https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the
eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD. Best deal I've seen, to date.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the
eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD. Best deal I've seen, to date.
Great!
Now you can use the savings ($$$) to purchase a collection of black
anal dildos to stick up your fucking asshole.
Haaaaaaaaa, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
On Tue, 9/15/2026 9:48 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:AMD do say 4C/8T ...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads.
Paul wrote:
On Tue, 9/15/2026 9:48 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:AMD do say 4C/8T ...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads.
<https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd-ryzen-5-3501u.html>
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads. Compared to three other CPU
for fun. It's similar to an N150, and how much of the
multithread, might depend on the cooling provided.
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/ryzen-5-3501u.c4442
3501u--
Zen+ (Picasso) 12nm 2018 GlobalFoundaries
4C 4T 2.1/3.7GHz
DDR4-2400, dual channel
TDP 15W
Vega 8 iGPU
N150 N95 6600H 5700G=Mine 5950X
Single thread CPUMark 1805 1893 1890 3142 3281 3476
Multithread CPUMark 6195 5354 5285 18050 24218 45252
1805*4=7220 with perfect scaling, 6195 is a bit off (3.4 threads).
My 4930K has a similar problem. 6 cores, but depending on
the bench, only gives 4 to 5 cores of performance, and
that's because of the ring bus. The Zens might be a hypercube
or something. Intel put a bus-mesh in some of theirs,
like say five buses running horizontal, six buses running
vertical, which performs better than three coupled-on-the-ends
of their ring buses (a technique from previous generations, nasty).
Summary - a weak sauce, bound to annoy, and make you buy another.
- silicon too old, for safety reasons, like "buying a refurb" computer
- chances are, fine on Linux (browsers behave better on Linux)
- nice aluminum box
- whereas, a good single-thread, helps on Windows a bit. I would
move to the next tier up for Windows.
- measure twice, cut once, try to select the right mini-PC before
splashing the cash. I've made similar mistakes, back in the Core2 era,
always buying the wrong one, having regrets later. Lots of mistakes.
I don't expect the refurb-market can do much better. At one time, the
refurb market was a valid choice, especially when quad cores started
showing up there.
Paul
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd-ryzen-5-3501u.html
It's eight.
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd-ryzen-5-3501u.html
It's eight.
I found two reports of it being "slow" (3500u which is the same as 3501u
but with slightly different power tuning). One for Windows, one for Linux.
In neither case, was anyone able to explain why. The machines have
to throttle when they hit their power limit.
You own two mini-PCs, and you're able to tell us what the
difference is like between the "low-tier" one and the "mid-tier" one.
Would you, in good conscience, sell the weak one to a student ?
The numbers on that processor, make it "barely better" than the N150.--
And it depends on the cooling, and how high they set the TDP, as
to whether it matches the N150.
When they don't state it, it is likely equipped as 1x16 instead
of 2x8. The 2x8 option gives more bandwidth to run the iGPU output.
But, it also wastes 1 watt of power, spinning up the second memory
interface. That's one of the reasons they configure for only
one DIMM when deciding what DIMMs to put in the box. The two options,
the 2x8 costs slightly more, because of the second DIMM PCB. When an
advert does not state the configuration, we assume it's the
stinky 1x16 option. But as the thing is short on power/TDP,
it's a matter of picking the best of the bad choices.
I have a laptop with a single core processor on it. The computer "works".
I took it out in the kitchen and tried to use it for a while.
I had to stop. That's how annoying that was. That's why I don't
like to see any material promoted, that's just going to be thrown
into the trash. If it can't run a browser, out the window it goes...
Paul
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-
thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-
thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
Hi Joel,
A customer of mine user to buy these things from Amazon.-a They
worked until the did not. They also had a lot of missing
hardware feature.
Now he buys the Mini's from Lenovo.-a It has worked out,
finally.
I have been know to buy used Lenovo mini's from eBay,
replace the missing NVMe drives and install Fedora on them.
I have a proposal out to a customer for such, only
I will scrub the tiny installed drive, install Tiny
11, and create a network printer server out of it for
a $$$$ printer that can only be run off Windows.
If you really, really want a Mini, consider Lenovo.
You will be a lot happier with it.
On 9/17/2026 4:59 PM, T wrote:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-
thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
Hi Joel,
A customer of mine user to buy these things from Amazon.-a They
worked until the did not. They also had a lot of missing
hardware feature.
Now he buys the Mini's from Lenovo.-a It has worked out,
finally.
I have been know to buy used Lenovo mini's from eBay,
replace the missing NVMe drives and install Fedora on them.
I have a proposal out to a customer for such, only
I will scrub the tiny installed drive, install Tiny
11, and create a network printer server out of it for
a $$$$ printer that can only be run off Windows.
If you really, really want a Mini, consider Lenovo.
You will be a lot happier with it.
Their offerings are far more expensive.-a The one I'm using, with four
cores eight threads 16 GB 512 GB, has not given me trouble.
If you really, really want a Mini, consider Lenovo.
You will be a lot happier with it.
Their offerings are far more expensive.-a The one I'm using, with four
cores eight threads 16 GB 512 GB, has not given me trouble.
You get what you pay for!
You can always go used from eBay
On 9/16/2026 7:24 AM, Paul wrote:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight-
thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads. Compared to three other CPU
for fun. It's similar to an N150, and how much of the
multithread, might depend on the cooling provided.
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/ryzen-5-3501u.c4442
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd- ryzen-5-3501u.html
It's eight.
On 9/17/2026 9:30 PM, T wrote:
If you really, really want a Mini, consider Lenovo.
You will be a lot happier with it.
Their offerings are far more expensive.-a The one I'm using, with four
cores eight threads 16 GB 512 GB, has not given me trouble.
You get what you pay for!
You can always go used from eBay
I'm pleased with what I have.-a It's hard to see why a non-gamer would
buy anything else, in fact.-a American OEMs are obsolete, to me.
I'm pleased with what I have.-a It's hard to see why a non-gamer would
buy anything else, in fact.-a American OEMs are obsolete, to me.
It all depends on what you are doing with it and how long
you want it to last.-a So like you are completely happy.
On 18/09/2026 08:39, T wrote:
I'm pleased with what I have.-a It's hard to see why a non-gamer would
buy anything else, in fact.-a American OEMs are obsolete, to me.
It all depends on what you are doing with it and how long
you want it to last.-a So like you are completely happy.
Corporate users will buy or lease from a company that expects full
support from the manufacturer for the thousands of purchases.
So Dell Lenovo or HP it is.,
You wont have that from Panda Poo electronics company, Shanghai.
I buy S/H HP these days. Ex corporate, 5 years old, Boring AF but mostly reliable and completely understood by Linux.
On 9/17/26 12:20, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/16/2026 7:24 AM, Paul wrote:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight- thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads. Compared to three other CPU
for fun. It's similar to an N150, and how much of the
multithread, might depend on the cooling provided.
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/ryzen-5-3501u.c4442
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd- ryzen-5-3501u.html
It's eight.
-a Could get MUCH better deals in mini-boxes just
-a two years ago - more RAM and CPU. Bought FOUR
-a of them, room to fit one SATA SSD too. Near
-a but not exact CPUs. The latest 'N' series Intel
-a required the MX "Advanced Hardware" edition that
-a uses a newer, 7.x.x, kernel.
-a Alas inflation and the tariff wars ......
-a Still have ONE "in waiting". Not THE best but
-a plenty good for Linux. Comes with Winders, will
-a make sure that never runs for one microsecond !
-a A matter of pride !!!
-a Within a range of applications, the Mini-Boxes
-a are just GREAT. They have ENOUGH power but are
-a minimal enough to be affordable. Have one set
-a up as a little NAS, another on my TV to stream
-a video (rarely do). Set up a third with BSD but
-a haven't found a good use for it yet.
-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described
as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing
them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might
not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly have a quiet fan), but
you should at least buy a box with enough horsepower.
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:10:02 -0400, Paul wrote:
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described
as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing
them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might
not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly have a quiet fan), but
you should at least buy a box with enough horsepower.
When I bought my Beelink SER4 it was around $350 iirc with a AMD Ryzen 7 4700U. It has worked out well. I knew what I was getting since I'd bought
an Acer Swift 3 in 2020 with the same processor.
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/18/2026 3:20 PM:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
-a-a-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
-a-a-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a-a-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/18/2026 3:20 PM:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
-a-a-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
-a-a-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a-a-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
Laptops are great on airplanes.-a Anywhere else in the world, they're already less so.-a They're pretty good on couches.-a Decent on toilets. Useful in media-displaying rooms.-a But at the end of the day, nothing is going to replace the box unit of a "computer" (with monitor and keyboard, etc.).
the China-sourced mini PCs are where it's at.
On 9/18/2026 4:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:10:02 -0400, Paul wrote:
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described
as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing >>> them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might >>> not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly have a quiet fan), but
you should at least buy a box with enough horsepower.
When I bought my Beelink SER4 it was around $350 iirc with a AMD Ryzen 7
4700U. It has worked out well. I knew what I was getting since I'd bought
an Acer Swift 3 in 2020 with the same processor.
Forget Beelink, the clones are where the action really is.
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/18/2026 3:20 PM:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
-a-a-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
-a-a-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a-a-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
Laptops are great on airplanes. Anywhere else in the world, they're
already less so. They're pretty good on couches. Decent on toilets.
Useful in media-displaying rooms. But at the end of the day, nothing is going to replace the box unit of a "computer" (with monitor and
keyboard, etc.).
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/18/2026 3:20 PM:Laptops are great on airplanes.-a Anywhere else in the world,
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
-a-a-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
-a-a-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a-a-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy. >>
they're already less so.-a They're pretty good on couches.-a
Decent on toilets. Useful in media-displaying rooms.-a But at
the end of the day, nothing is going to replace the box unit of
a "computer" (with monitor and keyboard, etc.).
Some computing devices, are designed to bolt to the VESA four hole
pattern on the back of the monitor. Don't do that unless you know
the stand for the monitor is stable and can handle that. That's
how call centers arrange a PC, they bolt it to the back of the monitor.
And there are different VESA patterns. On a large screen TV set, the
VESA hole pattern can be twice as big as the typical computer
monitor 100mmx100mm pattern. And you have to know the screw type
and thread pitch, to pick up some screws for it at the hardware
store. It doesn't always come with the screws to do that.
The VESA pattern can be used to hold a monitor on a wall,--
or it can be used (with some effort) to hold a mini-PC to
the back of the monitor. Some monitors have a cylindrical
shaft and heavy duty mount, so they can hold up a heavy load.
But the typical monitors we get in N.A. the stand is pretty
flimsy.
Paul
Joel W. Crump wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS (fixed):
On 9/18/2026 4:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:10:02 -0400, Paul wrote:
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described >>>> as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing >>>> them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might >>>> not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly have a quiet fan), but >>>> you should at least buy a box with enough horsepower.
When I bought my Beelink SER4 it was around $350 iirc with a AMD Ryzen 7 >>> 4700U. It has worked out well. I knew what I was getting since I'd bought >>> an Acer Swift 3 in 2020 with the same processor.
Forget Beelink, the clones are where the action really is.
Clones of what?
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to shortscreen (which I think
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/18/2026 3:20 PM:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
-a-a-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for whatDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
-a-a-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a-a-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy. >>
I was forgetting that your micro-box also needs a keyboard as well as a monitor.
Laptops are great on airplanes.-a Anywhere else in the world, they're already less so.-a They're pretty good on couches.-a Decent on toilets. Useful in media-displaying rooms.-a But at the end of the day, nothing is going to replace the box unit of a "computer" (with monitor and keyboard, etc.).
Laptops are great on airplanes. Anywhere else in the world, they're
already less so. They're pretty good on couches. Decent on toilets.
Useful in media-displaying rooms. But at the end of the day, nothing is going to replace the box unit of a "computer" (with monitor and
keyboard,
etc.).
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what YOU normally do ? IfDo you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
:-D I've used a laptop on a toilet. There, I read a book or a phone.
On 9/18/26 1:19 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
the China-sourced mini PCs are where it's at.
I have seen this good very wrong. Fall apart units that only last a
year, etc..
Here is a business rule for you:
If you go with the lowest bid, make sure you set aside enough money
to afford the next lowest bid when the lowest bid fails
On 9/18/2026 4:01 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:10:02 -0400, Paul wrote:
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described
as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and
throwing them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a
mini-PC, you might not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly
have a quiet fan), but you should at least buy a box with enough
horsepower.
When I bought my Beelink SER4 it was around $350 iirc with a AMD Ryzen
7 4700U. It has worked out well. I knew what I was getting since I'd
bought an Acer Swift 3 in 2020 with the same processor.
Forget Beelink, the clones are where the action really is.
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 17:45:10 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
:-D I've used a laptop on a toilet. There, I read a book or a phone.
A kindle has replaced most of my throne side reading matter.
When I was a kid we had a magazine box? holder? I don't know what to call it. It was a piece of mahogany furniture probably meant for the living room. Along with the magazine selection it had the Montgomery Ward catalog.
Times change so now people might shop Amazon on their phones.
you wont have that from Panda Poo electronics company, Shanghai.
Corporate users will buy or lease from a company that expects full
support from the manufacturer for the thousands of purchases.
So Dell Lenovo or HP it is.,
is that your box lacking an NVMe drive is probably slower than the mini PC.
On Fri, 9/18/2026 12:49 AM, c186282 wrote:
On 9/17/26 12:20, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/16/2026 7:24 AM, Paul wrote:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GXTCSJY6/
What makes this one interesting, at that price, is it has the eight- thread CPU with 16 GB RAM 512 GB SSD.-a Best deal I've seen, to date.
I think it's four threads. Compared to three other CPU
for fun. It's similar to an N150, and how much of the
multithread, might depend on the cooling provided.
https://www.techpowerup.com/cpu-specs/ryzen-5-3501u.c4442
https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/3000-series/amd- ryzen-5-3501u.html
It's eight.
-a Could get MUCH better deals in mini-boxes just
-a two years ago - more RAM and CPU. Bought FOUR
-a of them, room to fit one SATA SSD too. Near
-a but not exact CPUs. The latest 'N' series Intel
-a required the MX "Advanced Hardware" edition that
-a uses a newer, 7.x.x, kernel.
-a Alas inflation and the tariff wars ......
-a Still have ONE "in waiting". Not THE best but
-a plenty good for Linux. Comes with Winders, will
-a make sure that never runs for one microsecond !
-a A matter of pride !!!
-a Within a range of applications, the Mini-Boxes
-a are just GREAT. They have ENOUGH power but are
-a minimal enough to be affordable. Have one set
-a up as a little NAS, another on my TV to stream
-a video (rarely do). Set up a third with BSD but
-a haven't found a good use for it yet.
-a Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
-a YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
-a power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that
can only be described as "trash". We had people buying
$100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing them right into
the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might
not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly
have a quiet fan), but you should at least buy a
box with enough horsepower.
I did an experiment one day, and noticed my HD6450 13 watt
video card, provided "no appreciable acceleration" over
a MESA driven stack. Replacing it with another cheap video
card (a bit over a hundred bucks), I got acceleration
I could detect, as the new card promised 5x the performance
level (five times nothing, is still nothing). It wasn't
fast fast, but I was finally satisfied that it could
accelerate the graphics when a driver was loaded for it.
While the 13 watt card does function as a frame buffer,
it is otherwise "trash" because the performance is so low
as to be undetectable. It takes more work to feed it
stuff, than it pays back. You can do a basic decent frame
buffer that draws only 2 watts.
Try and find discussions about "processor model number"
and "slow", to check before hand, that the item is
really worth $350. If you have to buy two of them
to get a good one, maybe it would have been better
to spend $650 in the first place on a single one.
I can say that with authority, because I made that mistake
in spades, years ago. The incremental upgrades worth... nothing.
If you check the CPUMark numbers, you'll notice after a while,
the mini-PC makers, make two tiers. Maybe processors with a
single thread of 1600 or so, and the next tier up is
3000-3500 or so for single thread. On Windows, you're
"buying a box to do Windows Update". That's the first
application you want to run well, because it will get
in your road and piss you off. We buy enough machine
to dispatch that quickly. The next thing on the list,
is something powerful enough to run a browser.
There are four pages here for SingleThread, in the left side bar.
The four pages likely cover anything worth considering, then
you have to decide how much misery is worth saving a few bucks.
5000 to 3124 6600H 6C 12T , Intel Core 3 305 2P 4E 6T , 3000+
3121 to 2262
2261 to 1775 N150 = 1893
1775 to 1340
1339 to 988 E8400 Core2 Duo = 1235 (Ran early Win10 sorta OK, drew 43 watts)
988 to 594
594 to 273
272 to 32 Pentium III page
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
Paul
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 08:10:02 -0400, Paul wrote:
The industry has always had a "lowest tier" that can only be described
as "trash". We had people buying $100 Black Friday Tablets, and throwing
them right into the trash. When you're shopping for a mini-PC, you might
not need an i9 (and an i9 isn't going to exactly have a quiet fan), but
you should at least buy a box with enough horsepower.
When I bought my Beelink SER4 it was around $350 iirc with a AMD Ryzen 7 4700U. It has worked out well. I knew what I was getting since I'd bought
an Acer Swift 3 in 2020 with the same processor.
On 9/15/26 8:35 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
is that your box lacking an NVMe drive is probably slower than the
mini PC.
Had a customer that made the point that he could buy computer
much cheaper then the ones I recommended.-a I bought a Lenovo
Tiny and got the cheapest data drive they offered, which was
a laptop spinning drive.-a The machine ran like cap.-a And whatever
money he saved was lost through the times he had me work on
it and I had to wait and wait and wait for things to happen
whilst my meter ran and ran and ran.-a Yup.-a He sure showed me!
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I think generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy. >>>
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
On 9/18/26 1:06 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
you wont have that from Panda Poo electronics company, Shanghai.
The worst instance I came across was a customer who bought
a batch of the from Lotus Blossoms. They all had the same
cloned pirate copy of Windows and some weird remote assistance
program on them.
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy. >>>>
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
On 9/15/26 8:35 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
is that your box lacking an NVMe drive is probably slower than the mini PC.
Had a customer that made the point that he could buy computer
much cheaper then the ones I recommended.-a I bought a Lenovo
Tiny and got the cheapest data drive they offered, which was
a laptop spinning drive.-a The machine ran like cap.-a And whatever
money he saved was lost through the times he had me work on
it and I had to wait and wait and wait for things to happen
whilst my meter ran and ran and ran.-a Yup.-a He sure showed me!
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
Do you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
Do you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Different strokes for different folks.
I am a laptop user and need a laptop. (Some silly people 'argue' that
most people don't need a laptop, because they're mostly used in the same spot. Apparently these people can't grasp what 'mostly' really means.)
My wife uses Mini-PC with a large (larger than a laptop) monitor and seperate keyboard and mouse. For her use, the large monitor is a big pre
and the non-mobility isn't a con. (Her setup actually started as a
laptop which developed a dead display, which was replaced by the Mini-PC
when the laptop became too slow .)
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually
crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
Do you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Different strokes for different folks.
I am a laptop user and need a laptop. (Some silly people 'argue' that
most people don't need a laptop, because they're mostly used in the same spot. Apparently these people can't grasp what 'mostly' really means.)
My wife uses Mini-PC with a large (larger than a laptop) monitor and seperate keyboard and mouse. For her use, the large monitor is a big pre
and the non-mobility isn't a con. (Her setup actually started as a
laptop which developed a dead display, which was replaced by the Mini-PC
when the laptop became too slow .)
Had a customer that made the point that he could buy computer
much cheaper then the ones I recommended.-a I bought a Lenovo
Tiny and got the cheapest data drive they offered, which was
a laptop spinning drive.-a The machine ran like cap.-a And whatever
money he saved was lost through the times he had me work on
it and I had to wait and wait and wait for things to happen
whilst my meter ran and ran and ran.-a Yup.-a He sure showed me!
But you can fix that, and I bet such a customer could
also fix that if he wanted (cloning over, isn't that hard to do).
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy. >>>>
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/18 5:49:33, c186282 wrote:
[]
Think - DO you need an I9 superbox for what
YOU normally do ? If not, then these laptop-
power mini-boxes may be yer salvation.
Do you use them without a screen? If not, then rather than a
"laptop-power mini-box" (plus monitor), why not use a laptop?
Different strokes for different folks.
I am a laptop user and need a laptop. (Some silly people 'argue' that
most people don't need a laptop, because they're mostly used in the same spot. Apparently these people can't grasp what 'mostly' really means.)
My wife uses Mini-PC with a large (larger than a laptop) monitor and seperate keyboard and mouse. For her use, the large monitor is a big pre
and the non-mobility isn't a con. (Her setup actually started as a
laptop which developed a dead display, which was replaced by the Mini-PC
when the laptop became too slow .)
I bought my first laptop (Win98 era, IIRR), when I wanted the
portability option, but thought I'd rarely use it - I liked my
desktop(s) too much. But - even though I _didn't_ (and still don't, even
more so now) actually move it around much, I found I was using it more
and more, and the desktop less and less; and I _think_ I've been on
laptops ever since. (Might have bought - or built, I was building in
those days = one more desktop machine.)
On 9/19/26 6:36 AM, Paul wrote:
Had a customer that made the point that he could buy computer
much cheaper then the ones I recommended.-a I bought a Lenovo
Tiny and got the cheapest data drive they offered, which was
a laptop spinning drive.-a The machine ran like cap.-a And whatever
money he saved was lost through the times he had me work on
it and I had to wait and wait and wait for things to happen
whilst my meter ran and ran and ran.-a Yup.-a He sure showed me!
But you can fix that, and I bet such a customer could
also fix that if he wanted (cloning over, isn't that hard to do).
Yes.-a You and I could. Up the memory from 4 GB and
install an NVMe drive.-a Clonezilla to three rescue.
But not when the customer know better than you and is
proud you show in you up.-a And his buns squeak when
he walks because he is so cheap.
I have a used mini from Ebay that came without a drive.
I put in my own NVMe drive and it works beautifully!
So you are correct, it is doable.
On 2026/9/19 10:56:18, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
Sorry, the industry (TV and computer) uses the term "widescreen". Since,
in many cases (especially in TVs), the same diagonal measurement
certainly gave no increase in _height_ and generally a reduction, I call
it shortscreen.
Particularly, when 16:9 (ish) TV sets started to appear, I saw some
cases where a 16:9 set of a given WIDTH actually cost MORE than a 4:3
set of the same WIDTH (which had greater HEIGHT). So anyone sensible
would buy the cheaper one - they could still watch 16:9 programming _at
the same size_ (sets by then had switchable scans so no loss of
resolution), but could view 4:3 material at a bigger size. People were
just afraid of being _seen_ to have a 4:3 screen, regardless of the fact
that it was no less wide.
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were _actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.) OK, monitors (and graphics cards) have now got big enough
that you can work on two documents side-by-side (though I still wonder
how many people actually do).
On Sat, 9/19/2026 4:24 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/19 10:56:18, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric >>>> keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
Sorry, the industry (TV and computer) uses the term "widescreen". Since,
in many cases (especially in TVs), the same diagonal measurement
certainly gave no increase in _height_ and generally a reduction, I call
it shortscreen.
Particularly, when 16:9 (ish) TV sets started to appear, I saw some
cases where a 16:9 set of a given WIDTH actually cost MORE than a 4:3
set of the same WIDTH (which had greater HEIGHT). So anyone sensible
would buy the cheaper one - they could still watch 16:9 programming _at
the same size_ (sets by then had switchable scans so no loss of
resolution), but could view 4:3 material at a bigger size. People were
just afraid of being _seen_ to have a 4:3 screen, regardless of the fact
that it was no less wide.
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.) OK, monitors (and graphics cards) have now got big enough
that you can work on two documents side-by-side (though I still wonder
how many people actually do).
If you put two 16:9 monitors side by side, that gives you 32:9
which is pretty boring.
If you rotate two monitors and slap them together, you can make 18:16 .
You set one monitor up physically for 90 degree rotation,
the other one for 270 degree rotation, so the thin (top) bezels meet in
the center. A lot of things have to go right for you, for that
to be any sort of practical project.
Some monitors "fully support" rotation to compass points. The mount supports horizontal or vertical operation (pivoting mount), and the panel PCB has
a gravity-based sensor for detecting that the monitor is no longer
at zero degrees. You are unlikely to get that kind of support in a
$100-$200 monitor. Maybe at the $600 level, you'd get that level
of automation. Full rotation support, a "tall" monitor mount.
But you can still take "naive" monitors and do such a setup, as
long as the control panel scan controls are there to make it work.
The video card apparently has everything needed, for controlling
the output for any weird rotation plans you've got. It's the
intermediate software that may not be up to the task of
fiddling the controls.
The verification plan for multi-monitor, is extensive, and would be
a pain in the ass for software that is frequently modified. As
an example of an obscure bug, I was testing four monitors on two
video cards, and just in the naive panoramic orientation (no rotations
or funny stuff). In the middle of a session, out of the blue, the
video card numbering swapped. FX5200 Number 1 became FX5200 Number 2,
and vice versa, which of course messes up the panoramic orientation
with the mouse disappearing in the center of the screen or so. There
can be a lot of permutations and combinations to test, to prove
display control panels work. And some display control panels,
hardly anything works right :-) You don't have to "search" for
bugs, as your first bug is just waiting for you in plain sight.
Never underestimate the mayhem available in a Display control panel :-)
While you may "dream big", that control panel will get in your road
(as the Scot at work would have put it).
On 9/20/26 04:03, Paul wrote:We were talking about laptops and whether they're usable - multimonitor
On Sat, 9/19/2026 4:24 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/19 10:56:18, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I think >>>>> generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15" >>>>> ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric >>>>> keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
"shortscreen"??
Sorry, the industry (TV and computer) uses the term "widescreen". Since, >>> in many cases (especially in TVs), the same diagonal measurement
certainly gave no increase in _height_ and generally a reduction, I call >>> it shortscreen.
Particularly, when 16:9 (ish) TV sets started to appear, I saw some
cases where a 16:9 set of a given WIDTH actually cost MORE than a 4:3>>> set of the same WIDTH (which had greater HEIGHT). So anyone sensible
would buy the cheaper one - they could still watch 16:9 programming _at
the same size_ (sets by then had switchable scans so no loss of
resolution), but could view 4:3 material at a bigger size. People were
just afraid of being _seen_ to have a 4:3 screen, regardless of the fact >>> that it was no less wide.
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,>>> and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.) OK, monitors (and graphics cards) have now got big enough
that you can work on two documents side-by-side (though I still wonder
how many people actually do).
If you put two 16:9 monitors side by side, that gives you 32:9
which is pretty boring.
If you rotate two monitors and slap them together, you can make 18:16 .
I think with most monitors you'd still get a line down the middle.>>You set one monitor up physically for 90 degree rotation,
the other one for 270 degree rotation, so the thin (top) bezels meet in
the center. A lot of things have to go right for you, for that
to be any sort of practical project.
Yes - it came up recently on here; in Windows 10 (and possibly back to 7Some monitors "fully support" rotation to compass points. The mount supports >> horizontal or vertical operation (pivoting mount), and the panel PCB has
a gravity-based sensor for detecting that the monitor is no longer
at zero degrees. You are unlikely to get that kind of support in a
$100-$200 monitor. Maybe at the $600 level, you'd get that level
of automation. Full rotation support, a "tall" monitor mount.
But you can still take "naive" monitors and do such a setup, as
long as the control panel scan controls are there to make it work.
Yes, such bugs/features include where the taskbar appears (across bothThe video card apparently has everything needed, for controlling
the output for any weird rotation plans you've got. It's the
intermediate software that may not be up to the task of
fiddling the controls.
The verification plan for multi-monitor, is extensive, and would be
a pain in the ass for software that is frequently modified. As
an example of an obscure bug, I was testing four monitors on two
video cards, and just in the naive panoramic orientation (no rotations>> or funny stuff). In the middle of a session, out of the blue, the
video card numbering swapped. FX5200 Number 1 became FX5200 Number 2,
and vice versa, which of course messes up the panoramic orientation
with the mouse disappearing in the center of the screen or so. There
can be a lot of permutations and combinations to test, to prove
display control panels work. And some display control panels,
hardly anything works right :-) You don't have to "search" for
bugs, as your first bug is just waiting for you in plain sight.
Never underestimate the mayhem available in a Display control panel :-)
While you may "dream big", that control panel will get in your road
(as the Scot at work would have put it).
Um ... just kinda SKIP the "super-wide" view.
Not really useful - except maybe to 'gamers'.
I'm not one of those. Less CPU/display is
just FINE with me. Can get by on mini-boxes.
Yea ... I'm more a 'minimalist'. Plenty of us
out here. YOU pay out the fuckin' ass, WE
do not - but are still happy.
But
that's one of the main attractions of a laptop versus an
AIO, is it was potentially easier to slide into an empty
drawer of sufficient dimension.
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were _actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (
Um ... just kinda SKIP the "super-wide" view.
-a Not really useful - except maybe to 'gamers'.
rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 21:42:44 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I bought my first laptop (Win98 era, IIRR), when I wanted the
portability option, but thought I'd rarely use it - I liked my
desktop(s) too much. But - even though I _didn't_ (and still don't, even
more so now) actually move it around much, I found I was using it more
and more, and the desktop less and less; and I _think_ I've been on
laptops ever since. (Might have bought - or built, I was building in
those days = one more desktop machine.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compaq_Concerto
I got a lot of use out of my first laptop. I was driving OTR summers and >spending winters in AZ with a minimal solar configuration so portability
and lower power consumption were the major factors.
Compaq came so close in 1993 but the Concertos never sold and the model
was dropped in a couple of years. At $1500 it was competitive with the >laptops of the era.
On 20/09/2026 09:21, c186282 wrote:
Um ... just kinda SKIP the "super-wide" view.
-a Not really useful - except maybe to 'gamers'.
Not even when you can have a file editor in one window next door to a
window that is running your make system with a third window showing
debug output?
Or CAD in one, the slicer in the next and your 3D printer camera in the third?
With windows of *any* sort real estate can always be filled with
something useful
Of course if you are running a text console in full screen, you might as well use and old Wyse50 and forget LCD...
On Sat, 9/19/2026 5:56 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
That could be a reference to 16:9 screen in place
of 5:4 or 4:3 screens. The change in aspect ratio annoyed
a number of users.
On 2026/9/19 10:56:18, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric
keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
Sorry, the industry (TV and computer) uses the term "widescreen". Since,
in many cases (especially in TVs), the same diagonal measurement
certainly gave no increase in _height_ and generally a reduction, I call
it shortscreen.
Particularly, when 16:9 (ish) TV sets started to appear, I saw some
cases where a 16:9 set of a given WIDTH actually cost MORE than a 4:3
set of the same WIDTH (which had greater HEIGHT). So anyone sensible
would buy the cheaper one - they could still watch 16:9 programming _at
the same size_ (sets by then had switchable scans so no loss of
resolution), but could view 4:3 material at a bigger size. People were
just afraid of being _seen_ to have a 4:3 screen, regardless of the fact
that it was no less wide.
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were _actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.) OK, monitors (and graphics cards) have now got big enough
that you can work on two documents side-by-side (though I still wonder
how many people actually do).
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (
The reasons are simple. For every PC monitor sold, 100 TVS are sold.
4:3 was an expensive and low volume LCD. 16:9 were cheap and plentiful
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (
The reasons are simple. For every PC monitor sold, 100 TVS are sold.
4:3 was an expensive and low volume LCD. 16:9 were cheap and plentiful
It's all driven by movies and money.
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were _actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.)
OK, monitors (and graphics cards) have now got big enough--
that you can work on two documents side-by-side (though I still wonder
how many people actually do).
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is _not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at _that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (IMO it's _still_ not a good shape for web
pages; I have to do a lot of up-and-down scrolling to read the average
web page.)
I try to arrange it so my taskbar is on the side
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and I
vertical space for the webpage
Mark Lloyd wrote:I'd been waiting for the never-arriving update in Win11 that allowed
I try to arrange it so my taskbar is on the side
Win11 (by itself) doesn't allow that.
On 19/09/2026 11:42 pm, Paul wrote:
On Sat, 9/19/2026 5:56 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I thinkBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15"
ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric >>>> keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
That could be a reference to 16:9 screen in place
of 5:4 or 4:3 screens. The change in aspect ratio annoyed
a number of users.
