|
|
 FAQ
 Search
 Memberlist
 Usergroups
 Register
 Profile
 Private messages
 Log in
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 7:56 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
 |
|
Richard Freeman wrote:
| Quote: |
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45052901.9EE4EC3E@earthlink.net...
w_tom wrote:
Mister wrote:
The book smart people believe everything they read in a book and do
not care if what they read is proved false by real world experience.
The real world smart people read the book, but also experience and
learn from their real world experience. They know the difference
between what is theory described as fact and what is real.
That is my 2 cents worth, now back to the regularly scheduled
argument.
One who read books and learned well proven industry standards also
has decades more experience. To know a fact, one must have both
fundamental knowledge including theory, concepts, and the many
underlying principles. And then one must also have experience.
Anything less creates wild speculation or junk science reasoning.
Notice that Michael assumed 1970 power supplies were big, heavy
linear supplies. And yet in the 1970s, we were even designing,
testing, and repairing switching power supplies. (Ever have an
electrolytic explode right in front of your face? Also an experience.)
One was working with technology that the other did not even know
existed. So which one has more experience?
Where does Michael's knowledge reside? He is a technician. He saw
damage and then assumed reality only from observation. Long before he
was even using power supplies and before the IBM PC existed, I was
working with switching power supplies at the design level - meeting
requirements long established by peers who had been doing it even
longer. We repeatedly suffered and learned from reality - what works
and why things fail. Technicians sent us the failures. We learned why
failures happened - and changed designs accordingly. So you tell me
which one learned concepts 30 years ago AND has experience so much
longer than Michael.
Mister - I am totally confused why that was not obvious. Michael
has so little experience as to not even know switching power supplies
were common in the 1970s. That should have been a damning fact. He is
a technician who knows how to fix things by replacing parts in proven
designs. He did not even know of Intel specifications that computer
supplies must meet. Those familiar with computer power supply design
and failure knows those specs. Why do you not see this for what it
really is - the speculator verses one with 'dirt under his
fingernails'? I am truly mystified. Why was that not obvious?
That is a straight forward and 'honest from the heart' question. Why
did you not see this discussion for what it is? Why was Michael's lack
of knowledge even about switching power supplies in the 1970s not an
irrefutable fact? Why was that not obvious? I am truly mystified.
What was that not obvious?
Nothing is obvious after a trip through the blender you use to
distort the facts.
Keep spinning your lies. Anyone that has read the entire thread
knows what kind of person you really are. You never answer questions,
you take things out of context, and you snip away any links that refute
your lies.
I'll bet that you're not man enough to look at the back of your
computer and tell us what the AC input voltage ranges are, because it
will prove you wrong. I have over 100 PCs right not, and not one of
them says it will work at 90 VAC.
I also see that you aren't hanging around the electronics newsgroups
after they showed you for what you are.
news:sci.electronics
news:sci.electronics.basics
news:sci.electronics.components
news:sci.electronics.design
news:sci.electronics.equipment
news:sci.electronics.misc
news:sci.electronics.repair
Well I thought I had him run off aus.electronics for a while but he showed
up again like the bad stench he/she/it resembles - possibly something to do
with thefact that I had not posted there for a couple of months ....
To "Mister": Be careful how you reply to this character, or you'll have
him following you around and telling lies about you, too.
Yep "Mister" I second that you generally cannot believe a claim that w_tom
makes as he generally tells Lies and makes outrageous and impossible claims
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Hi Michael I was wondering why that half witted Moron w_tom was calling me
Michael on another Newsgroup (aus.electronics) now I know he is confusing me
with you I dont feel Insulted then ......
|
Thanks! ;-)
He's had it out for me for a long time because I got him all fired up,
then left him to stew while the other regulars tore him to pieces on one
of the sci.electronics newsgroups.
BTW, I used to read and post on aus.electronics from time to time,
but I got sick of "toaster boi". He was repeating himself as much as
w_tom. I figured that I would find a group that didn't smell of cats
and burnt toasters.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Richard Freeman
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:32 pm Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:450621AE.49837C9B@earthlink.net...
| Quote: | Richard Freeman wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45052901.9EE4EC3E@earthlink.net...
w_tom wrote:
Mister wrote:
The book smart people believe everything they read in a book and do
not care if what they read is proved false by real world experience.
The real world smart people read the book, but also experience and
learn from their real world experience. They know the difference
between what is theory described as fact and what is real.
That is my 2 cents worth, now back to the regularly scheduled
argument.
|
snipped - Lies from
w_tom ----------------------------------------------------
| Quote: |
Notice that Michael assumed 1970 power supplies were big, heavy
linear supplies. And yet in the 1970s, we were even designing,
testing, and repairing switching power supplies. (Ever have an
electrolytic explode right in front of your face? Also an
experience.)
One was working with technology that the other did not even know
existed. So which one has more experience?
|
Ha Ha Ha Ha is that who designed those crappy Switchers that I saw in the
80's - the ones that blew up if you looked at them Sideways I can see them
being an effort that w_tom would be proud of ;-)
Note here how w_tom deliberately misquotes Michael - Michael pointed out
that the PCs in the 1970's used Linear power Supplies so w_tom twists
Michaels words to say that there were no Switchers in the 1970's
where does w_toms knowledge reside ? That is difficult to say as he does not
seem to have any Genuine knowledge but just makes up 'facts' to suit
himself - he assumes Reality follows fantasy must be when the hallucinogens
kick in.
