<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Hell Of A Lotta Features Packed Into One Level</title>
	<atom:link href="http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/</link>
	<description>All tools. All the time.  Your source for news, information, and reviews of hand tools, power tools, and tools of all kinds.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:52:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Benjamen Johnson</title>
		<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/#comment-875834</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamen Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 13:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toolmonger.com/?p=22574#comment-875834</guid>
		<description>@Joe:

Good catch Joe, I missed that.  Here's the exact wording on the site. 

&lt;blockquote&gt;Standard anodized colors are Brilliant Red(#0334R), Royal Blue(#0334B), Black(#0334BK), and Platinium(#0334PL). &lt;/blockquote&gt;

I got the picture from Rockler because they had a better view of the level.  I'm assuming that, Checkpoint will do custom colors if the order is large enough.  That probably explains why Rockler has a lower price, they ordered a large quantity to get discount pricing and are passing the savings on to the consumer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Joe:</p>
<p>Good catch Joe, I missed that.  Here&#8217;s the exact wording on the site. </p>
<blockquote><p>Standard anodized colors are Brilliant Red(#0334R), Royal Blue(#0334B), Black(#0334BK), and Platinium(#0334PL). </p></blockquote>
<p>I got the picture from Rockler because they had a better view of the level.  I&#8217;m assuming that, Checkpoint will do custom colors if the order is large enough.  That probably explains why Rockler has a lower price, they ordered a large quantity to get discount pricing and are passing the savings on to the consumer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fred</title>
		<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/#comment-875827</link>
		<dc:creator>fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 13:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toolmonger.com/?p=22574#comment-875827</guid>
		<description>I'm not sure why - but my prior comment suggesting that Chad's Toolbox may offer a lower cost ($39.99) buying option - never got posted.
Have others had difficulty with this site - because we've had fairly good buying experiences with them - purchasing Checkpoint, Knippex and Wiha tools</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure why - but my prior comment suggesting that Chad&#8217;s Toolbox may offer a lower cost ($39.99) buying option - never got posted.<br />
Have others had difficulty with this site - because we&#8217;ve had fairly good buying experiences with them - purchasing Checkpoint, Knippex and Wiha tools</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/#comment-875746</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:55:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toolmonger.com/?p=22574#comment-875746</guid>
		<description>I understand Kevin's point, and agree with him in a lot of applications, but in this case, we're still talking about the basic functions of a level, so I don't think it's quite applicable.  Now if they were adding scissors, or a hammer head . . ..

As a side note, if it comes in "four different colors: Brilliant Red, Royal Blue, Black, and Platinum," (of which I'm glad) then what is shown above?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand Kevin&#8217;s point, and agree with him in a lot of applications, but in this case, we&#8217;re still talking about the basic functions of a level, so I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s quite applicable.  Now if they were adding scissors, or a hammer head . . ..</p>
<p>As a side note, if it comes in &#8220;four different colors: Brilliant Red, Royal Blue, Black, and Platinum,&#8221; (of which I&#8217;m glad) then what is shown above?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamen Johnson</title>
		<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/#comment-874306</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamen Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:42:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toolmonger.com/?p=22574#comment-874306</guid>
		<description>I was waiting for the Jack of all trades, master of none quote. 

There are plenty of products that fit this phrase, but there are some excellent products that don't.  Unfortunately as of late some companies have haphazardly slapped together multi-function products too because they have seen the success of some excellent multifunction products. 

I think it all depends on whether the tool is well thought out, well engineered, and the functions compliment each other. It also depends on what you mean by effective.

Take my Leatherman Micra for example.  There are a bunch of tools packed into a little easy to carry package, so I have it with me all the time.  Now any one of the tools on the Micro would be 10x better as a standalone tool, but they function well enough for me to get the job done.  It can be the difference between fixing something now and waiting until I can get the right tool.  

I haven't used the above tool, but I suspect that it is well engineered, and well thought out because of the reputation of the company.    And if the features aren't complimentary, at least maybe they don't get in each other's way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was waiting for the Jack of all trades, master of none quote. </p>
<p>There are plenty of products that fit this phrase, but there are some excellent products that don&#8217;t.  Unfortunately as of late some companies have haphazardly slapped together multi-function products too because they have seen the success of some excellent multifunction products. </p>
<p>I think it all depends on whether the tool is well thought out, well engineered, and the functions compliment each other. It also depends on what you mean by effective.</p>
<p>Take my Leatherman Micra for example.  There are a bunch of tools packed into a little easy to carry package, so I have it with me all the time.  Now any one of the tools on the Micro would be 10x better as a standalone tool, but they function well enough for me to get the job done.  It can be the difference between fixing something now and waiting until I can get the right tool.  </p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t used the above tool, but I suspect that it is well engineered, and well thought out because of the reputation of the company.    And if the features aren&#8217;t complimentary, at least maybe they don&#8217;t get in each other&#8217;s way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://toolmonger.com/2009/04/03/a-hell-of-a-lot-a-features-packed-into-one-level/#comment-874278</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:21:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://toolmonger.com/?p=22574#comment-874278</guid>
		<description>I work in my spare time in digital music and there's a general rule of thumb that the more features you pack into one tool, the less effective those features are compared to their single feature, stand-alone counterparts.

Is this just one step on the road to trying to pack way to much stuff into one item to the point where they aren't effective anymore?

~Kevin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I work in my spare time in digital music and there&#8217;s a general rule of thumb that the more features you pack into one tool, the less effective those features are compared to their single feature, stand-alone counterparts.</p>
<p>Is this just one step on the road to trying to pack way to much stuff into one item to the point where they aren&#8217;t effective anymore?</p>
<p>~Kevin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