That's what I thought it might have meant but had never seen it before.
16:9 sure, 4:3 sure!
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (
rCyGeneral computer userCO is not one thing, everyone has different needs.
The reasons are simple. For every PC monitor sold, 100 TVS are sold.
4:3 was an expensive and low volume LCD. 16:9 were cheap and plentiful
Nearer 2 TVs per monitor:
https://displaydaily.com/tv-market-recovering-getting-bigger-brighter-better/ https://omdia.tech.informa.com/pr/2026/may/desktop-monitor-shipments-reach-133point4-million-units-in-2025-as-gaming-monitors-fuel-recovery
I like my ultrawide monitor, nominally 21x9 although 43x18 is more
accurate; my field of view is wider than it is high and moving my head
side to side is more comfortable than vertically.
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when
it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a
little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were
_actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed,
and we're stuck with it. (
I also do not like 16:9 monitors. 16:10 works OK for me. I think 3:2
might be ideal, but other than some laptops it's not an option, AFAIK.
The reasons are simple. For every PC monitor sold, 100 TVS are sold.
4:3 was an expensive and low volume LCD. 16:9 were cheap and plentiful
It's all driven by movies and money.
Yes, although I could quibble with your 100X estimate. In the smaller
sizes, there's probably more monitors than there are TV's! Still,
1080P did become the standard, due to the shared cost.
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and I
vertical space for the webpage
now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
instead of left?)
Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:I'd been waiting for the never-arriving update in Win11 that allowed
I try to arrange it so my taskbar is on the side
Win11 (by itself) doesn't allow that.
that, just looked again, and I do have it, so scratch that :-)
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
Nearer 2 TVs per monitor:
https://displaydaily.com/tv-market-recovering-getting-bigger-brighter-better/
https://omdia.tech.informa.com/pr/2026/may/desktop-monitor-shipments-reach-133point4-million-units-in-2025-as-gaming-monitors-fuel-recovery
That does surprise me - is that world-wide, or one particular country?
I think most people in UK now do their computing via a 'phone; if they
do use something with a keyboard, they seem to buy one once in a blue
moon, whereas TVs seem to be changed almost as often as socks.
I like my ultrawide monitor, nominally 21x9 although 43x18 is more
accurate; my field of view is wider than it is high and moving my head
side to side is more comfortable than vertically.
You (and, really, all of us here) are probably not a typical user. I'd
_like_ a big monitor too (though not sure if I'd want any wider than
16:9), but not enough to have such an object making its presence felt.
(I have TVs smaller than most people do, too.)
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> writes:
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
Nearer 2 TVs per monitor:
https://displaydaily.com/tv-market-recovering-getting-bigger-brighter-better/
https://omdia.tech.informa.com/pr/2026/may/desktop-monitor-shipments-reach-133point4-million-units-in-2025-as-gaming-monitors-fuel-recovery
That does surprise me - is that world-wide, or one particular country?
Global. It does say in the articles...
I think most people in UK now do their computing via a 'phone; if they
do use something with a keyboard, they seem to buy one once in a blue
moon, whereas TVs seem to be changed almost as often as socks.
Depends on the activity. Almost anyone with an office job (whether done
from a literal office or from home) is likely to spend a substantial
amount of time using a laptop (perhaps connected to an external monitor)
or desktop, for example.
I like my ultrawide monitor, nominally 21x9 although 43x18 is more
accurate; my field of view is wider than it is high and moving my head
side to side is more comfortable than vertically.
You (and, really, all of us here) are probably not a typical user. I'd
_like_ a big monitor too (though not sure if I'd want any wider than
16:9), but not enough to have such an object making its presence felt.
(I have TVs smaller than most people do, too.)
IrCOm sure IrCOm an outlier in some ways, yes, but I wonder if thererCOs really such a thing as a rCytypical userrCO at all. All sorts of activities can benefit from more screen space, different people (or their
employers) have different tradeoffs between desk space and screen space,
etc.
On 2026/9/20 18:20:22, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and I
vertical space for the webpage
now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
instead of left?)
I think the worst thing Chrome did (some years ago now, before Edge, but
Edge kept the fault) was do away with the title bar (let alone the menu
bar), just - or so it seemed - that they could be "different". Knowing
the title of a web page is often useful. (I have an add-on that restores
it - though puts it in a [selectable] corner - ask if you want it.)
On 2026/9/20 12:24:46, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 11:42 pm, Paul wrote:_Were_ computer monitors (or laptop screens) ever 5:4? I know that shape
On Sat, 9/19/2026 5:56 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (which I think >>>>> generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this advantage), even 15" >>>>> ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that change) have at least a numeric >>>>> keyboard. And the screen size has never bothered me.Because laptops have small screens and keyboards are also usually crummy.
"shortscreen"??
That could be a reference to 16:9 screen in place
of 5:4 or 4:3 screens. The change in aspect ratio annoyed
a number of users.
That's what I thought it might have meant but had never seen it before.
16:9 sure, 4:3 sure!
was used in TV up to maybe 195x (when TV tubes were basically
round-bottomed flasks), but they switched to 4:3 around then (and mostly before video could be recorded in any way other than Kinescope, so there
is little archive material that shape).
On 2026/9/20 12:24:46, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 11:42 pm, Paul wrote:_Were_ computer monitors (or laptop screens) ever 5:4? I know that
On Sat, 9/19/2026 5:56 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
On 19/09/2026 8:13 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/18 22:19:52, Paul wrote:
On Fri, 9/18/2026 5:09 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 9/18/2026 5:05 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:
<Snip>
Tiny ones, yes. But since the switch to *shortscreen* (whichBecause laptops have small screens and keyboards are
also usually crummy.
I think generally was a Bad Move, but it does have this
advantage), even 15" ones (which tend to be 15.6 since that
change) have at least a numeric keyboard. And the screen size
has never bothered me.
"shortscreen"??
That could be a reference to 16:9 screen in place of 5:4 or 4:3
screens. The change in aspect ratio annoyed a number of users.
That's what I thought it might have meant but had never seen it
before. 16:9 sure, 4:3 sure!
shape was used in TV up to maybe 195x
(when TV tubes were basically round-bottomed flasks), but theyDaniel70
switched to 4:3 around then (and mostly before video could be
recorded in any way other than Kinescope, so there is little archive
material that shape).
--
On 9/19/26 15:03, T wrote:
On 9/19/26 6:36 AM, Paul wrote:
Had a customer that made the point that he could buy computer
much cheaper then the ones I recommended.-a I bought a Lenovo
Tiny and got the cheapest data drive they offered, which was
a laptop spinning drive.-a The machine ran like cap.-a And whatever
money he saved was lost through the times he had me work on
it and I had to wait and wait and wait for things to happen
whilst my meter ran and ran and ran.-a Yup.-a He sure showed me!
But you can fix that, and I bet such a customer could
also fix that if he wanted (cloning over, isn't that hard to do).
Yes.-a You and I could. Up the memory from 4 GB and
install an NVMe drive.-a Clonezilla to three rescue.
But not when the customer know better than you and is
proud you show in you up.-a And his buns squeak when
he walks because he is so cheap.
I have a used mini from Ebay that came without a drive.
I put in my own NVMe drive and it works beautifully!
So you are correct, it is doable.
-a The current - ok 2-years-ago - mini-boxes from
-a BMax and BeeLink were pretty damned good AND
-a affordable. You could buy most any strength
-a CPU and mem you wanted. I bought four of the
-a "ok laptop"-power ones. Nuked Winders and put
-a in Linux ... big boost in performance.
-a These have served me very well for a couple of
-a years now, and may HAVE to for a couple more
-a given current market realities.
-a If you are not a 'gamer', just need the Basic Shit,
-a then these units will serve VERY well for minimal
-a cash output. Even have an 'NAS' built on one ...
-a VBox with two alt systems on another, Simple vid
-a streaming on another. One unit in reserve still.
-a When, if, the trade wars diminish and AI sucking
-a up all the RAM in the world ends ... expect good
-a deals again.
-a DO have a decent desktop. Installed it, never really
-a used it for anything after. No need.
-a I note some Winders groups in the headers. I started
-a with computers even before the 'modern' era - PDP-11s
-a and that neat-o newfangled 'C' language, punch cards
-a with FORTRAN. DOS/Win started simply ... but it seems
-a they NEVER dumped the JUNK anywhere along the way. It
-a has built up and up and up. Oh, and the SPYware ...
-a wow ! M$ calls it something else, of course. In short
-a it has become an ultra-obese diabetic CRAP system
-a that uses up ten times as much space/CPU as actually
-a needed to Get Things Done.
-a As soon as practical I shifted all my office servers,
-a and a few workstations, to Linux. Much leaner and
-a meaner and more reasonable. You can Get It Done at
-a a fraction of the power. "Weak" boards become "strong".
-a Last guy who understood Linux ... management drove
-a him away. He was supposed to be my replacement.
-a Retired six months afterwards. The new guy could
-a not write a six line Python script - but WAS good
-a at M$ "solutions" ... so ... whatever ... they
-a will be good until Vlad/Xi attack. Then, ALL Gone.
-a I get my pension check regardless. Kinda sad though.
-a Note POLITICS ... vest with M$ or Apple and WHEN
-a things go all to hell you can BLAME it on THEM,
-a not yourself. This approach is a modern favorite,
-a BUTT-COVERING rather than competence.
-a Would have liked to shift ALL workstations to Linux, but,
-a well, seems 90-plus percent just can't COPE with the
-a computing concepts or software that's not 95% bells and
-a whistles and neat-o graphics. Had to carry them on my
-a back for decades.
-a Hmmm ... long LONG back, first 386 chips, we DID check
-a into Unix ... paid good money for SCO ... but there just
-a wasn't enough software anyone but guru's could cope with
-a alas.
-a Sorry, cannot restrict potential functional employees to
-a one percent of the pop. MOST people just don't GET computers.
-a Not how they're wired. Doesn't mean they are stupid ... just
-a "not wired for it". This truth is something We sometimes
-a seem to forget. Not everybody, indeed not MOST everybody,
-a are 'computer people'. "Simple" for Us ... totally
-a opaque for almost everyone else. Hey, hit me with
-a advanced math - totally opaque - but I CAN do computer
-a logic easily, down to the CPU register level if
-a needed. Lots of experience with micro-controllers.
-a WANT to learn micro-controllers ... suggest Arduinos,
-a PICs and maybe PI Picos. Seriously low-level.
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I think "widescreen" is_not_ a good fit for general computer use; when >>>> it first came in, it was presented as "do you want to watch movies in a >>>> little strip across your screen" - but at_that_ point, few people were >>>> _actually_ watching movies on their computer monitors. But it stayed, >>>> and we're stuck with it. (
I also do not like 16:9 monitors. 16:10 works OK for me. I think 3:2
might be ideal, but other than some laptops it's not an option, AFAIK.
I don't think I've seen a laptop (or similar) with other than widescreen
(of slightly varying ratios, perhaps) for many years. (Well, maybe some
of the very expensive tough ones designed to be dropped.)>
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even thatThe reasons are simple. For every PC monitor sold, 100 TVS are sold.
4:3 was an expensive and low volume LCD. 16:9 were cheap and plentiful
It's all driven by movies and money.
Yes, although I could quibble with your 100X estimate. In the smaller
sizes, there's probably more monitors than there are TV's! Still,
1080P did become the standard, due to the shared cost.
small now, I haven't looked lately.
Well stated!
I might add, anyone who has programmed in assembly or
machine code, does get computers.-a Not for the faint
of heart though!
Andy Burns wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:I'd been waiting for the never-arriving update in Win11 that allowed that, just looked again, and I do have it, so scratch that :-)
I try to arrange it so my taskbar is on the side
Win11 (by itself) doesn't allow that.
Bah!-a Why does "autohide" only work when the taskbar is at the bottom?
IrCOm sure IrCOm an outlier in some ways, yes, but I wonder if thererCOs really such a thing as a rCytypical userrCO at all. All sorts of activities can benefit from more screen space, different people (or theirIndeed. And adapting the way one works to the technology available has
employers) have different tradeoffs between desk space and screen space,
etc.
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
I always wondered what a McMansion looked like inside. Now I know.
I know that's an AI picture, but still... someone believes it.
That TV is worth looking at.
Paul
Depends whose balls they are playing with?Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
I always wondered what a McMansion looked like inside. Now I know.
I know that's an AI picture, but still... someone believes it.
That TV is worth looking at.
Paul
Kids playing with balls in that room will shorten the life of that screen
a bit? A lot?
On 2026/9/20 18:20:22, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and
vertical space for the webpage
I now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
instead of left?)
I think the worst thing Chrome did (some years ago now, before Edge, but
Edge kept the fault) was do away with the title bar (let alone the menu
bar), just - or so it seemed - that they could be "different". Knowing
the title of a web page is often useful. (I have an add-on that restores
it - though puts it in a [selectable] corner - ask if you want it.)
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:57:19 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 18:20:22, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and
vertical space for the webpage
I now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
instead of left?)
I think the worst thing Chrome did (some years ago now, before Edge, but
Edge kept the fault) was do away with the title bar (let alone the menu
bar), just - or so it seemed - that they could be "different". Knowing
the title of a web page is often useful. (I have an add-on that restores
it - though puts it in a [selectable] corner - ask if you want it.)
Firefox hides the menu bar by default. It seems to get harder to re-enable
it every time I need to.
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
Well stated!
I might add, anyone who has programmed in assembly or
machine code, does get computers.-a Not for the faint
of heart though!
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
I always wondered what a McMansion looked like inside. Now I know.
I know that's an AI picture, but still... someone believes it.
That TV is worth looking at.
Kids playing with balls in that room will shorten the life of that screen
a bit? A lot?
On Mon, 9/21/2026 8:41 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:Whereas the family terrier will simply look innocent and hurt when accused
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
I always wondered what a McMansion looked like inside. Now I know.
I know that's an AI picture, but still... someone believes it.
That TV is worth looking at.
Kids playing with balls in that room will shorten the life of that screen
a bit? A lot?
Yes, seeing that kid in the picture, that was my first thought.
Kid + Big Screen ==> Nuclear Error
You can tell the kid is staring at it, figuring out
how he is going to destroy it :-) There's a lot of
calculations to do, to make it look like an accident.
Paul
WOW!! Here in Australia, we only got T.V. in 1956
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though>> 22" is the smallest I found
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One 'netbook', which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not> to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!:-)
On 9/20/26 14:57, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 18:20:22, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and I >>> now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
vertical space for the webpage
instead of left?)
I think the worst thing Chrome did (some years ago now, before Edge, but
Edge kept the fault) was do away with the title bar (let alone the menu
bar), just - or so it seemed - that they could be "different". Knowing>> the title of a web page is often useful. (I have an add-on that restores
it - though puts it in a [selectable] corner - ask if you want it.)
Firefox ... you just click a box and the URL bar appears.
On 21/09/2026 7:44 pm, T wrote:
<Snip>
Well stated!
I might add, anyone who has programmed in assembly or
machine code, does get computers.-a Not for the faint
of heart though!
Back in about 1990, I was teaching basic Assembly Language programming
on a kit called the uBEEB or some such produced by, I think, the BBC,
which used the ZiLog Z80 uProcessor. Its Display was a four Digit LED (Address) display and a two Digit LED (Data) display.
The course just required converting Instructions (LDA, LDB, etc) into
the Hex code and entering that code into the RAM and then executing the Code.
For their final test the students had to convert a sequence of
Instructions into Code and enter that code and the Data I supplied into
the uBEEB kit, press 'RUN' and see what happened.
If they had done it right, the Display would show ....
FAIL ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU PASS ...
(on a loop)
It either worked (Pass) or it didn't (Fail) EASY!!
On Mon, 21 Sep 2026, Daniel70 wrote:
WOW!! Here in Australia, we only got T.V. in 1956
Random question: does Australia have a history of Old Time Radio Shows?
I would love to see if I can find any. I really love old time radio
theater. Like Yours Truly, Johhny Dollar and Gunsmoke, etc.
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now. >>>>
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work.
On 2026/9/21 4:56:40, c186282 wrote:Sry I meant menu bar.
On 9/20/26 14:57, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Not the URL bar (that's there all the time in Edge, though I think they
On 2026/9/20 18:20:22, Andy Burns wrote:
Mark Lloyd wrote:[]
(and the browser links bar is on the side too) so there's moreFirefox does allow that (even Edge does, so I presume Chrome too?) and I >>>> now prefer tabs down the right side (don't think Edge allows right
vertical space for the webpage
instead of left?)
I think the worst thing Chrome did (some years ago now, before Edge, but >>> Edge kept the fault) was do away with the title bar (let alone the menu
bar), just - or so it seemed - that they could be "different". Knowing
the title of a web page is often useful. (I have an add-on that restores >>> it - though puts it in a [selectable] corner - ask if you want it.)
Firefox ... you just click a box and the URL bar appears.
may call it the address bar), the title.
I remember a BBC series 'the Flying Doctor' which I assumed was made by the Australian broadcasting corporation.
Paul wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
That's when "8k" will make sense.
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
And larger speakers! A room that size would need something with 15"
woofers, I'd guess.
On Mon, 9/21/2026 5:44 AM, T wrote:
Well stated!
I might add, anyone who has programmed in assembly or
machine code, does get computers.-a Not for the faint
of heart though!
With no OS and no tools on the first computers, we used
a programming card and a pencil, to generate binary
to run on the machine. There was no assembler program
waiting for us to use. You had to work out all your branch
addresses your own self.
And you did not totally have to "get computers", because
the environment was so simple back then. No CPU caches
(didn't have to turn caches on), no virtual addresses
(no mapping necessary), no Ring3 and Ring0, all hardware
accessible. All you had to verify, was the starting vector address,
and that your SRAM for the program, showed up at such an address.
You had to make sure when the CPU did jump off to that
start address, your program was the first thing it executed.
Simple, really, compared to getting the 747 of today, airborne.
Paul
I remember at work - I think it might have been 199x - speaking to a
young man newly-graduated in computing, who had /never done any
assembly/. This startled me somewhat, but thinking about it, I saw that
the field was big enough that he'd still (then, anyway) not have any
trouble finding emplotment.>>
In Uni, they had us make a 8080 on a vector board and then do various programming tasks. I do remember the fun of adding and subtracting with machine code. Then they had us add an arithmetic processing chip and we
were in heaven.
And larger speakers! A room that size would need something with 15"
woofers, I'd guess.
In Uni, they had us make a 8080 on a vector board and then do
various programming tasks.-a I do remember the fun of
adding and subtracting with machine code.-a Then they had
us add an arithmetic processing chip and we were in heaven.
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now. >>>>
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work.
Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One 'netbook',
which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not
to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
On Mon, 9/21/2026 5:29 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now. >>>>>
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>> 22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work. >>
Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One 'netbook', >>> which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not
to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this
country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
At the cottage, and without any fancy antenna system, we could
just barely get enough analog signal on one TV channel, to get audio.
The picture was pure white snow, nothing to sync to, but
you could still get audio, which was good enough for
the nightly news.
You can't do that with digital TV. At that signal level, you
get LOS and a black screen.
The OTA digital TV, you can really
only count on it (getting some station to come in), in the
city. If I use my 15dBi antenna, I can get a representative sample
of city signals. With rabbit ears, only a few "lucky" channels
come in :-) It's not like the scheme encourages fringe reception
projects, as it barely works in the city.
Paul--
On 22/09/2026 02:13, T wrote:
In Uni, they had us make a 8080 on a vector board and then do various
programming tasks.-a I do remember the fun of adding and subtracting
with machine code.-a Then they had us add an arithmetic processing chip
and we were in heaven.
For an 8080? What on earth was that?
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the nor= >mal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even t= >hat
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now=
Indeed.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though=
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work=
.
,
Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One 'netbook'=
which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not=
to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this >country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as >camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
On 22/09/2026 02:13, T wrote:
In Uni, they had us make a 8080 on a vector board and then do
various programming tasks.-a I do remember the fun of
adding and subtracting with machine code.-a Then they had
us add an arithmetic processing chip and we were in heaven.
-aFor an 8080? What on earth was that?
On 2026/9/21 11:29:53, Daniel70 wrote:
On 21/09/2026 7:44 pm, T wrote:
<Snip>
Well stated!
I might add, anyone who has programmed in assembly or machine
code, does get computers. Not for the faint of heart though!
I remember at work - I think it might have been 199x - speaking to a
young man newly-graduated in computing, who had /never done any
assembly/. This startled me somewhat, but thinking about it, I saw
that the field was big enough that he'd still (then, anyway) not have
any trouble finding emplotment.>>
Back in about 1990, I was teaching basic Assembly Language
programming on a kit called the uBEEB or some such produced by, I
think, the BBC, which used the ZiLog Z80 uProcessor. Its Display
was a four Digit LED (Address) display and a two Digit LED (Data)
display.
AIM-65 or some similar kit? I don't think The Beeb ever got into any computer hardware
other than the work they did with Acorn, producing the family of
recognisable computers - model A, B, and Master, all recognisable by
the row of red function keys above the QUERTY, and the Electron, a
cut-down version. (Acorn - later Acorn RISC Machines, alias ARM -
then went on to produce the Archimedes range, but I don't think the
BBC were still connected by then. That was about the time the PC came
out, and unfortunately the Archimedes machines cost a lot more for a
similar specification, so lots of us jumped ship, though feeling
guilty about doing so.)
The course just required converting Instructions (LDA, LDB, etc)
into the Hex code and entering that code into the RAM and then
executing the Code.
For their final test the students had to convert a sequence of
Instructions into Code and enter that code and the Data I supplied
into the uBEEB kit, press 'RUN' and see what happened.
If they had done it right, the Display would show ....
FAIL ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU PASS ...... YOU
PASS ...
(on a loop)
It either worked (Pass) or it didn't (Fail) EASY!!
Neat!
Now you mention it I think the Beeb /did/ have _some_ connection to
the Raspberry Pi machines (if only linking some programmes to them) -
though a lot more tenuous connection than to the BBC computers - but
that was a _lot_ more recently.
On 21/09/2026 13:41, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Depends whose balls they are playing with?Paul <nospam@needed.invalid>wrote:
Apparently, someone believes this is what TV looks like.
https://www.cnet.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/c79a835c-51b0-442d-88a9-a257803c560b.jpg
Couldn't they have found a larger potted plant ?
I always wondered what a McMansion looked like inside. Now I know.
I know that's an AI picture, but still... someone believes it.
That TV is worth looking at.
-a-a Paul
Kids playing with balls in that room will shorten the life of that screen
a bit? A lot?
On 21/09/2026 18:13, Chris Abraham wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2026, Daniel70 wrote:
WOW!! Here in Australia, we only got T.V. in 1956
Random question: does Australia have a history of Old Time Radio
Shows? I would love to see if I can find any. I really love old time
radio theater. Like Yours Truly, Johhny Dollar and Gunsmoke, etc.
I remember a BBC series 'the Flying Doctor' which I assumed was made by
the Australian broadcasting corporation.
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now. >>>>
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Now you mention it I think the Beeb /did/ have _some_ connection toNo, this was definitely using a Zilog Z80 CPU.
the Raspberry Pi machines (if only linking some programmes to them) -
though a lot more tenuous connection than to the BBC computers - but
that was a _lot_ more recently.
On 22/09/2026 7:45 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Now you mention it I think the Beeb /did/ have _some_ connection toNo, this was definitely using a Zilog Z80 CPU.
the Raspberry Pi machines (if only linking some programmes to them) -
though a lot more tenuous connection than to the BBC computers - but
that was a _lot_ more recently.
All this discussion about T.V.'s has got me wondering what ever happened
to "P.i.P." (Picture in Picture) where you could be watching a program
on one channel and have a small insert picture in the corner of what was happening on another channel ..... so you knew when to switch over to
the Cricket/Football or whatever. Can't say I've ever seen it being
offered recently.
Or was that a function of a Beta/VHS Video Recorder I had at that time??
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
On 22/09/2026 8:38 pm, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 7:45 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
<Snip>
Now you mention it I think the Beeb /did/ have _some_ connection toNo, this was definitely using a Zilog Z80 CPU.
the Raspberry Pi machines (if only linking some programmes to them) -
though a lot more tenuous connection than to the BBC computers - but
that was a _lot_ more recently.
At other times, I had learnt programming for Intel 8085 and Motorola
6809 CPU's
Variety is the Spice of Life!!
On Sun, 9/20/2026 2:32 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensions 32", 43", 50", 55", 65", 75", 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!).
On 22/09/2026 12:10, Daniel70 wrote:
All this discussion about T.V.'s has got me wondering what ever
happened to "P.i.P." (Picture in Picture) where you could be watching
a program on one channel and have a small insert picture in the corner
of what was happening on another channel ..... so you knew when to
switch over to the Cricket/Football or whatever. Can't say I've ever
seen it being offered recently.
Or was that a function of a Beta/VHS Video Recorder I had at that time??
Probably. You need two tuners to decode two streams unless they happen
to be on the same digital MUX. Which in the UK is about a 20% chance..
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
On 2026-09-21 12:16, Paul wrote:
On Sun, 9/20/2026 2:32 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensions-a 32",-a 43",-a 50",-a 55",-a 65", 75",-a 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!).
I just looked. There are 28" units (I have one such)
That's why, when buying even cheap USB tuners, you read
the reviews to discover what evil awaits in the software
that comes with it. Invariably it's "software is awful",
when you read the reviews. It's hard to find a product
that doesn't have reviews like that.
On 22/09/2026 13:12, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-21 12:16, Paul wrote:
On Sun, 9/20/2026 2:32 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensionsa 32",a 43",a 50",a 55",a 65", 75",a 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!).
I just looked. There are 28" units (I have one such)
Hard to buy these days. I have a 32 and a 43 I think
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone now
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them work.
Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One 'netbook', which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not
to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 13:12, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-21 12:16, Paul wrote:Hard to buy these days. I have a 32 and a 43 I think
On Sun, 9/20/2026 2:32 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensions-a 32",-a 43",-a 50",-a 55",-a 65", 75",-a 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!).
I just looked. There are 28" units (I have one such)
Not here (The Netherlands). One main webshop (mediamarkt.nl) has 21 different 24" models (and 27").
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough,
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
At the cottage, and without any fancy antenna system, we could just
barely get enough analog signal on one TV channel, to get audio.
The picture was pure white snow, nothing to sync to, but you could still
get audio, which was good enough for the nightly news.
You can't do that with digital TV. At that signal level, you get LOS and
a black screen. The OTA digital TV, you can really only count on it
(getting some station to come in), in the city. If I use my 15dBi
antenna, I can get a representative sample of city signals. With rabbit
ears, only a few "lucky" channels come in :-) It's not like the scheme encourages fringe reception projects, as it barely works in the city.
Paul
On 22/09/2026 14:38, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 13:12, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Hard to buy these days. I have a 32 and a 43 I think
On 2026-09-21 12:16, Paul wrote:
I just looked. There are 28" units (I have one such)
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensions-a 32",-a 43",-a 50",-a 55",-a 65", 75",-a 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!). >>>>
-a-a Not here (The Netherlands). One main webshop (mediamarkt.nl) has 21
different 24" models (and 27").
Same in UKs biggest retailer of domestic shit. Starts at 24/27
On 22/09/2026 12:47, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 8:38 pm, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 7:45 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
<Snip>
Now you mention it I think the Beeb /did/ have _some_ connection toNo, this was definitely using a Zilog Z80 CPU.
the Raspberry Pi machines (if only linking some programmes to them) -
though a lot more tenuous connection than to the BBC computers - but
that was a _lot_ more recently.
At other times, I had learnt programming for Intel 8085 and Motorola
6809 CPU's
Variety is the Spice of Life!!
Z80. 6809, 8086 were what I cut my teeth on.
After that, C and who cared what the processor was? The compiler sorted
it for the most part.
On 22/09/2026 13:12, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-21 12:16, Paul wrote:Hard to buy these days. I have a 32 and a 43 I think
On Sun, 9/20/2026 2:32 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/20 17:26:9, chrisv wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the normal >>>> outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not even that >>>> small now, I haven't looked lately.
AI Overview
Standard TV sizes range from 32 inches to 85 inches or larger,
measured diagonally from corner to corner.
Common TV Dimensions-a 32",-a 43",-a 50",-a 55",-a 65", 75",-a 85"
********
If you believe the AI, then sets smaller than 32" don't exist (hah!).
I just looked. There are 28" units (I have one such)
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
It's just a whole lot of fun. If you want a test of your
skillz, try setting up MythTV, with the front end on
one computer, and the back end on a second computer.
It's a lot simpler if setting both ends on the same
computer, and keeping the tuner in your daily driver.
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:[]
On Mon, 9/21/2026 5:29 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this
country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and >>> thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things >>> like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
Well woohoo
At the cottage, and without any fancy antenna system, we could
just barely get enough analog signal on one TV channel, to get audio.
The picture was pure white snow, nothing to sync to, but
you could still get audio, which was good enough for
the nightly news.
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long into
the realm where analog became unwatchable
You can't do that with digital TV. At that signal level, you
get LOS and a black screen.
You didnt have a picture on analogue either.
The OTA digital TV, you can reallyAbsolute bollocks.
only count on it (getting some station to come in), in the
city. If I use my 15dBi antenna, I can get a representative sample
of city signals. With rabbit ears, only a few "lucky" channels
come in :-) It's not like the scheme encourages fringe reception
projects, as it barely works in the city.
Digital TV works if you have line of sight to the transmitter.
30 miles is a typical range on more or less flat country
Rabbits ears dont work unless you are less than a mile from the
transmitter.
Oh, and digital in the USA solved the Never The Same Color problem.
Paul
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this
country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
I have a portable 10 inch with build in rechargable battery:
https://www.bol.com/nl/nl/p/lenco-tft-1028bk-draagbare-televisie-hd-met-dvb-t2-10-inch-zwart/9200000054160430/
No longer available it says.
All this discussion about T.V.'s has got me wondering what ever happened
to "P.i.P." (Picture in Picture) where you could be watching a program
on one channel and have a small insert picture in the corner of what was happening on another channel ..... so you knew when to switch over to
the Cricket/Football or whatever. Can't say I've ever seen it being
offered recently.
Or was that a function of a Beta/VHS Video Recorder I had at that time??
I did lose a channel (7, which actually broadcast on channel 7) when
they switched to digital.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough,
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.
In the early sixties of last century I got hold of an old round CRT with 70 degrees deflection tube.
I started as curiosity to replace all tubes with transistors.
The tuner and IF was not that hard, neither was the vertical deflection.
The horizontal deflection was not that hard either: oscillator PLL, driver, power-transistor
some extra turns on the original horizontal output transformer to accommodate low voltage driving by a transistor.
Worked perfectly, was inspired by the Sony, see link below, but mine did not break..
I cheated a bit, used a tube for the HV rectifier, no money (school in those days) for a Si HV diode..
There also was an Electuur magazine transistor TV project, I used part of that circuit.
Later (from 1968) I worked in TV as engineer in the National network here.
Then even later had my own TV repair shop.
TV and related stuff are large part of my life.
First lots of studio equipment with tubes, then more an more transistors and digital logic everywhere.
computer came much later,
These day anybody can have their own TV station on YouTube for a few dollars. Even the war house ape
On 22/09/2026 8:33 am, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/09/2026 18:13, Chris Abraham wrote:I think 'the Flying Doctor' was produced by/for one or other of the Commercial Networks, the Seven Network, the Nine Network and the Ten
On Mon, 21 Sep 2026, Daniel70 wrote:
WOW!! Here in Australia, we only got T.V. in 1956
Random question: does Australia have a history of Old Time Radio
Shows? I would love to see if I can find any. I really love old time
radio theater. Like Yours Truly, Johhny Dollar and Gunsmoke, etc.
I remember a BBC series 'the Flying Doctor' which I assumed was made by
the Australian broadcasting corporation.
Network .... and it might not shock you to know they were named after
the VHS Channel that they transmitted on!
The Government funded network was the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) which transmitted on VHS Chn 2. The ABC also had a network of AM
radio stations which could be broadcasting locally based programs or State-based programming or National (Time Zone shifted) programming.
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long into
the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing.
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 5:29 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the >>>>>>> normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not
even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone >>>>>> now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was
the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them
work.
