What happened to Phil Allison?

WGAF.

"amdx"

Wot a lot of bollocks the NG is full of now.

.... Phil

Oh, I don't know. John Larkin has been talking electronics for a change, and Phil Hobbs has been active.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Don't be a stranger. This board is dull without your scintillating wit!

Not surprising, given that it's populated largely by septic tanks.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: snipped-for-privacy@netfront.net ---

It is just a high noise level..... Filtering & ignoring work for me...

John Ferrell W8CCW

Which would be?

I know you don't have a high opinion of my expertise - you mostly lack the wit to know what I'm talking about - but I'm curious as to what you might think this "one topic" might be.

It is difficult to thing of a topic that I might know nothing about - admittedly there are plenty where you don't value what I do know - but "knowing nothing" isn't quite the same as "knowing something that John Fields considers to be wrong" and objective outsiders wouldn't equate the two statements, and soome might find them diametrically opposed.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Michael, this one needs watching:

Win Jin Pom snipped-for-privacy@aol.com

It has all the criteria.......

mike

As your follow-up post made clear, the fault was in your English expression - as is so often the case - and not my comprehension of written English.

Technically speaking, it is impossible,because if I could identify it, I'd know at least one thing about it.

That is the wording that that you would have preferred that I used. Everybody's opinion of the reliability of their knowledge is fundamentally subjective, but my data-base has been being tested against reality for some fifty years now, and has proved to be pretty reliable.

You seem to have stopped testing yours against reality around the time the 555 became obsolescent, which would be about thirty years ago.

hn

It wasn't an explicit claim, but it is clearly implicit in your post, because

"just one topic you know nothing about"

clearly implies the existence of a number of topics that you consider I know nothing about, and yet post about. Since you can't express yourself very well, we have to ignore the fact that if I knew absolutely nothing about a topic, I wouldn't be able to post anything about - as I wouldn't know that it existed - and work out that what you intended to say was that you disagreed with stuff that I had posted.

Sadly, it wasn't a straw man, though you will obviously have trouble following the logic that demonstrates that you are an inarticulate Texan nitwit suffering from persistent delusions of competence.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Hmmm. A search in Mouser for the 555 yields 6 pages. On the first page alone you'll find that there are 152,667 555s in stock. Searching for 555s in Digikey yields 4 pages of results, all in stock. The quantity on the first page alone totally swamps the Mouser quantities - well over 400,000 in stock.

Mouser and Digikey (and others) seem to have a better grip on reality than you do, focusing on the viability of the part, rather than what you see as its "obsolence".

Ed

Slowman *is* obsolete. Why would you expect him to see the world any differently?

There are also SMD versions of the 555, so it must have current applications..

-Bill

John Fields isn't the only engineer who is still repeating what worked for him forty years ago. It doesn't make the 555 (or the 741) any less obsolete.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen