Driver to drive?

>"The soviet govt was legendary for idiotic financial decisions. Their fiat >financial system was not self correcting, and not well run. "

It was adjusted just fine. The sole goal was to exploit the people.

 

[Glenn]

On 06/01/15 02.16, George Herold wrote:

On Monday, January 5, 2015 3:41:45 PM UTC-5, Glenn wrote:
....
Wow! this is quite a post! Thanks. I know little about SMPS.
The paper has only simulation data. By bench test
I assume you (or someone) has built it and tested it?

The fast switch is the RB-IGBT you refer to later?
What about T1 T2? (I haven't chased down all your links.
that would take a while....)

George H.

Hi George

For T1 and T2 (passive switching/active rectification):
* you either use two parallel RB-IGBT (as mentioned in the article)
* or use two series connected MOSFETs

I have unfortunately not tested it yet.

Glenn

Therefore, as the number of high frequency switching devices is
decreased, the efficiency is increased. For instance, a 90% efficient
[H-bridge] converter becomes 97.2% efficient.
...
CONCLUSION
A new power inverter circuit was introduced that required only one high
frequency switching transistor. The inverter used a synchronizing
structure to change the voltage polarity on demand. Therefore, real time
generation of infinite voltage levels was realized. The state space
equations demonstrated a forth order system.
..."

The inverter could be used for solar micro-inverters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_micro-inverter

The inverter could also be used for:
* brushless motor
* step motor

The circuit is a "all-in-one". It could be used for (T1 and T2 refer to
the iupui.edu article):

* Positive DC, DV. T1 is used for active rectification. T2 is not used.

* Negative DC, DV. T2 is used for active rectification. T1 is not used.

* Any curve shape can be amplified with a signal from a suitable signal
generator. (retangular, saw tooth, triangular...) T1 is used for
positive curve parts - and T2 is used for negative curve parts.

Could it be used for a Class D audio amplifier with the right control
circuit? Low enough distortion?

The circuit bear resemblance with a reversed SEPIC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-ended_primary-inductor_converter

-

Indiana University. (2012, October 17). New class of power inverter
could mean cheaper, faster hybrid vehicles. ScienceDaily:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017153913.htm
Citat: "...
Izadian's invention, the result of a creative reconfiguration of an
electrical circuit during a laboratory experiment, would make inverters
cheaper, lighter and therefore more efficient than current models.
...
For example, unwanted harmonics are greatly reduced with Izadian's
invention.
..."

-

Additional reading:
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/index_files/Page356.htm
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/

Active rectification (synchronous rectification):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_rectification

-

They must be but besides the one switch, it also has two parallel
coupled e.g. Reverse Blocking IGBT (RB-IGBT). (Or two serially connected
Power MOSFETs. The Power MOSFETs must be connected so that their
substrate diodes have opposite directions):

http://www.google.dk/search?q=RB-IGBT

Application Characteristics of an Experimental RB-IGBT (Reverse Blocking
IGBT) Module:
http://www.pwrx.com/pwrx/app/04ias42p4.PDF

A High Efficiency Indirect Matrix Converter Utilizing RB-IGBTs:
http://www.pes.ee.ethz.ch/uploads/tx_ethpublications/friedli_PESC06.pdf

-

Definition:

http://www.ece.uic.edu/~i445/2011_445_Lecture7.pdf
Quote: "...
* Active switch: Switch state is controlled exclusively
by a third terminal (control terminal).

* Passive switch: Switch state is controlled by the
applied current and/or voltage at terminals 1 and 2.
...
Single-quadrant switch: on-state i(t) and off-state v(t) are unipolar.
[e.g. diode-like, reverse blocking]
..."


Better name: One active switch inverter.

The two active rectification switches are passive switches.

.

A half bridge uses two active switches.

A full bridge uses four active switches.

-

Alternative:

Design:

T1 serially connected to T2.

T1 is N-MOSFET with drain "up" (drain connected to L2 and C1).

T2 is N-MOSFET with drain "down" (drain connected to zero/commen).

T1 and T2 sources connected together.

.

Active rectification:

When positive output is needed T2 is on. T1 do active rectification.

When negative output is needed T1 is on. T2 do active rectification.