-a-a Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One
'netbook',
which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order not >>>> to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this
country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and >>> thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things >>> like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
Big commercial interests wanted to
grab the bandwidth.
On 2026-09-22, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long into >>> the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more
irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing.
Agreed. Nowadays it's all or nothing. The concept of
"graceful degradation" seems to have gone out of style.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/22 9:22:23, Jan Panteltje wrote:[]
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this
country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never
too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because
they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets, and >>> thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting things >>> like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer.
I have a portable 10 inch with build in rechargable battery:
https://www.bol.com/nl/nl/p/lenco-tft-1028bk-draagbare-televisie-hd-met-dvb-t2-10-inch-zwart/9200000054160430/
No longer available it says.
Is its screen less than SD resolution?
Is it deaf? (If you're in a flat part of .nl, that may not be so important.)
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave
up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me >anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external
hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page
doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no
longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
(Should we take this somewhere else? Of the 'groups I take, >uk.tech.broadcast would do, but I guess most in this thread aren't inthe UK!)
On 2026/9/22 16:35:29, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
I had a quick look at Currys - no way to select by screen size to see
what's available, but sorting by price, I was surprised to see - even >selecting only those in stock - two or three 24" sets in the cheapest
few. No 28"; the rest were 32", and one 40".
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
a 4:3 I presume?
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
B/W, if correctly focused, would always have been sharper than colour -
no shadowmask.
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Tubes (or valves as we called them in British English) were, originally,
more sensitive, though I think semiconductors have more or less caught
up now.
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!
Yes, with a particle accelerator (or three) at the back!
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough, >>> but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.
I think it approximated to about a kV per inch; the original Sinclair >portable multi-standard, had a 1" screen, and 1 kV. Colour sets needed
more, to get enough brightness out of using only one-third of the beam
power.
In the early sixties of last century I got hold of an old round CRT with 70 degrees deflection tube.
I think round ones survived longer in USA; I've certainly seen (pictures
of) colour (or rather color!) ones that were. Not sure why. Even pre-war
ones (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lhfs7FjKspw for Gerry
demonstrating one) here weren't round, though some of them had very
rounded corners!
I started as curiosity to replace all tubes with transistors.
The tuner and IF was not that hard, neither was the vertical deflection.
The horizontal deflection was not that hard either: oscillator PLL, driver, power-transistor
some extra turns on the original horizontal output transformer to accommodate low voltage driving by a transistor.
Worked perfectly, was inspired by the Sony, see link below, but mine did not break..
I cheated a bit, used a tube for the HV rectifier, no money (school in those days) for a Si HV diode..
I once replaced the DY51 in a small portable set with a stick diode -
gave a brighter (and I think smaller) picture; I think it was more
efficient. (I _think_ I did it because the valve diode suffered some >mechanical failure - anode wire broke off or something - rather than
just curiosity.)
[]
There also was an Electuur magazine transistor TV project, I used part of that circuit.
Ah, I remember that magazine - Elektor in UK! Good mag..>
Later (from 1968) I worked in TV as engineer in the National network here.
Ah = the company ABBA made commercials for! >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_PPrcdaMJc >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhSEKpPDesI
("Fernando" will never sound the same again!)
Then even later had my own TV repair shop.
I never actually worked in video (though I did in electronics), but
always took a great interest in it. (Sadly, except for museum work, much
of what I know is now of little use - true of much of my other
electronics knowledge too, such as 7400 series logic.)
TV and related stuff are large part of my life.Well, he's had to, as he's being shunned by the main ones!>
First lots of studio equipment with tubes, then more an more transistors and digital logic everywhere.
computer came much later,
These day anybody can have their own TV station on YouTube for a few dollars.
Even the war house ape
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough,
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
On 2026-09-22, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long into >>> the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more
irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing.
Agreed. Nowadays it's all or nothing. The concept of
"graceful degradation" seems to have gone out of style.
I had a quick look at Currys - no way to select by screen size to see
what's available
On 9/22/26 02:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 5:29 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/21 19:44:8, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/09/2026 15:26, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:32:42 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Indeed.
[snip]
Yes, I don't think you can _get_ a new TV - certainly not in the >>>>>>>> normal
outlets Joe public goes to - less than 32" - and probably not >>>>>>>> even that
small now, I haven't looked lately.
I seem to have seen 24" in Wal-Mart, although those could be gone >>>>>>> now.
40" and 43" are now in the aisle labeled "small TVs".
I remember when 19" was big.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes
though
22" is the smallest I found
I think last time I looked (and that wasn't too recently) 32 or 40 was >>>> the smallest for new TVs in the usual outlets.
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
Indeed, but you don't half end up fighting the software to make them
work.
-a-a Exactly. (In ~2008) I had a TV dongle in my Acer Aspire One
'netbook',
which had a whopping 8.9" display. We had to sit way back, in order >>>>> not
to develop neck pain from all the left/right turning!
:-)
"Camping" or "portable" ones used to be sold, mainly by maplin in this >>>> country (UK), before they disappeared. (They weren't own brand.) Never >>>> too successful - partly because they drew too much power relative to
their size, so difficult to keep going on batteries, but mainly because >>>> they were no less deaf - OK, maybe a _little_ less - than home sets,
and
thus needed connecting to a big aerial, which made their use as
camping/portable sets pretty pointless. AFAIK you can still get them
online. They also suffer from the same as the TV sticks - getting
things
like subtitles, EPG, AD, etc. just wasn't available, LCNs (channel
numbers) didn't work properly, and they even tended to use
half-resolution or similar. but the signal need was/is the main killer. >>>>
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
-a Big commercial interests wanted to
-a grab the bandwidth.
On 22/09/2026 20:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-22, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:The point is that the graceful degradation is masked. What would be unwatchable on analogue stays almost perfect until it dissappears in an instant.
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long
into
the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more
irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing.
Agreed.-a Nowadays it's all or nothing.-a The concept of
"graceful degradation" seems to have gone out of style.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave
up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me
anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external
hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page
doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no
longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
I bought a cheap made in China HD box for my big TV, maybe 30 USD at the time,
it can record to - and playback from a USB thumb drive, 128 GB now in it.
https://panteltje.nl/pub/sat_box_sizes_IXIMG_0907.JPG
left the old satellite TV box, right the new one
Things get ever smaller..
Mostly satellite reception here,
have an other made in China box for the local TV stations
But the TV can do the reception by itself, is merely used as HDMI monitor,
As I have a big steerable satellie dish that draws a bit of power when moving I prefer to use the boxes to drive the satellitedish motor,
that ways protecting my expensive TV
Anyways it all works perfectly, whole world on my TV with that movable dish.
I have several RTL_SDR sticks in use, some record my outside weather sensor, some airplane traffic, some ship traffic, some ham radio and TV,
https://panteltje.online/pub/boats_and_planes.gif
Use thse for spectrum analyzer too:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/radar_spectrum_sidebands.gif
I write all that software myself, do use some libraries of course,
open source much of it,Downloads here:
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html
rtl_sdr sticks can ever receive GPS
On 2026/9/22 11:52:42, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 8:33 am, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/09/2026 18:13, Chris Abraham wrote:I think 'the Flying Doctor' was produced by/for one or other of the
On Mon, 21 Sep 2026, Daniel70 wrote:
WOW!! Here in Australia, we only got T.V. in 1956
Random question: does Australia have a history of Old Time Radio
Shows? I would love to see if I can find any. I really love old time
radio theater. Like Yours Truly, Johhny Dollar and Gunsmoke, etc.
I remember a BBC series 'the Flying Doctor' which I assumed was made by
the Australian broadcasting corporation.
Commercial Networks, the Seven Network, the Nine Network and the Ten
Network .... and it might not shock you to know they were named after
the VHS Channel that they transmitted on!
The Government funded network was the Australian Broadcasting Commission
(ABC) which transmitted on VHS Chn 2. The ABC also had a network of AM
radio stations which could be broadcasting locally based programs or
State-based programming or National (Time Zone shifted) programming.
VHF :-)
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 09:43, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave
up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me
anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external
hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page
doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no
longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
I bought a cheap made in China HD box for my big TV, maybe 30 USD at the time,
it can record to - and playback from a USB thumb drive, 128 GB now in it.
https://panteltje.nl/pub/sat_box_sizes_IXIMG_0907.JPG
left the old satellite TV box, right the new one
Yes, I have one similar. But they are not even close to the features of
the M740
Things get ever smaller..
Mostly satellite reception here,
have an other made in China box for the local TV stations
But the TV can do the reception by itself, is merely used as HDMI monitor, >> As I have a big steerable satellie dish that draws a bit of power when moving
I prefer to use the boxes to drive the satellitedish motor,
that ways protecting my expensive TV
Anyways it all works perfectly, whole world on my TV with that movable dish. >>
I have several RTL_SDR sticks in use, some record my outside weather sensor, >> some airplane traffic, some ship traffic, some ham radio and TV,
https://panteltje.online/pub/boats_and_planes.gif
Use thse for spectrum analyzer too:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/radar_spectrum_sidebands.gif
I write all that software myself, do use some libraries of course,
open source much of it,Downloads here:
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html
rtl_sdr sticks can ever receive GPS
Cute :-)
Most of my entertainment comes via fibre nowdays.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough, >>> but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
It was a fixed voltage source created
by using a chain of diodes of lesser breakdown voltage
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough,
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds - transistors
to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
On 2026-09-23 10:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 20:52, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-22, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:The point is that the graceful degradation is masked. What would be
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Agreed.-a Nowadays it's all or nothing.-a The concept of
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long >>>>> into
the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more
irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing. >>>
"graceful degradation" seems to have gone out of style.
unwatchable on analogue stays almost perfect until it dissappears in
an instant.
Here, some channels I get with brief interruptions, the image freezes
for a second or so. Sometimes minutes. Sometimes the image interrupts
for less than a second, then sections of the image take a second or two
to recover.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough, >>>> but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
I know, I used those, not so expensive as you think.
Philips BUZ types
A *varying* voltage.10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
What modulation?
It was a fixed voltage source created
by using a chain of diodes of lesser breakdown voltage
The first ones had only one HV rectifier.
the voltage multipier blocks came later.
A power switching transistor did drive the HV and horizontal scan transformer.
There we later many different transistor models wit all sort of solutions.
On 22/09/2026 9:52 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:Back in my Australian Army HF Comms days, several of the (AWA E517/E519) Transmitters produced over 20kW output over the HF Frequency Range.
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy
enough, but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And
fragile.
As far as I know there were only EVER two AWA E517's (40kW PEP) ever
made ... and they were so bleeding edge at the time that the AWA
technicians initially employed to maintain/repair them would often
bypass Faulty Circuitry rather than fixing it .... so, later in the Equipments lives, when the Aust Army Technicians (like ME) went to fix
them, the first thing that had to be done was to find the relevant set
of Circuit Diagrams for the particular Transmitter so you knew what alterations had been made where!!
Fun and Games!!
On 2026/9/22 9:22:23, Jan Panteltje wrote:[...]
I have a portable 10 inch with build in rechargable battery:
https://www.bol.com/nl/nl/p/lenco-tft-1028bk-draagbare-televisie-hd-met-dvb-t2-10-inch-zwart/9200000054160430/
No longer available it says.
Is its screen less than SD resolution?
Is it deaf? (If you're in a flat part of .nl, that may not be so important.)
On 23/09/2026 13:26, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 9:52 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Circuit diagrams are online for those!
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:Back in my Australian Army HF Comms days, several of the (AWA
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes
though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller
-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy
enough, but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And
fragile.
E517/E519) Transmitters produced over 20kW output over the HF
Frequency Range.
As far as I know there were only EVER two AWA E517's (40kW PEP) ever
made ... and they were so bleeding edge at the time that the AWA
technicians initially employed to maintain/repair them would often
bypass Faulty Circuitry rather than fixing it .... so, later in the
Equipments lives, when the Aust Army Technicians (like ME) went to fix
them, the first thing that had to be done was to find the relevant set
of Circuit Diagrams for the particular Transmitter so you knew what
alterations had been made where!!
Fun and Games!!
It was discovered that a British sixpenny piece was exactly right for bypassing the interlock on the very high voltage Radar cabinets made by Marconis.
Since servicing one without power applied was essentially impossible... ..rather them than me. Cant remember what the magnetrons used, but it
wasn't a dry battery...ah. 5.5kV. At 5A....
Type M565
On 23/09/2026 05:04, c186282 wrote:[]
On 9/22/26 02:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
Essentially you could bend Shannon by utilising the fact that video and audio actually carry much less information than the bandwidth needed to transit them in analogue suggest.Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
-a Big commercial interests wanted to
-a grab the bandwidth.
Compression plus error correction plus quadrature amplitude modulation allowed more picture to be sent over noisy channels and still look
pretty much perfect, and in mots cases a lot better in terms of
sharpness and color rendition.
So instead of five channels, we got 105. and the same UHF space carried
them all.
So similar to cable and satellite transmission in terms of '100 channels
of shit on the TV'
Some of the lower frequencies got reassigned to DAB
Of course, now we have enormous Internet bandwidth, DTB is essentially obsolescent.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/22 9:22:23, Jan Panteltje wrote:[...]
I have a portable 10 inch with build in rechargable battery:
https://www.bol.com/nl/nl/p/lenco-tft-1028bk-draagbare-televisie-hd-met-dvb-t2-10-inch-zwart/9200000054160430/
No longer available it says.
Is its screen less than SD resolution?
Is it deaf? (If you're in a flat part of .nl, that may not be so important.)
There *are* no non-flat parts in .nl! :-) [1]
Essentially you could bend Shannon by utilising the fact that video andPlus, for audio anyway, you can use properties of how the human brain perceives it, i. e. you can throw away actual content as we won't
audio actually carry much less information than the bandwidth needed to
transit them in analogue suggest.
notice. (AIUI, that's how a lot of the mp3 compression works.)
Compression plus error correction plus quadrature amplitude modulationWell, the ECC makes the sharpness and colour perfect, until it falls
allowed more picture to be sent over noisy channels and still look
pretty much perfect, and in mots cases a lot better in terms of
sharpness and color rendition.
over completely.
(Depending on your decoder, there_can_ be a range
where degraded but still usable gets through, but it's a very narrow
range; for most purposes/people/channels, it's fine until it suddenly collapses, usually with nasty noises too - no warning it's going to,
which you got with analogue.)
So instead of five channels, we got 105. and the same UHF space carriedEfOe
them all.
So similar to cable and satellite transmission in terms of '100 channels
of shit on the TV'
And the upper ones to fobile moans. (Actually in UK I don't think any
Some of the lower frequencies got reassigned to DAB
went to DAB - that may have got some of where the VHF TV was, but that
was only the old "405 line" system A, which had been turned off well
before we went digital - TV had been UHF only in UK since then.)
Of course, now we have enormous Internet bandwidth, DTB is essentiallyWe don't_all_ have enormous internet bandwidth (I'm happy with what I
obsolescent.
have, but it's not enormous) - and there's still a small, but it still represents a significant number of people, proportion who don't have the internet at all. (Who are going to have to be given broadband MoDems ["routers" in UK] - possibly with battery backup - when the telephone
system is switched off. Which IMO has had far too little publicity.)
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
(Should we take this somewhere else? Of the 'groups I take,uk.tech.broadcast would do, but I guess most in this thread aren't in
the UK!)
I think round ones survived longer in USA; I've certainly seen (pictures
of) colour (or rather color!) ones that were. Not sure why. Even pre-war
ones (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lhfs7FjKspw for Gerry
demonstrating one) here weren't round, though some of them had very
rounded corners!
Nice video, yes, the round one ! in a rectangular housing!
I started as curiosity to replace all tubes with transistors.
The tuner and IF was not that hard, neither was the vertical deflection. >>> The horizontal deflection was not that hard either: oscillator PLL, driver, power-transistor
some extra turns on the original horizontal output transformer to accommodate low voltage driving by a transistor.
Worked perfectly, was inspired by the Sony, see link below, but mine did not break..
I cheated a bit, used a tube for the HV rectifier, no money (school in those days) for a Si HV diode..
I once replaced the DY51 in a small portable set with a stick diode -
gave a brighter (and I think smaller) picture; I think it was more
efficient. (I _think_ I did it because the valve diode suffered some
mechanical failure - anode wire broke off or something - rather than
just curiosity.)
Yes no filament heating power needed,
a bit less load on the horizontal output stage may have helped.
Later (from 1968) I worked in TV as engineer in the National network here. >>Ah = the company ABBA made commercials for!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_PPrcdaMJc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhSEKpPDesI
("Fernando" will never sound the same again!)
Well the 'National' should be the Dutch main TV network,
there was only one network and it has 3 channels back then.
I like music, play the keyboard every now and then.
In the olden days I played trumpet.
Then even later had my own TV repair shop.
I never actually worked in video (though I did in electronics), but
always took a great interest in it. (Sadly, except for museum work, much
of what I know is now of little use - true of much of my other
electronics knowledge too, such as 7400 series logic.)
Yes, did a lot af 7400 based stuff too, then CMOS..
https://panteltje.nl/pub/z80/graphics_card_top.jpg
https://panteltje.nl/pub/z80/ramdisk_top.jpg
Bit later, some 74HCT chips on the board here too:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/FPGA_board_with_25MHz_VCXO_locked_to_rubidium_10MHz_reference_IMG_3724.GIF
TV and related stuff are large part of my life.
First lots of studio equipment with tubes, then more an more transistors and digital logic everywhere.
computer came much later,
These day anybody can have their own TV station on YouTube for a few dollars.
Indeed! Unfortunately, they'll be back covering him.Even the war house apeWell, he's had to, as he's being shunned by the main ones!>
Yes :-) He asked for it!
On 2026/9/23 9:16:2, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
(Should we take this somewhere else? Of the 'groups I take,uk.tech.broadcast would do, but I guess most in this thread aren't in
the UK!)
Or to email (mine is valid); sounds like we have a lot in common. Rather
than continuing to try the patience of the Windows/Linux folk!
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 23/09/2026 13:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:A *varying* voltage.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!!Indeed.-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though >>>>>>>> 22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller >>>>>>>
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile.
-a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive.
Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough, >>>>> but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
I know, I used those, not so expensive as you think.
Philips BUZ types
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
What modulation?
The cathode is modulated. for video. Or sometimes the grid
the anode is simply +12kv or whatever fed through a chain of diodes. And
the deflection coils are fed by transformers
So nothing there except the anode requires a high voltage high frequency >transistor. Although the deflection coils used a lot of *power*.
Video modulation need volts AND speed. A hard problem that I was tasked
with very early in my electronics career..
It was a fixed voltage source created
by using a chain of diodes of lesser breakdown voltage
The first ones had only one HV rectifier.
the voltage multipier blocks came later.
Probably. One rectifier tube or 15 diodes - take your pick!
A power switching transistor did drive the HV and horizontal scan transformer.Yes. Power, not necessarily high voltage tho
There we later many different transistor models wit all sort of solutions. >>Yeah. Many ways to skin that cat
On 23/09/2026 14:42, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Actually the human brain DOES notice a lot of it. I play MP3s through myEssentially you could bend Shannon by utilising the fact that video andPlus, for audio anyway, you can use properties of how the human brain
audio actually carry much less information than the bandwidth needed to
transit them in analogue suggest.
perceives it, i. e. you can throw away actual content as we won't
notice. (AIUI, that's how a lot of the mp3 compression works.)
old but quality HiFi. Its not CD quality.
In fact its possible to do lossless compression - e.g. FLAC that
preserves all the qualaity and is still smaller that a full 16 bit
sample at 44kHz
If you go for lossy compressions the sky is the limit. Human speech is
comprehensible down to about 1kbps, which is the quality of the average Thames Estuary dweller. Innit.
Well VHF went along with analogue telly I think.
"In the UK, digital terrestrial television (Freeview) broadcasts using
UHF (Ultra High Frequency) Bands IV and V, spanning frequencies from 470
MHz to 698 MHz (historically up to 862 MHz, but higher frequencies were cleared for mobile 4G/5G data"
So the fobile moans did get a 100-MHz slice
Really its a Y2K problem There will be a few issues where its all a bit dodgy but for most people it will be 'sod the landline anyway - I hardly
use it'
And they will get given mobiles with Big Buttons instead.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/23 10:1:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:[]
On 23/09/2026 05:04, c186282 wrote:
On 9/22/26 02:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
Essentially you could bend Shannon by utilising the fact that video andWhy did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
-a Big commercial interests wanted to
-a grab the bandwidth.
audio actually carry much less information than the bandwidth needed to
transit them in analogue suggest.
Plus, for audio anyway, you can use properties of how the human brain >perceives it, i. e. you can throw away actual content as we won't
notice. (AIUI, that's how a lot of the mp3 compression works.)
Compression plus error correction plus quadrature amplitude modulation
allowed more picture to be sent over noisy channels and still look
pretty much perfect, and in mots cases a lot better in terms of
sharpness and color rendition.
Well, the ECC makes the sharpness and colour perfect, until it falls
over completely. (Depending on your decoder, there _can_ be a range
where degraded but still usable gets through, but it's a very narrow
range; for most purposes/people/channels, it's fine until it suddenly >collapses, usually with nasty noises too - no warning it's going to,
which you got with analogue.)
So instead of five channels, we got 105. and the same UHF space carried
them all.
So similar to cable and satellite transmission in terms of '100 channels
of shit on the TV'
:-)
Some of the lower frequencies got reassigned to DAB
And the upper ones to fobile moans. (Actually in UK I don't think any
went to DAB - that may have got some of where the VHF TV was, but that
was only the old "405 line" system A, which had been turned off well
before we went digital - TV had been UHF only in UK since then.)
We don't _all_ have enormous internet bandwidth (I'm happy with what I
Of course, now we have enormous Internet bandwidth, DTB is essentially
obsolescent.
have, but it's not enormous) - and there's still a small, but it still >represents a significant number of people, proportion who don't have the >internet at all. (Who are going to have to be given broadband MoDems >["routers" in UK] - possibly with battery backup - when the telephone
system is switched off. Which IMO has had far too little publicity.)
I am also radio ham, full license.
We have our own satellites , even space on a geostatic one:
https://unicomradio.com/qo-100/
And also local 70 cm wavelength networks.
Am not very active ATM.
But in case of WW3 it may come in handy to see if any lifeforms left :-)
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/23 9:16:2, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
(Should we take this somewhere else? Of the 'groups I take,uk.tech.broadcast would do, but I guess most in this thread aren't in
the UK!)
Or to email (mine is valid); sounds like we have a lot in common. Rather
than continuing to try the patience of the Windows/Linux folk!
What possible reason could there be to *not* annoy the Linux folks!?
And for us Windows folks, we need all the entertainment we can get,
because we're bored, because our stuff Just Works (TM) (Just not *this*
month (and so many others?), but we won't spill the beans!)
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/23 16:4:31, Jan Panteltje wrote:[]
I am also radio ham, full license.
G6JPG here - B licence, but they gave us all bands quite a few years
ago. But I haven't keyed a transmitter (other than a fobile, and that
not often) for decades.
We have our own satellites , even space on a geostatic one:
https://unicomradio.com/qo-100/
When I was last into that hobby, the UoSATs were the thing. (University
of Surrey, I think.)
With a hand-cranked battery-charger (or solar).
And also local 70 cm wavelength networks.
Am not very active ATM.
But in case of WW3 it may come in handy to see if any lifeforms left :-)
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 09:43, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave
up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me
anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external >>>> hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page >>>> doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no
longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
I bought a cheap made in China HD box for my big TV, maybe 30 USD at the time,
it can record to - and playback from a USB thumb drive, 128 GB now in it. >>> https://panteltje.nl/pub/sat_box_sizes_IXIMG_0907.JPG
left the old satellite TV box, right the new one
Yes, I have one similar. But they are not even close to the features of
the M740
Waht features do you mean?
Mine can record, as times you can set, playback, sometimes I record stuff mosty music, or sciencewprograms an then later copy it to teh 4 TB harddisc also connected to teh big Samsung TV.
Or a bit longer ago to DVD or blueray, or M-Disc
more than 1000 discs here, this is box 1 with 1000 discs:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/CD_box_binnenkant_IXIMG_0549.JPG
Holds old Linux distros too :-)
Things get ever smaller..
Mostly satellite reception here,
have an other made in China box for the local TV stations
But the TV can do the reception by itself, is merely used as HDMI monitor, >>> As I have a big steerable satellie dish that draws a bit of power when moving
I prefer to use the boxes to drive the satellitedish motor,
that ways protecting my expensive TV
Anyways it all works perfectly, whole world on my TV with that movable dish.
I have several RTL_SDR sticks in use, some record my outside weather sensor,
some airplane traffic, some ship traffic, some ham radio and TV,
https://panteltje.online/pub/boats_and_planes.gif
Use thse for spectrum analyzer too:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/radar_spectrum_sidebands.gif
I write all that software myself, do use some libraries of course,
open source much of it,Downloads here:
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html
rtl_sdr sticks can ever receive GPS
Cute :-)
Most of my entertainment comes via fibre nowdays.
Yes they wanted me to get a fiber subscription too.
But no way
For Internet at home and away I use a Huawei 4G USB stick,
now plugged into this Raspberry Pi4 8Gb I am posting this from,
when away I can put it in my Samsung laptop.
Fiber on the road ? no.
The rest here is satellite.
One big advantage of satellite is that the 'fiber guys' will determine what you can see (they get much from satellite but pick the channels they forward).
I can get stations from all over the world and viewpoints from all over the world via satellite.
The M740 could record two programs and play a recording simultaneously,
for instance.
It could edit a recording.
You could download a recording to the computer.
On 2026-09-23 14:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
I have searched for information on it.Yes, I have one similar. But they are not even close to the features of
the M740
Waht features do you mean?
Mine can record, as times you can set, playback, sometimes I record stuff
mosty music, or sciencewprograms an then later copy it to teh 4 TB
harddisc
also connected to teh big Samsung TV.
The M740 could record two programs and play a recording simultaneously,
for instance.
It could edit a recording.
You could download a recording to the computer.
It could automatically record all programs named "kojac" in a channel.
You could program the recordings using a web page on the computer.
It ran Linux. Originally there was a telnet port, then a community
firmware update added ssh, I think. There was ftp and http
And many things I have forgotten. I asked ChatGPT for a summary:
Yes. The **Siemens Gigaset M740 AV** was quite an ambitious DVB-T set-
top box for its time (around 2004rCo2005). It was essentially a **digital
TV receiver \+ PVR + network/media player**, rather than just a basic tuner.-a CHIP+1
-a### Main features
-a- **Dual DVB-T tuners** rCo two independent terrestrial digital-TV tuners. This allowed you to **watch one channel while recording
another**, and also enabled Picture-in-Picture (PIP).-a ManualsLib+1
- **Recording to external storage** rCo it had **no built-in hard disk**, but could record TV to a USB hard drive or a network drive. Recordings
were stored as MPEG-2 streams.-a Golem
- **Time-shifting / timeshift** rCo with a suitable USB hard disk, you
could pause live TV and continue watching later. The configuration
allowed a timeshift buffer of up to **240 minutes**.-a ManualsLib
- **Electronic Programme Guide (EPG)** rCo used programme-guide
information for navigating TV schedules and setting recordings.
- **Picture-in-Picture** rCo the second tuner could display another TV programme in a small window while the main programme remained full- screen.-a ManualsLib
- **Network connectivity** rCo built-in **100 Mbps Ethernet** allowed it
to communicate with a PC or network storage.-a Gigaset
- **USB 2.0** rCo two USB ports for external storage and peripherals. Gigaset
- **Network/media player** rCo it could play multimedia stored on a PC/ network drive or USB disk, including **MPEG-1/MPEG-2 video, MP3 audio,
and JPEG/BMP/PNG/GIF images**.-a Golem
- **PC-to-TV streaming** rCo the idea was that you could keep your media
on a computer elsewhere in the house and play it through the M740 AV on
your television.-a ManualsLib
- **SCART connections** rCo two Euro-AV/SCART sockets, one intended for
the TV and another for a VCR/other AV equipment.-a Gigaset
- **Digital audio** rCo optical/coaxial-style **S/PDIF digital audio output** (listed as Audio Digital), plus analogue stereo RCA outputs. Gigaset
- **PAL television output** rCo designed for the analogue PAL/SCART television environment of the period.-a Recambios y Accesorios Online
- **Software updates** rCo firmware could be updated manually, automatically, or via DVB-T according to the manual.-a ManualsLib
-a### Hardware specifications
| Feature-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | M740 AV-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| --------------------- | ------------------------- |
| TV tuners-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | **2 |u DVB-T**-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Network-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | **100 Mbps Ethernet**-a-a-a-a |
| USB-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | **2 |u USB 2.0**-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Video/TV-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | **2 |u SCART**-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Analogue audio-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | Left/right RCA-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Digital audio-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | S/PDIF-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Internal HDD-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | **No**-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| External recording-a-a-a | USB HDD / network storage |
| Dimensions-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | \~200 |u 200 |u 66 mm-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Weight-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | \~850 g-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Power-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a | 230 V / 50 Hz-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Standby consumption-a-a | \~1.7 W-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
| Operating consumption | \~12.5 W-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
### What makes it interesting today
-aThe really interesting part is that **this wasn't simply a DVB-T decoder**. Siemens essentially built a networked media centre around a dual-tuner PVR. For 2004, the combination of **dual DVB-T \+ USB
recording + timeshift \+ Ethernet + network media playback** was fairly sophisticated.-a CHIP+1
-aThere is one major caveat today: it was designed for the **original
DVB-T era**, so its usefulness depends heavily on what digital
terrestrial television standards are currently transmitted in your area. Modern DVB-T/T2 compatibility is a particularly important question
before assuming it can still receive today's broadcasts.
-aIf you're asking because **you have an M740 AV in front of you**, I
can also explain its **connections, how to use a USB hard drive with it, what file formats it supports, and whether it's still useful with modern Spanish DVB-T**.
[1] Yes, of course there are some, but I don't think they matter as far
as RF reception is concerned, except perhaps for the (rather low) hills
in Limburg (they/'we' think they have 'mountains' [2]).
Probably. One rectifier tube or 15 diodes - take your pick!
Carlos E.R. wrote:
The M740 could record two programs and play a recording
simultaneously, for instance.
It could edit a recording.
You could download a recording to the computer.
I spent several years using MythTV, but its rate of progress was slow,
now I switched to TVheadend and it seems pretty complete, just choose
your tuners wisely, don't buy one that has out-of-tree drivers, or
you'll be having to keep them tweaked for later kernels ... I've been
very impressed with a combined DVB-T2/S2/C2 card from Hauppauge (sp?)
On 2026/9/23 5:4:4, c186282 wrote:
[]
I think that had happened more or less before the digital switchover: IOn 22/09/2026 07:20, Paul wrote:
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
Big commercial interests wanted to
grab the bandwidth.
have memories of Bands IV/V extending from 4xx to 870 MHz (channels 21
to 68 [69 in places]); but 100 MHz chunks were repeatedly sold off the
top (the mobile 'phone industry was usually cited as hoovering up
anything available), so that I'm not sure if it even reaches 600
(channel 5x?), even by the time of digital.
What possible reason could there be to*not* annoy the Linux folks!?
And for us Windows folks, we need all the entertainment we can get,
because we're bored, because our stuff Just Works (TM) (Just
not*this* month (and so many others?), but we won't spill the
beans!)
As long there 'OT', preferably in brackets ('[OT]'), at the start of--
the 'Subject:' header, it's fine by me.
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than
the 4 we got in the sixties.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 23/09/2026 13:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:A *varying* voltage.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough, >>>>>> but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!! >>>>>>Indeed.-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller >>>>>>>>
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest
-a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was
-a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile. >>>>>>>> -a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive. >>>>>>>>
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
I know, I used those, not so expensive as you think.
Philips BUZ types
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
What modulation?
The cathode is modulated. for video. Or sometimes the grid
the anode is simply +12kv or whatever fed through a chain of diodes. And
the deflection coils are fed by transformers
So nothing there except the anode requires a high voltage high frequency
transistor. Although the deflection coils used a lot of *power*.
Video modulation need volts AND speed. A hard problem that I was tasked
with very early in my electronics career..
Ah yes, luminance, grid drive.
Plenty transistors available for that back then, 5 MHz fmax was enough.
