Talk:Prototyping

Can you think of a business in which prototyping would not work?

Yes. Newspapers hardly ever "stop the presses" to change the first version. Coal miners must get the coal that is actually in the ground -- there is no point in constructing some sort of "prototype" coal mine. People that milk cows learn to milk on an actual cow, not some sort of prototype. Pet stores sell the actual pet, rather than letting people start with a "prototype pet" before they get the actual pet. Restaurant chefs may "experiment" with new recipes, but even the experiments use real food ingredients, rather than some sort of "prototyping" material. --68.0.120.35 21:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do prototypes necessarily use a sort of "prototyping" material? Aren't models made of a different material called a mockup or something of the sort? In that case, the chef example above doesn't work - the new creations are prototypes. As for the others, the newspaper industry does use prototypes. That is, the first version referred to above. The first version is the definition of prototype - the prototype is the first version. The coal industry could benefit greatly from prototypes, and I'm sure they use them already. There are immense safety concerns, to name one only area in which a model, perhaps not full-sized, of a coal mine would work. Additionally, the coal mines themselves are not the only asset of the coal industry - you have countless types of vehicles, mining equipment, and support equipment. Milking cows - there would of course be no cow prototypes, as cows are not the product of the dairy industry. Instead, milk is. And I would hope there is prototype milk - a sample of the milk throughout its development cycle to make sure it is safe and clean. As for pet stores, it is right that they would doubtless have a need for a prototype. However, a prototype is used for a product. A pet store has no "products", instead they offer a service. They do not produce pets, they recieve and sell them. Even pet breeders do not produce the pets, they just reap the benefits of reproduction. Andyo2000 03:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Do prototypes necessarily use a sort of "prototyping" material? Aren't models made of a different material called a mockup or something of the sort?"

Yes, inert models are called a mockup. However, the comment on "prototyping" material refers to functional electrical prototypes quickly assembled using a plastic solderless breadboard instead of soldered to a fiberglass printed circuit board. Those are functional (in most ways), but would never be shipped to a customer. --68.0.120.35 05:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first version is the definition of prototype - the prototype is the first version.

In printing (and electronics, and I assume other fields as well), there are (at least) 2 methods of making something: one can make thousands of practically identical copies, using some sort of production line. (One can print thousands of copies of a newspaper on a printing press). Or one can make just one of something. (One can use a typewriter or hand-write a letter).

Even when both processes use the same materials (paper and black ink), and produce ("word-for-word") "the same" item (such as a particular newspaper article written by a particular journalist), it is usually pretty easy to tell which of the 2 processes was used to make that item.

When I say "prototype", I mean that someone expects to produce some item with a mass-production process, but first made one or a few copies (the prototype or prototypes) using some "one-at-a-time" process, and expects that testing that copy may lead to some changes to the design before going into mass production.

Once it goes into mass production, the items produced are not prototypes.

If I get the last paper printed for Monday before they turned off the presses and started loading Tuesday's edition, I wouldn't call the first copy that rolled off the presses the "prototype". (I might call it the "first version", if there were several versions). If you asked me for the prototype for that last paper printed, I might point at the computer monitors showing a simulation of what the paper might look like, or at the hand-written or typewritten submissions from each journalist and editor. --68.0.120.35 05:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Software Prototyping

There's a very good article on Software Prototyping that doesn't appear to even get a mention here. Is this something that needs to be addressed?

I made a note to see the software prototyping article in that section. (I want to leave part of it here because it is a significant form of prototyping, but I removed some of the details and will work on merging them into the software protoyping article.) I removed the merge to tag havign donme this. RJFJR 17:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed text

I removed the following unreferenced text from the Software prototyping section. Please put it back if you can find any references for it:

In the mid-1980s, prototyping was seen as the solution to the problem of requirements analysis within software engineering. Prototypes are any form of deliverables that model an application allowing users to visualize the application that is not yet constructed. Prototypes help users get an idea of what the system will look like, and make it easier for users to make design decisions without waiting for the system to be built. When they were first introduced the initial results were considered amazing. Major improvements in communication between users and developers were often seen with the introduction of prototypes. Early views of the screens led to fewer changes later and hence reduced overall costs considerably.

