Driver to drive?

[Robert Redelmeier]

In alt.lang.asm krw <krw@att.zzzzzzzzz> wrote in part:

In article <2M6bl.57936$2w3.51866@newsfe19.iad>, no@spam.invalid wrote:
"Skybuck Flying" <BloodyShame@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8549$496cf778$d5337e4d$13995@cache2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl...
How come they did get Sadam Hoessein but not Osama Bin Laden ?

Humm... Did your handlers let you get on the Internet without
your maintenance dose of Chlorpromazine again? What a shame.

Yawn> Another typical .nl'er heard from.

Well, just a probability. Statistics is descriptive, not prescriptive.

FWIW, I've lived in and posted from .nl . In some ways,
the least straight-jacketted of the EU. In other ways, worse.

Like most people, they are unaware their political scale
and calibration is different from elsewhere. They're shocked
when I tell them `de Telegraaf` (their right-most newspaper)
would be a leftist rag in the US. Or that in the US, the NYT
is considered leftist. They think it is right-wing American!
Le Pen is closest to a conservative US Democrat.

Understanding and respect are difficult when you are outside
whatever range is customary and tolerable.


-- Robert

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 13:22:39 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:17:07 -0800 (PST), makolber@yahoo.com wrote:



For real microwave apps, there's Sonnet Lite and Puff, both free, ................snip

what is "puff"?

Mark

What is "google"?

John

I have a copy of "Puff" around here somewhere ;-)

Though I may have tossed it... IIRC it was on a 5-1/4" floppy :-(

Is it available for "modern" operating systems?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food

 

[Joerg]

qrk wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:30:30 -0800, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Hal Murray wrote:
gEDA is rather strange with the power pins in multi-part packages. Kicad
does that nicely but has a raggedy looking title block and coordinate
frame, both of which cannot be customized well and cannot be removed at
all by the user.
Can you dance around their klutzy frame and title block by ignoring
them and putting your own smaller frame inside their frame, and then
running some postscript postprocessing to crop down to what you want?

That's what I want to try next because it seems there is no interest in
the gEDA community to look at the power pin issue and none in the Kicad
community to look at the frame thing. I'd love to write corrected code
myself by I am not a programmer. Being a hardware guy it's tough to
figure out PS postprocessing, could use some more mainstream file format
and do a crop by hand. Won't be very precise though.

If I have my druthers I'll fire up the old OrCad SDT. It was perfect but
didn't do zoom, print and stuff too well in a DOS window. I'll have to
see if it's better in a virtual machine with a clean native DOS on
there. Printing will probably remain an issue.

I still use SDT386+ as my primary schematic tool. With macros and a
keyboard with the function keys on the left side of the keyboard, this
is a very efficient way of designing. SDT386+ and PCB386+ drivers have
been constantly upgraded over the past 12 years outside of Orcad.

The biggest improvement: you don't need a real DOS environment
anymore. SDT & PCB now run in a real window in W2k, XP, and supposedly
Vista. A team effort by two people created video drivers so SDT and
PCB make real Windows graphics calls. One guy wrote VESA drivers in
assembly and another guy recoded in C, then created the GDI drivers.

Wow, thanks, Mark. I did not know that new drivers had been written. My
version is SDT-III so I'll have to look around on the Yahoo group again,
maybe it can be resurrected. Now where are those disks ... oops, would
be 5-1/4" ... now where's that old 5-1/4" drive ...

This would be cool. Back then I thought OrCad SDT was the best thing
since pivot irrigation.

As for printing, all my schematics are printed out to PDF which makes
them searchable. My work colleague wrote a tricky batch file which
automatically resizes any size drawing to a paper space of your choice
using Ghostscript. I modified an Open Office font which creates text
that closely matches what you see on the screen. To print a schematic
file to PDF is one command line batch file.

If you like printing to laserjet printers, there are drivers available
to do that.

That would be an issue since not all printers are HP-LJ compatible
anymore. But if one can print to PDF that problem goes away. Yeehaw!

If you need a GIF drawing to paste the schematic in a document, there
are conversion tools available to do that or you can convert your PDF
to bit map.

OrCad always put out nice bitmaps. In fact I did fully integrated docs
in MS-Word as early as 1989. Back then it was HPGL though and AFAIK
MS-Word has lost the ability to import that.

Want to stack a bunch of pins on top of another? Composer has been
modified to allow that which is useful for FPGA parts with dozens of
power and ground pins. 27 ground pins only require one pin space on
the schematic.