Maybe working from a 70 V to 100 V supply, done it many times.
Really its a Y2K problem There will be a few issues where its all a bitEfOe
dodgy but for most people it will be 'sod the landline anyway - I hardly
use it'
And they will get given mobiles with Big Buttons instead.
And an anytime contract?>
And also local 70 cm wavelength networks.
Am not very active ATM.
But in case of WW3 it may come in handy to see if any lifeforms left
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then that
-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
-a Lower-speed data and voice channels ... the freqs
-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
-a There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then that
-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
On 24/09/2026 09:10, c186282 wrote:
There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then thatModel aircraft started on 27MHz then moved to 35MHz (Europe and most of
-a-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
the world) and IIRC 72Mhz in the US. There were only about ten
frequencies on each band available
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
Then digital was developed to use the free-for-all 2.4Ghz band that is
used for wifi etc. And digital encoding meant that hundreds of models
could share the bandwidth.
-a-a Lower-speed data and voice channels ... the freqs
-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
-a-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
All digital terrestrial TV in the world is in the UHF band.-a IIRC 200MHz
to around 700MHz
My local transmitter is in the 500-700MHz range.
On 24/09/2026 09:10, c186282 wrote:
There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then thatModel aircraft started on 27MHz then moved to 35MHz (Europe and most of
-a-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
the world) and IIRC 72Mhz in the US. There were only about ten
frequencies on each band available
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
Then digital was developed to use the free-for-all 2.4Ghz band that is
used for wifi etc. And digital encoding meant that hundreds of models
could share the bandwidth.
-a-a Lower-speed data and voice channels ... the freqs
-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
-a-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
All digital terrestrial TV in the world is in the UHF band.-a IIRC 200MHz
to around 700MHz
My local transmitter is in the 500-700MHz range.
On 24/09/2026 9:39 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 09:10, c186282 wrote:
There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then thatModel aircraft started on 27MHz then moved to 35MHz (Europe and most
-a-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
of the world) and IIRC 72Mhz in the US. There were only about ten
frequencies on each band available
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
Then digital was developed to use the free-for-all 2.4Ghz band that is
used for wifi etc. And digital encoding meant that hundreds of models
could share the bandwidth.
-a-a Lower-speed data and voice channels ... the freqs
-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
-a-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
All digital terrestrial TV in the world is in the UHF band.-a IIRC
200MHz to around 700MHz
Picky, picky, I know but VHF covers 30 -> 300MHZ then UHF covers from
300 -> 3,000MHZ
Exactly., Not VHF. As c186282 statedMy local transmitter is in the 500-700MHz range.So UHF.
I believe that a lot of model aircraft and drones have some sort of
-a-a There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then that
-a-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
spread spectrum arrangement in the 2.4 GHz band
No idea what the old 27MHz band is used for now - CB radio anyone ?
On 24/09/2026 12:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 09:10, c186282 wrote:
There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then thatModel aircraft started on 27MHz then moved to 35MHz (Europe and most
-a-a was grabbed. I think some short-range drones
-a-a and model aircraft use that freq now.
of the world) and IIRC 72Mhz in the US. There were only about ten
frequencies on each band available
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
Then digital was developed to use the free-for-all 2.4Ghz band that is
used for wifi etc. And digital encoding meant that hundreds of models
could share the bandwidth.
-a-a Lower-speed data and voice channels ... the freqs
-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
-a-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
All digital terrestrial TV in the world is in the UHF band.-a IIRC
200MHz to around 700MHz
My local transmitter is in the 500-700MHz range.
I should have read this before replying to your earlier post :-\
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 14:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 09:43, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave >>>>> up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me >>>>> anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external >>>>> hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page >>>>> doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no
longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
I bought a cheap made in China HD box for my big TV, maybe 30 USD at the time,
it can record to - and playback from a USB thumb drive, 128 GB now in it. >>>> https://panteltje.nl/pub/sat_box_sizes_IXIMG_0907.JPG
left the old satellite TV box, right the new one
Yes, I have one similar. But they are not even close to the features of
the M740
Waht features do you mean?
Mine can record, as times you can set, playback, sometimes I record stuff
mosty music, or sciencewprograms an then later copy it to teh 4 TB harddisc >> also connected to teh big Samsung TV.
The M740 could record two programs and play a recording simultaneously,
for instance.
It could edit a recording.
You could download a recording to the computer.
It could automatically record all programs named "kojac" in a channel.
You could program the recordings using a web page on the computer.
It ran Linux. Originally there was a telnet port, then a community
firmware update added ssh, I think. There was ftp and http
And many things I have forgotten. I asked ChatGPT for a summary:
Yes. The **Siemens Gigaset M740 AV** was quite an ambitious DVB-T
set-top box for its time (around 2004rCo2005). It was essentially a >**digital TV receiver \+ PVR + network/media player**, rather than just
a basic tuner. CHIP+1
### Main features
- **Dual DVB-T tuners** rCo two independent terrestrial digital-TV
tuners. This allowed you to **watch one channel while recording
another**, and also enabled Picture-in-Picture (PIP). ManualsLib+1
- **Recording to external storage** rCo it had **no built-in hard disk**, >but could record TV to a USB hard drive or a network drive. Recordings
were stored as MPEG-2 streams. Golem
- **Time-shifting / timeshift** rCo with a suitable USB hard disk, you
could pause live TV and continue watching later. The configuration
allowed a timeshift buffer of up to **240 minutes**. ManualsLib
- **Electronic Programme Guide (EPG)** rCo used programme-guide
information for navigating TV schedules and setting recordings.
- **Picture-in-Picture** rCo the second tuner could display another TV >programme in a small window while the main programme remained
full-screen. ManualsLib
- **Network connectivity** rCo built-in **100 Mbps Ethernet** allowed it
to communicate with a PC or network storage. Gigaset
- **USB 2.0** rCo two USB ports for external storage and peripherals. Gigaset
- **Network/media player** rCo it could play multimedia stored on a >PC/network drive or USB disk, including **MPEG-1/MPEG-2 video, MP3
audio, and JPEG/BMP/PNG/GIF images**. Golem
- **PC-to-TV streaming** rCo the idea was that you could keep your media
on a computer elsewhere in the house and play it through the M740 AV on
your television. ManualsLib
- **SCART connections** rCo two Euro-AV/SCART sockets, one intended for
the TV and another for a VCR/other AV equipment. Gigaset
- **Digital audio** rCo optical/coaxial-style **S/PDIF digital audio >output** (listed as Audio Digital), plus analogue stereo RCA outputs. >Gigaset
- **PAL television output** rCo designed for the analogue PAL/SCART >television environment of the period. Recambios y Accesorios Online
- **Software updates** rCo firmware could be updated manually, >automatically, or via DVB-T according to the manual. ManualsLib
### Hardware specifications
| Feature | M740 AV |
| --------------------- | ------------------------- |
| TV tuners | **2 |u DVB-T** |
| Network | **100 Mbps Ethernet** |
| USB | **2 |u USB 2.0** |
| Video/TV | **2 |u SCART** |
| Analogue audio | Left/right RCA |
| Digital audio | S/PDIF |
| Internal HDD | **No** |
| External recording | USB HDD / network storage |
| Dimensions | \~200 |u 200 |u 66 mm |
| Weight | \~850 g |
| Power | 230 V / 50 Hz |
| Standby consumption | \~1.7 W |
| Operating consumption | \~12.5 W |
### What makes it interesting today
The really interesting part is that **this wasn't simply a DVB-T
decoder**. Siemens essentially built a networked media centre around a >dual-tuner PVR. For 2004, the combination of **dual DVB-T \+ USB
recording + timeshift \+ Ethernet + network media playback** was fairly >sophisticated. CHIP+1
There is one major caveat today: it was designed for the **original
DVB-T era**, so its usefulness depends heavily on what digital
terrestrial television standards are currently transmitted in your area. >Modern DVB-T/T2 compatibility is a particularly important question
before assuming it can still receive today's broadcasts.
If you're asking because **you have an M740 AV in front of you**, I
can also explain its **connections, how to use a USB hard drive with it, >what file formats it supports, and whether it's still useful with modern >Spanish DVB-T**.
Or a bit longer ago to DVD or blueray, or M-Disc
more than 1000 discs here, this is box 1 with 1000 discs:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/CD_box_binnenkant_IXIMG_0549.JPG
Holds old Linux distros too :-)
Things get ever smaller..
Mostly satellite reception here,
have an other made in China box for the local TV stations
But the TV can do the reception by itself, is merely used as HDMI monitor, >>>> As I have a big steerable satellie dish that draws a bit of power when moving
I prefer to use the boxes to drive the satellitedish motor,
that ways protecting my expensive TV
Anyways it all works perfectly, whole world on my TV with that movable dish.
I have several RTL_SDR sticks in use, some record my outside weather sensor,
some airplane traffic, some ship traffic, some ham radio and TV,
https://panteltje.online/pub/boats_and_planes.gif
Use thse for spectrum analyzer too:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/radar_spectrum_sidebands.gif
I write all that software myself, do use some libraries of course,
open source much of it,Downloads here:
https://panteltje.nl/panteltje/newsflex/download.html
rtl_sdr sticks can ever receive GPS
Cute :-)
Most of my entertainment comes via fibre nowdays.
Yes they wanted me to get a fiber subscription too.
But no way
For Internet at home and away I use a Huawei 4G USB stick,
now plugged into this Raspberry Pi4 8Gb I am posting this from,
when away I can put it in my Samsung laptop.
Fiber on the road ? no.
The rest here is satellite.
One big advantage of satellite is that the 'fiber guys' will determine what >> you can see (they get much from satellite but pick the channels they forward).
I can get stations from all over the world and viewpoints from all over the >> world via satellite.
Aha.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:46, Jan Panteltje wrote:It depends on when 'back then' was.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 23/09/2026 13:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:A *varying* voltage.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy enough,
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!! >>>>>>>Indeed.-a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller >>>>>>>>>
-a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for
-a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest >>>>>>>>> -a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch
-a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was >>>>>>>>> -a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile. >>>>>>>>> -a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive. >>>>>>>>>
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. And fragile.
I know, I used those, not so expensive as you think.
Philips BUZ types
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
What modulation?
The cathode is modulated. for video. Or sometimes the grid
the anode is simply +12kv or whatever fed through a chain of diodes. And >>> the deflection coils are fed by transformers
So nothing there except the anode requires a high voltage high frequency >>> transistor. Although the deflection coils used a lot of *power*.
Video modulation need volts AND speed. A hard problem that I was tasked
with very early in my electronics career..
Ah yes, luminance, grid drive.
Plenty transistors available for that back then, 5 MHz fmax was enough.
Maybe working from a 70 V to 100 V supply, done it many times.
I was tasked with a video driver with a 25MHz bandwidth for a head up >display in a next gen fighter aircraft. 1973.
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end speed,
but my boss took it over and added some complementary emitter followers
to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec.
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
On 23/09/2026 16:04, Jan Panteltje wrote:
And also local 70 cm wavelength networks.
Am not very active ATM.
But in case of WW3 it may come in handy to see if any lifeforms left
I think I saw the US gummint mandating AM radios in every car for
emergency broadcast usage.
Weird
On 23/09/2026 18:28, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:Not IME.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
Of course it made the possibility exsit, but by and large the broadcast standards were hige enough to make it an extreme rarity
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 14:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-23 09:43, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-22 14:28, Paul wrote:
On Mon, 9/21/2026 6:34 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Never had any trouble-a - several apps like VLC would work
But generally speaking, they like to sell you the tuner,
and the software side is a slog of multiple steps, guess
and by golly.
Years ago, I found digital TV on Linux a such a huge pain that I gave >>>>>> up, bought a separate tuner, and ditched my TV card.
I can't just say "Spain", then "search for any station, don't ask me >>>>>> anything whatsoever". Same as I do in Windows, or with a TV set.
Not in Linux.
I bought a Gigaset M740 AV. It was wonderful.
Two tuners.
Can record or play using a samba share in the computer, or an external >>>>>> hard disk plugged via USB 2.
Can record two programs and play a third previously recorded.
Can program things by timers or names.
Gets the entire EPG saved on disk.
There was a community developing improved firmwares, having a web page >>>>>> doing so many things I forget.
Unfortunately, the stations are now high definition, and the box no >>>>>> longer works. It works, but only tunes sounds.
I bought a cheap made in China HD box for my big TV, maybe 30 USD at the time,
it can record to - and playback from a USB thumb drive, 128 GB now in it. >>>>> https://panteltje.nl/pub/sat_box_sizes_IXIMG_0907.JPG
left the old satellite TV box, right the new one
Yes, I have one similar. But they are not even close to the features of >>>> the M740
Waht features do you mean?
Mine can record, as times you can set, playback, sometimes I record stuff >>> mosty music, or sciencewprograms an then later copy it to teh 4 TB harddisc >>> also connected to teh big Samsung TV.
The M740 could record two programs and play a recording simultaneously,
for instance.
It could edit a recording.
You could download a recording to the computer.
It could automatically record all programs named "kojac" in a channel.
You could program the recordings using a web page on the computer.
It ran Linux. Originally there was a telnet port, then a community
firmware update added ssh, I think. There was ftp and http
And many things I have forgotten. I asked ChatGPT for a summary:
Yes. The **Siemens Gigaset M740 AV** was quite an ambitious DVB-T
set-top box for its time (around 2004rCo2005). It was essentially a
**digital TV receiver \+ PVR + network/media player**, rather than just
a basic tuner. CHIP+1
### Main features
- **Dual DVB-T tuners** rCo two independent terrestrial digital-TV
tuners. This allowed you to **watch one channel while recording
another**, and also enabled Picture-in-Picture (PIP). ManualsLib+1
- **Recording to external storage** rCo it had **no built-in hard disk**,
but could record TV to a USB hard drive or a network drive. Recordings
were stored as MPEG-2 streams. Golem
- **Time-shifting / timeshift** rCo with a suitable USB hard disk, you
could pause live TV and continue watching later. The configuration
allowed a timeshift buffer of up to **240 minutes**. ManualsLib
- **Electronic Programme Guide (EPG)** rCo used programme-guide
information for navigating TV schedules and setting recordings.
- **Picture-in-Picture** rCo the second tuner could display another TV
programme in a small window while the main programme remained
full-screen. ManualsLib
- **Network connectivity** rCo built-in **100 Mbps Ethernet** allowed it
to communicate with a PC or network storage. Gigaset
- **USB 2.0** rCo two USB ports for external storage and peripherals. Gigaset
- **Network/media player** rCo it could play multimedia stored on a
PC/network drive or USB disk, including **MPEG-1/MPEG-2 video, MP3
audio, and JPEG/BMP/PNG/GIF images**. Golem
- **PC-to-TV streaming** rCo the idea was that you could keep your media
on a computer elsewhere in the house and play it through the M740 AV on
your television. ManualsLib
- **SCART connections** rCo two Euro-AV/SCART sockets, one intended for
the TV and another for a VCR/other AV equipment. Gigaset
- **Digital audio** rCo optical/coaxial-style **S/PDIF digital audio
output** (listed as Audio Digital), plus analogue stereo RCA outputs.
Gigaset
- **PAL television output** rCo designed for the analogue PAL/SCART
television environment of the period. Recambios y Accesorios Online
- **Software updates** rCo firmware could be updated manually,
automatically, or via DVB-T according to the manual. ManualsLib
### Hardware specifications
| Feature | M740 AV |
| --------------------- | ------------------------- |
| TV tuners | **2 |u DVB-T** |
| Network | **100 Mbps Ethernet** |
| USB | **2 |u USB 2.0** |
| Video/TV | **2 |u SCART** |
| Analogue audio | Left/right RCA |
| Digital audio | S/PDIF |
| Internal HDD | **No** |
| External recording | USB HDD / network storage |
| Dimensions | \~200 |u 200 |u 66 mm |
| Weight | \~850 g |
| Power | 230 V / 50 Hz |
| Standby consumption | \~1.7 W |
| Operating consumption | \~12.5 W |
### What makes it interesting today
The really interesting part is that **this wasn't simply a DVB-T
decoder**. Siemens essentially built a networked media centre around a
dual-tuner PVR. For 2004, the combination of **dual DVB-T \+ USB
recording + timeshift \+ Ethernet + network media playback** was fairly
sophisticated. CHIP+1
There is one major caveat today: it was designed for the **original
DVB-T era**, so its usefulness depends heavily on what digital
terrestrial television standards are currently transmitted in your area.
Modern DVB-T/T2 compatibility is a particularly important question
before assuming it can still receive today's broadcasts.
If you're asking because **you have an M740 AV in front of you**, I
can also explain its **connections, how to use a USB hard drive with it,
what file formats it supports, and whether it's still useful with modern
Spanish DVB-T**.
It is impressive, but dbb-t is dead here now, all dvb-t2
The liite Chinese box for terrestial TV I use can do timeshift too, althoug I never use that
It has an Ethernet interface and HDMI connector, even analog audio and video out.
Even has a main power connector (no wll-wart needed.
The even smaller Chinese satellite box had only HDMI out and needs a wall-wart
but accepts a USB memory stick.
Happy with both.
Editing I can do if needed by taking that USB memory stick and putting it in a PC (Raspberry here).
When its memory stick gets full, I copy/move stuff to the 4 TB harddisc so it has space again
create a subdirectory, last one satellite_6/ as you can see below
raspberrypi: /mnt/sda2/video # l
total 16847468
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Jan 21 2012 movies/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 23 2019 hcam/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3677094 Dec 24 2021 Non_Je_Ne_Regrette_Rien_Lyrics__Edith_Piaf.mp4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6092358417 Jul 1 2022 captain_ron.ps
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5596384752 Jul 1 2022 captain_ron.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5441710080 Jul 1 2022 captain_ron.mpg
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10895713 Jun 30 2023 wichita_lineman__Glen_Campbell.mp4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8642256 Oct 9 2023 The_Village_Stompers_Washington_Square.mp4
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Mar 24 2024 dvb_t2/
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 20480 May 25 2024 satellite/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 Sep 19 2024 backups/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 Feb 5 2025 satellite_2/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 20480 Mar 16 2025 satellite_3/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 16384 Nov 2 2025 satellite_4/
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16573854 Jul 22 09:08 sade_smooth_operator_official_1984.mp4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 23390265 Aug 7 10:42 Earth_and_Fire__Storm_And_Thunder_1972.mp4
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 48580293 Aug 7 10:44 Earth_and_Fire__Memories.mp4 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 9434443 Aug 7 11:12 Earth_and_Fire__Maybe_Tomorrow_Maybe_Tonight.mp4
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 Sep 13 19:16 satellite_5/
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12288 Sep 17 18:13 satellite_6/
raspberrypi: /mnt/sda2/video #
BTW 'l' stands for ls -rtl on my system (zsh config):
l /mnt/sda2/video/satellite_6/
total 89350240
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 63625216 Nov 2 2025 a.glass.of.champagne.ts -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 47935488 Nov 3 2025 lola.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 39272448 Nov 3 2025 when.you're.in.love.with.a.beaut.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 30031872 Nov 3 2025 i.think.we're.alone.now.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 29743104 Aug 28 17:37 can.the.can..suzi.quatro.ts -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 9721856 Sep 1 17:28 rose.garden..lynn.anderson.ts -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 31283200 Sep 9 10:16 wishing.on.a.star..rose.royce.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 28010496 Sep 9 10:21 baker.street.ts
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10010624 Sep 10 15:30 daddy.cool.ts
Lots of music from satellite!
Some science programs too
And that directory is ony about from one year (from November 2025)
goes back way back.
/mnt/sda2/video/satellite_1/
goes even further back.
And then I also copy it to the 4 TB harddisc conected to the huge Samsung HD TV.
Just select it with the remote if I want to see it.
Fiber on the road ? no.
The rest here is satellite.
One big advantage of satellite is that the 'fiber guys' will determine what >>> you can see (they get much from satellite but pick the channels they forward).
I can get stations from all over the world and viewpoints from all over the >>> world via satellite.
Aha.
I had cable when Reagan was US president, wanted to watch him speak,
but the cable company went to bed at that late hour (time difference with Europe)
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rtl.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the bropwser says something like 'URL not available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
On 23/09/2026 16:04, Jan Panteltje wrote:
And also local 70 cm wavelength networks.
Am not very active ATM.
But in case of WW3 it may come in handy to see if any lifeforms left
I think I saw the US gummint mandating AM radios in every car for
emergency broadcast usage.
Weird
On 24/09/2026 13:17, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[]
On 24/09/2026 12:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
In UK, channel 1 was around 50 MHz - and I think originally might evenIt looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
Yes - in Europe, I think originally something like 440-870; in UK at-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
In UK, channel 36 was reserved for something like airport radar. Which-a-a Many channels were 'reserved'. Same kind of greedy
-a-a issues. Grease yer pols, get results. Nothing new.
for the UHF channels. When we still used VHF for TV, the 405-line system (system A) used narrower channels; they were in Band I (sometimes called
All digital terrestrial TV in the world is in the UHF band.-a IIRC
200MHz to around 700MHz
My local transmitter is in the 500-700MHz range.
I should have read this before replying to your earlier post :-\
Yes. I was looking stuff up and channel number in (at least UK) UHF is multiply number by 8, and add 306MHz
So 8Mhz wide channels.The rest of Europe used much the same on the VHF bands (I think they
UK uses channels 21 to 68And miscellaneous radio and data channels.
Each transmitter is expected to to carry about 6-8 channels (Muxes) and
these have been carefully selected to allow a single (band) tunedThe transmitters are co-sited too, so you only need one aerial pointed
antenna to receive them all adequately and be far away from nearby transmitters as well, to reduce interference
Group A: Channels 21rCo34 (Lower range)
Group B: Channels 39rCo53 (Middle range)
Group C/D: Channels 48rCo68 (Upper range)
My transmitter is AB (Used to be C.D) ranging from channel 29 to 47
-- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
On 23/09/2026 15:55, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Really its a Y2K problem There will be a few issues where its all a bitEfOe
dodgy but for most people it will be 'sod the landline anyway - I hardly >>> use it'
And they will get given mobiles with Big Buttons instead.
And an anytime contract?>
Emergency calls are free on all networks in the UK and any network can
be used.
I rarely make a call on my mobile.
I am far more likely to send s text
or a whatsapp message. And that will be via wifi anyway so will not
attract 'mobile' charges
If I am in fact phoning a large organisation I will use my landline and
PABX and feature phone that dies hands free so I don't have to waste
money on mobile call charges as I am on PAYG ...
If I was older and more doddery Is be happy to use mobile
-a There USED to be a TV Channel-1 ... then that was grabbed. I thinkI believe that a lot of model aircraft and drones have some sort of
-a some short-range drones and model aircraft use that freq now.
spread spectrum arrangement in the 2.4 GHz band
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
On 2026-09-24, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:[]
On 23/09/2026 18:28, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:
Not IME.You got more channels in the same bandwidth,Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
Of course it made the possibility exsit, but by and large the broadcast
standards were hige enough to make it an extreme rarity
Maybe it's a studio thing. But I quite often find that people's lips
don't match their voices. Sometimes it's minor, at other times it's
quite distracting. But, just as stations used to love stretching (distorting) 4:3 images to fit 16:9 screens, enough people apparently
don't care. For interview shows, I often just glance at the screen
from time to time, effectively taking snapshots.
On 2026/9/23 18:28:2, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I very rarely notice it being out of sync. - not sure I ever have; if I
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
did, I think changing channel and coming back would sort it. That's DTV;
on YouTube, it's slightly more common, but even there, I suspect mostly
the fault of the source material/uploader.
Maybe it's a studio thing. But I quite often find that people's lips
don't match their voices. Sometimes it's minor, at other times it's
quite distracting. But, just as stations used to love stretching (distorting) 4:3 images to fit 16:9 screens, enough people apparently
don't care. For interview shows, I often just glance at the screen from
time to time, effectively taking snapshots.
On 2026/9/23 18:28:2, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I very rarely notice it being out of sync. - not sure I ever have; if I
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
did, I think changing channel and coming back would sort it. That's DTV;
on YouTube, it's slightly more common, but even there, I suspect mostly
the fault of the source material/uploader.
On 2026/9/24 14:23:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 13:17, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[]
On 24/09/2026 12:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
In UK, channel 1 was around 50 MHz - and I think originally might even
have been full AM (both sidebands, rather than the VSB - vestigial
sideband - everyone used later.[]
-a-a used by VHF TV were cheap and perfect - so they
-a-a GRABBED them. IS there a remaining UHF TV band now ?
Yes - in Europe, I think originally something like 440-870; in UK at
least, they kept selling off chunks of the top, so it now stops
something like 690 (someone said earlier in this thread).
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
For "online content" I use PlutoTV
On 2026-09-22, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/22 7:50:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Digital preserved picture quality well down into the noise. Error
correction and lower bandwidth needed enabled qualiry pictures long into >>> the realm where analog became unwatchable
But, for some reason, digital failure due to low signal is far more
irritating than analogue. To me anyway. I think it's the "cliff" thing.
Agreed. Nowadays it's all or nothing. The concept of
"graceful degradation" seems to have gone out of style.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:Did I?
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
For "online content" I use PlutoTV
Conelrad triangles
On 2026-09-24, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 23/09/2026 18:28, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:Not IME.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
Of course it made the possibility exsit, but by and large the broadcast
standards were hige enough to make it an extreme rarity
Maybe it's a studio thing. But I quite often find that people's lips
don't match their voices. Sometimes it's minor, at other times it's
quite distracting. But, just as stations used to love stretching (distorting) 4:3 images to fit 16:9 screens, enough people apparently
don't care. For interview shows, I often just glance at the screen
from time to time, effectively taking snapshots.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available') >>>
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
-- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.(You need the "-- " to be on a line by itself.) I'm not sure how you
work that out; even if you don't believe in climate change, I don't see
how you make it socialism. (Socialism - or what the US thinks of as socialism, anyway - isn't necessarily a bad thing anyway; you confuse it
with communism.)
On 2026/9/24 12:18:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:55, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Really its a Y2K problem There will be a few issues where its all a bit >>>> dodgy but for most people it will be 'sod the landline anyway - I hardly >>>> use it'EfOe
And they will get given mobiles with Big Buttons instead.
And an anytime contract?>
Emergency calls are free on all networks in the UK and any network can
be used.
Good point - I'd forgotten that.>
I rarely make a call on my mobile.
Is that because you use your landline instead, or just that you rarely
make a voice call at all?
If I am in fact phoning a large organisation I will use my landline and
PABX and feature phone that dies hands free so I don't have to waste
Ah, cordless set is it? [If it dies ... :-)]
money on mobile call charges as I am on PAYG ...
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile. It's
actually hard to find a PAYG mobile contract now! (I usually ask, and
the shop droid sooner or later uses the words "per month" when
explaining their offerings - which is not, of course, PAYG.)
If I was older and more doddery Is be happy to use mobileI ought to. I'm just bloody-minded.
I very rarely notice it being out of sync. - not sure I ever have; if IYou got more channels in the same bandwidth,And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. EfOU
did, I think changing channel and coming back would sort it. That's DTV;
on YouTube, it's slightly more common, but even there, I suspect mostly
the fault of the source material/uploader.
J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2026 1:57 PM:
On 2026/9/23 18:28:2, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:I very rarely notice it being out of sync. - not sure I ever have; if I
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio.-a :-(
did, I think changing channel and coming back would sort it. That's DTV;
on YouTube, it's slightly more common, but even there, I suspect mostly
the fault of the source material/uploader.
Sometimes, JP, I suspect that you do not live on the same planet as some
of us.
Sound and picture sync often differs for me, but I am in a very fringe
area. Sometimes sync is off by several seconds or more.
You'll probably never see this phenomenon if you can look out your
window and see the station's transmitter tower. That's where you are,
right?
You don't have a weak signal. You live in a congested area which is bristling with television transmitters.-a Dozens, if not more, within a
few dozen miles of you, right?
In fringe areas, with older analog tv, you would get a snowy picture at times.-a With digital, it's all or nothing.-a You either get a picture, or you get a-a jumble of crap.-a Digital TV looks like a drunk kaleidoscope when the signal is weak.
And thanks JP for, broadcasting your wisdom to all the linux and windows groups, as they are keenly interested in all these issues.-a There are
many other newsgroups that would also benefit from your posts. You
should add them too.
Please keep us all updated.-a We always love it.
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:Did I?
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
-a-a-a For "online content" I use PlutoTV
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available') >>>
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
-a-a (typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not
available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google
nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
For "online content" I use PlutoTV
Pluto is great, you gotta love a TV service that has things
like dedicated Addams Family and classic Dr. Who channels.
Still free and no need to create an account.
On 25/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
-a-a (typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not
available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google >>>>> nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another
computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
"BritainrCOs elites want you ready to die for a war they keep imagining"
etc etc
Jan Panteltje wrote:
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet (typing
rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available')
Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
On 2026/9/24 14:23:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 13:17, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[]
On 24/09/2026 12:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
In UK, channel 1 was around 50 MHz - and I think originally might even
have been full AM (both sidebands, rather than the VSB - vestigial
sideband - everyone used later.[]
On 2026/9/24 12:18:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
If I am in fact phoning a large organisation I will use my landline and
PABX and feature phone that dies hands free so I don't have to waste
Ah, cordless set is it? [If it dies ... :-)]
money on mobile call charges as I am on PAYG ...
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile.
On 2026/9/24 19:26:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-24, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:[]
On 23/09/2026 18:28, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2026-09-23, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:
Not IME.You got more channels in the same bandwidth,Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
And kissed goodbye to properly synchronized audio. :-(
Of course it made the possibility exsit, but by and large the broadcast
standards were hige enough to make it an extreme rarity
Maybe it's a studio thing. But I quite often find that people's lips
don't match their voices. Sometimes it's minor, at other times it's
quite distracting. But, just as stations used to love stretching
(distorting) 4:3 images to fit 16:9 screens, enough people apparently
They still do - especially in an obituary prog, where the archive
material is a mix. I don't know if it's because the modern reporter
doesn't _know_ about 4:3 material (and what button to press to pillarbox
it), or doesn't _care_; I'm not sure which is worse (probably the latter).
don't care. For interview shows, I often just glance at the screenThat's how I watch most TV - with the AD (audio description) on.
from time to time, effectively taking snapshots.
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet (typing
rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available')
Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
Plusnet's DNS (and presumably all BT/OR ISPs?) block rt.con,
quad8 doesn't, cloudflare quad1 doesn't, quad9 foundation doesn't
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available') >>>>
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another >computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 25/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
-a-a (typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not
available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google >>>>> nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another
computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
"BritainrCOs elites want you ready to die for a war they keep imagining"
etc etc
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
(typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another
computer using bind.
Yes, the other computer must then be modified in /etc/resolv.conf
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
For me, rt,com site shows a lot from the Russian perspective of the world
in English
Better than the EU viewpoint and US viewpoint only.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 25/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
-a-a (typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not
available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google >>>>>> nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS.
Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above
and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another
computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
Not really and not as bad as what streams out of the war house ape.
Actually its doing MUCH better than the rrest of the EU."BritainrCOs elites want you ready to die for a war they keep imagining"
etc etc
Yes, they need jobs, so war creates jobs
UK is not doing well financially, especially after leaving the EU.
But EU with Van der Lying or whatever that women's is, clearly plays the same game
business giving money to defense to build destructive weapons
Strange they give money to YouCrane and sanction Russia,
while it is YouCrane (well US CIA work's 'lensky is a CIA clown)
that blew p North-stream 2 pipeline making gas much more expensive for many Europeans
and forcing them to buy YouAsh fuel, see the CIA plot?
In Germany, AFD party now getting ever bigger, they are for better relations with Russia, so am I.
The people are fed up with the YouAsh's (it soon will be that) games of making war using
unrest triggered by SeeEyeA agents just to sell their crap weapons (F35 flew over this morning
dangerous noise so loud, what a piece of shit the F35 is!!!
You need no radar, 2 less than 1 dollar electret mikes can locate it . Stealth??? with that noise?, and the poor govs buy it.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 25/09/2026 15:25, Jan Panteltje wrote:Pretty much the same as Trump really
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 25/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:Odd. Works for me in UK. Wall to wall Russian lies of course.
On 2026-09-25 08:51, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:Yes, that is what they do to control what you see,
and switched the channel off..
