RF Circuit Design - Chris Bowick

Exactly. I came to that realization decades ago! "Work" trades hours of your life (a finite resource of unknown size) for "dollars" -- which can be obtained in many different ways. So, find a "way" that gives the most value to that fraction of your life.

Instead of doing what people want to pay you to do, find people who will pay to to do what you WANT to do! So, it's not quite "work"...

But, the catch, there, is that you have to KNOW how you want to spend your time! You have to take an active role in deciding how your life-hours are consumed. You can't just sit back and let The Boss relieve you of that decision.

My solution is just to reduce hours spent doing the "cruft" that is boring and, IMO, "nonessential". E.g., I've not taken a "vacation" in more than 40 years. I don't "shop" (you REALLY don't want to be in a store when I'm there as I am laser focused on what I *need* to get done -- so I can get it over with, quickly). Go "out" to eat only rarely; the time spent primping, driving, waiting for a table, waiting for food, eating, waiting for check and driving back home could be better spent prepping a meal that I *know* I will enjoy and then get back to things that I want to do (some folks live to eat; I eat to live). I keep books (ereaders) in all of the places where I am likely to find myself "idle but preoccupied" -- bathroom, kitchen, car, etc. so I can make progress on the titles I've opted to consume. Spend NO time on the phone (that has changed during the pandemic as friends have suddenly decided that it's OK to tie me up with chit-chat instead of resorting to email).

Even my time on-line (e.g., as I type this) is squeezed in while doing "something else" (downloads, web searches, etc.).

OTOH, I "waste" a lot of time doing things that I don't really NEED to do. E.g., I do a *lot* of baking (50 pounds of flour for XMAS) despite the fact that I don't like "sweets". Five hours, yesterday, baking a cheesecake (disgusting! all that fat and sugar!). But, it's a "special" way to thank certain people for kindnesses they've extended to me. (you saved *me* some time so I'll gift that time back to you in the time required to produce these "surplus calories")

I have little hope that she'll make much headway at it. But, if she gets ANYTHING from her efforts, she will have felt justified in pursuing them.

I'm lucky in that it's an avocation AND vocation. When I was younger, I thought ALL people chose their vocations with that criteria. Depressing to see how many don't have that "luxury" (or forethought?)

Sadly, many of the retirees that I know have settled into a life of watching TV, eating out and cleaning (but never USING!) the pool. It's hard not to see it as "waiting around for Death to show up"!

Others have had their plans sidetracked by unexpected realities (e.g., the friend who planned on hiking in Tibet discovering he needed hip replacements; the friend who moved here to be outdoors year round developing severe asthma preventing her from leaving the house; the athletic friend who blew out his back; etc.)

We watch a lot of movies (on DVD) -- moreso since the pandemic (as my other half's opportunities for entertainment have been "canceled"). But, I can do that without actually *watching* the movie. We also find ourselves gravitating to movies that we've already seen -- and enjoyed, immensely (typ comedies). These are easy to just listen to and recall what is actually happening on the screen without actually seeing it! So, I can be installing software on a new machine (largely a "waiting action") while "watching" a movie.

A neighbor's brother is visiting from Oz and has always enjoyed seeing me when here. On this trip, he brought a video of a... hmm, it's not really a movie as much as a sort-of "home movie" (even though it was obviously PRODUCED as a movie) of a *party* somewhere down-under. So, the visuals are largely uninteresting; just folks standing around sucking on beers. But, the *jokes* are entertaining -- once you get through the language and accent issues. I've "watched" it several times, already -- yet no need to actually see the "talking heads" while doing so! I'll have most of the jokes committed to memory, soon...

Reply to
Don Y
Loading thread data ...

Well, there is the old saying, "Choose a job you enjoy and you'll never work another day in your life." Not many people are fortunate enough to be able to do that these days, but those who can are lucky indeed.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

Make no mistake -- it's still "work" as I have contractual obligations to fulfill, deadlines and other constraints.

And, as I've chosen a project that presents some /challenging/ aspect to me, there is an element of "I've never done this before" that has to be factored in; how much extra effort might be required to LEARN the stuff that I need to know to complete the job? Will there be something that I hadn't anticipated that is inherently incompatible with the approach I'd contemplated when I bid the (fixed cost) job?