Somehow I doubt that w_tom even has a clue what an SMPS is ....
---- Snipped more crap from w_tom
| Quote: | Mister - I am totally confused why that was not obvious. Michael
has so little experience as to not even know switching power supplies
were common in the 1970s.
|
Common ???? I think w_tom is about a decade early here - they were far from
common in the 1970's and were only getting popular in the 80's - no wonder
Mister can tell how wrong w_tom is proving to be.
| Quote: | That should have been a damning fact.
|
*** straight! This is a telling fact that w_tom thinks they were common in
the 1970's and even I know that they were not ..... ( I was a child of the
70's)
I know yet another challenge for w_tom ( apart from the regular challenge of
remembering to breath ) - Name 5 Personal computers of the 1970's that used
SMPS.
| Quote: | He is
a technician who knows how to fix things by replacing parts in proven
designs. He did not even know of Intel specifications that computer
supplies must meet. Those familiar with computer power supply design
and failure knows those specs. Why do you not see this for what it
really is - the speculator verses one with 'dirt under his
fingernails'? I am truly mystified. Why was that not obvious?
|
Maybe that is because Mister can tell the stench of excrement when he sniffs
it .....
| Quote: | That is a straight forward and 'honest from the heart' question.
Why
did you not see this discussion for what it is? Why was Michael's
lack
of knowledge even about switching power supplies in the 1970s not an
irrefutable fact? Why was that not obvious? I am truly mystified.
What was that not obvious?
|
Nothing 'w' you have been shown up once again for the ignorant liar that you
are.....
| Quote: | Nothing is obvious after a trip through the blender you use to
distort the facts.
Keep spinning your lies. Anyone that has read the entire thread
knows what kind of person you really are. You never answer questions,
you take things out of context, and you snip away any links that refute
your lies.
I'll bet that you're not man enough to look at the back of your
computer and tell us what the AC input voltage ranges are, because it
will prove you wrong. I have over 100 PCs right not, and not one of
them says it will work at 90 VAC.
I also see that you aren't hanging around the electronics newsgroups
after they showed you for what you are.
news:sci.electronics
news:sci.electronics.basics
news:sci.electronics.components
news:sci.electronics.design
news:sci.electronics.equipment
news:sci.electronics.misc
news:sci.electronics.repair
Well I thought I had him run off aus.electronics for a while but he
showed
up again like the bad stench he/she/it resembles - possibly something to
do
with thefact that I had not posted there for a couple of months ....
To "Mister": Be careful how you reply to this character, or you'll
have
him following you around and telling lies about you, too.
Yep "Mister" I second that you generally cannot believe a claim that
w_tom
makes as he generally tells Lies and makes outrageous and impossible
claims
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Hi Michael I was wondering why that half witted Moron w_tom was calling
me
Michael on another Newsgroup (aus.electronics) now I know he is confusing
me
with you I dont feel Insulted then ......
Thanks! ;-)
|
Its always a pleasure and anyone who is putting the boot into w_tom cannot
be all bad ;-)
I guess the Fact that he is calling me Michael though is evidence that he is
on some pretty hard core Hallucinogenic drugs when we both live on opposite
sides of the world .... (well near enough)
| Quote: | He's had it out for me for a long time because I got him all fired up,
then left him to stew while the other regulars tore him to pieces on one
of the sci.electronics newsgroups.
|
Ahh look I just despise any Idiot who advises folk to do stupid things -
Like depend on MOVs for "100% Lightning protection" if does not end up
causing someone's death by advising them to keep using their computer during
a Thunderstorm it will only be due to the efforts of folk like you and me.
I kind of got side-tracked rolling out what has become Australia's third
largest ADSL Network (probably a piddly little thing by US standards as we
only have a tenth of the population) so I have not had as much of a chance
to post of late and I think when w_tom did his regular Google search for
Lightning, surge etc he must have noticed that I had not been as active of
late so he thought he would get away with writing crap on aus.electronics .
Anyway I just thought I would put the boot in to w_tom while I was over here
;-)
| Quote: | BTW, I used to read and post on aus.electronics from time to time,
but I got sick of "toaster boi". He was repeating himself as much as
w_tom. I figured that I would find a group that didn't smell of cats
and burnt toasters.
|
Yes when I found these Posts on Google I thought your name sounded familiar
.....
Best Regards (to Michael that is not w_tom - loser extraordinaire)
Richard Freeman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
w_tom
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 4:54 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
Mister wrote:
| Quote: | I used to be an elected official (politician). I would have guys like
this for lunch in a debate. I have a habit of leading a person down a
path of questions that would have them answer their own questionable
argument the way I see fit and then I would stomp on them. I found it
to be quite humorous, however the person(s) I did this to did not find
it so humorous and I quickly found out that you have no friends in
politics.
I just find it funny now to read some of the posts on here, especially
when one person continuously repeats so called facts. Sounds like a
broken record or a bad epsiode of Jerry Springer.
|
I gather you have described me a shyster. Because I am an engineer,
blunt honest, don't play political games, then I would make an
assumption. I am not entirely sure that was your post. You did not
specifically post my name. IOW But then I am that honest and that
demanding of facts before making a conclusion.