These days in the Netherlands they block rt.com on internet
-a-a (typing rt.com in the browser says something like 'URL not >>>>>>> available')
Easy to get past it, just modify /etc/resolv.conf to use the google >>>>>>> nameserver:
raspberrypi: ~ # cat /etc/resolv.conf
nameserver 8.8.8.8
nameserver 8.8.4.4
Then it works
I checked now, it does not work for me. Probably using the ISP DNS. >>>>>
they could actually send you to any fake website that way.
Are you running Linux, and changed /etc/resolve.conf like shown above >>>>> and then tried again?
Not that simple, I run dnsmasq on this computer. And it asks another
computer using bind.
If I were interested in reading that site I would do something,
otherwise I don't bother.
Not really and not as bad as what streams out of the war house ape.
Actually its doing MUCH better than the rrest of the EU.
"BritainrCOs elites want you ready to die for a war they keep imagining" >>> etc etc
Yes, they need jobs, so war creates jobs
UK is not doing well financially, especially after leaving the EU.
But EU with Van der Lying or whatever that women's is, clearly plays the same gameI feel for you.
business giving money to defense to build destructive weapons
Strange they give money to YouCrane and sanction Russia,
while it is YouCrane (well US CIA work's 'lensky is a CIA clown)
that blew p North-stream 2 pipeline making gas much more expensive for many Europeans
and forcing them to buy YouAsh fuel, see the CIA plot?
In Germany, AFD party now getting ever bigger, they are for better relations with Russia, so am I.
The people are fed up with the YouAsh's (it soon will be that) games of making war using
unrest triggered by SeeEyeA agents just to sell their crap weapons (F35 flew over this morning
dangerous noise so loud, what a piece of shit the F35 is!!!
You need no radar, 2 less than 1 dollar electret mikes can locate it .
Stealth??? with that noise?, and the poor govs buy it.
Fundamentally however bad it gets, its worse in the EU, far worse in the
USA and absolute suicide in Russia.
There are many ,many worse places to be, and what we have is worth
fighting for
I don't want to be living in some islamic shithole, or Russia, or China
Of what good are dead warriors? rCa Warriors are those who desire battle >more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory rCa The good of dead warriors, Mother, is >that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
Yes - in Europe, I think originally something like 440-870; in UK at
least, they kept selling off chunks of the top, so it now stops
something like 690 (someone said earlier in this thread).
Originally UHF channels 14-83 were in the 470-890 band. Then the
band got cut off at 806 MHz (and given to cell phones and such),
and TV tuners only went up to channel 69. More cuts came later.
By then many people were on cable, and a lot of bandwidth was
re-assigned; the signals weren't going out over the air, so
the cable companies had free rein. Our cable provider moved
FM stations down to the lower half of the 88-108 MHz band,
and eventually did away with FM coverage completly. That
was about the time I fired them.
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile. It's
actually hard to find a PAYG mobile contract now! (I usually ask, and
the shop droid sooner or later uses the words "per month" when
explaining their offerings - which is not, of course, PAYG.)
On 25/09/2026 4:44 am, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/24 14:23:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 13:17, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[]
On 24/09/2026 12:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
It looks like 'channel 1' was ~44MHz. Not uised much anywhere
In UK, channel 1 was around 50 MHz - and I think originally might even
have been full AM (both sidebands, rather than the VSB - vestigial
sideband - everyone used later.[]
AM, Sure, .... SSB, sure, .... DSB, yeap, .... ISB, even, .... but never heard of VSB.
I had to look it up! ;-(
On 24/09/2026 19:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
-- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.(You need the "-- " to be on a line by itself.) I'm not sure how you
work that out; even if you don't believe in climate change, I don't see
how you make it socialism. (Socialism - or what the US thinks of as
socialism, anyway - isn't necessarily a bad thing anyway; you confuse it
with communism.)
Because the intent of it is people control. Not climate control
I don't know about your country per se, but here in the UK the
'socialist' parties are more or less communist at heart.
Whatever difference there might once have been has vanished, apart from
the outward trappings
Eg. The 'Watermelon' people 'Green on the outside, red on the inside'
Its all part of the second class wannabe academics who think they are smarter than the average bear, and therefore they should be running everybody else's lives.
On 24/09/2026 19:50, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/24 12:18:58, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Both.
On 23/09/2026 15:55, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Really its a Y2K problem There will be a few issues where its all a bit >>>>> dodgy but for most people it will be 'sod the landline anyway - I hardly >>>>> use it'EfOe
And they will get given mobiles with Big Buttons instead.
And an anytime contract?>
Emergency calls are free on all networks in the UK and any network can
be used.
Good point - I'd forgotten that.>
I rarely make a call on my mobile.
Is that because you use your landline instead, or just that you rarely
make a voice call at all?
I find a mobile phone an unutterable pain to use. The interface is inconsistent and with payg the costs are high.
And having been in the business of providing email, via a proper
keyboard and screen, I am loathe to use anything else.
So I use mostly whatsapp-web, which is in some sense free, and rarely
make voice calls at all.
Nope. Its an old fashioned analogue business phone connected by a PABXIf I am in fact phoning a large organisation I will use my landline and
PABX and feature phone that dies hands free so I don't have to waste
Ah, cordless set is it? [If it dies ... :-)]
to the landline (will have to move it to VOIP)
Indeed. They tried hard to sell me a plan, and when they said 'how many calls do you make a month and I said, maybe two' they said 'yes, PAYGmoney on mobile call charges as I am on PAYG ...
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile. It's
actually hard to find a PAYG mobile contract now! (I usually ask, and
the shop droid sooner or later uses the words "per month" when
explaining their offerings - which is not, of course, PAYG.)
will be cheaper'.
I think the PAYG option still exists
If I was older and more doddery Is be happy to use mobileI ought to. I'm just bloody-minded.
Privilege of age...
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[...]
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile. It's
actually hard to find a PAYG mobile contract now! (I usually ask, and
the shop droid sooner or later uses the words "per month" when
explaining their offerings - which is not, of course, PAYG.)
I think in most countries, it's actually called 'Pre-Paid', not so
much PAYG (of course it *is* PAYG, but just not called that)..
With Pre-Paid (without a monthly fee), the costs per minute/SMS
('text') can be relatively high, but if you make few/short calls and
send few messages, Pre-Paid can be quite cost effective. (In NL,) My
yearly costs are in single digit Euros.
I don't bother with a 'shop droid', but just order a SIM online and
get going (also did/do pre-paid in AU and will do in NZ).
[...]--
Not really and not as bad as what streams out of the war house ape.
UK is not doing well financially, especially after leaving the EU.
business giving money to defense to build destructive weapons
On 25/09/2026 09:18, Andy Burns wrote:
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:Did I?
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
-a-a-a For "online content" I use PlutoTV
Maintaining attribution while drastically snipping is not something many user agents do well, if at all
It's amazing how many 'talking heads' can easily do without the heads.
Many of them can do without the talk too.
I THOUGHT that time sync frames were inserted...often on switch-on the
audio comes on first while the video waits for a sync frame to catch up.
I cant be arsed to google it though
Better than the EU viewpoint and US viewpoint only.
"I'm sure I'll take you with pleasure!" the Queen said. "Two pence a
week, and jam every other day."
Alice couldn't help laughing, as she said, "I don't want you to hire me
rCo and I don't care for jam."
"It's very good jam," said the Queen.
"Well, I don't want any to-day, at any rate."
"You couldn't have it if you did want it," the Queen said. "The rule is,
jam to-morrow and jam yesterday rCo but never jam to-day."
"It must come sometimes to 'jam to-day'," Alice objected.
"No, it can't," said the Queen. "It's jam every *other* day: to-day
isn't any other day, you know."
"I don't understand you," said Alice. "It's dreadfully confusing!"
I thought about that when someone was always putting things off until
later. She didn't seem to notice that "later" isn't a time (that
actually arrives) like "tomorrow", "yesterday", and "every other day"
aren't.
I like it! Hadn't heard that one. (My own nickname for a group is
"Alphabet people", for the LGBT... people - I'm actually mostly for them
[or at least against the discrimination and hate against them], but
their tendency to keep adding letters to their string loses them
credibility with me ...)
On 2026/9/25 10:6:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 19:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
work that out; even if you don't believe in climate change, I don't see
how you make it socialism. (Socialism - or what the US thinks of as
socialism, anyway - isn't necessarily a bad thing anyway; you confuse it >>> with communism.)
Because the intent of it is people control. Not climate control
You are entitled to your opinion. I grant that it sometimes _seems_ like "people control", in that they're telling (or advising, or asking,
people to do things in a way that they might not want to), but I think
the main bug in that argument is that people who want to control other
people usually want to for some gain to themselves - which most climate control people don't get. Sure, a _few_ may have shares in solar/wind
power, but not most.
I don't know about your country per se, but here in the UK the
I was pretty sure you were a MAGA American!
'socialist' parties are more or less communist at heart.
FWIW: I'm in UK too, and generally vote blue - I've never voted red.
(Yellow I think, some decades ago.) [For any US readers: our colours are
the opposite way round to yours; yours always cause me to have to do a double-take, as surely red is left - e. g. the USSR and Chinese flags!]
Whatever difference there might once have been has vanished, apart from
the outward trappings
Oh, I don't know - even the labour party (or most of them) can see how
bad life in Russia or China (let alone North Korea) is.
Eg. The 'Watermelon' people 'Green on the outside, red on the inside'
I like it! Hadn't heard that one. (My own nickname for a group is
"Alphabet people", for the LGBT... people - I'm actually mostly for them
[or at least against the discrimination and hate against them], but
their tendency to keep adding letters to their string loses them
credibility with me ...)
Shoulder, chip?
Its all part of the second class wannabe academics who think they are
smarter than the average bear, and therefore they should be running
everybody else's lives.
On 2026-09-25, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
I like it! Hadn't heard that one. (My own nickname for a group is
"Alphabet people", for the LGBT... people - I'm actually mostly for them
[or at least against the discrimination and hate against them], but
their tendency to keep adding letters to their string loses them
credibility with me ...)
I think the main problem is that they're trying to enumerate
every possible variation or combination - which in the end
is no more inclusive than the discrimination they're fighting.
(Compare it with South Africa's Byzantine race designations.)
I just call it LGBTLMNOP and let it go at that.
I suppose I really ought to find out what whatsApp (web or otherwise) is about; I just don't see (though haven't really looked) how it differs
from email, or at least an email mailing list.>
Sorry, I was just teasing you about your mistype ("dies" for "does"). INope. Its an old fashioned analogue business phone connected by a PABXIf I am in fact phoning a large organisation I will use my landline and >>>> PABX and feature phone that dies hands free so I don't have to wasteAh, cordless set is it? [If it dies ... :-)]
to the landline (will have to move it to VOIP)
ought to have learnt, from when I teased an American correspondent about
the ninth of November. (I learnt from that exchange, when Krystallnacht
was!)
On 2026/9/25 15:25:44, Jan Panteltje wrote:
[]
Not really and not as bad as what streams out of the war house ape.(When you wrote that in an earlier post, I assumed you _meant_ The
Orange One anyway.
[]
UK is not doing well financially, especially after leaving the EU.
Some of those who voted to leave did it for other than financial reasons.
[]
--business giving money to defense to build destructive weapons
I've yet to see a constructive weapon :-)
[]
IMO presents a very balanced view - certainly gives the view
of the ordinary Russian.
On 2026/9/25 9:22:55, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[]
It's amazing how many 'talking heads' can easily do without the heads.
Many of them can do without the talk too.
And far too often (not just broadcast stations - on YouTube too), they
think their head (face) is more important. Many times in the last few
years I've thought I'd rather see a map than your head; I can still hear
you, but I don't need to see you, and the vision channel could be used
for something more important, such as the area you're talking about with relevant places shown. Or a diagramme, if it's something technical. But they're all afraid of visual aids - surely it can't be because of that
NTNOCN sketch, that was forty-odd years ago!
On 25/09/2026 21:10, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
I suppose I really ought to find out what whatsApp (web or otherwise)
is about; I just don't see (though haven't really looked) how it
differs from email, or at least an email mailing list.>
It is simply a user interface that lets you send text messages with
pictures or attachements, talk, or have video calls with other people.
for zero opportunity cost if your phone has wifi to broadband...
It also has a web interface so you can do it without the mobile phone
being involved
I don't know when Krystallnacht was, but I do know what it was.
On 23/09/2026 15:28, Frank Slootweg wrote:
What possible reason could there be to*not*-a annoy the Linux folks!?"I'm sure I'll take you with pleasure!" the Queen said. "Two pence a
And for us Windows folks, we need all the entertainment we can get,
because we're bored, because our stuff Just Works (TM) (Just
not*this* month (and so many others?), but we won't spill the
beans!)
week, and jam every other day."
Alice couldn't help laughing, as she said, "I don't want you to hire me
rCo and I don't care for jam."
"It's very good jam," said the Queen.
"Well, I don't want any to-day, at any rate."
"You couldn't have it if you did want it," the Queen said. "The rule is,
jam to-morrow and jam yesterday rCo but never jam to-day."
"It must come sometimes to 'jam to-day'," Alice objected.
"No, it can't," said the Queen. "It's jam every *other* day: to-day isn't
any other day, you know."
"I don't understand you," said Alice. "It's dreadfully confusing!"
As long there 'OT', preferably in brackets ('[OT]'), at the start of
the 'Subject:' header, it's fine by me.
On 23/09/2026 15:41, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:I think that across the 6 muxes my transmitter transmits on there are in fact 110 channels, though many of them are radio, not TV.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than
the 4 we got in the sixties.
On 23/09/2026 15:46, Jan Panteltje wrote:
It depends on when 'back then' was.The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 23/09/2026 13:11, Jan Panteltje wrote:A *varying* voltage.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 16:35, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 22/09/2026 12:16, Daniel70 wrote:Making the RF part of a set out of transistors or chips was easy >>>>>>> enough,
On 22/09/2026 4:20 pm, c186282 wrote:
On 9/21/26 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Back in the day, every T.V. had at least one TUBE ..... the CRT!! >>>>>>>Indeed.-a-a -a-a Fam had a "big" 30" Zenith B&W console for quite
The pride of owning a 32" CRT monster was immense.
You cam still get 'bedroom' or 'camper' tellys at smaller >>>>>>>>>> sizes though
22" is the smallest I found
But stick a TV dongle in a laptop and you can-a go even smaller >>>>>>>>>
-a-a -a-a awhile. It was good. Still worked when swapped for >>>>>>>>> -a-a -a-a a color - most shows were in color by then. Clearest >>>>>>>>> -a-a -a-a one was a 22" Panasonic B&W out on the screen porch >>>>>>>>> -a-a -a-a (pre central A/C then). A few tubes and the rest was >>>>>>>>> -a-a -a-a transistors ... hybrid tech was kinda common for awhile. >>>>>>>>> -a-a -a-a Seem to remember tube-based tuners were more sensitive. >>>>>>>>>
but the anode grid and plate voltages were on the hundreds -
transistors to handle that were rare and expensive for a while. >>>>>>> And fragile.
I know, I used those, not so expensive as you think.
Philips BUZ types
10 to 12 kV anode was enough.That did not involve modulation:
What modulation?
The cathode is modulated. for video. Or sometimes the grid
the anode is simply +12kv or whatever fed through a chain of diodes. And >>> the deflection coils are fed by transformers
So nothing there except the anode requires a high voltage high frequency >>> transistor. Although the deflection coils used a lot of *power*.
Video modulation need volts AND speed. A hard problem that I was tasked
with very early in my electronics career..
Ah yes, luminance, grid drive.
Plenty transistors available for that back then, 5 MHz fmax was enough.
Maybe working from a 70 V to-a 100 V supply, done it many times.
I was tasked with a video driver with a 25MHz bandwidth for a head up display-a in a next gen fighter aircraft. 1973.
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end speed,
but my boss took it over and added some complementary emitter followers
to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec.
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:Did I?
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
-a-a-a For "online content" I use PlutoTV
Every faction is sure IT has the Better Way
-a for various reasons.
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end
speed, but my boss took it over and added some complementary emitter
followers to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec.
-a Smart boss.
-a How many of those NOW ???
-a It's all DISMAL.
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:...
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure
about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set
at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channel selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.)
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:...
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure
about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set
at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channel
selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.)
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
However, radio over a phone line, yes. Still exists here, usually hired
by commercial sites. I assume that now it uses internet.
I asked ChatGPT: it was called "Hilo musical" (musical wire or thread),
a Telef||nica service. Currently it is named "Spotmusic". Different technology.
The old one transmitted 6 channels on the same copper pair used for the phone, at a higher frequency. Somewhat similar to ADSL.
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/24/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:41, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:I think that across the 6 muxes my transmitter transmits on there are in
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than >>> the 4 we got in the sixties.
fact 110 channels, though many of them are radio, not TV.
Heh, early 60s, we got 3.5 channels - all a
bit fuzzy :-) On GOOD nights you could get
the 0.5th channel
Once, maybe age 11, climbed up on the roof, up
the antenna tower, to replace a balky antenna
pre-amplifier AND the antenna rotator unit
at midnight. We did have spares. Likely a
close lightning hit killed them. This was
the 60s reality.
Apparently my balls, though small, were
still good :-)
Oh NO NO NO ! Little kids climbing high towers
in the dark unsupervised to fool with electrical
equipment ??? The horror !!! Someone should
be ARRESTED !!!
Strongly suggest Henry Winkler's "Hazardous
History" show :-)
Dad just said something like "Good Job". I was
the weird son ... they didn't have a term for
"spectrum" back then ... but still managed to
get some parental affirmation. Good thing.
Made me stronger.
Hey, that's what we had to do, and how to prove
our worth, back in the day. Gained confidence,
competence and self-esteem.
Hey, REALLY wanted to see my midnight monster
movie !!!
Today's little useless WHINERS ... well ...
charge them HUGE HUGE $$$ to do what they
SHOULD know how to do themselves !
How far we've fallen. "Space Race" America
was the pinnacle.
The balky amplifier was sent to the repair
place and then served as the new spare. Do
you remember when electronics COULD be
repaired ??? Blown cap, I remember.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/25 15:3:22, Jan Panteltje wrote:[]
Better than the EU viewpoint and US viewpoint only.I like the reports from Steve Rosenberg, the BBC's man in Moscow; they >occasionally get broadcast, but they're more or less daily on X
(twitter) and YouTube. Though employed by the BBC, he is very fond of
Russia, and IMO presents a very balanced view - certainly gives the view
of the ordinary Russian. (Often include a nice bit of piano too; he's a >competent pianist [and arranger].)
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[...]
Ah, someone else who has a landline, and PAYG-only for mobile. It's
actually hard to find a PAYG mobile contract now! (I usually ask, and
the shop droid sooner or later uses the words "per month" when
explaining their offerings - which is not, of course, PAYG.)
I think in most countries, it's actually called 'Pre-Paid', not so
much PAYG (of course it *is* PAYG, but just not called that)..
With Pre-Paid (without a monthly fee), the costs per minute/SMS
('text') can be relatively high, but if you make few/short calls and
send few messages, Pre-Paid can be quite cost effective. (In NL,) My
yearly costs are in single digit Euros.
I don't bother with a 'shop droid', but just order a SIM online and
get going (also did/do pre-paid in AU and will do in NZ).
On 9/25/26 04:18, Andy Burns wrote:[]
Roger Blake wrote:
On 2026-09-24, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:Did I?
On 9/23/26 14:20, Andy Burns wrote:
-a-a-a For "online content" I use PlutoTV
Ummm ... odd question.
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:...
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure
about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set
at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channel
selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.)
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I asked GoogleAI:However, radio over a phone line, yes. Still exists here, usually hired
by commercial sites. I assume that now it uses internet.
I asked ChatGPT: it was called "Hilo musical" (musical wire or thread),
a Telef||nica service. Currently it is named "Spotmusic". Different
technology.
The old one transmitted 6 channels on the same copper pair used for the
phone, at a higher frequency. Somewhat similar to ADSL.
and it seems like only 60 years ago that we had "Dial a Disc" ...
"Life is rough, tough, and desperately unjust, and you had better get
used to it" I was taught at school.
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
No one is merely content to live a reasonably happy life, not stand out because really, they don't have anything to say, and just sleep soundly
at night.
--
ItrCOs easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain
On 25/09/2026 20:50, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 10:6:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 19:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
work that out; even if you don't believe in climate change, I don't see >>>> how you make it socialism. (Socialism - or what the US thinks of as
socialism, anyway - isn't necessarily a bad thing anyway; you confuse it >>>> with communism.)
Because the intent of it is people control. Not climate control
You are entitled to your opinion. I grant that it sometimes _seems_ like
"people control", in that they're telling (or advising, or asking,
people to do things in a way that they might not want to), but I think
the main bug in that argument is that people who want to control other
people usually want to for some gain to themselves - which most climate
control people don't get. Sure, a _few_ may have shares in solar/wind
power, but not most.
Renewables and 'climate' related industries are trillion dollar
economies . As per usual big money funds the communist memes makes huge profits and the sheeple get fucked
FWIW: I'm in UK too, and generally vote blue - I've never voted red.Ive never voted red or blue. Yellow once, then purple and now light blue
(Yellow I think, some decades ago.) [For any US readers: our colours are
the opposite way round to yours; yours always cause me to have to do a
double-take, as surely red is left - e. g. the USSR and Chinese flags!]
No one hates them at all, at the worst people are simply bored stiff
with them, and try to ignore them. The other alternative is to laugh
oneself silly at them.
Although a few parents are incensed that their ideology is being foisted
on their kids.
What you do in private, stays indoors.
But what you do in public needs to be regulated to avoid extreme views
of any sort
Shoulder, chip?
Its all part of the second class wannabe academics who think they are
smarter than the average bear, and therefore they should be running
everybody else's lives.
Nope. I was a first class REAL academic. until I got bored and moved to
the RealWorldrao
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the >Windows and Linux ones next time.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:...
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure >>>> about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set >>>> at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channel
selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.) >>>
I don't think it was called that.>>
I asked GoogleAI:However, radio over a phone line, yes. Still exists here, usually hired >>> by commercial sites. I assume that now it uses internet.
I asked ChatGPT: it was called "Hilo musical" (musical wire or thread), >>> a Telef<nica service. Currently it is named "Spotmusic". Different
technology.
The old one transmitted 6 channels on the same copper pair used for the >>> phone, at a higher frequency. Somewhat similar to ADSL.
Yes, Rediffusion originally started in the UK by relaying radio
broadcasts directly to subscribers' homes over wired networks.
How the Radio Relay Worked
o Wired Distribution: Founded as Broadcast Relay Service Limited (later
named Rediffusion) in 1928, the company used physical cables to pipe
radio programs straight into houses.
o No Radio Set Needed: Subscribers did not need an expensive or
complicated wireless radio receiver; they only needed a simple
loudspeaker and a selector switch wired to the Rediffusion network.
o Clear Reception: The wired "pipe radio" system eliminated static,
fading, and interference common with early aerial radio transmissions.
o BBC and Local Feeds: The service provided crisp audio relays of BBC
radio programmes and other stations from the early 1930s onwards, long
before the company expanded into television rental and commercial >broadcasting.
The standard Rediffusion selector box was a purely mechanical,
multi-position rotary switch that didn't require any mains electricity
or batteries to function.
?? How the Box Operated
o Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV) signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
o Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the street >using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
o The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
to this incoming multi-core cable. When you turned the dial, it
physically moved a brass contact inside the box to connect your speaker
to a specific pair of wires inside the cable.
o Volume Control: The box also housed a simple variable resistor >(potentiometer). Turning the volume knob restricted or allowed more >electrical current to flow to the speaker, making the audio quieter or >louder.Because the central station did all the heavy lifting of
capturing and amplifying the signal, the box in the home was effectively
just a remote switch and volume knob for a giant, town-wide audio system.>> >So there you have it! It was as I thought - just audio distribution; not
even carrier.>
and it seems like only 60 years ago that we had "Dial a Disc" ...
I'm pretty surer that continued until at least the 1970s ...
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the Windows and Linux ones next time.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[...]
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I don't think it was called that.>>
Smoke signs may work too
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
These days postal-pigeons with an 1 TB nano SDcard can carry a lot of data cheaper ..
Always feed the birds!
On 2026/9/26 4:21:4, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[]
"Life is rough, tough, and desperately unjust, and you had better get
used to it" I was taught at school.
In my opinion, taking steps to reduce the unjustness is generally not a
bad thing to do - certainly not preserving it.
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
If you followed that, why bother living?[]
The trouble is when I edit into the leading space.No one is merely content to live a reasonably happy life, not stand outSome are, especially as they get older.
because really, they don't have anything to say, and just sleep soundly
at night.
(Good one.) Your "-- " line has gained leading spaces, which stops it working.>
--
ItrCOs easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain
The Twain one reminds me of this one:
"Galbraith's Law of Human Nature: Faced with the choice between
changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everybody gets busy on the proof." - John Kenneth Galbraith
On 25/09/2026 21:34, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
IMO presents a very balanced view - certainly gives the view
of the ordinary Russian.
How on earth would he know what that is?
If you criticise Putin, you disappear.
Does he travel to Siberia to interview a labourer in Novosibirsk?
I don't think so.
He just talks to rich people in Moscow or St Petersburg,
On 2026/9/26 3:52:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 25/09/2026 20:50, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 10:6:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/09/2026 19:44, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
work that out; even if you don't believe in climate change, I don't see >>>>> how you make it socialism. (Socialism - or what the US thinks of as
socialism, anyway - isn't necessarily a bad thing anyway; you confuse it >>>>> with communism.)
Because the intent of it is people control. Not climate control
You are entitled to your opinion. I grant that it sometimes _seems_ like >>> "people control", in that they're telling (or advising, or asking,
people to do things in a way that they might not want to), but I think
the main bug in that argument is that people who want to control other
people usually want to for some gain to themselves - which most climate
control people don't get. Sure, a _few_ may have shares in solar/wind
power, but not most.
Renewables and 'climate' related industries are trillion dollar
And oil isn't?
economies . As per usual big money funds the communist memes makes huge
profits and the sheeple get fucked
I can't parse that last sentence - too many verbs in it, and/or too
little punctuation (did you mean a comma after "mwmes"?).
But the idea that green industry has much in common with communism makes
me smile.[]
Although a few parents are incensed that their ideology is being foisted
on their kids.
There are silly extremists in all groups. Much of such "foisting" is
only Daily Mail rabble-rousing. (Have you seen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI ? At least 16 years old,
and mostly still relevant (and funny)!>
What you do in private, stays indoors.
"As long as it doesn't frighten the horses", as they used to say - or
harm anyone else.
But what you do in public needs to be regulated to avoid extreme viewsIncluding holding (or at least espousing) extreme views.
of any sort
Nope. I was a first class REAL academic. until I got bored and moved to"It's all part of the "REAL" academics who think they are smarter ..."
the RealWorldrao
On 2026/9/26 4:36:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 25/09/2026 21:34, J. P. Gilliver wrote:You obviously have never seen his reports; https://x.com/BBCSteveR . He speaks to people on the street, and sometimes gets decidedly negative
IMO presents a very balanced view - certainly gives the view
of the ordinary Russian.
How on earth would he know what that is?
If you criticise Putin, you disappear.
Does he travel to Siberia to interview a labourer in Novosibirsk?
I don't think so.
He just talks to rich people in Moscow or St Petersburg,
(to Putin or Russia) comments; I do wish he'd blur the faces of those he speaks to!
Most of his reports _are_ looking at the Russian (news)papers, which
indeed have to toe the line - though IMO he's good at digging out the
odd bits of dissent even in those. But he does go out "on the street" occasionally - often in some small town.
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/26 4:21:4, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[]
"Life is rough, tough, and desperately unjust, and you had better get
used to it" I was taught at school.
In my opinion, taking steps to reduce the unjustness is generally not a
bad thing to do - certainly not preserving it.
Omigawd. A Lefty
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
If you followed that, why bother living?[]
Why not?
The trouble is when I edit into the leading space.--(Good one.) Your "-- " line has gained leading spaces, which stops it
ItrCOs easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain
working.>
Indeed.
people are innately conservative, especially on the Left. They haven't
had a fresh idea in 100 years really
On Sat, 26 Sep 2026 19:08:02 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"I have set followup. Thanks for your patience, Windows and Linux folk!>>
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the
Windows and Linux ones next time.
[]On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
[]I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I don't think it was called that.>>
[]I asked GoogleAI:
Yes, Rediffusion originally started in the UK by relaying radio
broadcasts directly to subscribers' homes over wired networks.
How the Radio Relay Worked
rCo Wired Distribution: Founded as Broadcast Relay Service Limited (later
named Rediffusion) in 1928, the company used physical cables to pipe
radio programs straight into houses.
Where did Rediffusion get the signal from given that there was no FMI think, basically, they had a big, sensitive, wireless set at the shop, connected to good (and possibly directional) aerials - better than the
in the 1930s? How did they eliminate static, fading, and interference especially if the conurbation was a long distance from the
transmitter?
I believe the system continued in the Falkland Islands until the lateI asked Google "Did the Falkland Islands have an unusual radio
1980s but I cannot find any details. Does anyone know?
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the
Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
On 2026/9/26 20:10:13, Frank Slootweg wrote:Oops, sorry, I thought I was replying to our .nl friend.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the >>> Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
I suggest you take that 'group; they're friendly, and from your posts I> think you'd fit right in with the atmosphere there. Although, obviously,
it mostly discusses UK matters, it does cover others (recent discussions about long wave stations for example).
[]
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:So you _want_ to be miserable?
On 2026/9/26 4:21:4, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
If you followed that, why bother living?[]
Why not?
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house
for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
If you criticise Putin, you disappear.
It's even worse if you belive in reincarnation:
Life sucks and then you die - and then life sucks again.
On 26/09/2026 08:23, c186282 wrote:
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end
speed, but my boss took it over and added some complementary emitter
followers to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec.
-a-a Smart boss.
-a-a How many of those NOW ???
-a-a It's all DISMAL.
Oh HIS boss was a dork.
I left after a year, When I went to see HIM he said 'well you haven't
done much have you?
I recited half a dozen projects that I had completed to spec and he said 'Oh,. yes'
I asked my boss what on earth it was all about.
He said:
"Remember when you called out Janice, the wire girl who was supposed to
make our prototypes, for sunbathing on the roof and knitting and
basically doing nothing"?
"Yes" I said.
"Well she's been sleeping with him for years"
My introduction to office politics. She was a dumb bitch too. I wouldn't have.
Mind you the next job was even worse.
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/24/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:41, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:I think that across the 6 muxes my transmitter transmits on there are in >>> fact 110 channels, though many of them are radio, not TV.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than >>>> the 4 we got in the sixties.
Heh, early 60s, we got 3.5 channels - all a
bit fuzzy :-) On GOOD nights you could get
the 0.5th channel
Once, maybe age 11, climbed up on the roof, up
the antenna tower, to replace a balky antenna
pre-amplifier AND the antenna rotator unit
at midnight. We did have spares. Likely a
close lightning hit killed them. This was
the 60s reality.
Apparently my balls, though small, were
still good :-)
Oh NO NO NO ! Little kids climbing high towers
in the dark unsupervised to fool with electrical
equipment ??? The horror !!! Someone should
be ARRESTED !!!
Strongly suggest Henry Winkler's "Hazardous
History" show :-)
Dad just said something like "Good Job". I was
the weird son ... they didn't have a term for
"spectrum" back then ... but still managed to
get some parental affirmation. Good thing.
Made me stronger.
Hey, that's what we had to do, and how to prove
our worth, back in the day. Gained confidence,
competence and self-esteem.
Hey, REALLY wanted to see my midnight monster
movie !!!
Today's little useless WHINERS ... well ...
charge them HUGE HUGE $$$ to do what they
SHOULD know how to do themselves !
How far we've fallen. "Space Race" America
was the pinnacle.
The balky amplifier was sent to the repair
place and then served as the new spare. Do
you remember when electronics COULD be
repaired ??? Blown cap, I remember.
Reminds me of my early days, fifties of last century
told the TV radio repair man (dad would not let me touch his radio)
how to fix it...
Asked my my mother if I could use my fathers soldering iron..
"No", so I took a screwdriver and heated it in the coal fire and soldered together my own radio.
