Chip with simple program for Toy

[Bob Masta]

On 29 Oct 2005 21:08:38 -0700, gigabite1123@hotmail.com wrote:

Alright... any help would be GLADLY appreciated... I'm trying to figure
out how to decide what diodes and transistors to use in projects...
what factors do I need to look at to make these decisions. thanks

You can probably get by with a surprisingly small number of
different types that you can keep on hand for "general purpose"
applications. For example, 2N3904 and 2N3906 transistors
for small-signal applications, 1N914 signal diodes, 1N4001-1N4004
(last digit is for voltage range) small rectifiers. I expect others
on this list will have their own personal favorites, but these will
go a long way to getting you started. When you see a circuit
design that does something "exotic" (like RF or high power),
you can observe what devices are used for such purposes,
and just go out and get those exact parts until you have
enough experience to judge for yourself.


Best regards.


Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Home of DaqGen, the FREEWARE signal generator

 

[Bob Masta]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:53:25 GMT, "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:

All DOS applications ran under Windows 3.1 preemptively.

I hadn't heard of this before. Can you explain how it worked?
I had the impression that the DOS application took over and
Windows apps didn't get any time at all. If there were time
slices for Windows apps, do you recall how they did this?

Thanks!




Bob Masta
dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom

D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Home of DaqGen, the FREEWARE signal generator

 

[Dan Hollands]

Relays will never be able to protect against overvoltage

You need something called a tranzorb or TVS (transient voltage supprressor)

Dan

--
Dan Hollands
1120 S Creek Dr
Webster NY 14580
585-872-2606
QuickScore@USSailing.net
www.QuickScoreRace.com
"Captain Blammo" <eas6@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:MTQ8f.116093$Ph4.3556513@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...

I'm trying to put together a protective device for the hotshoe on my
digital
camera. All that triggering an external flash requires is connecting its
two
terminals together through the camera, but most digicams will fry if
exposed
to more than 6v fed down the line by the flash unit.

I'm thinking that one or two AA batteries and a relay connected to the
camera would be just fine to protect against overvoltage, but the relay
needs to operate as close to instantly as possible and be able to pass
voltages from, say, 3 to 1000v on the flash unit side with no ill effect.

I had a look in the digikey catalogue, and just ended up getting confused
by
the vast array of relays and mystery variables listed with them. Since
I'll
be staking the life of the irreplaceably expensive camera on this, I was
wondering if someone could do me a huge favour and recommend the
appropriate
part.

Thanks for any help!

CB

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"Bob Masta" <NoSpam@daqarta.com> wrote in message
news:4364cb40.3983536@news.itd.umich.edu...

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:53:25 GMT, "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:

All DOS applications ran under Windows 3.1 preemptively.

I hadn't heard of this before. Can you explain how it worked?
I had the impression that the DOS application took over and
Windows apps didn't get any time at all. If there were time
slices for Windows apps, do you recall how they did this?

It was basically a form of cooperative multitasking. When the DOS app
called INT21 functions or made BIOS calls, Windos could then regain
control of the machine. Hardly what I'd call preemptive multitasking.

It is my opinion that even XP doesn't qualify as a proper OS. Any OS
that allows an errant application to hang things up is not right.

 

[Terry Pinnell]

"kell" <kellrobinson@billburg.com> wrote:

erik

Andy´s ASCII-Circuit

www.tech-chat.de


And PyAscii www.fidalqo.net


I tried www.fidalqo.net and got an error. Is the site down?

Seems to be. This works:
http://www.fidalgo.net/~garyr/pyascii/?N=D

Does Andy have an English version of his web site?
Don't think so.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On 30 Oct 2005 07:52:04 -0800, "The_Truth" <gigabite1123@hotmail.com>
wrote:

John G wrote:
The quick answer is ... Electronics 101 starts at you nearest teaching
institution next year.

You have to understand a lot of electronics to pick the devices you need
so before that you will have to rely on circuits designed by people with
the required experience.

well, I plan on starting as of january... but electronics comes natural
to me...

How does electronics come "natural"?

Tom

I just don't understand how to judge what needs to be used...
I mean... I know there are different types of transistors... switching,
amplification... etc... I just don't understand the difference in
operation well enough to decide "what" to use.

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:45:17 +0000, Andy Baxter
<news4@earthsong.null.free-online.co.uk> wrote:

Terry Pinnell said:

Seems to be. This works:
http://www.fidalgo.net/~garyr/pyascii/?N=D

this works under linux also.

What happened to the other method proposed.coded by someone who
posts/posted in these sci.electronics groups? Does anyone remember any
details about this? Thanks.