Facts about power supplies were technically accurate. Michael may
not have even been born when I was working as an engineer on switching
power supplies. Therefore your response totally confuses me. I posted
numbers, technical citations, etc - and yet you insist I am lying? I
repeatedly cite the same facts that others do not and cannot dispute.
I repeat them because those without technical knowledge will not even
acknowledge damning reality. You think I am lying? Why? That was my
question in the first post and you still did not answer it. It was no
setup as a shyster or Michael might post. The question was exactly
what an honest person would ask. Why would you deny what is even a
published fact 30+ years ago?
Yes, I am not a politician. I am an engineer who was doing this
stuff decades ago - probably longer than Michael even existed. This
thread is a classic example of how 'so many believe Saddam had weapons
of mass destruction' even though facts and numbers suggested otherwise.
But then, as an engineer, I also saw through that myth long before
Iraq was invaded.
If posting to a politician with a political agenda, then yes.
Nothing I have posted would hold water to those who only 'feel' rather
than know. But again, Mister, I am not attacking you as the myth
purveyors proclaim. I was and still am asking you because as an
engineer I am nakedly honest: why you did not see through others who
avoid technical reasons for their speculations? I am trying to
understand, for example, if you decide only on number of posters.
For example, why does that CBEMA industry standard from even 30 years
ago not have any relevance to you? Why do Intel specifications for
power supplies (that are found in responsible computer manufacturer
products) not have credibility?
Ignore those who say I will attack you. They will post political
myths and lies for reasons I will never understand. Why did you not
grasp technical facts proven by their sources such as Intel specs and
as found standard in computers from responsible manufacturers? Because
I am so technically driven and so bluntly honest, I am simply asking
you why one would see things politically - and believe those who post
insults rather than technical fact? There was no hidden agenda in my
earlier post. What was asked was only what was asked? No hidden
agenda that myth purveyors proclaimed. Why do responsible and highly
regarded sources, publications, and numbers mean nothing to your
conclusion? That was and still is the question - rephrased and posted
here many times so that no doubt of my question exists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mister
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:27 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
No offense to some of the engineers in here, but not all engineers can
find their way out of a wet paper bag, even if they designed it.
FILTER SET >Ba Bye<
On 12 Sep 2006 16:54:23 -0700, "w_tom" <w_tom1@usa.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Mister wrote:
I used to be an elected official (politician). I would have guys like
this for lunch in a debate. I have a habit of leading a person down a
path of questions that would have them answer their own questionable
argument the way I see fit and then I would stomp on them. I found it
to be quite humorous, however the person(s) I did this to did not find
it so humorous and I quickly found out that you have no friends in
politics.
I just find it funny now to read some of the posts on here, especially
when one person continuously repeats so called facts. Sounds like a
broken record or a bad epsiode of Jerry Springer.
I gather you have described me a shyster. Because I am an engineer,
blunt honest, don't play political games, then I would make an
assumption. I am not entirely sure that was your post. You did not
specifically post my name. IOW But then I am that honest and that
demanding of facts before making a conclusion.
Facts about power supplies were technically accurate. Michael may
not have even been born when I was working as an engineer on switching
power supplies. Therefore your response totally confuses me. I posted
numbers, technical citations, etc - and yet you insist I am lying? I
repeatedly cite the same facts that others do not and cannot dispute.
I repeat them because those without technical knowledge will not even
acknowledge damning reality. You think I am lying? Why? That was my
question in the first post and you still did not answer it. It was no
setup as a shyster or Michael might post. The question was exactly
what an honest person would ask. Why would you deny what is even a
published fact 30+ years ago?
Yes, I am not a politician. I am an engineer who was doing this
stuff decades ago - probably longer than Michael even existed. This
thread is a classic example of how 'so many believe Saddam had weapons
of mass destruction' even though facts and numbers suggested otherwise.
But then, as an engineer, I also saw through that myth long before
Iraq was invaded.
If posting to a politician with a political agenda, then yes.
Nothing I have posted would hold water to those who only 'feel' rather
than know. But again, Mister, I am not attacking you as the myth
purveyors proclaim. I was and still am asking you because as an
engineer I am nakedly honest: why you did not see through others who
avoid technical reasons for their speculations? I am trying to
understand, for example, if you decide only on number of posters.
For example, why does that CBEMA industry standard from even 30 years
ago not have any relevance to you? Why do Intel specifications for
power supplies (that are found in responsible computer manufacturer
products) not have credibility?
Ignore those who say I will attack you. They will post political
myths and lies for reasons I will never understand. Why did you not
grasp technical facts proven by their sources such as Intel specs and
as found standard in computers from responsible manufacturers? Because
I am so technically driven and so bluntly honest, I am simply asking
you why one would see things politically - and believe those who post
insults rather than technical fact? There was no hidden agenda in my
earlier post. What was asked was only what was asked? No hidden
agenda that myth purveyors proclaimed. Why do responsible and highly
regarded sources, publications, and numbers mean nothing to your
conclusion? That was and still is the question - rephrased and posted
here many times so that no doubt of my question exists. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBFan2000
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:28 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
Why is it that simply because someone was doing something when someone else
was in pampers they think they automatically better than the other person?