All this can be found on
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/OldDosOrcad/ . There are a bit over
300 members. The files section has new drivers and exe files to
support modern methods. Plus, there are a few dozen people who
actively use SDT and PCB on a daily basis which provide good
information on use and setup of old DOS Orcad.

If your customer wants Capture formated files, Capture imports SDT
files, and does a good job at it if its version 7 or newer.

Yes, some clients would like Capture files.

SDT's back-end processing is so open that you can write your own
netlist formaters which we have done to support our PCB tools. The
intermediate ASCII netlist file that SDT spits out can be converted to
a netlist format of your liking.

OrCad has always been great with customizing. Then they were bought :-(

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[RB]

RangersSuck wrote:

On Jan 11, 9:17 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that Gunner Asch
gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote on Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:06:18 -0800
in rec.crafts.metalworking :

On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:31:06 -0500, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com
wrote:
bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
... snip ...
Right-wingers would be funny if they weren't allowed to vote.
Quick - pass a Constitutional Amendment to fix that.
Why not just use the standard Leftwing method of working around the
Constitution, and pay a Liberal Judge to make a ruling?
I wonder how they are going to keep Republicans or conservatives
from voting, what with same day registration and no photo ID at the
polling place?
The Democrats have institutionalized vote fraud.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

Sure they have. Like the instant background checks for gun buyers. But
that's OK, because the Republicans like it. Right?

It's certainly a lot more stringent that, say, the documentation that
one is a legal Ohio voter.
How would you like if one could buy a handgun by answering a couple
questions?
"Is john Smith your real name?"
"Have you ever been convicted of a felony?
"Are you crazy? On drugs?"
"Here's your gun"

 

[Charles]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:0atnm4h4j6e145qkbknollpq062uahm5ob@4ax.com...

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:16:09 -0500, "Charles"
charlesschuler@comcast.net> wrote:

You're not listening. I said that charity is admirable, and I meant
both public and private charity. I personally spend about $30K a year
on various charities, like Doctors Without Borders and girls' schools
in Africa and Hep C research and homeless programs and schools in New
Orleans.

I do indeed apologize. It is just great that you contribute. I do too, but
my numbers are rather humble compared to yours.

But I believe that, longterm, the world must create wealth
and create jobs if it's to make everyone better off. You can't consume
more than you produce, now matter how you redistribute it.

Agrred!

Punishing people for being productive helps nobody.

Well, taxation is not exactly punishment, but it can be viewed as such. The
sliding scale of income tax is a prime example. Why should the upper
brackets pay so much? Because they can afford it is an offensive answer.
Because our economic system has rewarded them is a slightly better answer.
The best answer deals with moving wealth around in a stimulating way. I
know, our Gov. really screws this up.

In a few more years, that $30K a year will be a million dollars I
don't have. Money well spent, I hope.

Prudent investments in humans is always well spent.

What are you personally doing to help the less fortunate? Aside from
whining about people you imagine to be rich?

Gee, I did not even know that you were rich. I am happy that you are rich.
Or comfortable. I am comfortable and share what I can with those who are
less comfortable. But, I hate fund raisers!

 

[RangersSuck]

On Jan 11, 9:17 pm, pyotr filipivich <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that Gunner Asch
gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote on Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:06:18 -0800
in rec.crafts.metalworking :

On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:31:06 -0500, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com
wrote:

bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:

... snip ...

Right-wingers would be funny if they weren't allowed to vote.

Quick - pass a Constitutional Amendment to fix that.  

Why not just use the standard Leftwing method of working around the
Constitution, and pay a Liberal Judge to make a ruling?

        I wonder how they are going to keep Republicans or conservatives
from voting, what with same day registration and no photo ID at the
polling place?
        The Democrats have institutionalized vote fraud.

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

Sure they have. Like the instant background checks for gun buyers. But
that's OK, because the Republicans like it. Right?

 

[RangersSuck]

On Jan 11, 2:06 pm, Gunner Asch <gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:

Why not just use the standard Leftwing method of working around the
Constitution, and pay a Liberal Judge to make a ruling?

Gunner

Right. Like the judges who put that asshole Bush into office in the
first place.

 

On 13 jan, 10:11, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:
It would be nice if things were otherwise, but putting your faith in
an article that was published in "Energy and Environment" is over-
optimistic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_and_Environment

Shoot the messenger again eh ? We can't have your religion denied..

