it work. This isn't even remotely true. Nobody at that scale just hacks it together. That sort of approach works for articles on various hardware hacking websites, not for real-life design and manufacturing of products.

ilyt 3y ago
given that line > such as image sensors designed for other uses (such as smartbombs and guided missiles) I'd assume comment above was satire
- gizajob 3y ago
  Not entirely! I think some of the large 35mm-size sensors used in the early cameras were designed with those kinds of applications in mind. I know BMD didn't design the sensors in-house, and used off-the-shelf parts, that in a couple of cases were actually larger than the desired sensor size, so they used it anyway but discarded part of the image produced from the sensor in order to make it 35/16mm format.
gizajob 3y ago
You'd be amazed... They're hacking together extremely professionally, but I'd imagine many engineers at BMD consider themselves hacking and what they do to be hacking, but I don't have access to any. I'd say my general premise is true though.
- robomartin 3y ago
  > You'd be amazed... I am amazed...by some of the comments. This isn't a garage operation with a bunch of dudes hacking on a plywood workbench. This is a real engineering organization with a well-optimized process and enough vertical integration to deliver excellent products at scale. That's how you do what they do. It is always interesting to watch people on HN, who obviously know very little about anything outside of hacking software, talk about making physical products. There's another thread on the first page about the realities of making a single plastic part. Read it. <sarcasm>It was obviously hacked together.</sarcasm>
  - gizajob 3y ago
    Well, I used to work there… so I at least have first-hand experience of the unorthodox methods and flexible working culture, one that is focussed on solutions rather than academic-type rigour. You’d be surprised how small the teams can be that design these products, ready for manufacture in Singapore.
    - robomartin 3y ago
      > Well, I used to work there… Good for you. Don't confuse an optimized process for "hacking". Don't diminish their accomplishments that way. I have lots of history with this company, including being personal friends with one of the founders for the last twenty years (as in, I stay at his home when I visit). They don't hack shit together. They have optimized an efficient engineering and manufacturing process. There's a simple reality in physical product engineering: The engineering process is directly related to product quality and reliability, which, in turn, is directly connected to failure rates and support/service load. A product that is hacked together will, at scale, invariably result in a bad quality and reliability along with a massive support load. This is not a financially viable approach at scale, not at all. Sure, one can hack things together during initial ideation and product definition. This, in the context of a solid product development process, is a normal aspect of almost any engineering organization, from consumer to aerospace. However, once enough is learned about the available solutions and approaches, not entering into a well-run engineering process is a costly mistake. No successful organization at scale hacks products together, it just doesn't happen.
      - hackmiester 3y ago
        I think you have some preconceived notions of what "hacking" is and isn't. Most on Hacker News do not use "hack" as a pejorative. I suspect in this case it's just an engineering / practicality focused ethos that can be applied as opposed to "design by committee." Hacking something together - and then refining it - is how many good products are designed.
        3y ago

ilyt 3y ago

given that line > such as image sensors designed for other uses (such as smartbombs and guided missiles) I'd assume comment above was satire

gizajob 3y ago
Not entirely! I think some of the large 35mm-size sensors used in the early cameras were designed with those kinds of applications in mind. I know BMD didn't design the sensors in-house, and used off-the-shelf parts, that in a couple of cases were actually larger than the desired sensor size, so they used it anyway but discarded part of the image produced from the sensor in order to make it 35/16mm format.

gizajob 3y ago

You'd be amazed... They're hacking together extremely professionally, but I'd imagine many engineers at BMD consider themselves hacking and what they do to be hacking, but I don't have access to any. I'd say my general premise is true though.

robomartin 3y ago
> You'd be amazed... I am amazed...by some of the comments. This isn't a garage operation with a bunch of dudes hacking on a plywood workbench. This is a real engineering organization with a well-optimized process and enough vertical integration to deliver excellent products at scale. That's how you do what they do. It is always interesting to watch people on HN, who obviously know very little about anything outside of hacking software, talk about making physical products. There's another thread on the first page about the realities of making a single plastic part. Read it. <sarcasm>It was obviously hacked together.</sarcasm>
- gizajob 3y ago
  Well, I used to work there… so I at least have first-hand experience of the unorthodox methods and flexible working culture, one that is focussed on solutions rather than academic-type rigour. You’d be surprised how small the teams can be that design these products, ready for manufacture in Singapore.
  - robomartin 3y ago
    > Well, I used to work there… Good for you. Don't confuse an optimized process for "hacking". Don't diminish their accomplishments that way. I have lots of history with this company, including being personal friends with one of the founders for the last twenty years (as in, I stay at his home when I visit). They don't hack shit together. They have optimized an efficient engineering and manufacturing process. There's a simple reality in physical product engineering: The engineering process is directly related to product quality and reliability, which, in turn, is directly connected to failure rates and support/service load. A product that is hacked together will, at scale, invariably result in a bad quality and reliability along with a massive support load. This is not a financially viable approach at scale, not at all. Sure, one can hack things together during initial ideation and product definition. This, in the context of a solid product development process, is a normal aspect of almost any engineering organization, from consumer to aerospace. However, once enough is learned about the available solutions and approaches, not entering into a well-run engineering process is a costly mistake. No successful organization at scale hacks products together, it just doesn't happen.
    - hackmiester 3y ago
      I think you have some preconceived notions of what "hacking" is and isn't. Most on Hacker News do not use "hack" as a pejorative. I suspect in this case it's just an engineering / practicality focused ethos that can be applied as opposed to "design by committee." Hacking something together - and then refining it - is how many good products are designed.
      - 3y ago