Is it mere assumption and/or arrogance? I ask this not only because of this
thread but because its a common thing in the groups I subscribe to.
Countless posters always resort to that arrogant post, assuming that since
they might have more years doing a job they are better or that their opinion
matters more. Sure more years of experience generally makes that person
more informed, especially in a field that moves as fast as technology but
that is not always the case. Assuming it is shows disrespect and arrogance!
A wise person once said that a true wiseman has many more questions than
answers!
"w_tom" <w_tom1@usa.net> wrote in message
news:1158105263.527116.311110@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Mister wrote:
I used to be an elected official (politician). I would have guys like
this for lunch in a debate. I have a habit of leading a person down a
path of questions that would have them answer their own questionable
argument the way I see fit and then I would stomp on them. I found it
to be quite humorous, however the person(s) I did this to did not find
it so humorous and I quickly found out that you have no friends in
politics.
I just find it funny now to read some of the posts on here, especially
when one person continuously repeats so called facts. Sounds like a
broken record or a bad epsiode of Jerry Springer.
I gather you have described me a shyster. Because I am an engineer,
blunt honest, don't play political games, then I would make an
assumption. I am not entirely sure that was your post. You did not
specifically post my name. IOW But then I am that honest and that
demanding of facts before making a conclusion.
Facts about power supplies were technically accurate. Michael may
not have even been born when I was working as an engineer on switching
power supplies. Therefore your response totally confuses me. I posted
numbers, technical citations, etc - and yet you insist I am lying? I
repeatedly cite the same facts that others do not and cannot dispute.
I repeat them because those without technical knowledge will not even
acknowledge damning reality. You think I am lying? Why? That was my
question in the first post and you still did not answer it. It was no
setup as a shyster or Michael might post. The question was exactly
what an honest person would ask. Why would you deny what is even a
published fact 30+ years ago?
Yes, I am not a politician. I am an engineer who was doing this
stuff decades ago - probably longer than Michael even existed. This
thread is a classic example of how 'so many believe Saddam had weapons
of mass destruction' even though facts and numbers suggested otherwise.
But then, as an engineer, I also saw through that myth long before
Iraq was invaded.
If posting to a politician with a political agenda, then yes.
Nothing I have posted would hold water to those who only 'feel' rather
than know. But again, Mister, I am not attacking you as the myth
purveyors proclaim. I was and still am asking you because as an
engineer I am nakedly honest: why you did not see through others who
avoid technical reasons for their speculations? I am trying to
understand, for example, if you decide only on number of posters.
For example, why does that CBEMA industry standard from even 30 years
ago not have any relevance to you? Why do Intel specifications for
power supplies (that are found in responsible computer manufacturer
products) not have credibility?
Ignore those who say I will attack you. They will post political
myths and lies for reasons I will never understand. Why did you not
grasp technical facts proven by their sources such as Intel specs and
as found standard in computers from responsible manufacturers? Because
I am so technically driven and so bluntly honest, I am simply asking
you why one would see things politically - and believe those who post
insults rather than technical fact? There was no hidden agenda in my
earlier post. What was asked was only what was asked? No hidden
agenda that myth purveyors proclaimed. Why do responsible and highly
regarded sources, publications, and numbers mean nothing to your
conclusion? That was and still is the question - rephrased and posted
here many times so that no doubt of my question exists.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBFan2000
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:28 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
| Quote: | Yes, I am not a politician. I am an engineer who was doing this
stuff decades ago - probably longer than Michael even existed. This
thread is a classic example of how 'so many believe Saddam had weapons
of mass destruction' even though facts and numbers suggested otherwise.
But then, as an engineer, I also saw through that myth long before
Iraq was invaded.
|
How great for you, perhaps you should be working at the pentagon? Or
perhaps you should buy some tarot cards and take your show on the road. Or
even better, do some research before you post.
Over 500 hundred shells have been found loaded with both sarin and mustard
gas since the beginning of the war. Yes most were degraded but still
deadly. In early 2005 a shell wired as a IED on a Baghdad street exploded
and 3 servicemen were taken to a hospital with minor blisters and they were
also temporarily blinded, a common reaction to Sarin nerve agent. The few
papers that reported this incident tried, in vain, to say that Sarin is not
a WMD. Unlike so many others I spent time (over a month) researching Sarin,
(as well as Iraq's history) below is a small part of an article I wrote for
a newspaper.
_______________
......Sarin gas was discovered by Nazi Germany in 1938. This fact alone
should give us an idea of how horrific this stuff is. It is odorless,
colorless, and tasteless and 500 times more toxic then Cyanide.
While it's true that our exposed soldiers were quickly treated and released,
these minor injuries should not be used as a means to measure Sarins'
destructive power. What many don't understand is that Sarin, as developed
by the Iraqis, is a binary chemical agent. Like an epoxy glue, Sarin
consists of two agents that mix to produce the deadly gas. While the agents
can mix in an uncontrolled manner during an explosion, the agent should be
mixed in proper ratios before detonation. Once mixed properly 100
milligrams (one drop) is more than enough to kill an adult male, in fact a
roomful of adult males!