But, definitely more enjoyable than making Model 27 of yet-another-product!

Reply to
Don Y

Cursitor Doom vegetates in front of the Daily Mail, Russian Today and Zero Hedge.

He's not showing any interest in how the world actually works, but rather soaks up a bizarre and over-simplified explanation of how it can be seen to work - if you ignore enough of what is actually going on.

It's roughly equivalent to pigging out on true romance novels or TV soap operas. You get to process a bunch of information that makes you feel good, but doesn't have much to do with reality.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

o Hedge.

soaks up a bizarre and over-simplified explanation of how it can be seen t o work - if you ignore enough of what is actually going on.

operas. You get to process a bunch of information that makes you feel good, but doesn't have much to do with reality.

Bill, I still remember when you quit this group because people were not engaged i n electronics but rather in flame wars. And here you have CD actually talking about electronics and subjects relate d to them and rather than appreciating that someone you disagree with polit ically might be a multi-dimensional person - you want (Need to) drag him ba ck into the political flame wars.

I do write this with some trepidation because after all, you are a man of s cience reason and objectivity......just saying.

Reply to
Brent Locher

You wouldn't know that from his postings here in recent years, though.

I won't let that happen again. If Bill becomes too provocative once more I'll just KF him again for 6 months in the interests of group harmony.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

:

f

Zero Hedge.

her soaks up a bizarre and over-simplified explanation of how it can be see n to work - if you ignore enough of what is actually going on.

ap operas. You get to process a bunch of information that makes you feel go od, but doesn't have much to do with reality.

d in electronics but rather in flame wars.

ated to them and rather than appreciating that someone you disagree with po litically might be a multi-dimensional person - you want (Need to) drag him back into the political flame wars.

f science reason and objectivity......just saying.

kill filing bill is like kill filing a ranting uncle..... just let him rant and shadow box and pontificate to the walls. Every once in a while someth ing interesting still pops out.

Reply to
Brent Locher

Er, how will your killfiling him (again) affect how other people see him and interact with him?

BTW, I seem to have escaped your killfile (again). I suggest you put me back on your naughty step.

BTW2, do you still regard Russia Today as your "most trusted news source" and avoid reading sources that might contradict that?....

On 31/08/17 22:59, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:22:14 -0700, lonmkusch wrote: > >> While you're deciding, I think I'm going to stroll over to RT for some >> good unbiased news. > > If you can't see that RT is a zillion times more reputable as a news > source than CNN/NBC/BBC et al, you must be totally blind. Sure they > aren't 100% impartial; no news organisation is. But they are my most > trusted news source even if not yours - until such time as I ever > discover otherwise, of course.

and....

On 15/05/18 18:50, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Tue, 15 May 2018 09:25:04 -0700, John Larkin wrote: > >> The official story is that he's had a heart attack. Of course, there are >> a lot of other stories. > > I'm not aware of those. I don't even read so-called respectable > newspapers. But the heart attack was only last week, so that can't > possibly be the reason.

Reply to
Tom Gardner

ero Hedge.

er soaks up a bizarre and over-simplified explanation of how it can be seen to work - if you ignore enough of what is actually going on.

p operas. You get to process a bunch of information that makes you feel goo d, but doesn't have much to do with reality.

in electronics but rather in flame wars.

You didn't get the my motives quite right. I don't mind the flame wars, but the level of electronic discussion wasn't up to much.

ted to them and rather than appreciating that someone you disagree with pol itically might be a multi-dimensional person - you want (Need to) drag him back into the political flame wars.

Cursitor Doom has a vilely superficial approach to electronics, as he does to everything else he posts about. His " I just cannot understand the menta lity of those who show no interest in the world and how it works," showed a complete absence of any self-comprehension on his part and - as such - it was comical enough to high-light. You may lack a sense of humour.

science reason and objectivity......just saying.