Tom

 

[The_Truth]

because I've worked with electronics since I was 5... I have just
recently started trying to create circuits... ;-D

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 17:43:27 +0000, Terry Pinnell
<terrypinDELETE@THESEdial.pipex.com> wrote:

Tom MacIntyre <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:45:17 +0000, Andy Baxter
news4@earthsong.null.free-online.co.uk> wrote:

Terry Pinnell said:

Seems to be. This works:
http://www.fidalgo.net/~garyr/pyascii/?N=D

this works under linux also.

What happened to the other method proposed.coded by someone who
posts/posted in these sci.electronics groups? Does anyone remember any
details about this? Thanks.

Tom

Well, two methods have been suggested so far. Are you referring to a
third?

I haven't seen all posts, but there was a guy a few years back when I
first started who coded an application that created a substitution for
ASCII art. It was a bit controversial here due to its not crating
strictly text files, something like that.

Tom

 

Have not tried it but it looks fun. May be a bit beyond 'easy'. Worth
checking out though....

http://www.makezine.com/images/02/mousey.pdf

 

[Mxsmanic]

Anthony Fremont writes:

That's what they say, but.......

But it's true.

Right, you don't really have much choice but to use the machine as an
admin.

That's not the fault of the OS. There are some applications that will
run without special privileges.

You'd have to go to pretty good lengths to write code that would hang
Linux just because you ran it as root.

No more so than for XP.

Hanging the kernel is primarily
accomplished by device drivers, which are running in kernel space, so
all bets are really off there.

The same is true for XP.

My point is that hanging windows is allot easier.

Except that it's not.

On Linux it's fairly tricky just getting into position to
be able to start slapping the kernel around unless you're a device
driver of course.

If you're running a GUI, it's easy.

I'm not sure I really agree with that. It's probably a point of view
kinda thing. My background is in the mainframe world originally doing
online TP, so my definition of stability tends to be different from many
people.

I have the same background. XP is stable.

The same goes for security. Even Linux upsets me greatly at
times, especially MythTV and the ivtv driver. But that tends to be the
fault of the third party programmers and not the Linux kernel.

Linux and UNIX are quite insecure, compared to NT.

I can't fault the OS if hardware dies but, depending upon the particular
hardware, the driver might be graceful about it.

The driver is usually written by the hardware vendor. Many drivers
are very poorly written.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

 

[Mxsmanic]

Anthony Fremont writes:

That's why there is 4 ring levels supported in hardware. Too bad M$
doesn't utilize it properly, Linux wins hands down here and only uses 2
of the 4 levels.

NT-based versions of Windows are much more secure than Linux or UNIX.
You only need hardware support for two levels or privilege.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

 

[BillW50]

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:iM69f.33654$Bf7.13203@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:45:02 GMT

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:qF59f.482$p37.367@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:Yj29f.33575$Bf7.32821@tornado.texas.rr.com...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:41:44 GMT

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:v429f.441$p37.342@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...

"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:i3s4m1hrkf574e5p79inehev45bvon2uvt@4ax.com...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 20:42:43 +0200

mark349@lycos.com writes:

OS/2 is dead and gone, and although it was superior in design
to the old versions of Windows, it was not superior to NT.

Supposedly better in design, but OS/2 sucked in real life for
many of us! As only one OS/2 Win session had sound while the
others was soundless. And a good number of Windows applications
would routinely crashed under OS/2, but stable as a rock under
Windows 3.1. Then the OS/2 GUI was unstable for at least a
couple of years and crashed the whole system. Then the FixPaks
often caused more problems than they fixed. IBM programmers are
morons!

Am I the only guy that was working with this crap back then?

Nope!

IBM contracted with M$ to write OS/2 for them in like 1987.

It might have been in '86 actually. And MS had been working on
Windows since about '84. Although MS couldn't give the development
time it deserved because those MS programmers were mostly working on
OS/2. MS lost 3 years in Windows development because of OS/2.

I suppose that's one way to look at the time that M$ spent sucking
money from IBM and using it for their own gains.

IBM paid Microsoft by the K-line. Which means by the lines of code they
produced. IBM got the lines and MS got paid. Anytime MS didn't produce
code for OS/2, MS didn't get paid. So how could MS get paid for their
own gains by IBM? That's impossible.

M$ drug their feet on the release, while spending IBM's money, so
that they could get Win 3.0 out before OS/2, by saying that OS/2
just wasn't stable enough for release yet. Yeah, no conflict of
interest their.

IBM only paid MS for the lines of code MS produced. IBM didn't care
if MS spent more time to make the code lean, mean and faster. As
IBM would

I think IBM had visions of stability that M$ will never attain, ever.

pay you less if you did so. IBM was cutting their own throats. IBM
is full of a much of morons. Impossible to work with and to get
paid fairly for. Hell I would work slowly and drag my feet as well
for those morons.

Yeah, morons. They only own the mainframe market even though
Honeywell made better hardware. IBM's only moronic move was to
allow M$ to screw them for a second time. The first time being with
MSDOS/IBMDOS games.