Had a very good book on radio, and some good magazines
not sure there is an English version:
https://onetuberadio.com/2016/01/15/eugene-aisberg-radio-writer/
All tubes in those days, no transistors :-)
Later I worked in broadcasting...
Bit more complex systems :-)
I would secretly listen late at night as kid with my crystal radio using the metal spiral
matras as antenna to those late night radio plays,
some were quite good at predicting the future we have now...
I had a TV repair shop for some years too.
I remember once, when I came back from traveling far way and needed some place
to stay and money, went to an agency and got a job at a small repair shop.
I fixed things so fast that at some point the guy got mad (could not make money
charging customers for a few minutes)
that he took the just repaired TV, smashed it on the ground and said:
"Now repair it again".
I left (no idea what happened to his shop 9and TV)) and got an other job via that agency the next day at a large accelerator..
Even they said: Do not work so fast...
Well its easy stuff?
LOL
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/26 4:21:4, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[]
"Life is rough, tough, and desperately unjust, and you had better get
used to it" I was taught at school.
In my opinion, taking steps to reduce the unjustness is generally not a
bad thing to do - certainly not preserving it.
Omigawd. A Lefty
Oh - so anyone who is not 100% selfish is automatically "a lefty"? [I've
told you my voting history.]
So you _want_ to be miserable?
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
If you followed that, why bother living?[]
Why not?
[]
I'm having similar problems with Thunderbird, which has the tendency to swallow the linefeed before it, thus tacking it onto the end of a lineThe trouble is when I edit into the leading space.--(Good one.) Your "-- " line has gained leading spaces, which stops it
ItrCOs easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
Mark Twain
working.>
of text, which also stops it being recognised as a .sig separator.
[]
Indeed.Oh, the right is pretty conservative too - that's why the party has that name!
people are innately conservative, especially on the Left. They haven't
had a fresh idea in 100 years really
On 2026-09-26, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:So you _want_ to be miserable?
On 2026/9/26 4:21:4, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Later on "Life's a bitch - and then you die"
If you followed that, why bother living?[]
Why not?
Some people aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
Life sucks and then you die - and then life sucks again.
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Who was jonathan swift?
I bet he used redhat linux.
On 27/09/2026 02:36, c186282 wrote:
On 9/26/26 05:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 08:23, c186282 wrote:
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end
speed, but my boss took it over and added some complementary
emitter followers to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec.
-a-a Smart boss.
-a-a How many of those NOW ???
-a-a It's all DISMAL.
Oh HIS boss was a dork.
I left after a year, When I went to see HIM he said 'well you haven't
done much have you?
I recited half a dozen projects that I had completed to spec and he
said 'Oh,. yes'
I asked my boss what on earth it was all about.
He said:
"Remember when you called out Janice, the wire girl who was supposed
to make our prototypes, for sunbathing on the roof and knitting and
basically doing nothing"?
"Yes" I said.
"Well she's been sleeping with him for years"
My introduction to office politics. She was a dumb bitch too. I
wouldn't have.
Mind you the next job was even worse.
-a-a Gee ... you've nothing good to say
-a-a about anybody, do you ???
Good people don't need mentioning.
These are cautionary tales, Not eulogistic valedictions
Had 'good', but not 'extreme', experience with
computers/electronics since the very old days.
However I did find those 'other interests' to
dilute my attention. Not ashamed ... I'm kind
of the New World Handyman, the Generalist. Know
ENOUGH about a LOT of things so I can see
bullshit and chart a good course.
Seems like nobody else can match your
computer skill-set - but we are not in these
groups because we know EVERYTHING - but because
we need extra input on esoteric issues. MANY
of those these days.
For fun, look into Sumeria ... very informative
where it comes to latter regional cultures.
Provides 'context', more "Big Picture" about
how and why things are so fucked up. How's
yer base on mRNA vaccines ? Heavy industrial
control panels ? What "fittest" really means ?
It's a BIG universe - not ALL computers.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/26 13:38:21, Jan Panteltje wrote:[]
Smoke signs may work too
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
"Torch" in UK.
These days postal-pigeons with an 1 TB nano SDcard can carry a lot of data >> cheaper ..
Always feed the birds!
See RFC1489 "A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian >Carrier" - collision avoidance ... datagram padding ... prioritised
pecking order ... self-regenerating carriers ... audit trails ... and
RFC2549, "IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service" - inheritanceYes I see that one .
tree ... rather overdoes it, but still
These two RFCs are from 1990 and
1999 - strangely, the same date in each :-)
On 26/09/2026 21:36, Charlie Gibbs wrote:[]
On 2026-09-26, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
A basic credo of the Hard Left.So you _want_ to be miserable?
Some people aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
Me. I am content.
I don't think - unlike the New Left - that I am some perfect being that
has to change the world to conform to my own Image.
We always considered the Black Labrador to be a reincarnated Buddhist
Monk who had gotten a bit above himself with intellectual pride.
A marvellously nice nature, randy AF and terminally thick.
On 26/09/2026 20:37, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
In my opinion, taking steps to reduce the unjustness is generally not a >>>> bad thing to do - certainly not preserving it.
Omigawd. A Lefty
Oh - so anyone who is not 100% selfish is automatically "a lefty"? [I've
told you my voting history.]
Its not what you saidf, its the sanctimonious way you said it...
people are innately conservative, especially on the Left. They haven'tOh, the right is pretty conservative too - that's why the party has that
had a fresh idea in 100 years really
name!
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what doesn't.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the pretense of 'making everything better'
[]"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
See RFC1489 "A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian
Carrier" - collision avoidance ... datagram padding ... prioritised
pecking order ... self-regenerating carriers ... audit trails ... and
?? I find:
RFC 1489: Registration of a Cyrillic Character Set | RFC Editor
Got that number right?
I find:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1489/
RFC 1489: Registration of a Cyrillic Character Set
RFC2549, "IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service" - inheritanceYes I see that one .
tree ... rather overdoes it, but still
These two RFCs are from 1990 and
1999 - strangely, the same date in each :-)
Well the bird thing .. better encrypt stuff and keep the method secret.
These days with nano-sdcards and travelling by plane and security checks. there are many places you can hide you secret cellphone data,
so small are those nano sdcards,
just put an almost empty nano-nano card in your phone.
On 2026-09-25, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
I like it! Hadn't heard that one. (My own nickname for a group is
"Alphabet people", for the LGBT... people - I'm actually mostly for them
[or at least against the discrimination and hate against them], but
their tendency to keep adding letters to their string loses them
credibility with me ...)
I think the main problem is that they're trying to enumerate
every possible variation or combination - which in the end
is no more inclusive than the discrimination they're fighting.
(Compare it with South Africa's Byzantine race designations.)
I just call it LGBTLMNOP and let it go at that.
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the Windows and Linux ones next time.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure >>>> about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set >>>> at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channelI had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.) >>>
I don't think it was called that.>>
I asked GoogleAI:However, radio over a phone line, yes. Still exists here, usually hired
by commercial sites. I assume that now it uses internet.
I asked ChatGPT: it was called "Hilo musical" (musical wire or thread),
a Telef||nica service. Currently it is named "Spotmusic". Different
technology.
The old one transmitted 6 channels on the same copper pair used for the
phone, at a higher frequency. Somewhat similar to ADSL.
Yes, Rediffusion originally started in the UK by relaying radio
broadcasts directly to subscribers' homes over wired networks.
How the Radio Relay Worked
rCo Wired Distribution: Founded as Broadcast Relay Service Limited (later named Rediffusion) in 1928, the company used physical cables to pipe
radio programs straight into houses.
rCo No Radio Set Needed: Subscribers did not need an expensive or
complicated wireless radio receiver; they only needed a simple
loudspeaker and a selector switch wired to the Rediffusion network.
rCo Clear Reception: The wired "pipe radio" system eliminated static,
fading, and interference common with early aerial radio transmissions.
rCo BBC and Local Feeds: The service provided crisp audio relays of BBC
radio programmes and other stations from the early 1930s onwards, long
before the company expanded into television rental and commercial broadcasting.
The standard Rediffusion selector box was a purely mechanical,
multi-position rotary switch that didn't require any mains electricity
or batteries to function.
rUON+A How the Box Operated
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV) signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the street using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
to this incoming multi-core cable. When you turned the dial, it
physically moved a brass contact inside the box to connect your speaker
to a specific pair of wires inside the cable.
rCo Volume Control: The box also housed a simple variable resistor (potentiometer). Turning the volume knob restricted or allowed more electrical current to flow to the speaker, making the audio quieter or louder.Because the central station did all the heavy lifting of
capturing and amplifying the signal, the box in the home was effectively
just a remote switch and volume knob for a giant, town-wide audio system.>> So there you have it! It was as I thought - just audio distribution; not
even carrier.>
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the Windows and Linux ones next time.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-25 21:39, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/25 0:17:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:...
On 2026-09-24, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:[]
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
(Cable _radio_ did have some reach, I think in the 1950s; I'm not sure >>>> about this, but I _think_ that was basically a big radio (wireless) set >>>> at the hub, with just direct audio distributed. Not sure how channel
selection was implemented! "Rediffusion" was I think the main company.) >>>
I don't think it was called that.>>
I asked GoogleAI:However, radio over a phone line, yes. Still exists here, usually hired
by commercial sites. I assume that now it uses internet.
I asked ChatGPT: it was called "Hilo musical" (musical wire or thread),
a Telef||nica service. Currently it is named "Spotmusic". Different
technology.
The old one transmitted 6 channels on the same copper pair used for the
phone, at a higher frequency. Somewhat similar to ADSL.
Yes, Rediffusion originally started in the UK by relaying radio
broadcasts directly to subscribers' homes over wired networks.
How the Radio Relay Worked
rCo Wired Distribution: Founded as Broadcast Relay Service Limited (later named Rediffusion) in 1928, the company used physical cables to pipe
radio programs straight into houses.
rCo No Radio Set Needed: Subscribers did not need an expensive or
complicated wireless radio receiver; they only needed a simple
loudspeaker and a selector switch wired to the Rediffusion network.
rCo Clear Reception: The wired "pipe radio" system eliminated static,
fading, and interference common with early aerial radio transmissions.
rCo BBC and Local Feeds: The service provided crisp audio relays of BBC
radio programmes and other stations from the early 1930s onwards, long
before the company expanded into television rental and commercial broadcasting.
The standard Rediffusion selector box was a purely mechanical,
multi-position rotary switch that didn't require any mains electricity
or batteries to function.
rUON+A How the Box Operated
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV) signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the street using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
to this incoming multi-core cable. When you turned the dial, it
physically moved a brass contact inside the box to connect your speaker
to a specific pair of wires inside the cable.
rCo Volume Control: The box also housed a simple variable resistor (potentiometer). Turning the volume knob restricted or allowed more electrical current to flow to the speaker, making the audio quieter or louder.Because the central station did all the heavy lifting of
capturing and amplifying the signal, the box in the home was effectively
just a remote switch and volume knob for a giant, town-wide audio system.>> So there you have it! It was as I thought - just audio distribution; not
even carrier.>
and it seems like only 60 years ago that we had "Dial a Disc" ...
I'm pretty surer that continued until at least the 1970s ...
On 9/27/26 03:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 02:36, c186282 wrote:
On 9/26/26 05:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 08:23, c186282 wrote:
I NEARLY got it right. Just a little lacking in ultimate top end-a-a Smart boss.
speed, but my boss took it over and added some complementary
emitter followers to buffer the capacitance and scraped by the spec. >>>>>
-a-a How many of those NOW ???
-a-a It's all DISMAL.
Oh HIS boss was a dork.
I left after a year, When I went to see HIM he said 'well you
haven't done much have you?
I recited half a dozen projects that I had completed to spec and he
said 'Oh,. yes'
I asked my boss what on earth it was all about.
He said:
"Remember when you called out Janice, the wire girl who was supposed
to make our prototypes, for sunbathing on the roof and knitting and
basically doing nothing"?
"Yes" I said.
"Well she's been sleeping with him for years"
My introduction to office politics. She was a dumb bitch too. I
wouldn't have.
Mind you the next job was even worse.
-a-a Gee ... you've nothing good to say
-a-a about anybody, do you ???
Good people don't need mentioning.
-a Look up the term "ego"-a :-)
These are cautionary tales, Not eulogistic valedictions
-a Mostly just looks like excuses to trash
-a everybody else 'inferior'.
-a We all have different skill sets and levels.
-a I get into a lot of areas you don't - that's
-a for sure. Not all are 'tech' - but AS informative
-a and interesting.
-a It's a BIG universe - not ALL computers.
On 2026/9/27 8:27:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 02:36, c186282 wrote:[]
On the contrary: if good people are not recognised, they _may_ give up-a Gee ... you've nothing good to say
-a about anybody, do you ???
Good people don't need mentioning.
These are cautionary tales, Not eulogistic valedictions
doing whatever the good thing is, even if it takes many years; a
_little_ praise often goes a long way. In these 'groups - well, the
Windows 10 one anyway (also 7 and XP in the past) - I've had good
information and advice, even if I haven't always agreed with (or
understood!) it, from, among others, Mayayana (I think using a different
name now), Winston, VanguardLH, and above all Paul.
Also, if you never mention good people but only tell "cautionary tales", _you_ become known as a misery-guts, complainer, etcetera. And some
people start to ignore you.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 26/09/2026 23:14, Hank Rogers wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:I think he predates America so you would not have heard of him
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a LondonWho was jonathan swift?
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Pre-independence but not pre-America; Moll Flanders gets transported to Maryland.
On 27/09/2026 8:14 am, Hank Rogers wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Who was jonathan swift?
"the creator of the fictional island of Lilliput", the fictional land
that was featured in the satirical prose novel "Gulliver's Travels" (1726)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Swift
I bet he used redhat linux.
--
On 2026/9/27 8:15:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 21:36, Charlie Gibbs wrote:[]
On 2026-09-26, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
A basic credo of the Hard Left.So you _want_ to be miserable?
Some people aren't happy unless they're unhappy.
I've got news for you: only a few of them think that. _Every_ group has
a few misery-guts ...>
Me. I am content.
You sure don't come across as.
[]
I don't think - unlike the New Left - that I am some perfect being that
has to change the world to conform to my own Image.
Nor do most of them. (In case it needs saying, I'm not with them.)
[]
--We always considered the Black Labrador to be a reincarnated BuddhistLabs are indeed adorable.
Monk who had gotten a bit above himself with intellectual pride.
A marvellously nice nature, randy AF and terminally thick.
Or, even 'A' for 'Asexual' ... for those who couldn't be F...ed!!
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change whatThey just have a different idea to you about what is working.
doesn't.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
But isn't 'wire' a form of 'cable'??
On 27/09/2026 10:58, Daniel70 wrote:
But isn't 'wire' a form of 'cable'??
In *this* context cable was coaxial RF, wire tended to me more twisted pair
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.Aye.
On 27/09/2026 12:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.Aye.
A lefty and a conservative are stuck outside a city wall whose gates
have closed for the night.
The conservative says 'I will just wait till morning'
The Lefty says 'how old fashioned. I will light up a pipe of weed and imagine I am inside already'
On 27/09/2026 09:37, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 26/09/2026 23:14, Hank Rogers wrote:Pre-independence but not pre-America; Moll Flanders gets transported
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:I think he predates America so you would not have heard of him
Jonathan SwiftWho was jonathan swift?
to Maryland.
Good old Moll.
But was it called 'America' at that time?
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 27/09/2026 09:56, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2026 8:14 am, Hank Rogers wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Who was jonathan swift?
"the creator of the fictional island of Lilliput", the fictional land
that was featured in the satirical prose novel "Gulliver's Travels" (1726) >>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Swift
The staggering thing is that no one actually bothered to look that up, >except you.
Some people are so PROUD of their ignorance.
In fact he was a lot more than that, but that's been forgotten
I bet he used redhat linux.
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people >recognize the signal and rescue me?
On 27/09/2026 10:20, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
That is pure Leftism.The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what >>> doesn't.They just have a different idea to you about what is working.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
There are in fact clear objective data available as to what works and
what does not
ITS NOT A "MATTER OF OPINION"
On 26/09/2026 19:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
rUON+A How the Box OperatedAt some point, Rediffusion added TV: BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. The TV sets
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV) signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the street >> using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
were simplified, as there was no tuner (or carrier I suppose). And the
TVs could also receive radio (without the TV being powered up).
Most of my early-a experience was not in computers. It was in military electronics, where we learnt how to waste public money
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Aye.
On 26/09/2026 20:37, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
On 2026/9/26 20:26:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:26, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Pot, kettle ... I think a fair proportion of those following thisIn my opinion, taking steps to reduce the unjustness is generally not a >>>>> bad thing to do - certainly not preserving it.
Omigawd. A Lefty
Oh - so anyone who is not 100% selfish is automatically "a lefty"? [I've >>> told you my voting history.]
Its not what you saidf, its the sanctimonious way you said it...
wouldn't say _I_ am the sanctimonious one between the two of us!
[]
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.people are innately conservative, especially on the Left. They haven't >>>> had a fresh idea in 100 years reallyOh, the right is pretty conservative too - that's why the party has that >>> name!
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what
doesn't.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
On 27/09/2026 10:16, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
On 2026/9/27 8:15:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Me. I am content.
You sure don't come across as.
Yanks never understand sarcasm, do they?
[]Oh but they do.
I don't think - unlike the New Left - that I am some perfect being that
has to change the world to conform to my own Image.
Nor do most of them. (In case it needs saying, I'm not with them.)
[]
On 27/09/2026 12:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.Aye.
A lefty and a conservative are stuck outside a city wall whose gates
have closed for the night.
The conservative says 'I will just wait till morning'
The Lefty says 'how old fashioned. I will light up a pipe of weed and imagine I am inside already'
On 2026-09-27 13:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 10:20, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:That is pure Leftism.
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what >>>> doesn't.They just have a different idea to you about what is working.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
There are in fact clear objective data available as to what works and
what does not
ITS NOT A "MATTER OF OPINION"
That's a matter of opinion itself :-P
On 27/09/2026 09:56, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2026 8:14 am, Hank Rogers wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Who was jonathan swift?
"the creator of the fictional island of Lilliput", the fictional land
that was featured in the satirical prose novel "Gulliver's Travels" (1726) >>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Swift
The staggering thing is that no one actually bothered to look that up, except you.
Some people are so PROUD of their ignorance.
In fact he was a lot more than that, but that's been forgotten
I bet he used redhat linux.
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the
Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[...]
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I don't think it was called that.>>
In The Netherlands, it was called 'draadomroep', which roughly
translates to wirebroadcast, so 'wire', not 'cable' and 'broadcast', not 'radio' (because it wasn't).
And it indeed worked like (your snipped) Google's AI Overview said.
[...]
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun violence and deaths are reduced.
On 2026-09-27 13:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 10:20, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:That is pure Leftism.
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only changeThey just have a different idea to you about what is working.
what
doesn't.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
There are in fact clear objective data available as to what works and
what does not
ITS NOT A "MATTER OF OPINION"
That's a matter of opinion itself :-P
On 2026-09-27 14:06, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 12:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.Aye.
A lefty and a conservative are stuck outside a city wall whose gates
have closed for the night.
The conservative says 'I will just wait till morning'
The Lefty says 'how old fashioned. I will light up a pipe of weed and
imagine I am inside already'
Doesn't appeal to me.
On 2026/9/27 13:6:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 12:18, Carlos E.R. wrote:(Which makes the participant happier? Discuss. [No, please don't!])
They just have a different idea to you about what is working.Aye.
A lefty and a conservative are stuck outside a city wall whose gates
have closed for the night.
The conservative says 'I will just wait till morning'
The Lefty says 'how old fashioned. I will light up a pipe of weed and
imagine I am inside already'
whereas the third member of the party, an engineer of no particular
political leaning, starts to examine the gate mechanism to see if he can figure out a way of getting in.
(Wasn't it he who
suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could solve some problems by
eating the poor?)
On 2026/9/27 13:25:44, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-27 13:50, The Natural Philosopher wrote::-)
On 27/09/2026 10:20, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:That is pure Leftism.
The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what >>>>> doesn't.They just have a different idea to you about what is working.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the >>>>> pretense of 'making everything better'
There are in fact clear objective data available as to what works and
what does not
ITS NOT A "MATTER OF OPINION"
That's a matter of opinion itself :-P
There's also
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. - H.L.Mencken
- and your "clear objective data" (or your conclusion[s] from it) is
that answer.
On 2026/9/27 11:44:52, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
rUON+A How the Box Operated
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV) signals >>> over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the street >>> using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
At some point, Rediffusion added TV: BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. The TV sets
were simplified, as there was no tuner (or carrier I suppose). And the
TVs could also receive radio (without the TV being powered up).
So when the switch was in the radio position (one of several), the
incoming signal was routed directly to the TV speaker?
J. P. Gilliver wrote:Student housing where I lived in the 80s still had the chunky
Max Demian wrote:
At some point, Rediffusion added TV: BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. The TV sets
were simplified, as there was no tuner (or carrier I suppose). And the
TVs could also receive radio (without the TV being powered up).
So when the switch was in the radio position (one of several), the
incoming signal was routed directly to the TV speaker?
That's right.
On Sat, 9/26/2026 3:10 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_radio#/media/File:GRD-Utrecht.JPG
On 27/09/2026 16:12, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 11:44:52, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
rUON+A How the Box Operated
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV)
signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the
street
using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores).
Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was connected
At some point, Rediffusion added TV: BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. The TV sets
were simplified, as there was no tuner (or carrier I suppose). And the
TVs could also receive radio (without the TV being powered up).
So when the switch was in the radio position (one of several), the
incoming signal was routed directly to the TV speaker?
That's right.
On 2026/9/26 21:2:35, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:10:13, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the >>> Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
I suggest you take that 'group; they're friendly, and from your posts I think you'd fit right in with the atmosphere there. Although, obviously,Oops, sorry, I thought I was replying to our .nl friend.
it mostly discusses UK matters, it does cover others (recent discussions about long wave stations for example).
[]
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
On 27/09/2026 10:20, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/27 8:7:8, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
That is pure Leftism.The point about conservatism, is to keep what works and only change what >>> doesn't.They just have a different idea to you about what is working.
The Progressive Left changes what works into what doesn't. Under the
pretense of 'making everything better'
There are in fact clear objective data available as to what works and
what does not
ITS NOT A "MATTER OF OPINION"
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people recognize the signal and rescue me?
I always refer to it as 'rat head' , tried it once many years ago and
never again as the gcc / libs were incompatible.
We all have different skill sets and levels.
I get into a lot of areas you don't - that's for sure. Not all are
'tech' - but AS informative and interesting.
On 2026-09-27 17:56, Paul wrote:
On Sat, 9/26/2026 3:10 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_radio#/media/File:GRD-Utrecht.JPG
Interesting that none mentions the Spanish system used by Telef||nica for many years.
People increasingly don't _like_ a generalist these days though. (Unless
it has changed since I left work.) In my career - which was in
electronics - I _was_ a generalist (though more on the digital than
analogue side), but bosses don't know where to put you: management likes pigeonholes. In general life, I try to learn a bit about a lot - for
example, I keep learning wrinkles of plumbing, and have added a
washbasin for friends, and recently learnt how to repair a
poorly-flushing WC cistern; I know how to wire a plug and generally troubleshoot a lot of things. I don't say this to brag, more puzzlement
that lots of people don't have the curiosity.
Most of my early experience was not in computers. It was in military electronics, where we learnt how to waste public money
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index >> is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun >> violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/26/26 08:10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/24/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:41, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>I think that across the 6 muxes my transmitter transmits on there are in >>>>> fact 110 channels, though many of them are radio, not TV.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than >>>>>> the 4 we got in the sixties.
Heh, early 60s, we got 3.5 channels - all a
bit fuzzy :-) On GOOD nights you could get
the 0.5th channel
Once, maybe age 11, climbed up on the roof, up
the antenna tower, to replace a balky antenna
pre-amplifier AND the antenna rotator unit
at midnight. We did have spares. Likely a
close lightning hit killed them. This was
the 60s reality.
Apparently my balls, though small, were
still good :-)
Oh NO NO NO ! Little kids climbing high towers
in the dark unsupervised to fool with electrical
equipment ??? The horror !!! Someone should
be ARRESTED !!!
Strongly suggest Henry Winkler's "Hazardous
History" show :-)
Dad just said something like "Good Job". I was
the weird son ... they didn't have a term for
"spectrum" back then ... but still managed to
get some parental affirmation. Good thing.
Made me stronger.
Hey, that's what we had to do, and how to prove
our worth, back in the day. Gained confidence,
competence and self-esteem.
Hey, REALLY wanted to see my midnight monster
movie !!!
Today's little useless WHINERS ... well ...
charge them HUGE HUGE $$$ to do what they
SHOULD know how to do themselves !
How far we've fallen. "Space Race" America
was the pinnacle.
The balky amplifier was sent to the repair
place and then served as the new spare. Do
you remember when electronics COULD be
repaired ??? Blown cap, I remember.
Reminds me of my early days, fifties of last century
told the TV radio repair man (dad would not let me touch his radio)
how to fix it...
Asked my my mother if I could use my fathers soldering iron..
"No", so I took a screwdriver and heated it in the coal fire and soldered together my own radio.
Had a very good book on radio, and some good magazines
not sure there is an English version:
https://onetuberadio.com/2016/01/15/eugene-aisberg-radio-writer/
All tubes in those days, no transistors :-)
Later I worked in broadcasting...
Bit more complex systems :-)
I would secretly listen late at night as kid with my crystal radio using the metal spiral
matras as antenna to those late night radio plays,
some were quite good at predicting the future we have now...
I had a TV repair shop for some years too.
I remember once, when I came back from traveling far way and needed some place
to stay and money, went to an agency and got a job at a small repair shop. >>> I fixed things so fast that at some point the guy got mad (could not make money
charging customers for a few minutes)
that he took the just repaired TV, smashed it on the ground and said:
"Now repair it again".
I left (no idea what happened to his shop 9and TV)) and got an other job via
that agency the next day at a large accelerator..
Even they said: Do not work so fast...
Well its easy stuff?
LOL
You got deeper in than I did. Also transistors
were replacing valves at the time. Dad had a big
RCA manual of transistor circuits.
Did build a few little transistor-based radios.
"Crystal" radios were kinda interesting. If near
an antenna you didn't even need a battery. Don't
think you can do that easily with FM band.
These days, the AARL manual is the go-to ... they
even covered a lot of valve circuits until recently.
Straight-up practical, not much wasted on esoteric
theory.
Yes RSGB handbook was a big help a bit later (early sixties).
Build several transistor radios,
first Germanium transistors here were from Philips
OC13 and what was it OC45 for RF? And an OC16 power transistor!
And super-regenerative receivers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superregenerative_receiver
But then the market was overflooded with 2 transistor small portable radios.
Build a one transistor FM 'oscillator' transmitter, dynamic microphone in series
with the supply was enough for very good sound quality,
the collector capacitance of the transistor changed a lot when the supply voltage varied, the dynamic mike did that, causing FM modulation.
You could hear a clock ticking via FM from the other room so sensitive!
On 2026/9/27 8:27:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 02:36, c186282 wrote:[]
On the contrary: if good people are not recognised, they _may_ give up-a Gee ... you've nothing good to say
-a about anybody, do you ???
Good people don't need mentioning.
These are cautionary tales, Not eulogistic valedictions
doing whatever the good thing is, even if it takes many years; a
_little_ praise often goes a long way. In these 'groups - well, the
Windows 10 one anyway (also 7 and XP in the past) - I've had good
information and advice, even if I haven't always agreed with (or
understood!) it, from, among others, Mayayana (I think using a different
name now), Winston, VanguardLH, and above all Paul.
Also, if you never mention good people but only tell "cautionary tales", _you_ become known as a misery-guts, complainer, etcetera. And some
people start to ignore you.
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/27/26 04:55, Jan Panteltje wrote:
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/26/26 08:10, Jan Panteltje wrote:
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>wrote:
On 9/24/26 07:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/2026 15:41, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 09:45:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>>I think that across the 6 muxes my transmitter transmits on there are in >>>>>> fact 110 channels, though many of them are radio, not TV.
On 22/09/2026 17:05, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:20:00 -0400, Paul wrote:You got more channels in the same bandwidth,
[snip]
Why did we need digital TV again ?
I keep forgetting the reason for it :-)
You get a more stable, less noisy picture (when it works).
I get 3 channels, but with subchannels that's 16. That's a lot more than
the 4 we got in the sixties.
Heh, early 60s, we got 3.5 channels - all a
bit fuzzy :-) On GOOD nights you could get
the 0.5th channel
Once, maybe age 11, climbed up on the roof, up
the antenna tower, to replace a balky antenna
pre-amplifier AND the antenna rotator unit
at midnight. We did have spares. Likely a
close lightning hit killed them. This was
the 60s reality.
Apparently my balls, though small, were
still good :-)
Oh NO NO NO ! Little kids climbing high towers
in the dark unsupervised to fool with electrical
equipment ??? The horror !!! Someone should
be ARRESTED !!!
Strongly suggest Henry Winkler's "Hazardous
History" show :-)
Dad just said something like "Good Job". I was
the weird son ... they didn't have a term for
"spectrum" back then ... but still managed to
get some parental affirmation. Good thing.
Made me stronger.
Hey, that's what we had to do, and how to prove
our worth, back in the day. Gained confidence,
competence and self-esteem.
Hey, REALLY wanted to see my midnight monster
movie !!!
Today's little useless WHINERS ... well ...
charge them HUGE HUGE $$$ to do what they
SHOULD know how to do themselves !
How far we've fallen. "Space Race" America
was the pinnacle.
The balky amplifier was sent to the repair
place and then served as the new spare. Do
you remember when electronics COULD be
repaired ??? Blown cap, I remember.
Reminds me of my early days, fifties of last century
told the TV radio repair man (dad would not let me touch his radio)
how to fix it...
Asked my my mother if I could use my fathers soldering iron..
"No", so I took a screwdriver and heated it in the coal fire and soldered together my own radio.
Had a very good book on radio, and some good magazines
not sure there is an English version:
https://onetuberadio.com/2016/01/15/eugene-aisberg-radio-writer/
All tubes in those days, no transistors :-)
Later I worked in broadcasting...
Bit more complex systems :-)
I would secretly listen late at night as kid with my crystal radio using the metal spiral
matras as antenna to those late night radio plays,
some were quite good at predicting the future we have now...
I had a TV repair shop for some years too.
I remember once, when I came back from traveling far way and needed some place
to stay and money, went to an agency and got a job at a small repair shop. >>>> I fixed things so fast that at some point the guy got mad (could not make money
charging customers for a few minutes)
that he took the just repaired TV, smashed it on the ground and said:
"Now repair it again".
I left (no idea what happened to his shop 9and TV)) and got an other job via
that agency the next day at a large accelerator..
Even they said: Do not work so fast...
Well its easy stuff?
LOL
You got deeper in than I did. Also transistors
were replacing valves at the time. Dad had a big
RCA manual of transistor circuits.
Did build a few little transistor-based radios.
"Crystal" radios were kinda interesting. If near
an antenna you didn't even need a battery. Don't
think you can do that easily with FM band.
These days, the AARL manual is the go-to ... they
even covered a lot of valve circuits until recently.
Straight-up practical, not much wasted on esoteric
theory.
Yes RSGB handbook was a big help a bit later (early sixties).
Build several transistor radios,
first Germanium transistors here were from Philips
OC13 and what was it OC45 for RF? And an OC16 power transistor!
And super-regenerative receivers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superregenerative_receiver
Ah ... "howlers" :-)
WERE pretty sensitive though.
But then the market was overflooded with 2 transistor small portable radios. >>
Build a one transistor FM 'oscillator' transmitter, dynamic microphone in series
with the supply was enough for very good sound quality,
the collector capacitance of the transistor changed a lot when the supply
voltage varied, the dynamic mike did that, causing FM modulation.
You could hear a clock ticking via FM from the other room so sensitive!
ONE transistor is pretty lean for an FM radio.
CAN be done, have seen diagrams, but you lose
something somewhere.
One transistor AM receivers, easier.
Oh well, it's all chips/PLLs now.
Note though, IF a bunch of nukes go off, it IS
possible thru fairly low-tech methods to build
usable vacuum valves from scratch and scrap.
