SC letter this month

Interesting Mailbag letter from an Ian Farquar in the latest Feb SC mag, talking about the "simple, pedestrian and straightforward" projects being published these days, compared with the innovative projects of the early EA (e.g. EDUC-8 and MiniScamp). I'm surprised SC published it, as it does pull a few punches.

He's got some good points when you compare todays component availability with that of yesteryear, and some of the leading edge projects being published in the other mags. Admittedly the other mags like Circuit Cellar have most of the projects submitted by readers, often as part of very competitive design contests, thus it's easy for them to draw in very high tech and innovative projects. Perhaps SC could try a similar scheme?

I'll certainly agree with the valve amp and vintage radio stuff. I know there is a huge vintage radio following, but I've always believed that the column does not belong in a magazine called Silicon Chip.

Comments?...

Dave :)

Reply to
David L. Jones
Loading thread data ...

"David L. Jones" wrote

Interesting Mailbag letter from an Ian Farquar in the latest Feb SC mag,

I'm surprised SC published it, as it does pull a few punches.

***Pulling your punches means that you do not attempt to hurt your opponent,you have got the meaning totally wrong!! What you should have written is," It does NOT pull any punches"!

Brian g

Reply to
Brian g

Glad we got that sorted out then :-)

--
Cheers .......... Rheilly P
>
Reply to
Rheilly Phoull

Wasn't it EA that wanted project submissions that cost no more than $100 or so?. Here it is:

"How much is 'too expensive', and how complex is 'too complex'? Well, the price of the parts for a project is generally a good guide. Currently the most popular projects are those where the parts cost less than $100-150." quoted from EA's guide: writers.doc dated 18/4/97

There seems to be a perception that people only want simple project taking no more than an hour to build and that the big projects aren't supported by kit suppliers as they don't sell many.

Reply to
Mark Harriss

Certainly many years ago I sent a letter bemoaning the usage of security devices in a series of trivial projects. From memory, the projects were frivilous voltage monitors that logged to a PC, yet the author had decided he was going to make a killing by writing some software linked to said serial numbers of security device. The projects were virtually what you would find from an app note.

Another point I raised is todays youth never get to build such exciting projects as the ETI 660, Dream, and various other micro designs as I did. Shit I learnt a lot about computing systems playing with them and building add on cards.

I made mention then that he should rename the magazine "Thermonic Valve" as the usage of the word Silicon Chip truly misrepresented the average monthly content presented.

Perhaps there's an opening, bring out a magazine called "Thermonic Valve" and load it up with Circuit Cellar style designs :D

Never got an acknowledment from Leo "Homer" Simpson about the letter and he lost a customer straight up for that attitude alone for several years.

Ray

Reply to
Ray

Yes, very true. I can remember when EA would furiously avoid publishing almost any project which used a programmable device. The kit suppliers will generally not touch a kit that costs too much or includes any exotic devices or construction techniques, but that has at least changed with regards to micros and the odd surface mount project. Indeed, if a project is not available as a kit it is almost certainly doomed to "failure", or may not even make publication. But that doesn't stop say Circuit Cellar from publishing leading edge designs, and almost none of their projects are available as kits, the magazine is purely for "technical interest" for most readers. But a magazine like circuit cellar is aimed at the professional engineering market, and so has the support of all the big chip makers and advertisers. SC is aimed squarely at the dwindling hobby electronics and vintage radio markets, and so has the ads and article content to match. Should SC stay in that market, or should they branch out I wonder?

Dave :)

Reply to
David L. Jones

Hi Dave,

Well, I spent quite a while writing a reply, and a damn good one at that I think. Unfortunately something happened in between the 'submit' and 'appear' phases, so it was lost in the ether (net).

I have to agree somewhat with Lord Farquar's comments, although I think that many things in SC, although not relevant, still are interesting.

I'll leave it at that, not wanting to write stuff I've already written (and lost)...

Cheers, Phil.

Reply to
philbx1

Don't you hate that! I now make a habit of doing a CTRL-C on every web based form I fill in just before I hit Send, just in case the ether swallows it. Has now saved my sanity on quite a few occasions.

Dave :)

Reply to
David L. Jones

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.