As with any chemical agent there are varying degrees of exposure. Minor
exposure, like that suffered by our troops can result in, vomiting, eye
pain/blindness, drooling, and drowsiness, among many other ailments. Those
at this level of exposure often fully recover but can also suffer from
respiratory problems and disturbed sleep for the rest of their lives. If
the device is delivered in a way that renders the agent as an aerosol, those
unlucky enough to breathe it in can expect violent tremors, convulsions,
seizures, coma, and ultimately death. I have even read about convulsions
strong enough that the victim breaks his/her own back while vomiting up vast
amounts of blood.
They have now found that the shell was carrying 3 or 4 liters of Sarin. If
that amount, even in a degraded state, had been properly mixed, loaded onto
a missile, and detonated over a city it could have cause massive casualties
that would make the 9-11 casualties pale in comparison. Sarin is also a
heavy chemical; this makes detonation over a city ideal because the gas will
quickly settle on the population.
Saddam himself admitted twice to producing 790 tons (remember, one drop
kills) of Sarin nerve agent. He used it on Iran and then on his own people.
Then he said he voluntarily destroyed it all. When simply asked to provide
proof of the destruction he suspiciously remained silent. While strangely
the left-wing somehow finds Saddam trustworthy, the rest of us realize that
if you know a madman had chemical weapons and can't prove his claims of
destroying them, then you must assume he still has them. This, by the way,
is the same assumption that Clinton and his congress openly advertised in
the late 90's.......
______________________
I wrote this article (obviously) awhile after the incident I mentioned
above. That was one shell that exploded, since them they have found over
500 of these shells. Most in a degraded state but still potent enough to
make thousands extremely sick and probably kill many. The anti-American
left immediately started the montra that these weapons were pre desert storm
and so they don't count. I would love and I mean love to see these people
in a room with one of these shells that have been cracked open and sprayed
into the room. You know not one of them would even get close to a intact
shell let along a cracked one. Instead the anti-American left focus on
undermining the troops saying they support them but in the next breath
saying they can't win and that they are rapists and murderers. We have a
media that openly celebrates everytime the troops death toll passes a
increment of 500. We use to have an unspoken rule that politics stopped at
the waters edge, but its not uncommon to see former politicians speaking out
against their country when out giving speeches. We even have a former
president, Jimmy Carter, inviting the last president of Iran to America to
speak at a "rally" on the 5th anniversary of 9-11. For this it is my belief
that he should be tried for treason and should receive the punishment that
treason use to carry.
By the wa, when I refer to the "anti-American left" I don't mean the entire
left. I think it is important to keep separate the left that was once and
still is an important part of the process and those that specifically act to
harm the country. Dems like, for example my grandmother, while being
pro-abortion and pro-social programs, cared about the country. They cared
when the country was under attack; they stood up and defend her when she was
in trouble, as my grandfather did in the Air-Corp. Those Dems are a
important part of the system, they bring balance! (you know, ying and yang)
The Anti-American Dems, like MoveOn.org, Cindy Sheehan, John Kerry, John
Murtha, John McCain, and so on actively work against our troops. The
majority deserve prison time if not worse!
God knows I don't agree with everything Bush and the Republicans have done
(immigration and spending come to mind) but when it comes to the war I
support him, he's (unfortunately) the best we have when it comes to
security. And until we the people get smart, and take Washington back (by
force if necessary) it will continue to be "vote for the worst of two evils"
WOW, sorry for the huge OT post, but mike started it. :-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBFan2000
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:28 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
So true, some are so smart they can't function normally. Same with network
administrators. I just dealt with one that was great on networking but try
to engage him in everyday conversation and he couldn't string a sentence
together.
"Mister" <not_a_chance@this_email_address.com> wrote in message
news:qvjeg21jmhem2orop2ofd2an731nutrcq8@4ax.com...
| Quote: | No offense to some of the engineers in here, but not all engineers can
find their way out of a wet paper bag, even if they designed it.
FILTER SET >Ba Bye
On 12 Sep 2006 16:54:23 -0700, "w_tom" <w_tom1@usa.net> wrote:
Mister wrote:
I used to be an elected official (politician). I would have guys like
this for lunch in a debate. I have a habit of leading a person down a
path of questions that would have them answer their own questionable
argument the way I see fit and then I would stomp on them. I found it
to be quite humorous, however the person(s) I did this to did not find
it so humorous and I quickly found out that you have no friends in
politics.
I just find it funny now to read some of the posts on here, especially
when one person continuously repeats so called facts. Sounds like a
broken record or a bad epsiode of Jerry Springer.
I gather you have described me a shyster. Because I am an engineer,
blunt honest, don't play political games, then I would make an
assumption. I am not entirely sure that was your post. You did not
specifically post my name. IOW But then I am that honest and that
demanding of facts before making a conclusion.
Facts about power supplies were technically accurate. Michael may
not have even been born when I was working as an engineer on switching
power supplies. Therefore your response totally confuses me. I posted
numbers, technical citations, etc - and yet you insist I am lying? I
repeatedly cite the same facts that others do not and cannot dispute.
I repeat them because those without technical knowledge will not even
acknowledge damning reality. You think I am lying? Why? That was my
question in the first post and you still did not answer it. It was no
setup as a shyster or Michael might post. The question was exactly
what an honest person would ask. Why would you deny what is even a
published fact 30+ years ago?