However, over the next decade, while proving a useful technique, it did not solve the requirements problem:

Managers, once they see the prototype, often have a hard time understanding that the finished design will not be produced for some time.
Designers often feel compelled to use the patched-together prototype code in the real system, because they are afraid to 'waste time' starting again.
Prototypes principally help with design decisions and user interface design. However, they can not tell what the requirements were originally.
Designers and end users can focus too much on user interface design and too little on producing a system that serves the business process.

Lakeworks (talk) 12:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proof of concept

A proof of concept does not have to be a prototype... It can also be done just to show that you can :)

Proof of concept is not prototyping Prototyping in software environment is mostly done with the aim to sell something, you are producing showcases for your customers. This could be very simple solutions as long as they fulfill the eye catcher function. A proof of concept on the other hand has nothing to do with 'look and feel'. As the name states it is used to proof some technical requirements, mostly with the aim of minimizing financial risks.

I disagree. There is nothing about the term 'prototype' that dictates what it's used for; it may be a marketing prototype, it may be a technical proof of concept, it may be something else. All of these things are prototypes in my view, though in the marketing case if it's non functional then the term prototype is probably stretching it - maybe 'marketing model' would be a more appropriate term. The trouble is 'prototype' is rather a loose term in practice, since a prototype could be a very accurate model for the final production version, or something much less developed - often engineers will refer to early prototypes for the latter. If I had to opt for one definition over the other, I'd say the opposite of what you're saying - that a proof of concept is more a true prototype than a marketing exercise. However, I don't think we do have to plump for one or the other, we just have to make the article more inclusive. Graham 00:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd consider a proof-of-concept as a type of prototype, intended to prove feasibility. Other kinds of prototypes are used for marketing, or to nail down requirements, or to gather performance data, or... well, you get the picture. --Allan McInnes (talk) 06:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A proof of concept doesn't need to be a device though, it can be a scientific result (data) that validates a method as well. I think they are separate concepts that happen to have a lot of overlap for engineers, but not necesarily in all feilds.--AAMiller 23:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sure. I'm not supporting the merge of proof of concept into this article. I was simply trying to point out that the assertion that "Proof of concept is not prototyping" is not (IMHO) correct. --Allan McInnes (talk) 00:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proof-of-concept may appear different through the development lifecycle of the intended final product. Examples are:

Technology Model made by integration of ad hoc hardware in laboratory, e.g. by using evaluation kits for microcontrollers.

Concept Visualisation by laboratory integration of components and supporting elements made by rapid prototyping techniques e.g. SLA

Functional Models hand-built to demonstrate appearance, size and basic functionality of the final product. Models may have supporting elements (SLA) and may therefore not be representative for robustness tests

Prototypes more or less hand-built, but made by final components and supporting elements. Prototypes are fully representative for performance tests as well as robustness tests, and should be deployed for testing in an operational environment e.g. at customers' sites

Pilot Production Series made on final manufacturing setup for product qualification tests prior to release to market

Current Production Series ... well they are final products so the era of prototypes has ended

Svendhaugaard 09:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

20-layer circuit board prototype

"Epson uses inkjet technology to create world's first 20-layer, ultra-thin circuit board" [1]

Is this historical enough to use as a reference in this article? (Is this really the world's first 20 layer circuit board? If not, I would be very interested in knowing when the "world's first 20 layer circuit board" was made.) --68.0.120.35 21:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the World's first 20-layer board but it may be the first made by inkjet printing. I find too specific to be of interest for associating it to the term of "prototyping". Svendhaugaard 09:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? What is the world's first 20-layer circuit board? Could you give me a link or reference? I agree that it doesn't really belong in this article on "prototyping", but perhaps it would be appropriate for the "history" section of "printed circuit board" or "history of electrical engineering". --68.0.120.35 04:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A section of students revisions

query for settling unverified information

(dated 10-april-2008)

Advantages of prototyping

   * May provide the proof of concept necessary to attract funding
   * Early visibility of the prototype gives users an idea of what the final system looks like
   * Encourages active participation among users and producer
   * Enables a higher output for user

(what higher output? large amount of output? highly desireable output? or what else?)

   * Cost effective (Development costs reduced)

(could use for more detail explanation? what makes cost effective? besides labour cost & what else?)

   * Increases system development speed
   * Assists to identify any problems with the efficacy of earlier design, requirements analysis and coding activities
   * Helps to refine the potential risks associated with the delivery of the system being developed

Xmlv (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]