It's more a question of not putting too much faith in a messenger that
doesn't look all that trustworthy.

The journal is not listed in the ISI's Journal Citation Reports
indexing service for academic journals.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

On 13 jan, 17:11, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:42:35 -0500, "Charles"

charlesschu...@comcast.net> wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:7j9nm4dqmj0lre4b4ndb6ke3hpu8vk6459@4ax.com...
On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:54:07 +0000, Raveninghorde
raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:

So it's reasonably probable that there is no longterm CO2 increase, no
global warming, no positive correlation between CO2 and temperature,
and no sea level rise, and that carbon taxes are just more taxes.

Just as it's reasonably probable to assume that the U.S. economy will
recover quickly, on its own.

Yes, that is also reasonably probable.

John doesn't spell out the reasoning that lead him to conclude that
any of these propositions were "reasonably" probable, and a sceptical
observer might imagine that his assessments had
more to do with what he'd like to be true than any extended
ratiocination.

His enthusiastic acceptance of a rather dubious paper, reprinted from
a dubious publication

http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=585&...

doesn't inspire any great confidence.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

[Howard Swain]

<a7yvm109gf5d1@netzero.com> wrote in message news:a800b769-1dec-440c-9e30-c3a61975148b@x8g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 13, 4:14 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Rip up a trace (heat it with a soldering iron and peel) and look at
the underside.

Since there isn't much I can do about it, I've elected to email Rogers
and ask their opinion.

2) The formulas often used for impedance are empirical approximations
and never give attenuation/inch,

TXLINE does, but I don't know that I believe the numbers. And it's
still loss at frequency, which is not risetime.

I'll look into it. You always have the right free tool it seems.

John's number of 12 dB/m at 3 GHz seems awfully high to me.
Could it be for FR-4, which as a loss tangent of about 0.015?
I'm assuming your material is similar to Rogers 4350B, which
has a dielectric constant of 3.5 and a loss tangent of only 0.003

4) Stackup (thicknesses) can't change since it would be a major re-
spin, so I'm trying to see if re-arranging ground planes will allow
wider traces and not screw up the rest of the design

That's the thing to do. Possibly slot out the plane on layer 2...
barely possible.

Yes that's what I'm looking at but it interferes with the transition
from the inner (short) microstrip.
So I'll have to look at the tradeoffs here.

I was going to ask you what your transition was between coax and
your microstrip. But now it seems you have another transistion
on the board?
I suspect all these transistions. Can you look at the whole path
with a fast (30 ps or 50ps) TDR?
I've been surprised at how it doesn't seem to take much of a
glitch in impedance to slow down the risetime.

Are you sure the lab's risetime measurement is accurate? I'm guessing
your 150 ps with that skinny trace is real, but you never know. How
are they doing it?

Don't know. The engineer is overworked so I stepped into the lab this
afternoon and will test myself.
It's chaos, there's only one 13GHz infiniium and only one 12GHz probe,
all the other stuff is 6GHz stuff.


Oh, why does the risetime matter? Does it have to be 50 ohms?

It's the spec and yes, it's the spec too.

--
Regards,
Howard
hswain@ix.netcom.com

 

[Raveninghorde]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:50:28 -0800 (PST), bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:

On 13 jan, 10:08, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Bill Slomanwrote:
You've no idea how dodgy the 19th century CO2 measurments were

The articles I've read say the exact opposite. It's not a difficult measurement. Now
didn't the 19th century produce most Physics and Chemistry too ? How on earth could
they have done that if they could even measure CO2 ?

They could measure it, but there are practical limits to the size of
the sealed container you can use to isolate your sample of air and
slosh it around with lime water.

As a graduate student I hooked up a 12 litre spherical flask to my
vacuum line to hold my stock of nitric oxide. It was the biggest flask
the department held in store, because it was about as big as you could
grasp securely.

It holds about half a gram molecule of air at atmospheric pressure an
room temperature (a gram mole occupies 22.4 litres at STP). In the
19th century - when the CO2 content of the air was around 300ppm -
that would have contained about 7 milligrams of CO2.

If you'd precipitated all of it as CaCO3 or BaCO3 (better) you'd get
to produce about 16 milligrams of calcium carbonate or 32 milligrams
of barium carbonate. You'd then have to get it all out of the flask
and into your filter paper, without exposing the lime water (or baryta
water) to any more carbon dioxide. You then have to calcine your
filter paper to get rid of it, which would also get rid of the CO2,
leaving you some 9 milligrams of calcium oxide to weigh, or some 25
milligrams of barium oxide.