Yes, I am not a politician. I am an engineer who was doing this
stuff decades ago - probably longer than Michael even existed. This
thread is a classic example of how 'so many believe Saddam had weapons
of mass destruction' even though facts and numbers suggested otherwise.
But then, as an engineer, I also saw through that myth long before
Iraq was invaded.
If posting to a politician with a political agenda, then yes.
Nothing I have posted would hold water to those who only 'feel' rather
than know. But again, Mister, I am not attacking you as the myth
purveyors proclaim. I was and still am asking you because as an
engineer I am nakedly honest: why you did not see through others who
avoid technical reasons for their speculations? I am trying to
understand, for example, if you decide only on number of posters.
For example, why does that CBEMA industry standard from even 30 years
ago not have any relevance to you? Why do Intel specifications for
power supplies (that are found in responsible computer manufacturer
products) not have credibility?
Ignore those who say I will attack you. They will post political
myths and lies for reasons I will never understand. Why did you not
grasp technical facts proven by their sources such as Intel specs and
as found standard in computers from responsible manufacturers? Because
I am so technically driven and so bluntly honest, I am simply asking
you why one would see things politically - and believe those who post
insults rather than technical fact? There was no hidden agenda in my
earlier post. What was asked was only what was asked? No hidden
agenda that myth purveyors proclaimed. Why do responsible and highly
regarded sources, publications, and numbers mean nothing to your
conclusion? That was and still is the question - rephrased and posted
here many times so that no doubt of my question exists. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
w_tom
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:27 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
Mister wrote:
| Quote: | No offense to some of the engineers in here, but not all engineers can
find their way out of a wet paper bag, even if they designed it.
|
Why not answer a question asked logically and without any insult?
Why do you have a problem with industry standards including 1970s CBEMA
and Intel's power supply specifications? Why a politician response
with insults? I simply asked you to logically explain why sources
considered industry benchmarks are completely ignored. But after two
replies and after no answers, apparently emotion - not logic - is your
agenda. Is that true?
Where are these engineers that might take insult? The guy we send
out to locate and recover defective parts is Michael Terrel. His own
responses are classic of one with only a technician's grasp. Hell,
he did not even know well understood power supply standards from Intel.
He did not even know how common the switching power supply was in
early 1970s. He is not an engineer and his experience is limited. He
is apparently a good tech, but only a tech. Therefore you did not
insult him? Where are these engineers you didn't mean to insult?
Mister was asked a simple question. Why does the one who read books
and learned well proven industry standards, that has decades more
experience, and that cites technical sources and numbers - why do you
deny the only engineering facts posted here?
It is a fact - brownouts must not damage electronics. If brownouts
are destructive, then power down - another brownout that slowly
becomes a blackout - would also be destructive. Why do you have a
problem with this fact that was even standard to all linear and
switching power supplies 30+ years ago? It was a simple question. Do
you intend to answer it or just intend to insult? Again, a simple
question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 11:30 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
w_tom wrote:
| Quote: |
Mister wrote:
No offense to some of the engineers in here, but not all engineers can
find their way out of a wet paper bag, even if they designed it.
Why not answer a question asked logically and without any insult?
Why do you have a problem with industry standards including 1970s CBEMA
and Intel's power supply specifications? Why a politician response
with insults? I simply asked you to logically explain why sources
considered industry benchmarks are completely ignored. But after two
replies and after no answers, apparently emotion - not logic - is your
agenda. Is that true?
Where are these engineers that might take insult? The guy we send
out to locate and recover defective parts is Michael Terrel.
|
First of all, spell my name right, moron. Second, YOU don't send me
ANYWHERE, except in your *** dreams where you are actually doing
something useful for the world, like scrubbing toilets for the real
engineers.
| Quote: | His own
responses are classic of one with only a technician's grasp.
|
That's right. That's why at least one of my designs in aboard the
International Space Station as part of the Lockheed-Martin supplied KU
band video and data link. How could a technician do that? It was a
modified Microdyne 700 Series telemetry receiver modified to operate on
the 48 VDC power buss, and mounted into a custom rack mount cage by
Lockheed-Martin. I had to solve a random memory problem and wrote an
ECO to switch from the traditional battery backed 2K * 8 static RAM to a
ZMD Capstore part. It also removed the lithium battery from the
receivers, which was a requirement when we got the receiver order from
Lockheed-Martin. Can you tell us why you aren't allowed to use a
lithium battery on the space station? I know the answer.
How do you like the weather satellite photos on the TV news? I wrote
a couple ECOs for the modules used in the turnkey three rack system we
delivered to Wallops Island, Virginia. Oh, yeas, I also wrote a lot of
the test procedures, designed and built a lot of test fixtures for four
different product lines.
| Quote: | Hell,
he did not even know well understood power supply standards from Intel.
|
A good technician takes a crap design from a half assed engineer and
build a marketable product. The bad engineer then pats himself on the
back and talks down to the techs who saved his sorry ass.
As far as not understanding Intel's RECOMMENDATIONS (Intel is not a
standards committee and can't set standards. Of course, if you really
were an Electrical Engineer, you would already know that.), it is you
that doesn't know how to read them. Their current list of approved
power supplies don't meet the standards you claim that they have to.