Flattery doesn't work on me. I like it as much as anybody else, but it alwa ys prompts the reaction "what are they after". In this case you were probab ly fishing for a complacent response - I do strive to be reasonable and obj ective, but I'm well aware how often I fail to get there.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

:

f

Zero Hedge.

her soaks up a bizarre and over-simplified explanation of how it can be see n to work - if you ignore enough of what is actually going on.

ap operas. You get to process a bunch of information that makes you feel go od, but doesn't have much to do with reality.

d in electronics but rather in flame wars.

ated to them and rather than appreciating that someone you disagree with po litically might be a multi-dimensional person - you want (Need to) drag him back into the political flame wars.

f science reason and objectivity......just saying.

Cursitor Doom certainly wouldn't. All he can recognise is whether a post ag rees with his silly ideas.

Fine by me. Cursitor Doom's responses to my posts are never constructive, a nd rarely comical enough to satirise.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

No it isn't. It's simply good netiquette. The original URLs are usually too long to fit on one line so they end up 'broken' on the reader's news client software if not curtailed.

I could equally well disparage CNN and the Washington Post if you want to talk about untrustworthy news media.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

That's not plausible. If it was the case then you could simply post both URLs.

Everybody could then see the source, and those few with broken/inadequate newsreaders could use the shortened version.

Simpler explanation for your choice: you know that people will automatically discount zerohedge, but you want to trick them into reading that rubbish.

This is the rubbish you wrote:

On 31/08/17 22:59, Cursitor Doom wrote: > On Thu, 31 Aug 2017 11:22:14 -0700, lonmkusch wrote: > >> While you're deciding, I think I'm going to stroll over to RT for some >> good unbiased news. > > If you can't see that RT is a zillion times more reputable as a news > source than CNN/NBC/BBC et al, you must be totally blind. Sure they > aren't 100% impartial; no news organisation is. But they are my most > trusted news source even if not yours - until such time as I ever > discover otherwise, of course. >

Reply to
Tom Gardner

I don't know what has been corrected, or to the extent all of the prior exi sting chapters have specifically been changed. Ch4 as a new section "Softwa re Design Tools." One part is about a free tool that does little, and the o ther part is if you have Keysight Genesys. I don't see a huge value in the section.

There are two new chapters

  1. RF FRONT-END Design
  2. RF DESIGN Tools

Chapter 8 is okay, I suppose. Not too deep or too special. Ch9 is worthless , IMO. There are two new co-authors. I am guess the new edition is mainly their d oing, not Bowick's. In the Preface, the new authors didn't explain what cha nges they actually made. I don't think a lot of value was added to the book . It was always an introductory book anyway, and still is. Good stuff in it ... it is just that there is so much more. I don't think I'd but the second after already having the first, knowing what I know now.

Other books that I think are practically useful for RF circuit design are:

"Introduction to Radio Frequency Design", Wes Hayward, (c) 1995 ^ Lots of basic useful stuff w/ good explanations (Tektronix & Triquint guy )

"RF Design Guide Systems, Circuits and Equations", Peter Vizmuller, (c) 19

95 ^ again, a lot of straight up basic but very useful stuff (Former Motorola guy; expert on helical filters) The excel spreadsheets on the book disk (in really old Excel format) actual ly have useful stuff in them.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Some other good stuff is

Gilmore & Besser, "Practical RF Circuit Design for Modern Wireless Systems" ^ both volumes, but especially the first.

Maas's "The Rf And Microwave Circuit Design Cookbook" is nice. Also, his m ixer book is a classic.

William Egan's "PRACTICAL RF SYSTEM DESIGN" is great if you're doing hard c ore RX'er design, but it is not for the hobbyist.

Rohde & Rudolph "RF/MICROWAVE CIRCUIT DESIGN FOR WIRELESS APPLICATIONS" gre at and not for the hobbyist.

There are many more excellent books.

Reply to
Simon S Aysdie

I

I think the PDF, or DJVU, EPUB, or ______, will pretty much last forever.

Maybe Jeff can send some of his old books to

formatting link
. They'll scan them, and they do a *great job* of it. (See
formatting link
to see their setup fo r scanning. It is primo.) While the scans some people do suck, they don't need to. I clean my scans up with Paperport.