It's a tedious procedure, so you won't do it often, and an analytical
balance is only sensitive to about a tenth of a milligram, so it isn't
all that precise, even if your technique is perfect.

If you looked at this link given by Don:

http://www.biomind.de/nogreenhouse/daten/EE%2018-2_Beck.pdf

It shows the measurment techniques and notes the number of times
various scientist did them. For example Schultze 1600 measurement in 3
years, 1868-1871.

Even Keeling accepts the quality of some of the results taken in the
1870s. I note these are the ones that agree with his 280ppmv base
line. Me cynical?

 

On Jan 13, 4:14 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Rip up a trace (heat it with a soldering iron and peel) and look at
the underside.

Since there isn't much I can do about it, I've elected to email Rogers
and ask their opinion.

2) The formulas often used for impedance are empirical approximations
and never give attenuation/inch,

TXLINE does, but I don't know that I believe the numbers. And it's
still loss at frequency, which is not risetime.

I'll look into it. You always have the right free tool it seems.

4) Stackup (thicknesses) can't change since it would be a major re-
spin, so I'm trying to see if re-arranging ground planes will allow
wider traces and not screw up the rest of the design

That's the thing to do. Possibly slot out the plane on layer 2...
barely possible.

Yes that's what I'm looking at but it interferes with the transition
from the inner (short) microstrip.
So I'll have to look at the tradeoffs here.

Are you sure the lab's risetime measurement is accurate? I'm guessing
your 150 ps with that skinny trace is real, but you never know. How
are they doing it?

Don't know. The engineer is overworked so I stepped into the lab this
afternoon and will test myself.
It's chaos, there's only one 13GHz infiniium and only one 12GHz probe,
all the other stuff is 6GHz stuff.

Oh, why does the risetime matter? Does it have to be 50 ohms?

It's the spec and yes, it's the spec too.

 

[Joel Koltner]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:m55om45tfua1772qb4pr285nh5v5hrv65q@4ax.com...

If I were hiring a tech, I might prefer the DeVry, because a
university engineer might decide he's underemployed and move on at the
first opportunity.

You just need to insure that his most attractive opportunity -- assuming he's
good -- is going to be within your company as an engineer...

 

On 13 jan, 10:08, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Bill Slomanwrote:
You've no idea how dodgy the 19th century CO2 measurments were

The articles I've read say the exact opposite. It's not a difficult measurement. Now
didn't the 19th century produce most Physics and Chemistry too ? How on earth could
they have done that if they could even measure CO2 ?

They could measure it, but there are practical limits to the size of
the sealed container you can use to isolate your sample of air and
slosh it around with lime water.

As a graduate student I hooked up a 12 litre spherical flask to my
vacuum line to hold my stock of nitric oxide. It was the biggest flask
the department held in store, because it was about as big as you could
grasp securely.

It holds about half a gram molecule of air at atmospheric pressure an
room temperature (a gram mole occupies 22.4 litres at STP). In the
19th century - when the CO2 content of the air was around 300ppm -
that would have contained about 7 milligrams of CO2.

If you'd precipitated all of it as CaCO3 or BaCO3 (better) you'd get
to produce about 16 milligrams of calcium carbonate or 32 milligrams
of barium carbonate. You'd then have to get it all out of the flask
and into your filter paper, without exposing the lime water (or baryta
water) to any more carbon dioxide. You then have to calcine your
filter paper to get rid of it, which would also get rid of the CO2,
leaving you some 9 milligrams of calcium oxide to weigh, or some 25
milligrams of barium oxide.

It's a tedious procedure, so you won't do it often, and an analytical
balance is only sensitive to about a tenth of a milligram, so it isn't
all that precise, even if your technique is perfect.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

[Jamie]

Eeyore wrote:

bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:


On 11 jan, 19:05, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com
wrote:

bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote:

bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:

Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:

As posted previously feedback or not discussed here:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/research-articles/satellite-and-climate-m...

Other than Bill most people will accept this guy as credible. Check
his profile on his website.

The editor and at least one reviewer at Geophysical Research Letters
found him less than convincing, if his web-site is to be believed.

Eeyore and Ravenhorde may find him credible, but people who know more
about the subject seem to have reservations.