The CBEMA standard WAS for business equipment like copiers and class A
business computers, Mini computers like the PDP-11, and computer
terminals), not "Class B" personal computers. Of course, you should
already know this, if you had the background you claim.
I was declared an engineer at 20 years old by the US Army at Ft.
Knox, Ky. while in basic training, and I have the papers to prove it.
| Quote: | He did not even know how common the switching power supply was in
early 1970s. He is not an engineer and his experience is limited.
|
Another lie. You make things up to support your lies. Switching
supplies were rare through the 70s, and most of what was in use was
crap. The computers I listed all had linear supplies. I had a pair of
Checkmate (National Semiconductor) Class A Mini Computers that were
built in the mid '80s that had linear supplies, so your lies just don't
float.
He
| Quote: | is apparently a good tech, but only a tech. Therefore you did not
insult him? Where are these engineers you didn't mean to insult?
Mister was asked a simple question. Why does the one who read books
and learned well proven industry standards, that has decades more
experience, and that cites technical sources and numbers - why do you
deny the only engineering facts posted here?
It is a fact - brownouts must not damage electronics. If brownouts
are destructive, then power down - another brownout that slowly
becomes a blackout - would also be destructive. Why do you have a
problem with this fact that was even standard to all linear and
switching power supplies 30+ years ago? It was a simple question. Do
you intend to answer it or just intend to insult? Again, a simple
question.
|
You have no idea what you are talking about. There are a lot of
shaved to the last penny "Bean Counter" products on the market that
shouldn't be.
I'll tell you what, why don't you give us your real name, the college
where you claim that got your degree, and the year you graduated so we
can verify that you've even been near an engineer?
Why have you never answered any questions put to you, like what is
the input voltage range marked on the back of your computer? Its not
that hard, to see it, if you'll just pull your lying head out of your
infected *** and take a look at it. Are you such a pathological
liar that you can't tell the truth about anything?
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mister
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:02 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 06:30:55 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | That's right. That's why at least one of my designs in aboard the
International Space Station as part of the Lockheed-Martin supplied KU
band video and data link. How could a technician do that? It was a
modified Microdyne 700 Series telemetry receiver modified to operate on
the 48 VDC power buss, and mounted into a custom rack mount cage by
Lockheed-Martin. I had to solve a random memory problem and wrote an
ECO to switch from the traditional battery backed 2K * 8 static RAM to a
ZMD Capstore part. It also removed the lithium battery from the
receivers, which was a requirement when we got the receiver order from
Lockheed-Martin. Can you tell us why you aren't allowed to use a
lithium battery on the space station? I know the answer.
How do you like the weather satellite photos on the TV news? I wrote
a couple ECOs for the modules used in the turnkey three rack system we
delivered to Wallops Island, Virginia. Oh, yeas, I also wrote a lot of
the test procedures, designed and built a lot of test fixtures for four
different product lines.
|
Michael, we finally tracked you down. This is Evets Sboj from the
galaxy Elppa. I would like to take you to our master Llib Setag on
the mothership Tfosorcim. You have defeated our mindless drone known
as w_tom. We will not harm you, we only want to extract your brain.
You too can then walk the earth mindlessly as so many other w_toms
have done for centuries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Freeman
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:53 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:450621AE.49837C9B@earthlink.net...
| Quote: | Richard Freeman wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45052901.9EE4EC3E@earthlink.net...
w_tom wrote:
Mister wrote:
The book smart people believe everything they read in a book and do
not care if what they read is proved false by real world experience.
The real world smart people read the book, but also experience and
learn from their real world experience. They know the difference
between what is theory described as fact and what is real.
That is my 2 cents worth, now back to the regularly scheduled
argument.
|
- - - - - - - Snipped waste of bandwidth from w_tom - - - - - - - - - - -
| Quote: | Nothing is obvious after a trip through the blender you use to
distort the facts.
Keep spinning your lies. Anyone that has read the entire thread
knows what kind of person you really are. You never answer questions,
you take things out of context, and you snip away any links that refute
your lies.
I'll bet that you're not man enough to look at the back of your
computer and tell us what the AC input voltage ranges are, because it
will prove you wrong. I have over 100 PCs right not, and not one of
them says it will work at 90 VAC.
I also see that you aren't hanging around the electronics newsgroups
after they showed you for what you are.
news:sci.electronics
news:sci.electronics.basics
news:sci.electronics.components
news:sci.electronics.design
news:sci.electronics.equipment
news:sci.electronics.misc
news:sci.electronics.repair
Well I thought I had him run off aus.electronics for a while but he
showed
up again like the bad stench he/she/it resembles - possibly something to
do
with thefact that I had not posted there for a couple of months ....
To "Mister": Be careful how you reply to this character, or you'll
have
him following you around and telling lies about you, too.
Yep "Mister" I second that you generally cannot believe a claim that
w_tom
makes as he generally tells Lies and makes outrageous and impossible
claims
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Hi Michael I was wondering why that half witted Moron w_tom was calling
me
Michael on another Newsgroup (aus.electronics) now I know he is confusing
me
with you I dont feel Insulted then ......
Thanks! ;-)
He's had it out for me for a long time because I got him all fired up,
then left him to stew while the other regulars tore him to pieces on one
of the sci.electronics newsgroups.
|
Michael,
I get 6 postings before w_tom choose to ignore me whereas I make it 8
Postings until he chose to ignore you - mind you, you started before me, so
I guess you can justify claiming you had already worn the moron down before
I started, so lets say that gives you a handicap of ... -2 posts But then
you gave him a break from between the 1st and the 8th so I reckon we can
add one of those posts back ......
So that leaves the score at ;-)
Michael 7
Richard 6
w_tom Loser and Liar (as always)
Does this game score like Golf ????
Should we go by posts or points made against w_tom ? - nah points scored is
a bit like shooting fish in a barrel
Regards
Richard Freeman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:14 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
Richard Freeman wrote:
| Quote: |
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:450621AE.49837C9B@earthlink.net...
Richard Freeman wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:45052901.9EE4EC3E@earthlink.net...
w_tom wrote:
Mister wrote:
The book smart people believe everything they read in a book and do
not care if what they read is proved false by real world experience.
The real world smart people read the book, but also experience and
learn from their real world experience. They know the difference
between what is theory described as fact and what is real.
That is my 2 cents worth, now back to the regularly scheduled
argument.
- - - - - - - Snipped waste of bandwidth from w_tom - - - - - - - - - - -
Nothing is obvious after a trip through the blender you use to
distort the facts.
Keep spinning your lies. Anyone that has read the entire thread
knows what kind of person you really are. You never answer questions,
you take things out of context, and you snip away any links that refute
your lies.
I'll bet that you're not man enough to look at the back of your
computer and tell us what the AC input voltage ranges are, because it
will prove you wrong. I have over 100 PCs right not, and not one of
them says it will work at 90 VAC.
I also see that you aren't hanging around the electronics newsgroups
after they showed you for what you are.
news:sci.electronics
news:sci.electronics.basics
news:sci.electronics.components
news:sci.electronics.design
news:sci.electronics.equipment
news:sci.electronics.misc
news:sci.electronics.repair
Well I thought I had him run off aus.electronics for a while but he
showed
up again like the bad stench he/she/it resembles - possibly something to
do
with thefact that I had not posted there for a couple of months ....
To "Mister": Be careful how you reply to this character, or you'll
have
him following you around and telling lies about you, too.
Yep "Mister" I second that you generally cannot believe a claim that
w_tom
makes as he generally tells Lies and makes outrageous and impossible
claims
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
Hi Michael I was wondering why that half witted Moron w_tom was calling
me
Michael on another Newsgroup (aus.electronics) now I know he is confusing
me
with you I dont feel Insulted then ......
Thanks! ;-)
He's had it out for me for a long time because I got him all fired up,
then left him to stew while the other regulars tore him to pieces on one
of the sci.electronics newsgroups.
Michael,
I get 6 postings before w_tom choose to ignore me whereas I make it 8
Postings until he chose to ignore you - mind you, you started before me, so
I guess you can justify claiming you had already worn the moron down before
I started, so lets say that gives you a handicap of ... -2 posts But then
you gave him a break from between the 1st and the 8th so I reckon we can
add one of those posts back ......
So that leaves the score at ;-)
Michael 7
Richard 6
w_tom Loser and Liar (as always)
Does this game score like Golf ????
Should we go by posts or points made against w_tom ? - nah points scored is
a bit like shooting fish in a barrel
Regards
Richard Freeman
|
More like "Trolls in a teacup" ;-)
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:26 am Post subject: Re: Odd PSU behavior? |
|
|
Mister wrote:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 06:30:55 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
That's right. That's why at least one of my designs in aboard the
International Space Station as part of the Lockheed-Martin supplied KU
band video and data link. How could a technician do that? It was a
modified Microdyne 700 Series telemetry receiver modified to operate on
the 48 VDC power buss, and mounted into a custom rack mount cage by
Lockheed-Martin. I had to solve a random memory problem and wrote an
ECO to switch from the traditional battery backed 2K * 8 static RAM to a
ZMD Capstore part. It also removed the lithium battery from the
receivers, which was a requirement when we got the receiver order from
Lockheed-Martin. Can you tell us why you aren't allowed to use a
lithium battery on the space station? I know the answer.
How do you like the weather satellite photos on the TV news? I wrote
a couple ECOs for the modules used in the turnkey three rack system we
delivered to Wallops Island, Virginia. Oh, yeas, I also wrote a lot of
the test procedures, designed and built a lot of test fixtures for four
different product lines.
Michael, we finally tracked you down. This is Evets Sboj from the
galaxy Elppa. I would like to take you to our master Llib Setag on
the mothership Tfosorcim. You have defeated our mindless drone known
as w_tom. We will not harm you, we only want to extract your brain.
You too can then walk the earth mindlessly as so many other w_toms
have done for centuries.
|
Sorry, but I have to decline. That's one of the few body parts that
still works. Being 100% disabled really stinks. :(
Anyway, I need my brain for a while longer to finish writing my
Sci-Fi trilogy. It covers a couple hundred years of earths history and
aliens like w_tom. You know the type: mindless, greedy, and not as well
armed as they thought they were. :)
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Richard Freeman
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