Who screwed whom again? IBM only paid MS $80,000 for everything
(including DOS, Basic, etc.). And IBM paid no royalties to Microsoft no
matter how many copies IBM sold.

Finally IBM got fed up and took the project away from M$.

Yeah, IBM got fed up alright! As Microsoft didn't want to be a
slave to IBM (who always makes slaves or crushes anybody that gets
in their way

Too bad that isn't true since they would have done the world a great
favor by crushing M$.

Actually Bill Gates did the world a favor by saving all of us from IBM.
As nobody else was willing to do it. Including Gary Kildall.

up to this point in time). And IBM wanted MS to create OS/2 which
would be made to run on only true IBM PCs after they have the world
hooked on OS/2.

Yeah that is a great plan for us, NOT! Bill Gates had taken the
biggest risk in his career. As nobody ever bucked IBM and had
survived. Although he did it! And thank goodness he did! As we all
would be using real IBM machines and OS/2 by now.

Actually, if Gates wasn't so good at being greedy, we'd all be
using something that actually worked. OS/2 was crap too. Too bad
Xerox didn't have sense enough to stay in the game, they had the
best product for the office in 1980. Apple didn't have anything
that could come close for around 10 years. It took M$ almost
another 5 years on top of that to catch up.

Gates being greedy? Since IBM only paid Gates $80,000 for millions of
copies of DOS, Basic, Fortran, etc. So IBM *only* spent about a nickel
for all of the MS software per computer. So if anybody got ripped off,
it was Gates.

And since you mentioned Xerox, those foolish Xerox executives gave Steve
Jobs all of Xerox's GUI secrets for nothing! That is right, NOTHING!
Then Apple has the balls to turn around a sue Microsoft for stealing
Apple's GUI, when Apple had stolen it from Xerox in the first place.
Yup, Xerox could have had it all and they (bozos in management) didn't
even know it.

Sure IBM was ticked that Bill Gates wasn't going to play along. So
they parted ways. And IBM wouldn't sell any IBM computer with
Windows installed for a short time. Until IBM realized that they
couldn't sell IBM computers with either crappy PC-DOS or OS/2 on
them. As people wanted Windows instead, plain and simple.

The only reason being that M$ delayed OS/2 was so that Win 3.0
could get the jump on it. If OS/2 would have shipped on time, it
would have possibly eliminated windows.

Yes probably this is true. Although MS still would have gotten third
parties to write applications for Windows instead of OS/2. Which did
happen anyway. And IBM had the balls to threaten third parties to
write applications for OS/2, but wasn't willing to pay them to do so.
Well I wouldn't listen to big bully IBM either.

There are very many suspicious similarities in "bugs" within the
graphics system calls of Win 3.0 and OS/2.

The same MS programmers wrote both OS/2 and Windows 3.0. So why
should this be a surprise?

It's not a surprise to me. I think it just goes to show that M$ had
no qualms about directly lifting the code that they originally
wrote for IBM using IBM's money and, AFAICT, IBM's design goals.
I'm not saying that was illegal back then, but it certainly
wouldn't happen in today's IP obsessed world without bringing about
major court battles.

Here was a true visionary: http://www.cadigital.com/kildall.htm

Yes I know all about Gary Kildall! I was a big supporter of his until he
killed off CP/M without any warning! Then Gary had become a big creep to
me and other developers. Later I learned he often screwed his other
customers left and right as well. SCP was one company that he burned
badly. Luckily it burned him in his ass, now didn't it?

And talk about being greedy, Gary almost invented the word. As you had
to pay him big bucks to make him do anything. And it wouldn't be to your
liking, but his. And while Gary Kildall and Bill Gates were playing
around with DEC computers. I was working on the VTAS computer which got
the US to the moon. So as far as I was concern, both were playing around
with kids' stuff at the time.

Now having said the above, I do admit that Gary was nothing less than
one great programmer without a doubt. Although everything had to be done
his way, or forget it. And that is why Gary did well without any
competitors, but failed once someone else was in the OS game.

Funny IBM also does well without competition, but also fails once
competition arrives. And oddly enough, Microsoft only gets better when
there are competitors. Otherwise they basically just sit on their butt
doing nothing.

You obviously really like M$ so there probably isn't much point in
continuing this until it becomes a real pissing contest. I run windos
on some machines because I basically have to. When I need something
that really works, I use Linux.

I actually use Windows because it does work. Linux has way too many
lacks and wants to keep me happy. And did you know that Linus Torvalds
also uses Windows? Yup he said so right in his own book.

______________________________________________
Bill (using a Toshiba 2595XDVD & Windows 2000)
-- written and edited within Word 2000

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On 30 Oct 2005 09:35:18 -0800, "The_Truth" <gigabite1123@hotmail.com>
wrote:

because I've worked with electronics since I was 5... I have just
recently started trying to create circuits... ;-D

Well, I did, with my Dad for starters, and later on my own, since I
was a kid too, but when I studied for my EET there was nothing natural
about it - it was hard work.