Transistors/chips, NOT.
rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2026 14:03:36 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
I always refer to it as 'rat head' , tried it once many years ago and
never again as the gcc / libs were incompatible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html
They didn't name names but it was Red Hat Linux. Their version couldn't >compile the kernel so there was a separate compiler for that. They also
made some 'improvements' to Python that broke existing scripts.
I switched to SuSE. I preferred KDE anyway and while it was theoretically >possible to replace the default GNOME on RHL with KDE, why bother.
About 25 years later I gave it a second chance and installed the Fedora
KDE spin. It has worked well and KDE finally made it to first class
citizen status rather than a spin.
For old times sake I also have SUSE Tumbleweed/KDE on another machine.
Other than zypper rather than dnf there isn't a lot of difference despite >Fedora not being a rolling distro technically.
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun >>> violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that.
Note though, IF a bunch of nukes go off, it IS
-a possible thru fairly low-tech methods to build
-a usable vacuum valves from scratch and scrap.
-a Transistors/chips, NOT.
On Sun, 9/27/2026 1:28 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-27 17:56, Paul wrote:
On Sat, 9/26/2026 3:10 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
-a-a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_radio#/media/File:GRD-Utrecht.JPG >>Interesting that none mentions the Spanish system used by Telef||nica for many years.
What's surprising about the topic, is there were so many small efforts
to do this. I would never have guessed people would pay for a
"plumbed signal" for the purpose.
I think here, there was as much of a tendency to "collect music",
if you wanted a quality source. As then you were more in
control of the specifics. For example, in high school, one
person had a livingroom, where three walls of it had 8 track
tapes stacked up. There were all sorts of esoteric R&B tapes
to choose from, all carefully sorted so they could be located
on request.
The largest collection I know of, someone had a house here,
that was stuffed with vinyl albums. The owner of the house
was a DJ, and when he did a shift on the radio, *all* of the
selections for his shift, were from his collection. Radio stations
are not run that way today, and he sold off his collection
as part of his retirement nest egg.
On 27/09/2026 20:58, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know
happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We
know gun
violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that.
Economy is always worse under Labour. People get poorer under labour, so crime goes up.
Labour encourages the politics of conflict, and stifles any individual attempts to make things better.
The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime
As you may have noticed we are having one of our periodic lapses into
the insanity and incompetence of a labour 'government' (sic!) right now.
It will end in tears, It always does.
They have no idea how to run (ruin ?) the economy, and no idea how to
tax business.
If, as a country, we make nothing and do nothing then the only way to
raise revenue is to sell stuff or borrow money.
The cost of borrowing is going up, and we are running out of things to
sell.
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
On 27/09/2026 9:46 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
"20 gauge"?? Bloody hell!! DUCK!
On 28/09/2026 09:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 20:58, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know
happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We
know gun
violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that. >>>
Economy is always worse under Labour. People get poorer under labour,
so crime goes up.
Labour encourages the politics of conflict, and stifles any individual
attempts to make things better.
The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime
As you may have noticed we are having one of our periodic lapses into
the insanity and incompetence of a labour 'government' (sic!) right now.
It will end in tears, It always does.
Probably .. mostly .. true
They have no idea how to run (ruin ?) the economy, and no idea how to
tax business.
If, as a country, we make nothing and do nothing then the only way to
raise revenue is to sell stuff or borrow money.
The cost of borrowing is going up, and we are running out of things to
sell.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people
recognize the signal and rescue me?
Mine is a Cree.
Good question.
You can - if locked up - shine it outside at night and some people may tell the
police about that light.
If lost in the wild shine it upwards so helicopters looking for you can see it.
The SOS ... ___ ... sign sequence is well known I think.
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people
recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you!
On 27/09/2026 18:12, Max Demian wrote:
On 27/09/2026 16:12, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Probably not directly: Normally the audio would be 100V line and need an impedance matching transformer (or maybe the TV sets output transformer
On 2026/9/27 11:44:52, Max Demian wrote:
On 26/09/2026 19:08, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
rUON+A How the Box Operated
rCo Central Distribution: Rediffusion set up central amplification
stations in towns. These stations received radio (and later, TV)
signals
over the air via high-quality aerials.
rCo Multi-Core Cables: The amplified signals were sent out down the >>>>> street
using overhead cables that contained multiple separate wires (cores). >>>>> Each core carried a different station or channel.
rCo The Rotary Switch: The selector box in your living room was
connected
At some point, Rediffusion added TV: BBC1, BBC2 and ITV. The TV sets >>>> were simplified, as there was no tuner (or carrier I suppose). And the >>>> TVs could also receive radio (without the TV being powered up).
So when the switch was in the radio position (one of several), the
incoming signal was routed directly to the TV speaker?
That's right.
via a different tap)
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-27 21:09, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people
recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you!
Don't it straight up if close, it can hurt your eyes :-P
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 9/26/2026 2:39 PM:
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London
coffee-house for the voice of the kingdom.
Jonathan Swift
Who was jonathan swift?
I bet he used redhat linux.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the
Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast related.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[...]
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I don't think it was called that.>>
In The Netherlands, it was called 'draadomroep', which roughly
translates to wirebroadcast, so 'wire', not 'cable' and 'broadcast', not 'radio' (because it wasn't).
And it indeed worked like (your snipped) Google's AI Overview said.
[...]
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/26 21:2:35, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:10:13, Frank Slootweg wrote:Oops, sorry, I thought I was replying to our .nl friend.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the >>>>> Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
I suggest you take that 'group; they're friendly, and from your posts I
think you'd fit right in with the atmosphere there. Although, obviously, >>> it mostly discusses UK matters, it does cover others (recent discussions >>> about long wave stations for example).
[]
Well, I don't know if I am your (singular and plural) friend, but I
*do* live in NL! :-)
Here, the macro figures are wonderful. Employment rate is now "full employment", higher than ever. And it is a socialist government in
coalition with communists.
On Sat, 9/26/2026 3:10 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the >>> Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast
related.
On 2026/9/26 11:47:1, Abandoned Trolley wrote:[...]
On 26/09/2026 11:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
I had not heard of cable radio. Interesting.
I don't think it was called that.>>
In The Netherlands, it was called 'draadomroep', which roughly
translates to wirebroadcast, so 'wire', not 'cable' and 'broadcast', not
'radio' (because it wasn't).
And it indeed worked like (your snipped) Google's AI Overview said.
[...]
Van der Heem N.V. and related companies - The Hague, Utrecht and Sneek
https://www.vanderheem.info/radiocentrale3.html
Various systems were abandoned after testing or not implemented at all because the costs
of operation were too high. The most well-known methods will be briefly mentioned here.
High frequency wire broadcasting;
the intention was to transmit a high frequency over existing conductors (eg high-current conductors),
which were modulated with a low-frequency signal (music, etc.). The filters and further equipment
required at the central point made this system impractical.
High frequency wire broadcasting using 1 double wire.
With this system, which is used in England,
a special double wire system is stretched along the houses, on which branches can be made. Some
carrier waves are conducted on this double wire, which in turn are modulated with the low-frequency
signal; these voltages must be detected at the connected parties, for which a simple receiver is used.
This system can be very excellent in terms of network construction, but the costs that must be incurred
by the affiliated parties will have to determine whether this system can be applied in the Netherlands.
Low frequency wire broadcasting over 1 double-wire telephone.
A wire broadcasting system is in use in the municipality of The Hague, which to date can be used without
additional cable costs. The basic idea of rCirCithis system is to give greater efficiency to the telephone
double wires of private telephone connections, which are unused for 95% of the day. In the telephone
exchange, the radio program is set at telephone level, which is brought up to loudspeaker strength by
the telephone subscriber via an amplifier. The affiliates have a device that ensures that if a telephone
conversation is called up, the radio program is interrupted, so that the telephone conversation can be
made normally, while there is also a push button with which a step switch in the telephone exchange
can be operated, to which the 4 radio programs are placed. This system will be difficult to fit with
advancing telephone technology, so that after a few years this method will be abandoned in The Hague.
Wire broadcasting over 4 telephone double wires.
A method is in use in the municipality of Rotterdam that uses 4 telephone double wires, from which the
connections for radio subscribers are tapped in parallel. In the telephone exchange, as in the system
discussed under 3, the radio programs are again set at telephone level (max 4 Volts), which are brought
to loudspeaker strength for the connected parties via a program selector (switch) and a small amplifier.
This system has the disadvantage that 4 double wires must be reserved for radio purposes in all branch
telephone cables, while making a connection (underground) is often more expensive than a branch to a
lead cable network (block network). The aforementioned systems are generally called voltage systems,
because only voltages are applied to the connected parties, which then supply the energy that the
loudspeaker needs to function properly via amplifiers, etc.
The system of wire broadcasting at loudspeaker level used in
the Netherlands will be described in somewhat more detail here.
This system provides energy to connected parties, so that it is possible
to use the speaker immediately; However, this means that this energy must be the same everywhere. For
example, it should not be the case that one subscriber hears nothing, while the loudspeaker of the
other subscribers produces too much sound. This can easily be achieved with a good combination of
amplifiers and networks. If the cable conductors are thick enough so that no greater voltage losses
than 3 dB occur, the differences in strength are inaudible.
A second property that the wire broadcasting network must meet is a frequency characteristic that is as
straight [flat] as possible. As is known, the cable broadcasting stations transmit radio programs; these
consist of music and speech. The idea now is that when a tone of 6000 periods is produced for a microphone,
it will again be audible as a tone of 6000 periods.
In the beginning of wire broadcasting it often happened that a network was so large that it started to
prefer special frequencies; For example, if tone 6000 was sent from the exchange with 20 Volts in the
cables, it sometimes happened that 40 Volts or more were measured at certain places in the network;
this is an unacceptable change in the frequency characteristic; This unintentional increase in voltages
at certain frequencies is called resonances, which arise at distances of more than 2 km power cable
length. When designing a wire broadcasting network, care must therefore be taken not to use power cables
longer than 2 km.
*******
And a picture of the installation outside a building. A conduit appears to come from the ground, and two connections leave the top of the distribution box.
The screws on the box fashioned like a "security screw" for which the consumer does not have a tool to get it open. Implying that something
about the connections is "energetic".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_radio#/media/File:GRD-Utrecht.JPG
Paul
On 2026/9/27 19:20:49, Frank Slootweg wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2026/9/26 21:2:35, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/26 20:10:13, Frank Slootweg wrote:Oops, sorry, I thought I was replying to our .nl friend.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
uk.tech.broadcast added, as it seemed appropriate! I'll maybe remove the
Windows and Linux ones next time.
Please don't do that, unless it's really *only* UK *and* broadcast >>>> related.
I suggest you take that 'group; they're friendly, and from your posts I >>> think you'd fit right in with the atmosphere there. Although, obviously, >>> it mostly discusses UK matters, it does cover others (recent discussions >>> about long wave stations for example).
[]
Well, I don't know if I am your (singular and plural) friend, but I
*do* live in NL! :-)
I meant Jan Panteltje. But you'd probably enjoy (and be welcome in) UYB too.
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket of
the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had one
which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could match
it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio
chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There
are no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a
tank. - Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
On 27/09/2026 20:58, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun
violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that.
Economy is always worse under Labour. People get poorer under labour, so crime goes up.
Labour encourages the politics of conflict, and stifles any individual attempts to make things better.
The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime
As you may have noticed we are having one of our periodic lapses into
the insanity and incompetence of a labour 'government' (sic!) right now.
It will end in tears, It always does.
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There
are no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a
tank. - Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
A power so great it can only be used for good or evil!
-- Firesign Theatre
On Sep 28, 2026 at 1:13:07rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119d7ij$24b8p$8@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 20:58, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun
violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that. >>>
Economy is always worse under Labour. People get poorer under labour, so
crime goes up.
Labour encourages the politics of conflict, and stifles any individual
attempts to make things better.
The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime
As you may have noticed we are having one of our periodic lapses into
the insanity and incompetence of a labour 'government' (sic!) right now.
It will end in tears, It always does.
I know little of UK politics but that did not sound reasonable. AI can be VERY
wrong... but I asked anyway.
* "Economy is always worse under Labour / people get poorer" rCo FALSE
GDP and household disposable income grew steadily during the 1997rCo2008 Labour
government, while post-WWII average GDP growth remains similar under both parties. By contrast, real household income stagnated severely during the 2010rCo2024 Conservative era. https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/crxx/ukea
* "Crime goes up under Labour" rCo FALSE
Crime trends follow long-term social shifts rather than governing parties. Overall crime in England and Wales peaked in 1995 (under Conservatives) and dropped significantly throughout the late 1990s and 2000s under Labour. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice
* "The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime" rCo FALSE
Tens of thousands of legitimate private businesses, tech startups, and small enterprises launch every year in the UK regardless of political leadership. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house
*"It always ends in tears" rCo RHETORIC
Standard partisan commentary. Modern UK history shows both parties have overseen periods of economic growth alongside eventual recessions and political turnover.
Do you have evidence to back your claims?
On 28/09/2026 11:46, Daniel70 wrote:
On 27/09/2026 9:46 pm, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
<Snip>
Soon to be renamed REDNECK Linux, because it comes with a 20 gauge
penguin gun
"20 gauge"?? Bloody hell!! DUCK!
LOL. It's virtually a toy. AKA 'rook gun' .
On 28/09/2026 17:45, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 28, 2026 at 1:13:07rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wroteLabour always get into power just when the Tories have managed to create
<119d7ij$24b8p$8@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 20:58, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 27, 2026 at 9:39:19rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119bgrn$1glpo$7@dont-email.me>:
On 27/09/2026 16:04, Brock McNuggets wrote:
And we know the economy does better under Democrats. We know happiness index
is higher under liberal polices. We know health is better, too. We know gun
violence and deaths are reduced.
In the UK, its the exact opposite
Do you have evidence to back it? Looking briefly now I do not find that. >>>>
Economy is always worse under Labour. People get poorer under labour, so >>> crime goes up.
Labour encourages the politics of conflict, and stifles any individual
attempts to make things better.
The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime
As you may have noticed we are having one of our periodic lapses into
the insanity and incompetence of a labour 'government' (sic!) right now. >>>
It will end in tears, It always does.
I know little of UK politics but that did not sound reasonable. AI can be VERY
wrong... but I asked anyway.
* "Economy is always worse under Labour / people get poorer" rCo FALSE
GDP and household disposable income grew steadily during the 1997rCo2008 Labour
government, while post-WWII average GDP growth remains similar under both
parties. By contrast, real household income stagnated severely during the
2010rCo2024 Conservative era.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/crxx/ukea >>
* "Crime goes up under Labour" rCo FALSE
Crime trends follow long-term social shifts rather than governing parties. >> Overall crime in England and Wales peaked in 1995 (under Conservatives) and >> dropped significantly throughout the late 1990s and 2000s under Labour.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice
* "The only avenue for entrepreneurs is (violent) crime" rCo FALSE
Tens of thousands of legitimate private businesses, tech startups, and small >> enterprises launch every year in the UK regardless of political leadership. >> https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house
*"It always ends in tears" rCo RHETORIC
Standard partisan commentary. Modern UK history shows both parties have
overseen periods of economic growth alongside eventual recessions and
political turnover.
Do you have evidence to back your claims?
some growth in the economy, and then proceed to destroy it.
So on paper they can look good, but living with the reality is a
different matter.
On 28/09/2026 17:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
Forward! Into the Past!J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There
are no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a
tank. - Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
A power so great it can only be used for good or evil!
-- Firesign Theatre
On 27/09/2026 16:37, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
(Wasn't it he who
suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could solve some problems by
eating the poor?)
I can't remember, But I do remember the conflict between Big Endians and
Little Endians
(Wasn't it [Swift] who suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could
solve some problems by eating the poor?)
On 27 Sep 2026 in comp.os.linux.misc, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
(Wasn't it [Swift] who suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could
solve some problems by eating the poor?)
Indeed it was - if memory serves, hunger and overpopulation.
On 2026/9/27 17:38:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/09/2026 16:37, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Yes - predated the one in microprocessors (or whatever it was) by some centuries!
(Wasn't it he who suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could solve
some problems by eating the poor?)
I can't remember, But I do remember the conflict between Big Endians
and
Little Endians
On 2026/9/28 22:46:34, Joe Makowiec wrote:
On 27 Sep 2026 in comp.os.linux.misc, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
(Wasn't it [Swift] who suggested - tongue in cheek - that we could
solve some problems by eating the poor?)
Indeed it was - if memory serves, hunger and overpopulation.
Called, IIRR, "A Modest Proposal".
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-27 21:09, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people
recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you!
Don't it straight up if close, it can hurt your eyes :-P
I have something much more powerful:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/1_1_2021_blue_laser_1.gif
the bending of the beam is from the camera optics.
You better wear safety glasses, do not point it at people or cars or planes!
https://panteltje.nl/pub/laser_propulsion_test_1_IXIMG_0856.JPG
It will easily set something on fire.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-28 16:46, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-27 21:09, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people >>>>> recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you!
Don't it straight up if close, it can hurt your eyes :-P
Oops.
Don't look at it straight...
I have something much more powerful:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/1_1_2021_blue_laser_1.gif
the bending of the beam is from the camera optics.
You better wear safety glasses, do not point it at people or cars or planes! >> https://panteltje.nl/pub/laser_propulsion_test_1_IXIMG_0856.JPG
It will easily set something on fire.
Right, but that's a laser, not something to take while hiking on the
hills. :-D
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it is completely untrue.
Might be true in the UK. Our right is EXTREME right... yours might not be.
On 28/09/2026 20:26, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it isNorm,ally you just look at the rate of change of public debt and fdeficit.
completely untrue.
Under a reasonably conservative government, it goes down. Under Labour
it rises as they borrow money to pay off their voters. create
meaningless jobs and inflate the economy
Might be true in the UK. Our right is EXTREME right... yours might not be.
I wouldn't say the US right was particularly extreme prior to King
Donald. And he isn't right so much as a pure 'robber baron'.
And the US librals are basically corrupt parasites on the public purse.
The level of corruption is as bad as Russia, except for the need to--
conceal it in a putative democracy.
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all
sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road..
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25:32rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119g06c$34jdi$4@dont-email.me>:*shrug*. Not my fault if you are fooled by superficial staistics.
On 28/09/2026 20:26, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it is >>> completely untrue.Norm,ally you just look at the rate of change of public debt and fdeficit.
I do not.
Under a reasonably conservative government, it goes down. Under Labour
it rises as they borrow money to pay off their voters. create
meaningless jobs and inflate the economy
Again, where is the evidence. And how does the average Joe do? To me that is more important.
Might be true in the UK. Our right is EXTREME right... yours might not be. >>I wouldn't say the US right was particularly extreme prior to King
Donald. And he isn't right so much as a pure 'robber baron'.
That is fair... though we do have a very strong "Religious Right"... which is odd given how the Jesus of the Bible is, in general, promoting liberal values.
Pork Barrel politics rules OK.
And the US librals are basically corrupt parasites on the public purse.
That is not backed by evidence. Not that the Democrats are good -- BOTH major parties are paid for and beholden to the very rich (and easy to show: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746). It has gotten worse since then.
The level of corruption is as bad as Russia, except for the need to
conceal it in a putative democracy.
On 29/09/2026 10:43, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25:32rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote*shrug*. Not my fault if you are fooled by superficial staistics.
<119g06c$34jdi$4@dont-email.me>:
On 28/09/2026 20:26, Brock McNuggets wrote:I do not.
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it is >>>> completely untrue.Norm,ally you just look at the rate of change of public debt and fdeficit. >>
Under a reasonably conservative government, it goes down. Under Labour
it rises as they borrow money to pay off their voters. create
meaningless jobs and inflate the economy
Again, where is the evidence. And how does the average Joe do? To me that is >> more important.
Look it up
Well they are more extreme conservatives, They don't want to change AT ALL.
Might be true in the UK. Our right is EXTREME right... yours might not be. >>>I wouldn't say the US right was particularly extreme prior to King
Donald. And he isn't right so much as a pure 'robber baron'.
That is fair... though we do have a very strong "Religious Right"... which is
odd given how the Jesus of the Bible is, in general, promoting liberal values.
E.g,. in the swinging sixties, when birth control became available, we
all fucked like rabbits and no unwanted pregnancies happened, but the religious conservatives thought that a good bang without pregnancy was 'sinful' so wanted to limit contraception
And the US librals are basically corrupt parasites on the public purse.
That is not backed by evidence. Not that the Democrats are good -- BOTH major
parties are paid for and beholden to the very rich (and easy to show:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746). It has gotten worse
since then.
Pork Barrel politics rules OK.
The most corrupt scam *ever *perpetrated - 'renewaable' energy - is
entirely a Libral invention.
Al Gores 'most convenient lie'
--
The level of corruption is as bad as Russia, except for the need to
conceal it in a putative democracy.
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket
of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could
match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably
both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio
chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:56:21rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119g205$34jdi$7@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 10:43, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25:32rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote*shrug*. Not my fault if you are fooled by superficial staistics.
<119g06c$34jdi$4@dont-email.me>:
On 28/09/2026 20:26, Brock McNuggets wrote:I do not.
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it is >>>>> completely untrue.Norm,ally you just look at the rate of change of public debt and fdeficit. >>>
I am not. I care about how the people are doing... and likely will do in the future. I look mostly to evidence-based policies and equal rights.
Pork Barrel politics rules OK.
The most corrupt scam *ever *perpetrated - 'renewaable' energy - is
entirely a Libral invention.
Al Gores 'most convenient lie'
This is a feelings based view from you. Not one based on evidence. Man-made global climate change is real and should be dealt with -- based on evidence.
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket
of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you
could match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so
presumably both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage
above the radio chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was
connected). I think there were high impedance horn extension speakers
at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
On 29/09/2026 12:01, Max Demian wrote:[]
(Yes, I had - still have, somewhere - such headphones from when I wasI think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
On 29/09/2026 11:41, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:56:21rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119g205$34jdi$7@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 10:43, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 2:25:32rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote*shrug*. Not my fault if you are fooled by superficial staistics.
<119g06c$34jdi$4@dont-email.me>:
On 28/09/2026 20:26, Brock McNuggets wrote:
Evidence? I mean I hear right wingers say that about the US... and it is >>>>>> completely untrue.Norm,ally you just look at the rate of change of public debt and fdeficit.
I do not.
I am not. I care about how the people are doing... and likely will do in the >> future. I look mostly to evidence-based policies and equal rights.
ROFLMFAO
'evidence based policies' 'equal rights'
Tell me how a carrot has 'equal rights' to an asteroid
Or how borrowing -u52bn is 'evidence based policies'
Pork Barrel politics rules OK.
The most corrupt scam *ever *perpetrated - 'renewaable' energy - is
entirely a Libral invention.
Al Gores 'most convenient lie'
This is a feelings based view from you. Not one based on evidence. Man-made >> global climate change is real and should be dealt with -- based on evidence.
Its not 'feeling based'.
Show me *any* detectable reduction in *global* CO2 levels since
'renewable energy' became fashionable.
The data is here.
https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2_data_mlo.png
Renewable energy has had NO IMPACT WHATSOEVER on the rise in global CO2 levels
Renewable energy is called 'belief based policies'
*Evidence based* policies would immediately cease all deployment of
renewable energy and put it into nuclear power. If CO2 reduction is what
is required.
Because 'renewable energy' has TOTALLY FAILED TO REDUCE CO2 LEVELS ONE IOTA
*Irrespective* of whether man made CO2 is causing climate change or not,
the EVIDENCE shows that, overall, renewable energy has UTTERLY FAILED to reduce it.
What's true
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand.
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's true
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a >> record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says
decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand.
So renewables are not working and have not worked
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed
I rest my case.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's trueSo renewables are not working and have not worked
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a >>> record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says
decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand. >>
This does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed
This does not fit the evidence.
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations are not evidence.
On 2026/9/28 17:46:5, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 17:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
Forward! Into the Past!J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf >>>>
The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There
are no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a
tank. - Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
A power so great it can only be used for good or evil!
-- Firesign Theatre
It's so simple,
so very simple,
that only
a child
can do it!
(Tom Lehrer, "New Math".)
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket
of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could
match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably
both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio
chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
On 28/09/2026 22:25, J. P. Gilliver wrote:[]
It's so simple,
so very simple,
that only
a child
can do it!
(Tom Lehrer, "New Math".)
"Base eight is just like base ten really - if you're missing two fingers!"
A fellow Lehrer fan. I first heard his work when I was working in a chemistry lab in my year off before university, and my supervisor and I
got onto the subject of small, imprecise units of measurement: jots, smidgens and pinches.
And Tony sang "It just takes a smidgen / To poison a pigeon" and the
conversation lurched off sideways into the works of Tom Lehrer. He lent
me a tape he'd made of a couple of his TL LPs. And the rest is history.
I've yet to meet a Henry who spells his name "Hen3ry (the 3 is silent)"
but I did know a woman at university called Matilda who went one better
and signed her name "Ma~" (ma-tilde) which I'm sure TL would have
approved of.
On 29/09/2026 13:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You
cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation
transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
Can't you feed the loudspeaker via an electrolitic capacitor to stop the
DC?
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket
of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could >>>> match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably >>>> both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio >>>> chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's trueSo renewables are not working and have not worked
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a >>> record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says
decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand. >>
This does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed
This does not fit the evidence.
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations are not evidence.
(Basically - give up; he won't be told. I have - which doesn't mean I've given in, I've just tired of trying.)
On 2026/9/29 15:19:29, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's trueSo renewables are not working and have not worked
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a >>>> record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says >>>> decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand. >>>
He didn't read (or, if he did, didn't take in) what you said (basically, alternatives have _reduced the rise_).>
The cost of deploying wind and solar has skyrocketed as the amount of [enetration onto the grid has increased: Trying to manage a wildlyThis does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed
This does not fit the evidence.
Initially, like anything, they _did_ cost more - like anything new. The
cost of both solar and wind have been plummeting for some time now.
Britain frequently gets more than half it's electricity from non-fossil sources, and frequently is totally fossil-free - I think has had
fossil-free (certainly coal-free) _months_.
As for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% at
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
There are windier parts of Scotland where they have to look for uses for
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations
are not evidence.
all the extra wind energy they have, since the grid hasn't kept up with capacity so they can't pipe it to where it's needed - yet. And that's
just land-based wind; when offshore wind is taken into account, Britain
is steaming (!) ahead. The main problems with wind are it's in the wrong places (which is being addressed), and yes, it's not there all the time
- which is _not_ a reason not to use it when it is! (There's a man in
town giving away money. But he's not there every day, so I'm not going
to take _any_ of his money. Eh?) We need more batteries - both big ones
and distributed ones (e. g. cars).
It is simply an article of faith.
Not scientific data
The cost of deploying wind and solar has skyrocketed as the amount of [enetration onto the grid has increased: Trying to manage a wildly fluctuating input as well as a fluctuating output is horrendous, and has already caused a complete blackout in the Iberian peninsula. It doesn'tThis does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed >>>This does not fit the evidence.
Initially, like anything, they _did_ cost more - like anything new. The
cost of both solar and wind have been plummeting for some time now.
Britain frequently gets more than half it's electricity from non-fossil
sources, and frequently is totally fossil-free - I think has had
fossil-free (certainly coal-free) _months_.
matter what bullshit concocted figures you reference, People know that
CO2 has not been affected and that electricity prices have tripled,
while the cost of gas nuclear and coal have not
This was BEFORE Trumps latest little adventure.
As for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% at
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
There are windier parts of Scotland where they have to look for uses for
all the extra wind energy they have, since the grid hasn't kept up with
capacity so they can't pipe it to where it's needed - yet. And that's
just land-based wind; when offshore wind is taken into account, Britain
is steaming (!) ahead. The main problems with wind are it's in the wrong
places (which is being addressed), and yes, it's not there all the time
- which is _not_ a reason not to use it when it is! (There's a man in
town giving away money. But he's not there every day, so I'm not going
to take _any_ of his money. Eh?) We need more batteries - both big ones
and distributed ones (e. g. cars).
Exactly., It always meeds *more public money spending on it* whilst it
more and more fails to deliver on it.
Your reasoning is such faith based bullshit.
But it doesn't matter. Everyone with a brain knows that renewables are
not only dead, but beginning to smell.
Belief and bullshit based policies cannot stand in the face of evidence based ones
(Why do I keep bothering?)
On 2026/9/29 18:50:7, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[]
It is simply an article of faith.
Not scientific data
The cost of deploying wind and solar has skyrocketed as the amount ofThis does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed >>>>This does not fit the evidence.
Initially, like anything, they _did_ cost more - like anything new. The
cost of both solar and wind have been plummeting for some time now.
Britain frequently gets more than half it's electricity from non-fossil
sources, and frequently is totally fossil-free - I think has had
fossil-free (certainly coal-free) _months_.
[enetration onto the grid has increased: Trying to manage a wildly
fluctuating input as well as a fluctuating output is horrendous, and has
already caused a complete blackout in the Iberian peninsula. It doesn't
Yes, it's more _difficult_. That doesn't necessarily make it more _expensive_.
matter what bullshit concocted figures you reference, People know that
CO2 has not been affected and that electricity prices have tripled,
Ah, "people know" - so "an article of faith", eh? :-)
while the cost of gas nuclear and coal have notWell, gas a bit due to Putin's war.
This was BEFORE Trumps latest little adventure.
As for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% at
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
Rubbish. Most - more than half - of the current rise in the price of
Diesel has been since the middle east activities.
[]
There are windier parts of Scotland where they have to look for uses for >>> all the extra wind energy they have, since the grid hasn't kept up with
capacity so they can't pipe it to where it's needed - yet. And that's
just land-based wind; when offshore wind is taken into account, Britain
is steaming (!) ahead. The main problems with wind are it's in the wrong >>> places (which is being addressed), and yes, it's not there all the time
- which is _not_ a reason not to use it when it is! (There's a man in
town giving away money. But he's not there every day, so I'm not going
to take _any_ of his money. Eh?) We need more batteries - both big ones
and distributed ones (e. g. cars).
Exactly., It always meeds *more public money spending on it* whilst it
more and more fails to deliver on it.
This is a case of where you have to spend to save. (Which I know is
anathema to you.)
Your reasoning is such faith based bullshit.
But it doesn't matter. Everyone with a brain knows that renewables are
not only dead, but beginning to smell.
Oh, "Everyone ... knows" - faith again?
No, they can't!
Belief and bullshit based policies cannot stand in the face of evidence
based ones
Keeping the subject line relevant is a full-time job in this thread, let alone any chance of the body being on-topic (in now 5 'groups)!
On 2026/9/29 16:40:21, NY wrote:
A fellow Lehrer fan. I first heard his work when I was working in a
chemistry lab in my year off before university, and my supervisor and I
So not The Elements, then!
got onto the subject of small, imprecise units of measurement: jots,
smidgens and pinches.
And Tony sang "It just takes a smidgen / To poison a pigeon" and the
Have you come across the orchestrated version? IMO beautifully done (I
don't know by whom - probably himself): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsMLDzlAm_A .
Nice story about that which I _hope_ is true - the orchestral sheet
music parts had been handed out, but _without_ the title; little
mutterings from the orchestra of "what a charming little waltz" (which
it is) - then the producer tapped and said "OK - Poisoning Pigeons in
the Park, take one", to a general dropping of jaws.
conversation lurched off sideways into the works of Tom Lehrer. He lent
me a tape he'd made of a couple of his TL LPs. And the rest is history.
Did you know he'd _specifically_ made his works - including recordings - public domain? Nice man.
I've yet to meet a Henry who spells his name "Hen3ry (the 3 is silent)"
The delivery is excellent there: At first you're supposed to think it's Henrrry, until he adds that line.
but I did know a woman at university called Matilda who went one better
and signed her name "Ma~" (ma-tilde) which I'm sure TL would have
approved of.
Lovely!
Socialism in action, as opposed to theory.
"Lets clean up our industry that pollutes so much"
"But that will drive up costs"
"Well people will have to pay a little bit more"
"Or simply move the pollution to china and get it even cheaper"
There are windier parts of Scotland where they have to look for uses for
all the extra wind energy they have, since the grid hasn't kept up with capacity so they can't pipe it to where it's needed - yet. And that's
just land-based wind; when offshore wind is taken into account, Britain
is steaming (!) ahead. The main problems with wind are it's in the wrong places (which is being addressed), and yes, it's not there all the time
- which is _not_ a reason not to use it when it is! (There's a man in
town giving away money. But he's not there every day, so I'm not going
to take _any_ of his money. Eh?) We need more batteries - both big ones
and distributed ones (e. g. cars).
