That's a good thing for whatever reason it's happening.
Congratulations.
For just my hobby stuff it took a long time to figure out how to get better google results and especially kill old dead links. Bummer when you are fighting yourself.
They aren't against the average guy, but I think they could do a lot better.
But all this stuff is what pisses me off about googling these days.
Pick any subject and look for information about it. Now try to figure out how to filter out all the people trying to sell me something vaguely related to my search. Five or ten years ago, before you all started buying your way to the front of the list, I could actually find technical information.
It still is a great resource, but I now try a lot of different search engines. Sometimes that helps, but usually all the major hits are trying to sell me something.
It had to get bad eventually. Hmmm, what if google offered me an option (for a price maybe) to exclude any results that came from someone who paid google to get nearer to the front of the search results? Google, are you listening here?
The PAID ads are in a specific area (2 areas) on Google. just ignore them.
The problem is that those NOT selling something often don't want to invest in time or money for you to find them.
Niche specific searches are coming up though, just for these kind of reasons.
Sorry to hear about your loss. My last dog was a 17 year old Rat Terrier that we had to have him put to sleep. He was having mini strokes, sometimes several in a day and we couldn't let him keep suffering Over a couple months they went from once in awhile, to where the vet said that he was going to die anyway. That was in the mid '70s, and I haven't been able to bring myself to have another pet since then.
-- 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
I read those papers to try and get a handle on this. For example, see AoE page 413, Figure 7.16. Graph A shows the open loop output impedance of various opamps. Some turn up with frequency, some are flat, and the OP-07 is shown as turning down with frequency.
-- Tony Williams.
-- Don\'t renew. It worked for me 10-15 years ago, but maybe they\'re like Pasternack now?
--- Sour grapes?
Over the last ten or fifteen years I've posted hundreds (if not thousands) of _original_ drawings, sketches, ASCII schematics, LTSpice circuit lists, and verbal circuit descriptions which work and have nothing to do with 555's. Also, I've _never_ posted anything using a 741.
And you?
You post tales of being "important" in an era long gone and walk around with a chip perpetually on your shoulder.
Sad, really...
-- John Fields Professional Circuit Designer
It's a shame he won't walk around with 'some' chips on his shoulder! ! Cmon sloman, get a few 555's, sit down at the breadboard, have fun! Be bold, take a chance, get a 556, if you dare! regards, tom
That sim should be used as confirmation more than anything else. It's much more fun to work out the circuits by Gedankenexperiment first, visualize the various time domain responses as scope displays in your imagination, and get a good *feel* for how it will go.
You should experiment with the visual approach in addition to your usual analysis, this will enable you to draw on valuable intuitive resources that otherwise go unused.
The best circuit in the world will have bugs if the construction is hellacious, and lots of other things can be wrong too, usually as a result of the user not fully appreciating the critical elements in the circuit- that is what I look for, vulnerabilities. I don't care who published the circuit, and this is in the general literature, my first approach is to ask "now what's wrong with this circuit"- the alternative null hypothesis approach: this circuit hypothetically will not work unless further inspection and analysis shows that assumption to be true with less likelihood than 0.01%.
I know how that is.
I lost a fox terrier to a car when I was twelve years old. I saw it happen... he ran out into the street.
Then we've lost two Dachshunds to cars in the past 40 years, one dug under the fence, one got out because a gardener didn't latch a gate.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
[snip]
We had a female Dachshund that had seizures, she'd just fall over, but quickly recover.
One day she fell over into the swimming pool.
That was not a pleasant thing to come home to.
The other dogs must have witnessed the final struggles. They suddenly took to giving the edge of the pool a wide berth. When we would get in the pool they'd become panicky.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
When publishing a circuit, the sim is really handy in the explanation - "look at the votage on this node at this time". Apart from that simulations are mainly useful for catching drop-offs, where you've left out a component, or hooked it up wrong.
I'm too old to have learned to work any other way.
Sure. I've covered a lot of squared paper with scribbled graphs and timing diagrams in my time - I'm just a lot less visual than most engineers.
