In Craftsman, Sennett makes the [typical] argument that drawing on the computer is less effective and subordinate process than drawing by hand.  The passage has a very biased and opinion-based demeanor.  The examples used to support his thesis are weak and very subjective.  As an emerging profession at the current time I am quite bothered when I hear things like this feel as though it is a conversation that is going to go on for the next couple decades.  The work place is split at the moment, on one side there are the seasoned professionals who did everything by hand for their entire career and on the other is the younger generations who have learned how to do everything on the computer.  The former feels that ‘right’ way is to make/draw by hand and that the computer is much inferior.  They also love to give us younins a hard time about ‘not knowing what trace paper is’  or ‘ not knowing how to draw by hand,’ and are serious about it while it is untrue.  The only valid argument I have heard on this topic is by architect Barry Burkis, who says ‘paper has a memory,’ and he explains how the drawings you do on paper do not go away, unless of course you through them away.  The argument is made that the memory is lost when drawing on the computer because instead of drawing over lines, we delete and redraw erasing the ability to periodically look back and compare.  Although this can, and most certainly does happen, I do not believe the ‘computer’ is the problem.  The problem lays in the skills the professional has developed. It is most certainly possible to draw with memory on the computer; it is as simple as continuously copying your drawing over each time you make a change or saving a new file as soon and the design changes or evolves.  I get quite annoyed when I hear these condescending remarks because I believe they are fueled by ignorance.  Instead of saying something’s dumb and unnecessary, look at when seems to be the issue and take a stab at breaching the gap.