Value of the DIR approach

[Jason B]

Standardization prevents progress.

No it doesn't. Not if the body applying the standards re-evaluates the standards on a regular basis like GUE does.

 

[Thalassamania]

No it doesn't. Not if the body applying the standards re-evaluates the standards on a regular basis like GUE does.

Standardization, if rationally applied, does not prevent innovation, but it does slow it down, and on balance that can be a good thing. But I hold out little hope in the scuba industry. I was in the backrooms when we were trying to get auxiliary use "standardized" and I left in disgust as it became clear that the best that could be done was the market driven "golden triangle," which I might note does not include the only intelligent solution on the table, passing the primary.

 

[boulderjohn]

No it doesn't. Not if the body applying the standards re-evaluates the standards on a regular basis like GUE does.

And who would be responsible for telling all the manufacturers in the world what they can and cannot do in equipment design, and who would enforce it?

 

[TSandM]

DIR has a head-to-toe equipment check, where all divers on the team test everything they are going to use, and discuss what auxiliary equipment is being carried and where. There is no need for each diver to inspect everybody else's equipment, however, because it's all the same.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Standardization prevents progress.

As someone who has spent the past 30+ years working in various high-tech industries (semiconductor processing, computers, medical instruments, telecommunications, Internet applications, etc.) I would have to disagree with that statement ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[joe rock]

Not to be mean spirited but several people are acting like those rubber neckers at an accident. You know, complain about all the people who slow down to get an eyeful - thus causing a traffic jam. And then, when the complainers get close by, they slow down and have a look...

Been away for a few days, I like to look

 

[boulderjohn]

As someone who has spent the past 30+ years working in various high-tech industries (semiconductor processing, computers, medical instruments, telecommunications, Internet applications, etc.) I would have to disagree with that statement ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I don't believe we are talking about the same thing.

By the way, I used to be an ISO 9000 auditor-it was my job to check on many of those standards.

 

[Jason B]

And who would be responsible for telling all the manufacturers in the world what they can and cannot do in equipment design, and who would enforce it?

...and Halcyon was born!

 

[djanni]

I'm not sure I see how, since in this senario it is just as likely that the non-dir diver would be just as unfamiliar with the DIR divers gear, putting the DIR diver in the same risk. If I am diving in a wreck with a non-dir buddy with an Air2, and we had an OOA incident, I would much rather be the one donating than the one receiving in that senario. I would say for my self that I would be in the greater risk if I needed to share air.

Keep in mind the OP was addressing the value of DIR to a Receational Diver. I don't consider wreck penetration or cave diving Recreational.

Speaking for myself, if I were going to enter a wreck or a cave I would get some training in that area and I would use the appropriate equipment. I would not knowingly put myself or another in a compromising situation.

However, generally speaking I agree with you. In the situation you describe you might be at greater risk but if the non-DIR diver was familar with a broad range of configurations you could be a little better off.

I believe the sword cuts both ways.

 

[TxHockeyGuy]

The problem is there is a huge difference in how standardization is approached in the computing industry and how it is approached in the DIR community. The DIR equivalent in computers would say we would all have to run the same OS and with the same configuration on every PC. Granted this means you would only have to learn one configuration and you could function on any computer in the world. The non DIR standardization is saying this IDE drive will work under Linux, Windows, or Mac. Some standardization is good for the sake of interoperability, but not to the point where you take away all choice of different and potentially better tools/methods.