You mean people who CLAIM to know more about the subject, whose jobs would disappear
overnight if they told the real truth. They have a vested interested in telling lies
about 'anomalies' and 'corrections'.

You do like this thoroughly fatuous conspiracy theory

It's not 'conspiracy', it's FRAUD (a criminal offence) and I hope the IPCC and other major
contributors spend jail time.

Ooooh, didn't Hansen ask for just that for the oil company bosses a while back ? Shows how
out of touch with reality he is.

"Anything you can do we can do better
We can do anything better than you "

Or so you'd like to think. In fact you enthusiastically accuse me of
lying, and can't come up with single specific example, and I'm sure
that your libellous comments about the IPCC are equally ill-founded.


Time will be the judge of that.

What if sea level keeps dropping for example ?

Graham

Great for business, more real-estate.

Maybe by then, we'll be on the marsion currency.

http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5"

 

[Richard The Dreaded Liber]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:37:07 -0600, RB wrote:

How would you like if one could buy a handgun by answering a couple
questions?

As a patriot and lover of Freedom, I'd like that a lot.

"Is john Smith your real name?"
"Have you ever been convicted of a felony? "Are you crazy? On drugs?"
"Here's your gun"

Here's my gun license:

Amendment II, Constitution of the United States:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.
--
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Cheers!
Rich

 

On 12 jan, 15:48, krw <k...@att.zzzzzzzzz> wrote:

In article <l3hlm4hc8aveqjmbs79rv8r2j7bvjkh...@4ax.com>,
gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net says...



On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:17:30 -0800, pyotr filipivich
ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:

I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that Gunner Asch
gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote on Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:06:18 -0800
in rec.crafts.metalworking :
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:31:06 -0500, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com
wrote:

bill.slo...@ieee.org wrote:

... snip ...

Right-wingers would be funny if they weren't allowed to vote.

Quick - pass a Constitutional Amendment to fix that.  

Why not just use the standard Leftwing method of working around the
Constitution, and pay a Liberal Judge to make a ruling?

      I wonder how they are going to keep Republicans or conservatives
from voting, what with same day registration and no photo ID at the
polling place?
      The Democrats have institutionalized vote fraud.

tschus
pyotr

Vote!  And vote Often!

    "Vote early, vote often."
             Richard J. Daly

Whereas the Republicans - as exemplified by Jeb Bush in Florida in
2000, got out of theur way to make sure that a many likely Democrat
voters are excluded from the electoral rolls.

America does seem to have a generous supply of corrupt politicians on
either side of their political divide. It may be symptomatic that the
crooked Republicans try and stop their opponentent from voting, while
the crooked Democrats encourage their supporters to vote too often.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

On 10 jan, 23:53, Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote:

krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote innews:bgmhm4t48ns60fqc9gdiatsnn8nh1pj6b6@4ax.com:





On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:13:02 -0800 (PST), MooseFET
kensm...@rahul.net> wrote:

On Jan 10, 8:33 am, buleg...@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Jan 10, 11:30 am, krw <k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

If he doesn't screw it up (far) worse, it will count as a miracle.

I think at this point they are all rearranging the deck chair on the
Titanic

For years it has been "other than the cancer, the patient is
healthy".  Now it seems that it has a bad heart and a broken leg too.
We can fix the problems one at a time but it is going to take a while.

The problem is Obama bin Biden is going to break the other leg, two
arms, and shoot the patient as a cure.  >$1T deficits as far as the
eye can see.  Come on!

an interesting quote from Greg Gutfield;

when liberals want things to actually work, they start acting like
conservatives.
It means that liberal policies can only exist if the country is strong
enough to sustain the damage done by liberal policies.

Right wingers have selective memories, and are totally unconcious of
the damage done by conservative policies. Jim Yanik is never going to
appreciate that The War on Drugs works exactly as well as Prohibition
did, and has done more damage (because it has been going on longer).

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

[Eeyore]

Raveninghorde wrote:

Wasserman, a consultant and program manager for a Minnesota utility
company, expects that a power factor correction penalty could be added
to residential energy bills in the future to offset the unproductive
power created by the influx of millions of low power factor CFL bulbs

Oh the irony.

100W GLS bulbs have just been withdrawn from British shops btw.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

pseidel78@hotmail.com wrote:

Someone who can actually DO THE JOB instead of talking about it.

Graham