Glenn

 

On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 6:09:00 PM UTC, jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

"The soviet govt was legendary for idiotic financial decisions. Their fiat >financial system was not self correcting, and not well run. "

It was adjusted just fine. The sole goal was to exploit the people.

By alienating them it failed to do well at that


NT

 

[Don Y]

On 1/6/2015 8:50 AM, Joerg wrote:

Don Y wrote:
On 1/5/2015 6:48 PM, Joerg wrote:

Rather than respond to each of your comments/questions, individually, let
me summarize:

The UI/UX for news vs email is defined by the mail/news *client*.
The protocols are effectively similar (in terms of how the client
can *build* that UI and the quality/feel of the UX).

An email client can "peek" on the server to see how many messages are
present meeting a specific set of criteria (e.g., raw count, unread,
unseen, etc.). So, checking to see what *might* be present on the
server requires only the lightest of touches (no data traffic).

A "message" can be decomposed into headers, body and attachments. So,
the client can elect to defer downloading portions of the "message" that
are not of interest to the user at the present time.

It can choose to examine *just* the headers of those (or some SUBSET of
those) *without* bearing the cost of transferring the entire message body
(incl attachments). Again, allowing the email client to only impose
the cost of looking at those things that may be of interest to the user
to keep traffic light.

As such, it can present "summary information" about the mailbox's content
to the user WITHOUT actually fetching that content:
- originator of message
- intended recipient
- subject
- date/time
- size
- whether it has been read or not
- whether it has been *seen* previously (i.e., "new")
- if it has been *answered* (replied to)
- if it has been deleted
- if it represents a draft (not yet intended to be "sent")
- the identities of any "co-recipients" (Cc)
- the GLOBALLY unique identifier of message to which it is replying (if any)
- the presence of attachments (if any)

It can allow the user to *search* the messages on the server (read or unread)
without having to download all of that content just to find which message(s)
are of interest. For example, all UNSEEN messages containing the text
"Order Form". Or, any message containing "meeting with client". Coupled
with the summary information above, this lets the client refine his
interests. Handy for a slow connection or one where you "pay for traffic"
(e.g., "data plan") -- why download messages with huge attachments? Perhaps
just download the *message* and leave the attachment for later!

It can allow the mailbox user to create folders *on* the server in which
to organize received (AND PENDING) messages -- handy if you want to start
composing an email using a colleague's computer and finish it, later.

With all of this information available *before* the body is even present
on the local machine, the email client can present that summary in any
way the user deems appropriate. E.g., want to *thread* your email
conversations? ("View | Sort by | Threaded" in Tbird) Want to list them
in the order they were sent? Or, sorted by sender? Recipient? Examine
only those that contain the text "Monthly Invoice for Services Rendered"?

[Try doing that last one with a USENET client! I.e., you would have
to download EVERY message body and perform the search "locally". So, you
have to *rely* on folks to always put information that you might want to
search for in the *subject* line if you want to avoid looking through all
that body text! Search for "bug fix", "workaround", "update", "new release",
etc.]

(POP can't do many of these but can do some -- with a bit of creative coding.
NNTP can't do many of them, either.)

I do not sell products, I am a consultant who designs stuff or find and
corrects bugs in other designs.

Sorry, but I don't see anything in your mailing list idea that I can't
already do if I wanted to.

If you're not *providing* support, then the choice isn't yours to make! :>

As I said, there is no difference between IMAP and NNTP in terms of
these capabilities.

So why not just keep using NNTP?

Because *mail* and *news* are very different media -- with very different
capabilities.

I can wish a friend "Bon voyage!" by:
- telephoning
- sending a greeting card
- sending a letter
- sending a postcard
- sending a telegram
- sending an email
- taking out a full-page ad in the newspaper
- buying a "spot" on a local TV/radio channel
etc.

*All* will get my message across. Should he choose to reply, would he
really want to use the same medium that *I* did?

"Thanks, Don! See you in two weeks. I left a house key under the mat..."

News (USENET) is a broadcast medium. Email is a point-to-point medium.
I.e., to *approximate* a broadcast, you would have to email to a LIST
of known recipients -- you can never broadcast to "The World at Large".
The flip side of that is you can never know who has *seen* your USENET
message (email will at least tell you if it has not yet been *delivered*,
assuming you don't enforce return receipts).