It's too easy to see ways in which a circuit won't work. You have to get inside the designer's head and work out what they were trying to do. At Cambridge Instruments I'd figure that it took a couple of hours before I could tell the difference between a carefully designed circuit and one that had been thrown together, and many of the requests for modification that I went through proposed modifying a well-designed circuit that final test didn't understand into something vile that they did understand.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
The 555 user's community. like the 741 user's community, consists of people who haven't noticed that there are new integrated circuits introduced every year, allowing you to skin the cat a whole lot of different ways, almost all of them better than one that you learned when you first got out of nappies.
I don't think that - and you've got no honest reason for claiming that I do.
Comforting.
Not at that instant. Mike thought that I needed to lean more about electron beam microfabricators, so I spent six months debugging the EBMF 10.5 - rather more effectively than was good for Mike's ego - before going on to do the system design for the shaped beam electron-beam microfabricator project, where iI was responsible for the electronics system design and and supervised a team of some ten electronic engineers. Fun while it lasted.
I did get in one bit of design in during that six months - the electrostatic beam blanking system on the column was dead crude, which meant that we needed to put +/-60V across the blaning plates to move the beam right off the final apperture, and the existing circuit wasn't short circuit proof. When I went back fitien years later, they were still using my circuit, and I think I persuaded the physicist responsible for the new column in the new EBMF to go for better quality blanking electrodes that would do the job with smaller voltages.
What makes you think that?
Your capacity for jumping to the wrong conclusion remains unimpaired.
More than you, obviously.
Clearly, you don't know much about innovative development. You go out of your way to minimise the rsiks that you can minimise, because you can be confident that the crucial innovations are going to give you loads of unexpected problems, no matter how carefully you try to anticipate them.
God save us from inventors. I've got a couple of friends who have their names on a number of patents, some of them useful, so they probably rate as inventors, but they don't see themselves that way. I've also known a number of people who deliberately tried to invent new stuff, and claimed that any new idea that surfaced in their vicinity was in fact invented by them, which led to a great deal of bad feeling. EMI Central Research had a large patent department and a "patent everything" policy, which encouraged a particularly rich crop of this kind of inventor - most of them utterly useless. One of the worst offenders - a certain C.A.G. LeMay - had invented the exceedingly useful back-projection algorithm that made the original EMI brain-scanner practical
and therafter couldn't be stopped from involving himself in every project under the sun. Since his work habits involved making undocumented changes to other peoples circuits late at night - to see what would happen - you can imagine how much fun he was to have around.
Despite my anti-inventor prejudice I have managed to get my name on three patents, so I do know that Eureka feeling.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
I did my playing with the 555 in 1975. I didn't like it much then, and haven't seen any necessity to use it since.
The only chip that I may have over-used would be the ICT7024 programmable logic device - its major virtue is that it plugs into a
22V10 socket, but offers some 20 logic cells, so you could salvage a lots of bad designs with it back when 22V10's were popular, and it is just big enough to be useful for (dumb) system-on-a-chip applications.-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
"John Fields" schreef in bericht news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...
I wouldn't say that. He's not a brilliant salesmen when he needs to sell himself, but other than that...
-- Thanks, Frank. (remove \'q\' and \'.invalid\' when replying by email)
Never posted anything using either the 555 or the 741.
But I do appreciate the comic relief when you post one of your cute little ASCII schematics in a serious thread ...
Well, that does seem to be what you see.
Strange, really.
-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Oh, read her article this issue, you may just change your mind! HAHAAHAHAHAHA
That's a great idea: submit parody circuits with lots of nonsense equations to back them up. After a few major embarassments, they'd actually have to find an engineer to review submissions before they print them. Fun!
John
One thing we do is the paid google ads. We get a report that shows impressions as well as click-throughs, which we pay for. The impressions report shows (approximately) if anyone is searching for that particular word combination. The google reports are pretty helpful.
google, by default, turns on the 'adwords' option, where your ads appear on other people's sites, and they get a share of the click-through revenue. That's an expensive, useless crock that we had to op-out of.
John
I don't want that job.
And one would have to assume that they care...but if they cared, they'd print better stuff....
Cheers,
Phil Hobbs
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.