Re: Are TS555's really supposed to suck this much?

Maybe you were standing in a kookdom.

Any fool can make such a claim. Since you are obviously exceptionally foolish, one is obliged to treat it with exceptional scepticism.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

ng

ot

So you concede the point.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

My wife tells me that I am a paradoxical bad speller - which reflects a particular reading strategy, which is associated with a very high reading rate. It's not any kind of indication of idiocy - quite the reverse.

The second vowel in "category" is unstressed, which means that what one hears is a "schwa" which would be the same whatever vowel was present in the orthographic representation.

A google search on "catagory" throws up 2,260,000 hits, which makes it a pretty popular error. The correct spelling throws up 1,110,000,000 hits, so "catagory" isn't actually an acceptable variant, and to that

- very limited - extent your comment has merit.

Grown-ups don't get excited about typos, and people who understand how the brain works are aware that typos don't reflect any kind of underlying problem - the brain, like any other signal processing system, has to make a compromise between error rate and the time spent on error checking, so normal human performance is tpproduce some kind of error of action roughly every half hour. For programmers, that is roughly one error per thirty lines of code.

Drinking a beer or being a bit tired raises the error rate without actually disrupting the mechanism.

I'm afaid that you need to recognise your own idiocy level, rather than making your idocy patent by making unjustified claims about other people's performance.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Of course. When that is what happens. Some idiot the other day claimed one of the most commonly used chips in the world to be obsolete. That guy is foolish. Oh... that's right... YOU are that foolish idiot.

The difference being that I am not a fool, and my claim is factual.

The difference in the case of your claims is that you are a foolish, worn out, old, engineer wanna be that never had the competency required, an you do claim a great chip to be obsolete.

Essentially my remarks and claims about me are true, and my remarks and claims about you are true.

You cannot keep up with modern word usage. The term, in our modern world, you dumb turkey, is SKEPTICISM. You'll never make it out of the hole you dug for yourself, and you are still down there, digging it deeper.

That usage has been the norm and correct term for a long time now. Your term is archaic.

You lose, again.

Bwuahahahahah! Any old excuse in a storm, eh?

Nope. You're on the idiot bus, and they have a seat with your name on it there.

When your IQ is only 20, as in the case with you, perhaps.

Bwuahahahaha! Be afraid... be very afraid.

Your personality is the issue, and is blatantly apparent. That you missed that simple premise is yet another tell. It wasn't about performance, it is about the words you choose to lay down. The fact that you fail in both regards has no association between the two.

NONE of our programmers introduce typos into ANY of their thousands upon thousands of lines of code. We perform mission critical services. It is not surprising that you would be beneath understanding such industrial safety mechanisms as simple as hiring competent personnel.

Mr Nymbecile, you are a septic tank and a dullard to boot. You are therefore in no position to pass comment on spelling or the use of the English language in general.

There must be a s*it fly in the room... no... Wait! The s*it flies are here because what is in the room is a huge pile of s*it named 'warm'n'flat.

Your mother should be in prison for the felony crime against society of not flushing the retarded piece of s*it that you are, the moment she shat you out of the retarded piece of s*it ass that she is. Your father should be drawn and quartered.

Put that in your spell checker and smoke it, you retarded little piece of s*it.

I found a site that not only has examples, they have physical examples!

And cheap as a heathkit too! But already built!

It came out at around 140 when last tested, quite some time ago, which means that it is high enough that regular tests don't say anything more that that it is appreciably higher than average.

Since I can read and write and construct coherent sentences, it has to be a lot hgher than 20, as you'd be aware if you had any idea of what you were talking about.

I'm much more nervous about the idea that someone as ill-informed as you are has anything to do with performing "mission critical services".

at

Of course they do. But they check their code, and explain successive small lumps of it to other programmers (walk-throughs)in order to find and correct these typos.

The fact that you are unaware that this is going on tells us how willing you to pontificate on subjects where you are painfuly ill- informed.

Since I'm well aware how the problem is dealt with, and you - equally clearly - are not, the lack of understanding is entirely yours, clown.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

and

es.

idiot.

Dimbulb thinks that "widely used" is incompatible with "obsolete". He's too dim to understand the idea of legacy parts and legacy design, which keep crappy old chips in production despite the fact that they could - and should - be replaced in every application by something newer, cheaper and better.

Unfortunately, redesigning a device and creating a new printed circut layout and production documents all cost money, so it ends up being more profitable to keep on churning out the same old rubbish.

If Dimbulb were an engineer he'd know about this, so he has to be a pointy-headed manager.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Except that you content here that a perfectly viable chip is obsolete, and your refusal to admit that you are wrong, shears a good 120 points off that number, guaranteed.

Also, we can tell that you are stupid. The chip argument just cements it in stone.

Since I am working right along side these people, and you are not, never have, and likely never will, I think your argument severely lacks mettle.

Great, yet sad indictment of your problem. You know nothing about the industry at all. Your "could be replaced in every application by something newer, cheaper and better" proves that fact.

Not that there is anything wrong with the original, but do you really think that all those chip fab and design boys are using the same art for these dies and chip designs that they were when the fab features were 50 times larger? You really are an idiot if that is the case.

You shot yourself in the head with the "all that costs money though..." remark. In more ways than one.

You prove that it is you that really does not understand the micro-electronic industry at all, much less the engineering behind analog and digital circuits.

Your remarks here prove it beyond doubt.

So Bill,

How about if you head on over to the site mentioned --

This could likely help a lot of people, being exposed to some "better than a

---Joel

Typical Slowman double-talk. If it's "more profitable", it's LESS COST to stay with "legacy" parts.

Check out

They continue to make some of my chip designs that were done in the early '60's!

Wonder why? It's PROFITABLE you dummy.

In the past year I've been approached to create modern versions of those of my old designs that are now unobtainium.

As for the 555 it's one of the cleverest designs ever... CMOS versions exist in the most modern of processes. Even my original MC4024 voltage-controlled multivibrator has been resurrected in modern CMOS.

You dummy! You dummy! You dummy! You dummy! You dummy! You dummy!

You're so ignorant that you don't realize how stupid you are. Why don't you do us all a favor and put a gun to your head and blow that puss-filled pimple away? I promise to come to your funeral and LAUGH ;-) ...Jim Thompson