Think about that difference and you will see the multitude of things
that you can do with email that just have no counterpart in USENET.

Web portals try to walk a middle ground -- giving you the worst of
both worlds...

 

[Joerg]

Don Y wrote:

On 1/6/2015 8:50 AM, Joerg wrote:
Don Y wrote:
On 1/5/2015 6:48 PM, Joerg wrote:

Rather than respond to each of your comments/questions, individually, let
me summarize:

The UI/UX for news vs email is defined by the mail/news *client*.
The protocols are effectively similar (in terms of how the client
can *build* that UI and the quality/feel of the UX).

An email client can "peek" on the server to see how many messages are
present meeting a specific set of criteria (e.g., raw count, unread,
unseen, etc.). So, checking to see what *might* be present on the
server requires only the lightest of touches (no data traffic).

A "message" can be decomposed into headers, body and attachments. So,
the client can elect to defer downloading portions of the "message" that
are not of interest to the user at the present time.

It can choose to examine *just* the headers of those (or some SUBSET of
those) *without* bearing the cost of transferring the entire message body
(incl attachments). Again, allowing the email client to only impose
the cost of looking at those things that may be of interest to the user
to keep traffic light.

As such, it can present "summary information" about the mailbox's content
to the user WITHOUT actually fetching that content:
- originator of message
- intended recipient
- subject
- date/time
- size
- whether it has been read or not
- whether it has been *seen* previously (i.e., "new")
- if it has been *answered* (replied to)
- if it has been deleted
- if it represents a draft (not yet intended to be "sent")
- the identities of any "co-recipients" (Cc)
- the GLOBALLY unique identifier of message to which it is replying (if
any)
- the presence of attachments (if any)

It can allow the user to *search* the messages on the server (read or
unread)
without having to download all of that content just to find which
message(s)
are of interest. For example, all UNSEEN messages containing the text
"Order Form". Or, any message containing "meeting with client". Coupled
with the summary information above, this lets the client refine his
interests. Handy for a slow connection or one where you "pay for traffic"
(e.g., "data plan") -- why download messages with huge attachments?
Perhaps
just download the *message* and leave the attachment for later!

It can allow the mailbox user to create folders *on* the server in which
to organize received (AND PENDING) messages -- handy if you want to start
composing an email using a colleague's computer and finish it, later.

With all of this information available *before* the body is even present
on the local machine, the email client can present that summary in any
way the user deems appropriate. E.g., want to *thread* your email
conversations? ("View | Sort by | Threaded" in Tbird) Want to list them
in the order they were sent? Or, sorted by sender? Recipient? Examine
only those that contain the text "Monthly Invoice for Services Rendered"?

Thanks for the summary. I do see the advantages of IMAP and it's on my
long term wish list for email. But first I have to get some other things
going, one of them being to coax a very recalcitrant Windows 7 into
doing what older (and IMHO better) OS'es always did with ease and
without having to spend days of wrestling with it.

[Try doing that last one with a USENET client! I.e., you would have
to download EVERY message body and perform the search "locally". So, you
have to *rely* on folks to always put information that you might want to
search for in the *subject* line if you want to avoid looking through all
that body text! Search for "bug fix", "workaround", "update", "new
release",
etc.]

Thing is, I do not need to do fancy stuff with Usenet. NNTP does
everything I want and if I am happy with something I tend to keep it.

(POP can't do many of these but can do some -- with a bit of creative
coding.
NNTP can't do many of them, either.)

POP3 has worked great so far and I can live on with it. But I do see
some advantages in IMAP, potentially making a switch worthwhile.
However, first I'll research that because I don't want to get into a
nasty mess like I just did with the transition from XP to Windows 7. In
hindsight I should have stuck with XP. Learned a painful lesson there.

IMAP would make a lot of sense if I ever got a smart phone. I am not
sure if I ever do though because right now I don't have too much use for
it. Plus I do not subscribe to the concept of technology just for
technology's sake. There has to be a large enough upside in it for me.

I do not sell products, I am a consultant who designs stuff or find and
corrects bugs in other designs.

Sorry, but I don't see anything in your mailing list idea that I can't
already do if I wanted to.

If you're not *providing* support, then the choice isn't yours to make! :

Sure it is. I make the choice with my check book like I did when buying
the CAD license. The company with NNTP forums got my check. A CAD
decision is pretty much final when it's done.