Tom

 

[Rikard Bosnjakovic]

Andy Baxter wrote:

this works under linux also.

Works on any system that's got Python installed.


--
Sincerely, | http://bos.hack.org/cv/
Rikard Bosnjakovic | Code chef - will cook for food
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[BillW50]

"Jamie" <jamie_5_not_valid_after_5_Please@charter.net> wrote in message
news:bj69f.32661$E17.11599@fe03.lga...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:23:18 -0800

"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:N839f.452$p37.235@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:38:05 GMT

You have never mentioned cooperative tasking in anything you have
posted. Me thinks you really don't know about the different methods
of multitasking and the pros and cons of each.

Ha., i would be careful making statements like that.
i cut out most of the original poster since you
were trying very hard to out smart him (publicly).
there are a couple of things you made an error on
which i won't get into.

I reread what I had posted and I see no errors I've made. So feel free
to disprove me if you wish. And yes, I am indeed human and I do make
mistakes. Most of them are do from moody, irrational female types.
Otherwise I do fairly well most of the time. <grin>

______________________________________________
Bill (using a Toshiba 2595XDVD & Windows 2000)
-- written and edited within Word 2000

 

[BillW50]

"Jamie" <jamie_5_not_valid_after_5_Please@charter.net> wrote in message
news:e969f.32658$E17.20850@fe03.lga...
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:12:37 -0800

BillW50 wrote:

vanagonvw@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1130531700.900539.275640@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Date: 28 Oct 2005 13:35:00 -0700


Hardly dead,


You mean hardly useful! And IBM dropped support a few months before
they were saying they would never drop OS/2 support. IBM has never
done anything except lie to me over and over again.


and oh by the way, NT was built on early OS/2 code. NT and 2000 had
plenty of OS/2 code in their kernel, and can even run text mode
OS/2 apps. If you had seen the code...... you would know that.


I did a search through OS/2 files for the Microsoft copyright in
Warp a few years ago. And Warp was littered everywhere with
Microsoft's code throughout OS/2.

excuse me, if memory serves IBM had MS write the first OS which i
think was for the 286 and thought that it would be alive for a long
time. then when 386 hit they tried to get MS to rewrite it for them
and thus ms quoted such a high price just to get them to go away
thus leading the way for MS to where they are now. mean while IBM
then took over the development to carry it on with their own
programmers. that is the way i remember it.

Yes. Did you feel I would disagree with your memory?

______________________________________________
Bill (using a Toshiba 2595XDVD & Windows 2000)
-- written and edited within Word 2000

 

This is what I plan to build:
http://www.hotmp3gear.com/powerrunner.htm

I'd buy it, but I'm cheap..and yes the sad truth is that theft is a
great possiblity on long distance cycle trips. Back up those picks at
every cyber cafe you come to (there are thousands in Central South
America and South East Asia...people in those countries cant afford a
home pc so they go to cafes that charge 20 cents an hour) Cafes are
harder to find in the first world. Send the cds home via airmail.
This device is heavy. Lighter if you dont need the charger and can use
the generator to charge the Nimh battery pack. Just pack well. People
pack way too much junk they dont need on trips like this. Cut weight
in other places. You only need a few changes of clothes...you WILL
stink no matter how many undies you have.
Sorry if this has turned into a backpacker/Cycler forum.
Jay

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <dxb9f.36934$Bf7.35070@tornado.texas.rr.com> "Anthony
Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

Like I said, I'll have to see something backing that up. M$ got plenty
for each and every copy of MS-DOS they FORCED onto OEMs.

For each copy of MS-DOS, yes. They didn't get royalties for each copy
of IBM-DOS that IBM distributed.

Notice the different letters, "MS-DOS" and "IBM-DOS", that indicates
they're separate products, with separate licensing terms.

--
Sorry, she meant to say "stripped naked and thrown out an airlock",
I'm sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
-- John Sheridan, B5

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <qke9m1p0heo78scseqobps79je6u9fcfe1@4ax.com> Mxsmanic
<mxsmanic@gmail.com> wrote:

BillW50 writes:

Actually it was the other way around. As IBM black mailed into writing
OS/2. And IBM's master plan was to get everyone off of MS-DOS and on to
OS/2. Then IBM would have OS/2 changed to run on only true IBM PCs. Thus
killing off the clone market and MS as well. This was all documented and
shown on PBS.

IBM sounds a lot like Apple.

Of course we've all seen how this has worked for Apple... "Think
different (as long as it's how we tell you)"

--
Sorry, she meant to say "stripped naked and thrown out an airlock",
I'm sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
-- John Sheridan, B5