1 Jun
2006
1 Jun
'06
6:51 p.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
How can you possiibly tell me what I enjoy and what I don't? If you don't
like gabbing a soldering iron and 'scope and diving into the logic fine, but
don't try to critisse those of us who do.
-tony
-----------------------------------------------------
Tony, I am not telling you what you enjoy or don't. I was simply commenting
on your many many statements that troubleshooting to a component level is
your belief in the right way to do things. If you feel I was criticizing,
then I apologize for my comments. I was merely saying that I don't
understand why you can't do both: fix old time computers and be intimate
with the latest and greatest. Both are fun. If you are interested in only
one aspect of the hobby, more power to you. It's your life.
As for my likes, yes I use a soldering iron and oscilloscope every day. As
play, I also design using TTL and linear, though usually with a wire wrap
gun instead of solder. For example, I spent last weekend repairing a batch
of HP180 oscilloscopes that had sat in the garage for 20 years.
As far as I know, I have the oldest working computer on this list - built in
1962. Several list members have seen it in operation. Al K is busy
archiving the software and manuals for the benefit of the list. But I also
love my G4's and have ordered a Quad G5. I use a laptop constantly, and see
nothing wrong with playing with the latest offerings from Microsoft. It's
all a big game. Why not play with the entire genre?
Billy
2 Jun
2 Jun
4:24 p.m.
Tony, I am not telling you what you enjoy or
don't. I was simply =
commenting
on your many many statements that troubleshooting to a component level =
is
your belief in the right way to do things. If you feel I was =
I beleie you can't know you've cured a fault unless you know what the
fault wss (just having the fault go away is not good enough!). And the
only way to know where the fault is is to trace it to the component. At
which point you might as well do component level repair (_finding_ the
fault is what takes the time, replacing a component, even a 100+ pin SMD
chip, is a lot quicker).
criticizing,
then I apologize for my comments. I was merely saying that I don't
understand why you can't do both: fix old time computers and be intimate
with the latest and greatest. Both are fun. If you are interested in =
If you enjoy that, fine. That is no reason for me to _have_ to enjoy it too.
only
one aspect of the hobby, more power to you. It's your life.
As for my likes, yes I use a soldering iron and oscilloscope every day. =
As
play, I also design using TTL and linear, though usually with a wire =
wrap
gun instead of solder. For example, I spent last weekend repairing a =
I was using the term 'solcering iron' somewhat figuratively. Obviously I
regard wire-wrap as being equivalent in this context.
I like wire wrap, and it's certainly reliable, but the problem I have
with it is that the special sockets are expensive and have to be
mail-ordered over here. So for quick projects (10 or so ICs) I find it
quicker to solder it. Verowire (or whatever it's called now) is fast, not
as reliable as wire-wrap, bnt OK for making test circuits, etc (heck, I
built a complete transputer system using Verowire, it ran fine for 10
years It would probalby still run if I powered it up).
[...]
love my G4's and have ordered a Quad G5. I use a
laptop constantly, and =
see
nothing wrong with playing with the latest offerings from Microsoft. =
Well, considering Microsoft OSes (at least the ones I've had the
misfortune to use) are closed-source, difficult to use, crash if you look
at them worng, and have as much security as a tissue paper front door, I
am not sure why I should like them.
It's
all a big game. Why not play with the entire genre?
This is about as sensible as saying that 'pianos and guitars are musical
instruments, if you enjoy playing one you _must_ necessarily enjoy the
other'.
To be honest, I am not a 'computer person'. I don't much enjoy
programming. I'm an electronics/mechanical person. I like tinkering with
hardware, but it computers, radios, cameras, clocks, whatever. So I could
turn your statement round and say 'Well, you enjoy working on your 1962
mainframe, why don't you strip down an M-series Leica. It's all machinery
after all'
-tony
5:34 p.m.
On Friday 02 June 2006 07:24 pm, Tony Duell wrote:
Not that I ever screwed around with SMD, but yeah, troubleshooting is what
takes the time. Too bad it was such a PITA when I repaired things for a
living to get the customers to understand that sometimes...
[...]
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. --Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
Tony, I am not
telling you what you enjoy or don't. I was simply
commenting on your many many statements that troubleshooting to a
component level is your belief in the right way to do things. If you feel
I was
I beleie you can't know you've cured a fault unless you know what the
fault wss (just having the fault go away is not good enough!). And the
only way to know where the fault is is to trace it to the component. At
which point you might as well do component level repair (_finding_ the
fault is what takes the time, replacing a component, even a 100+ pin SMD
chip, is a lot quicker).
3 Jun
3 Jun
3:02 p.m.
Not that I ever screwed around with SMD, but yeah,
troubleshooting is what
takes the time. Too bad it was such a PITA when I repaired things for a
living to get the customers to understand that sometimes...
Agreed. I once very nearly submitted a bill which read :
2N3904 transisotr : \pounds 0.10
Knowing how to find the fault, and discovring which transistor to
replace : \pounds 49.90
FWIW, this was on a very rare prototype HP calculator (not mine!), and
the owner was very happy to have a non-original part fitted if it meant
he could try programming it. Of course there was no service data
available then, not even a schenatic [1], but one of the more normal
production machines was similar enough to be a great help
[1] There is one now, but you have to put up with having it as jpeg files...
In general, at least on classic computer repairs, the components are the
cheap part.
-tony
6782
days inactive
6783
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
Billy.Pettit＠wdc.com -
rtellason＠blazenet.net