On 2026-09-29, J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
Keeping the subject line relevant is a full-time job in this thread, let
alone any chance of the body being on-topic (in now 5 'groups)!
On 2026/9/29 16:40:21, NY wrote:
A fellow Lehrer fan. I first heard his work when I was working in a
chemistry lab in my year off before university, and my supervisor and I
So not The Elements, then!
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:
These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd.
And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd.
I never heard him rhyme "orange". Too simple, probably.
got onto the subject of small, imprecise units of measurement: jots,
smidgens and pinches.
And Tony sang "It just takes a smidgen / To poison a pigeon" and the
Have you come across the orchestrated version? IMO beautifully done (I
don't know by whom - probably himself):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsMLDzlAm_A .
Nice story about that which I _hope_ is true - the orchestral sheet
music parts had been handed out, but _without_ the title; little
mutterings from the orchestra of "what a charming little waltz" (which
it is) - then the producer tapped and said "OK - Poisoning Pigeons in
the Park, take one", to a general dropping of jaws.
Wow. I didn't hear that version.
conversation lurched off sideways into the works of Tom Lehrer. He lent
me a tape he'd made of a couple of his TL LPs. And the rest is history.
Did you know he'd _specifically_ made his works - including recordings -
public domain? Nice man.
I have a book titled "Too Many Songs by Tom Lehrer with Not Enough
Drawings by Ronald Searle". It contains complete lyrics and piano
scores for all his greatest hits.
On 29/09/2026 15:19, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's trueSo renewables are not working and have not worked
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a >>>> record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says >>>> decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand. >>>
This does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed
This does not fit the evidence.
I see you have resorted to simple lying and denial
...Twas ever thus
Remember, *I* look to evidence Your emotions or proclamations are not evidence.
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations
are not evidence.
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:
These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd.
And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd.
On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 19:19, Charlie Gibbs wrote:And the split line-ends:
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:
-a-a-a-a These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd.
-a-a-a-a And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd.
"We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb"
Works perfectly in American.
Have you come across the orchestrated version? IMO beautifully done (I
don't know by whom - probably himself): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsMLDzlAm_A .
Nice story about that which I _hope_ is true - the orchestral sheet
music parts had been handed out, but _without_ the title; little
mutterings from the orchestra of "what a charming little waltz" (which
it is) - then the producer tapped and said "OK - Poisoning Pigeons in
the Park, take one", to a general dropping of jaws.
Did you know he'd _specifically_ made his works - including recordings - public domain? Nice man.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_energy_storage_system
Year MWh MW Hours Country
2027 19000 1000 19 UAE
Now, that's a battery EfOe
It has 5200 MWp of solar panels, 19000MWh battery, at
a cost of around 6.1 billion USD. 90 sqkm land required.
I've tried to find a breakdown, of how much the panels
cost of that total, to use as a scale factor for other
solar projects, but the info doesn't seem to be available.
The batteries are getting bigger.
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:47:24rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote <119gj1s$3cdrk$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 15:19, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's true
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a
record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says >>>>> decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand.
So renewables are not working and have not worked
This does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed >>>This does not fit the evidence.
I see you have resorted to simple lying and denial
...Twas ever thus
You offer no evidence.
Remember, *I* look to evidence Your emotions or proclamations are not
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations
are not evidence.
evidence.
You offer no evidence.
On 2026-09-29, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 29/09/2026 21:50, Andr|- Coutanche wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 19:19, Charlie Gibbs wrote:And the split line-ends:
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:"We'll try to stay serene and calm
-a-a-a-a These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd. >>>> -a-a-a-a And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd. >>>
When Alabama gets the bomb"
Works perfectly in American.
Getting ecstatic
And sorta dramatic
And doing the Vatic-
an Rag
My favourite split is:
And you may have thought it tragic,
Not to mention other adjec-
tives, to think of all the weeping they will do.
On 29/09/2026 21:01, Brock McNuggets wrote:[]
You offer no evidence.I did. You just hand waved reality away as 'opinions'
There is no hope for you. And no point in arguing with you.
You have drunk the Libral Koolaid and it has destoyed your brain.
Bye
Getting ecstatic[]
And sorta dramatic
And doing the Vatic-
an Rag
There the guy who's got religion'll
tell you if your sin's original
On 29/09/2026 21:50, Andr|- Coutanche wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 19:19, Charlie Gibbs wrote:And the split line-ends:
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:
-a-a-a-a These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd. >>> -a-a-a-a And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd.
"We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb"
Works perfectly in American.
Getting ecstatic
And sorta dramatic
And doing the Vatic-
an Rag
On 29/09/2026 21:01, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:47:24rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119gj1s$3cdrk$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 15:19, Brock McNuggets wrote:
On Sep 29, 2026 at 7:04:37rC>AM MST, "The Natural Philosopher" wrote
<119gghl$3bbn1$1@dont-email.me>:
On 29/09/2026 14:39, Brock McNuggets wrote:
What's true
* Global CO2 is still rising. Fossil CO2 emissions were projected to hit a
record high in 2025, up 1.1%, and emissions are about 10% higher than when the
Paris Agreement was adopted.
* Renewables haven't been enough so far. The Global Carbon Budget says >>>>>> decarbonisation isn't enough to offset the growth in global energy demand.
So renewables are not working and have not worked
This does not fit the evidence.
Despite trebling the price of energy everywhere they have been deployed >>>>This does not fit the evidence.
I see you have resorted to simple lying and denial
...Twas ever thus
You offer no evidence.
Remember, *I* look to evidence Your emotions or proclamations are not
I rest my case.
Your case is not based on evidence. Fair enough. Thanks for that.
Only a fool continues a failed policy expecting a different result.
But them fundamentally, that's what...
Remember, I look to evidence and equal rights. Your emotions or proclamations
are not evidence.
evidence.
You offer no evidence.
I did. You just hand waved reality away as 'opinions'
There is no hope for you. And no point in arguing with you.
You have drunk the Libral Koolaid and it has destoyed your brain.
Bye
On 2026-09-29, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 29/09/2026 21:50, Andr|- Coutanche wrote:
On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 19:19, Charlie Gibbs wrote:And the split line-ends:
Still, nobody could torture a rhyme like Tom Lehrer:"We'll try to stay serene and calm
-a-a-a-a These are the only ones of which the news has come to Hah-vahd. >>>> -a-a-a-a And there may be many others but they haven't been discah-vahd. >>>
When Alabama gets the bomb"
Works perfectly in American.
Getting ecstatic
And sorta dramatic
And doing the Vatic-
an Rag
My favourite split is:
And you may have thought it tragic,
Not to mention other adjec-
tives, to think of all the weeping they will do.
On 29/09/2026 12:01, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same
way that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker"
socket of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen.
I had one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so
you could match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output,
so presumably both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage
above the radio chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket
was connected). I think there were high impedance horn extension
speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't
require a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if
you don't want a loudspeaker.
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way
that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket
of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could >>>> match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably >>>> both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio >>>> chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
Rubbish. Most - more than half - of the current rise in the price ofAs for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% atThis was BEFORE Trumps latest little adventure.
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
Diesel has been since the middle east activities.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-28 16:46, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-27 21:09, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people >>>>>> recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you!
Don't it straight up if close, it can hurt your eyes :-P
Oops.
Don't look at it straight...
I have something much more powerful:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/1_1_2021_blue_laser_1.gif
the bending of the beam is from the camera optics.
You better wear safety glasses, do not point it at people or cars or planes!
https://panteltje.nl/pub/laser_propulsion_test_1_IXIMG_0856.JPG
It will easily set something on fire.
Right, but that's a laser, not something to take while hiking on the
hills. :-D
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all
sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road..
Not everyone is ready for them. For some reason, PEI in Canada
(an island on the East coast) installed a battery maybe a year
ago, and it recently had a fire. The batteries were modular,
so there was space around the module involved. But the only response
the fire department there had, was to keep dumping water on it
and adjacent modules, to cool it off. And when the smoke would
die down (and the citizens would assume it was out), the fire
would flare up again. It doesn't appear that firefighting has
advanced at all with this stuff. There was one proposal, to put out
the fires by adding liquid nitrogen to the box, but I haven't
heard of anyone actually deploying such a scheme.
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm
speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4, I don't understand the
drawings. :-?
On 30/09/2026 10:27, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The EZZ80 and BCA4 valves are full wave rectifiers in the power supply. (Equivalent to two diodes in each valve, with a tapped transformer secondary. Back when semiconductors were expensive, I've done similarYes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm
speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4, I don't understand the
drawings. :-?
with a pair of germanium diodes, as it was cheaper than a bridge
rectifier.)i
The relevant stage for this thread is the output stage, which is two
EL504 pentodes being driven in a sort of push-pull configuration by the
input triode. The EL504s each have an independent DC supply.
The circuit specifies an 800 ohm load, but I first expected to see a
more standard 600 ohm load...
On 2026-09-29 14:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 29/09/2026 12:01, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same
way that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker"
socket of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the
kitchen. I had one which had a transformer and a wander plug
arrangement so you could match it. Some valve radios had a high
impedance output, so presumably both connections would be at (more
or less) HT voltage above the radio chassis (which would be earth
if the earth socket was connected). I think there were high
impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because
there are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't
require a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if
you don't want a loudspeaker.
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You
cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation
transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
That's true also for transistors, and we don't normally use
transformers. We use capacitors.
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way >>>>> that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket >>>>> of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could >>>>> match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably >>>>> both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio >>>>> chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm
speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4, I don't understand the
drawings. :-?
the EL504s use the bottom one being driven to conduct more which pulls
the cathode voltage of the other down, making it a class A output stage.
On 2026-09-29 20:05, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Rubbish. Most - more than half - of the current rise in the price ofAs for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% atThis was BEFORE Trumps latest little adventure.
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
Diesel has been since the middle east activities.
Russia was an exporter of diesel, and now they can't because Ukraine is halting Russian refineries. That also has an effect in the countries
that still bought diesel from them despite the sanctions.
I saw in the media the other day a design for electric cars, that would eject (with rockets or explosives) the battery pack in case of fire EfOe
On 2026-09-29 14:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 29/09/2026 12:01, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't want a loudspeaker.
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
That's true also for transistors, and we don't normally use transformers. We use capacitors.
Did you know he'd _specifically_ made his works - including recordings - public domain? Nice man.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[About Tom Lehrer:]
Did you know he'd _specifically_ made his works - including recordings -
public domain? Nice man.
Not that it matters, but according to international law (the Bern Convention), you can't actually do that (declare your work to be public domain). Whatever you do, you still have (misnomer:) copyright, or
better, author's rights. But you *can* declare your works to be freely copyable, modifyable, <whatever>, which effectively amounts to - but is
not - the same as 'public domain'. (In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction, even that doesn't 'help'.)
As an example, I have the 'copyright'/authors rights to this post, but
of course I implicitly give permission to copy it, but I do *not* lose
my author's right to be properly attributed when quoted, i.e. quoting
without attribution is not permitted (and yes, we have threathened with
legal action against a person who intentionally violated that author's
right over and over).
[...]
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-28 16:46, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-27 21:09, Frank Slootweg wrote:Don't it straight up if close, it can hurt your eyes :-P
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2026-09-26 14:38, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Even have a flashlight that can blink SOS.
Me too, but I don't remember which of several it is. Now, will people >>>>>>> recognize the signal and rescue me?
If it's a real strong flashlight, *I* will come and rescue you! >>>>>
Oops.
Don't look at it straight...
I have something much more powerful:
https://panteltje.nl/pub/1_1_2021_blue_laser_1.gif
the bending of the beam is from the camera optics.
You better wear safety glasses, do not point it at people or cars or planes!
https://panteltje.nl/pub/laser_propulsion_test_1_IXIMG_0856.JPG
It will easily set something on fire.
Right, but that's a laser, not something to take while hiking on the
hills. :-D
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all
sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the >> windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road..
At night, or day? That's interesting.
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ESEfc-Efc+, EUEfc-Efc|;
On 30/09/2026 11:19, John Williamson wrote:
the EL504s use the bottom one being driven to conduct more which pulls
the cathode voltage of the other down, making it a class A output stage.
Yes, the use of the top one is something I hadn't seen before, but it certainly works.
Lot of heat for not much power, and You would get more out of e.g. a
single EL34 with a transformer.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way >>>>> that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket >>>>> of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had
one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could >>>>> match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably >>>>> both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio >>>>> chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I
think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there
are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require
a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ESEfc-Efc+, EUEfc-Efc|;
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-29 14:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 29/09/2026 12:01, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time.
Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't want a loudspeaker.
Its NOT juts a matter of impedance - its a matter of DC bias. You cannot build a
valve amplifier that delivers true AC without an isolation transformer. Loudspeakers don't like DC bias
That's true also for transistors, and we don't normally use transformers. We use capacitors.
Example of a bridged amplifier for direct drive of a speaker.
This typically puts around 3mV of DC across the speaker cone.
I have one of these on the Test Machine, driving old bookshelf speakers.
https://www.circuitbasics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/TDA2003-Bridged-Amplifier-Schematic.png
The single ended version (driving speaker with respect to ground),
uses a 1000uF capacitor to block the DC.
https://www.circuitbasics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/TDA2003-Stereo-Amplifier-Schematic.png
The voltage you can run that at, is +18V, as it's an automotive amplifier
and expects to be run off a car battery. And 18V is about as much as you
can expect (exclusive of load-dumps).
Paul--
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
On 30/09/2026 11:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 11:19, John Williamson wrote:Assuming the transformer could handle the bandwidth. The output from the circuit given would be flatter and less distorted, even across the audio bandwidth, assuming a resistive load.
the EL504s use the bottom one being driven to conduct more which pulls
the cathode voltage of the other down, making it a class A output stage.
Yes, the use of the top one is something I hadn't seen before, but it
certainly works.
Lot of heat for not much power, and You would get more out of e.g. a
single EL34 with a transformer.
As the designer saw fit to use smoothed DC for the heater of the input valve, avoiding noise and hum were obviously a priority.
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
On 30/09/2026 14:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
I've always wondered why copyright is deemed to expire some period (eg
70 years) after the *death* of the author, rather than dating from the creation/publication of the work when copyright (and now, author's
rights) is first asserted. It means that works created when the author
was young earn far more royalties and are protected for a lot longer
than those created near the end of his life.
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed,
dunno.
Russia was an exporter of diesel, and now they can't because Ukraine is halting Russian refineries. That also has an effect in the countries that still bought diesel from them despite the sanctions.
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
On 30/09/2026 10:48, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-29 20:05, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
Rubbish. Most - more than half - of the current rise in the price ofAs for raising costs (I won't claim tripling, but looks like 50% atThis was BEFORE Trumps latest little adventure.
least, probably heading towards 100% for diesel), starting wars in
certain areas hasn't helped ...
Diesel has been since the middle east activities.
Russia was an exporter of diesel, and now they can't because Ukraine
is halting Russian refineries. That also has an effect in the
countries that still bought diesel from them despite the sanctions.
Russia has been importing diesel to keep its war machine going for a
long time
The rise in diesel in the last 2 months is 100% a Trump/Iran war issue. because the embargo on Russian fuel and the price cap meant that What
did come out of Russia was too cheap to be profitable
And I know to the day when Diesel and kerosene prices started to rise, because my house heating is kerosene and my car runs Diesel
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
On 30/09/2026 10:27, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
The EZZ80 and BCA4 valves are full wave rectifiers in the power supply. (Equivalent to two diodes in each-a valve, with a tapped transformer secondary. Back when semiconductors were expensive, I've done similarYes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm
speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/
H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4, I don't understand the
drawings. :-?
with a pair of germanium diodes, as it was cheaper than a bridge rectifier.)i
The relevant stage for this thread is the output stage, which is two
EL504 pentodes being driven in a sort of push-pull configuration by the input triode. The EL504s each have an independent DC supply.
The circuit specifies an 800 ohm load, but I first expected to see a
more standard 600 ohm load...
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 17:54, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com>wrote:
On 28/09/2026 16:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 28/09/2026 14:03, Max Demian wrote:
Yes, I suppose there could be a matching transformer, in the same way >>>>>> that there were boxes you connected to the "extension speaker" socket >>>>>> of the main (valve) radio so you could listen in the kitchen. I had >>>>>> one which had a transformer and a wander plug arrangement so you could >>>>>> match it. Some valve radios had a high impedance output, so presumably >>>>>> both connections would be at (more or less) HT voltage above the radio >>>>>> chassis (which would be earth if the earth socket was connected). I >>>>>> think there were high impedance horn extension speakers at one time. >>>>Valve amps ALWAYS have an output transformer. Not least because there >>>>> are no 'P channel ' valves.
I think there were high impedance horn speakers, which wouldn't require >>>> a transformer. And, of course, high impedance headphones if you don't
want a loudspeaker.
Yes some tube TVs had 800 Ohm speakers without transformers.
Example of a tube output stage without transformer to drive a 800 Ohm speaker:
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GaJkZ9klfLw/VOecHjVgPuI/AAAAAAAAA4g/H2qcMWJ3tuA/s1600/Schema.png
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both those tube you mention have 2 anodes and one cathode,
each are used as 2 diodes to make 347 V from two opposite phase transformer outputs, to give a power line with less ripple (100 Hz versus a 50 Hz ripple or 120 Hz versus 60 Hz in 'merryca, as in case of one diode,
that way needing less supply filtering, allows smaller filter capacitors to be
used,
anode1
0----->|----
|--0 -cathode
0----->|----
anode2
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
It is a schematic diagram shows how the 'tubes' are connected.
You need some electronics expericne to understand thsoe circuit.
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all
sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the >>> windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road..
At night, or day? That's interesting.
Daytime
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno.
I feed the birds here every day, mostly crows..
I put some food outside, they like potato chips and nuts :-)
Fruit they have enough, plenty of grapes in the garden here and apples on the trees in front of the house.
They sit and wait for me every morning :-)
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
"National Brotherhood Week" is also a classic:
It's fun to eulogize/
The people you despise/
As long as you don't let them in your schools...
It's only for a week, so have no fear/
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
Any mains powered amplifier hums a bit. And even ones that are not.
mains hum fields are all pervasive
The best one I have has an SMPS power supply feeding a class D
amplifier. Feels way too light for the power
On 30/09/2026 14:47, NY wrote:No (for long-dead composers, anyway - there are composers well into the
On 30/09/2026 14:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
I've always wondered why copyright is deemed to expire some period (eg
70 years) after the *death* of the author, rather than dating from the
creation/publication of the work when copyright (and now, author's
rights) is first asserted. It means that works created when the author
was young earn far more royalties and are protected for a lot longer
than those created near the end of his life.
The official reason is to provide an income for any surviving family members.
On 2026/9/30 23:35:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The source (of the power) may not go very high, but all sorts of
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
transients get onto an automotive supply - I think it would be unwise
not to design such equipment to _withstand_ 50-100 volts on the supply
line, even if it only expects to _work_ on say 12-15. (fairly simple protection - chokes and capacitors, possibly followed by beefy zeners - should be sufficient.)
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both those tube you mention have 2 anodes and one cathode,
each are used as 2 diodes to make 347 V from two opposite phase transformer >> outputs, to give a power line with less ripple (100 Hz versus a 50 Hz ripple >> or 120 Hz versus 60 Hz in 'merryca, as in case of one diode,
that way needing less supply filtering, allows smaller filter capacitors to be
used,
anode1
0----->|----
|--0 -cathode
0----->|----
anode2
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
It is a schematic diagram shows how the 'tubes' are connected.
You need some electronics expericne to understand thsoe circuit.
I am an electronics engineer :-)
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-30 14:50, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all >>>> sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the >>>> windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road.. >>>>
At night, or day? That's interesting.
Daytime
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno. >>I feed the birds here every day, mostly crows..
I put some food outside, they like potato chips and nuts :-)
Fruit they have enough, plenty of grapes in the garden here and apples on the
trees in front of the house.
They sit and wait for me every morning :-)
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
It is prohibited here to feed doves, I forgot to mention.
rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 12:50:47 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
My bane is the black billed magpie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-billed_magpie
They're pretty bird but very noisy. I have an automatic kibble feeder for >the cats and the have the schedule down pat. They arrive early and argue >among themselves outside my bedroom window. The cats ignore them and vice >versa.
They're not migratory but with the shorter days one or two may show up but >not the flock.
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>wrote:
On 2026/9/30 14:34:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:[]
Any mains powered amplifier hums a bit. And even ones that are not.Yes, I have one of those - came with an external supply, similar to
mains hum fields are all pervasive
The best one I have has an SMPS power supply feeding a class D
amplifier. Feels way too light for the power
(probably identical to) the sort that comes with laptops (or did a few
years ago: modern laptop ones are tiny). Yes, far too small and light
for the power - because with modern transistors, class D dissipates
hardly any (waste, heating) power in the output transistors, so needs
hardly any heatsinking, which is much of the weight in a transistor >amplifier. I think mine is rated something like 50W (might be per
channel!), and is about fag-packet size - really just big enough to
support the connectors and volume knob.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both those tube you mention have 2 anodes and one cathode,
each are used as 2 diodes to make 347 V from two opposite phase transformer >>> outputs, to give a power line with less ripple (100 Hz versus a 50 Hz ripple
or 120 Hz versus 60 Hz in 'merryca, as in case of one diode,
that way needing less supply filtering, allows smaller filter capacitors to be
used,
anode1
0----->|----
|--0 -cathode
0----->|----
anode2
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
It is a schematic diagram shows how the 'tubes' are connected.
You need some electronics expericne to understand thsoe circuit.
I am an electronics engineer :-)
Practical experience with tubes?
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
In the drawing?
Maybe just a drawing error / constraint.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both anodes look the same size to me!
IIRC I have used that tube in the long ago past.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both those tube you mention have 2 anodes and one cathode,
each are used as 2 diodes to make 347 V from two opposite phase transformer >>> outputs, to give a power line with less ripple (100 Hz versus a 50 Hz ripple
or 120 Hz versus 60 Hz in 'merryca, as in case of one diode,
that way needing less supply filtering, allows smaller filter capacitors to be
used,
anode1
0----->|----
|--0 -cathode
0----->|----
anode2
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
It is a schematic diagram shows how the 'tubes' are connected.
You need some electronics expericne to understand thsoe circuit.
I am an electronics engineer :-)
Practical experience with tubes?
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
In the drawing?
Maybe just a drawing error / constraint.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both anodes look the same size to me!
IIRC I have used that tube in the long ago past.
"National Brotherhood Week" is also a classic:
It's fun to eulogize/
The people you despise/
As long as you don't let them in your schools...
It's only for a week, so have no fear/
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!
On 2026/9/30 14:58:33, John Williamson wrote:Precisely. You'd think that the fairest approach would be for every work
The official reason is to provide an income for any surviving familyBut surely they've benefited from the earlier works already, and/or
members.
could benefit from the later ones; I agree with NY, it seems illogical
to go from the death rather than the creation.
On 30/09/2026 14:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
I've always wondered why copyright is deemed to expire some period (eg
70 years) after the *death* of the author, rather than dating from the creation/publication of the work when copyright (and now, author's
rights) is first asserted. It means that works created when the author
was young earn far more royalties and are protected for a lot longer
than those created near the end of his life.
On 30/09/2026 14:47, NY wrote:Yes, the unexpired portion is inherited by heirs - spouse/children of an author.
On 30/09/2026 14:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 13:25, Frank Slootweg wrote:
In some juridictions you have to be
dead for 70 years or so, for your work to become public domain and in
other juridiction,
So no copyright on classical music anymore
I've always wondered why copyright is deemed to expire some period (eg
70 years) after the *death* of the author, rather than dating from the
creation/publication of the work when copyright (and now, author's
rights) is first asserted. It means that works created when the author
was young earn far more royalties and are protected for a lot longer
than those created near the end of his life.
I think copyright does extend to heirs.
One of THE funniest things of the past
few years is when Florida Gov DeSantis
sent several bus-loads of illegal immigrants
to snooty 'progressive' Martha's Vineyard
which constantly bragged about how much they
LOVED such people and embraced 'sanctuaries'.
Within 24 hours they managed to forcibly evict
ALL their beloved immigrants to some shit-hole
far far away :-)
On Wed, 30 Sep 2026, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Russia was an exporter of diesel, and now they can't because Ukraine
is halting Russian refineries. That also has an effect in the
countries that still bought diesel from them despite the sanctions.
I hope that this kind of escalation doesn't result in Russia razing Kyiv.
rbowman <bowman@montana.com>wrote:
On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 12:50:47 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
My bane is the black billed magpie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-billed_magpie
They're pretty bird but very noisy. I have an automatic kibble feeder for
the cats and the have the schedule down pat. They arrive early and argue
among themselves outside my bedroom window. The cats ignore them and vice
versa.
They're not migratory but with the shorter days one or two may show up but >> not the flock.
Yes we have those here too, clled 'eksters' in Dutch.,
IF the crows allow them then they also get hold of the food.
There are only one or two here, but a whole lot of crows.
I guess fighting NAZIs caused prices to go up
-a and supplies to go down - ergo we should not
-a have fought the Axis, right ???
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
On 2026/9/30 23:35:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The source (of the power) may not go very high, but all sorts of
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
transients get onto an automotive supply - I think it would be unwise
not to design such equipment to _withstand_ 50-100 volts on the supply
line, even if it only expects to _work_ on say 12-15. (fairly simple protection - chokes and capacitors, possibly followed by beefy zeners - should be sufficient.)
I am an electronics engineer :-)
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
On 9/30/26 18:51, John Ames wrote:
"National Brotherhood Week" is also a classic:
It's fun to eulogize/
The people you despise/
As long as you don't let them in your schools...
It's only for a week, so have no fear/
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!
-a One of THE funniest things of the past
-a few years is when Florida Gov DeSantis
-a sent several bus-loads of illegal immigrants
-a to snooty 'progressive' Martha's Vineyard
-a which constantly bragged about how much they
-a LOVED such people and embraced 'sanctuaries'.
-a Within 24 hours they managed to forcibly evict
-a ALL their beloved immigrants to some shit-hole
-a far far away :-)
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-30 14:50, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all >>>>> sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the
windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road.. >>>>>
At night, or day? That's interesting.
Daytime
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno.
I feed the birds here every day, mostly crows..
I put some food outside, they like potato chips and nuts :-)
Fruit they have enough, plenty of grapes in the garden here and apples on the
trees in front of the house.
They sit and wait for me every morning :-)
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
It is prohibited here to feed doves, I forgot to mention.
Interesting!
Why?
On 2026/9/30 23:35:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The source (of the power) may not go very high, but all sorts of
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive-a is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
transients get onto an automotive supply - I think it would be unwise
not to design such equipment to _withstand_ 50-100 volts on the supply
line, even if it only expects to _work_ on say 12-15. (fairly simple protection - chokes and capacitors, possibly followed by beefy zeners - should be sufficient.)
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotive is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
I'm not familiar with valves EZ80 and 6CA4,
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both those tube you mention have 2 anodes and one cathode,
each are used as 2 diodes to make 347 V from two opposite phase transformer >>> outputs, to give a power line with less ripple (100 Hz versus a 50 Hz ripple
or 120 Hz versus 60 Hz in 'merryca, as in case of one diode,
that way needing less supply filtering, allows smaller filter capacitors to be
used,
anode1
0----->|----
|--0 -cathode
0----->|----
anode2
I don't understand the drawings. :-?
It is a schematic diagram shows how the 'tubes' are connected.
You need some electronics expericne to understand thsoe circuit.
I am an electronics engineer :-)
Practical experience with tubes?
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
In the drawing?
Maybe just a drawing error / constraint.
https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
Both anodes look the same size to me!
IIRC I have used that tube in the long ago past.
On 10/1/26 02:12, Jan Panteltje wrote:
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
In the drawing?
-a Maybe just a drawing error / constraint.
-a-a https://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_ez80.html
-a-a-a Both anodes look the same size to me!
IIRC I have used that tube in the long ago past.
-a "Drawings" are often NOT to scale.
On 30/09/2026 23:50, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I am an electronics engineer :-)Draughtsmen are not electronic engineers. There may have been distinctly 'different' anodes
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-30 14:50, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all >>>>> sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the
windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road.. >>>>>
At night, or day? That's interesting.
Daytime
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno.
I feed the birds here every day, mostly crows..
I put some food outside, they like potato chips and nuts :-)
Fruit they have enough, plenty of grapes in the garden here and apples on the
trees in front of the house.
They sit and wait for me every morning :-)
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
It is prohibited here to feed doves, I forgot to mention.
Interesting!
Why?
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-10-01 08:12, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-30 14:50, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
On 2026-09-29 11:00, Jan Panteltje wrote:
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>wrote:
Execpt when you expect encountering dangerous animals.
This laser I have, has small things you can screw on it to project all >>>>>> sorts of patterns.
I have used a 'star pattern' to chase away doves that were shitting on the
windows here.
Now they are shitting on windows a few houses further along the road.. >>>>>>
At night, or day? That's interesting.
Daytime
But doves here are attracted by a neighbour that feeds them. Or fed, dunno.
I feed the birds here every day, mostly crows..
I put some food outside, they like potato chips and nuts :-)
Fruit they have enough, plenty of grapes in the garden here and apples on the
trees in front of the house.
They sit and wait for me every morning :-)
But doves made a mess, made a lot of noise too.
It is prohibited here to feed doves, I forgot to mention.
Interesting!
Why?
Because they are considered a pest, I understand. Pigeons or doves, I
don't know, it is the same word in Spanish.
On 01/10/2026 02:36, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
On 2026/9/30 14:58:33, John Williamson wrote:
The official reason is to provide an income for any surviving familyBut surely they've benefited from the earlier works already, and/or
members.
could benefit from the later ones; I agree with NY, it seems illogical
to go from the death rather than the creation.
Precisely. You'd think that the fairest approach would be for every work
to be in copyright for the same length of time, during which time sales generate royalties, rather than works produced earlier in life to be in copyright for longer.
The other change I'd like to see to copyright laws is that they lapse if supplies of the work cease because it has gone out of print: ie they
exist to protect sales, and if there are no sales, there is no copyright
to protect and generate royalties from those sales. That is very
different from "moral right to be identified as author" which should
last forever. It would end the "dog-in-a-manger" situation where a book
goes out of print and the copyright holder does not want to make any
more copies, but no-one else is allowed to make copies of it to satisfy
any demand, even if those copies generate royalties to the copyright holder.
At least Crown Copyright on OS maps only lasts 50 years so National
Library of Scotland can publish and maps from 1976 or earlier, which is virtually "yesterday" to my brain ;-)
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 30/09/2026 23:50, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I am an electronics engineer :-)Draughtsmen are not electronic engineers. There may have been distinctly >'different' anodes
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
I've never come across a twin diode 'bottle'. I think mostly amps I
have seen use to distinct anodes and cathodes in the same bottle
Oh. My bad. No they are single cathode twin anode.
The GZ34 is the most common
https://frank.pocnet.net/sheets/030/g/GZ34.pdf
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>wrote:
On 30/09/2026 23:50, Carlos E. R. wrote:Draughtsmen are not electronic engineers. There may have been distinctly
I am an electronics engineer :-)
What I don't understand is why the two anodes have different sizes.
'different' anodes
I've never come across a twin diode 'bottle'. I think mostly amps I
have seen use to distinct anodes and cathodes in the same bottle
Oh. My bad. No they are single cathode twin anode.
The GZ34 is the most common
https://frank.pocnet.net/sheets/030/g/GZ34.pdf
Impressive!
How the world changed when the Si bridge rectifier came!
On 2026-09-30 15:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 30/09/2026 12:37, Paul wrote:
On Wed, 9/30/2026 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Automotivea is 13.8V rated and that/s it. The alternators wont go
higher. Which is why you use bridged amps
I have seen 15 volts.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 03:36:06 |
| Calls: | 1,194 |
| Files: | 1,353 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (1,590K bytes) |
| Messages: | 291,364 |
