<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN class=240154315-01022000><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2>In as
much as it is possible to separate `engines' from `interfaces', there is a
critical difference, one that may play a role in public vs. private funding (and
developement). One of the major reasons DOE2.x enjoys the success it does is
because it is open and has been extensively `tested' or `proven', within the
given context of good vs bad modeling practices. This acceptance of the `engine'
allows anybody to put an interface on it and not impact this basic strength.
Even if the interface is completely closed, as long as people can see the
resulting BDL code, there is a varying but generally large degree of faith in
the model.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=240154315-01022000><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=240154315-01022000><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial size=2>Indeed, I would be much more hesitant to used either PowerDOE,
Visual DOE, eQuest, or VisualDOE PlantOnly, were it not for the fact that I can
see the resulting BDL input. This `tranparency' is also part of the reason we
switched from Trace 600 to DOE2.1 some ten years ago. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Postman@gard.com
[mailto:Postman@gard.com]<B>On Behalf Of</B> Jeff Hirsch<BR><B>Sent:</B>
Monday, January 31, 2000 4:42 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
BLDG-SIM@gard.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [BLDG-SIM] Hornet's Nest -- Policy for
Public Investment in Energy Software<BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3>Also we do engines, interfaces, and specialized
applications - we do not see a policy that allows public investment in
engines but not interfaces logical. Again, the policy for public
funding should be to do what is needed most, but in a way that enhances the
private sector not competes with it; use of public funding for enabling
technology is almost always welcome, for products is ONLY welcome if it is
spend within the private sector through competitive awards.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>---<BR>Jeff Hirsch<BR>James J. Hirsch & Associates<BR>Building
Performance Analysis Software & Consulting<BR>12185 Presilla
Road<BR>Camarillo, CA 93012-9243 USA<BR>phone: (805) 553-9000<BR>fax: (805)
532-2401<BR>email: <A
href="mailto:Jeff.Hirsch@DOE2.com">Jeff.Hirsch@DOE2.com</A><BR>web: <A
href="http://DOE2.com">http://DOE2.com</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><PRE>
==================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE>
===========================
You received this e-mail because you are subscribed
to the BLDG-SIM@GARD.COM mailing list. To unsubscribe
from this mailing list send a blank message to
BLDG-SIM-UNSUBSCRIBE@GARD.COM
</PRE></BODY></HTML>