And I agree with Jeff that the text search of the PDF, after OCR, is a very useful feature, and easier than the manual use of the Index. Plus, with e- search you can find stuff that isn't even in the index. I searched my scan of Motchenbacher and Fitchen for "roller coaster effect" -- it wasn't in th e index, but I immediately got it with search and stepped through the diffe rent "finds" with ease.

I really like my paper books. I make notes in them, and I don't like readin g books on the computer. But I like the PDFs too. I can take the PDF with m e on travel. I can't do much of that with paper.

Reply to
Simon S Aysdie

In the sense of from now till the first large EMP event or other disaster. See e.g. Alexandria, Constantinople, etc.

OCRed PDFs as a backup for paper are excellent, I agree. As a replacement, not so much.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics 
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 

http://electrooptical.net 
http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply to
Phil Hobbs
[...]

PDF-Xchange viewer does OCR and allows you to add comments to the PDF file. It is free. I'm running V2.5 which is very old, but it still has a wide range of options for commenting. It runs on XP and later.

formatting link

The later version is called PDF-XChange Editor. I don't know much about it, but the manual and download links are at

formatting link

--
Science teaches us to trust. - sw
Reply to
Steve Wilson

It's not rubbish and I stand by every word of it. You want rubbish? Just pick up the NYT, the WaPo or switch on CNN/MSNBC etc.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

Of course you do. You are a far-right-thinking idiot, and he's being rude about your favourite comforting delusions.

You won't find it, but you will find stuff that contradicts Cursitor Doom's favourite delusions. It isn't rubbish, but he really doesn't like it. The chill wind of reality ...

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
Bill Sloman

t I

f

f
s

y

st

rt

s.

r.

com/.. They'll scan them, and they do a *great job* of it. (See

formatting link
to see their set up for scanning. It is primo.) While the scans some people do suck, they do n't need to. I clean my scans up with Paperport.

very useful feature, and easier than the manual use of the Index. Plus, wit h e-search you can find stuff that isn't even in the index. I searched my s can of Motchenbacher and Fitchen for "roller coaster effect" -- it wasn't i n the index, but I immediately got it with search and stepped through the d ifferent "finds" with ease.

ading books on the computer. But I like the PDFs too. I can take the PDF wi th me on travel. I can't do much of that with paper.

I'll give an example. I recently found, after 15-20 years of looking, Darli ngton's 1939 paper "Synthesis of Reactance 4-poles." This little Bell pamph let is on acid paper, very yellowed, and is very fragile. It also seems to be rare in any form. So I scanned-in the whole thing at either 300 or 400 d pi BW. I then cleaned up my scan work further with Paperport, and also copi ed the 6x9 pages onto 8.5x11 pages (also with Paperport). (I need to re-do the centering--I have a better method now, but it is good enough as-is.) Th en I printed it double-sided with a laser printer, comb-bound it, and it ca me out pretty nice. I mean, the laser printer smoothed out most all of the pixelation that can be seen on screen, but even that is not bad. It is as g ood as a decent "print on demand."

With the 6x9 pages now on 8.5x11 pages, I can make easily make notes in the margins, as the margins are now nice and wide... kind of like legal court decisions. (I have speculated that the reason for wide margins in court dec isions was exactly for the purpose of those who come later to make their ow n notes. But what do I know? It is just my guess.) If I mess a page up, I c an reprint it and then re-insert it into the comb. The PDF is searchable, o f course.

Reply to
Simon S Aysdie

e.

t,

Okay--good to know. Thanks!

I have Acro Pro 9.5... it has been serving me well, but I'll guess that som ehow the SW people will eventually make it obsolete and non-functional. The Acro Pro 9.5 OCR engine is okay--nothing to brag about. It is about as goo d as the built in OCR of Paperport.

When I bought Paperport many years ago (v14, from Nuance at the time; now i t is Kofax,... I think). The Nuance program "PDF Viewer Plus 7.1" came bund led with it. If PDF scans are poor quality, or what is being scanned is poo r to begin with, I've noticed PDF Viewer Plus 7 does a better detection job than Acro Pro 9.5, or the built in Paperport OCR. Now you've given me anot her to try!

Reply to
Simon S Aysdie

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.