As I said, there is no difference between IMAP and NNTP in terms of
these capabilities.

So why not just keep using NNTP?

Because *mail* and *news* are very different media -- with very different
capabilities.

I know, and that's why NNTP is just fine for news. Has been for decades.

I can wish a friend "Bon voyage!" by:
- telephoning
- sending a greeting card
- sending a letter
- sending a postcard
- sending a telegram
- sending an email
- taking out a full-page ad in the newspaper
- buying a "spot" on a local TV/radio channel
etc.

*All* will get my message across. Should he choose to reply, would he
really want to use the same medium that *I* did?

"Thanks, Don! See you in two weeks. I left a house key under the mat..."

News (USENET) is a broadcast medium. Email is a point-to-point medium.
I.e., to *approximate* a broadcast, you would have to email to a LIST
of known recipients -- you can never broadcast to "The World at Large".
The flip side of that is you can never know who has *seen* your USENET
message (email will at least tell you if it has not yet been *delivered*,
assuming you don't enforce return receipts).

Think about that difference and you will see the multitude of things
that you can do with email that just have no counterpart in USENET.

Why should they have a counterpart when they are not needed?

Web portals try to walk a middle ground -- giving you the worst of
both worlds...

Web portals are typically somewhere between clunky and useless.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

>"By alienating them it failed to do well at that "

By that time the place was milked practically dry. They moved on.

Do not ask where, because I will not answer.

 

[Joerg]

Joerg wrote:

Don Y wrote:
On 1/6/2015 8:50 AM, Joerg wrote:
Don Y wrote:
On 1/5/2015 6:48 PM, Joerg wrote:
Rather than respond to each of your comments/questions, individually, let
me summarize:

The UI/UX for news vs email is defined by the mail/news *client*.
The protocols are effectively similar (in terms of how the client
can *build* that UI and the quality/feel of the UX).

An email client can "peek" on the server to see how many messages are
present meeting a specific set of criteria (e.g., raw count, unread,
unseen, etc.). So, checking to see what *might* be present on the
server requires only the lightest of touches (no data traffic).

A "message" can be decomposed into headers, body and attachments. So,
the client can elect to defer downloading portions of the "message" that
are not of interest to the user at the present time.

It can choose to examine *just* the headers of those (or some SUBSET of
those) *without* bearing the cost of transferring the entire message body
(incl attachments). Again, allowing the email client to only impose
the cost of looking at those things that may be of interest to the user
to keep traffic light.

As such, it can present "summary information" about the mailbox's content
to the user WITHOUT actually fetching that content:
- originator of message
- intended recipient
- subject
- date/time
- size
- whether it has been read or not
- whether it has been *seen* previously (i.e., "new")
- if it has been *answered* (replied to)
- if it has been deleted
- if it represents a draft (not yet intended to be "sent")
- the identities of any "co-recipients" (Cc)
- the GLOBALLY unique identifier of message to which it is replying (if
any)
- the presence of attachments (if any)

It can allow the user to *search* the messages on the server (read or
unread)
without having to download all of that content just to find which
message(s)
are of interest. For example, all UNSEEN messages containing the text
"Order Form". Or, any message containing "meeting with client". Coupled
with the summary information above, this lets the client refine his
interests. Handy for a slow connection or one where you "pay for traffic"
(e.g., "data plan") -- why download messages with huge attachments?
Perhaps
just download the *message* and leave the attachment for later!

It can allow the mailbox user to create folders *on* the server in which
to organize received (AND PENDING) messages -- handy if you want to start
composing an email using a colleague's computer and finish it, later.

With all of this information available *before* the body is even present
on the local machine, the email client can present that summary in any
way the user deems appropriate. E.g., want to *thread* your email
conversations? ("View | Sort by | Threaded" in Tbird) Want to list them
in the order they were sent? Or, sorted by sender? Recipient? Examine
only those that contain the text "Monthly Invoice for Services Rendered"?


Thanks for the summary. I do see the advantages of IMAP and it's on my
long term wish list for email. But first I have to get some other things
going, one of them being to coax a very recalcitrant Windows 7 into
doing what older (and IMHO better) OS'es always did with ease and
without having to spend days of wrestling with it.


[Try doing that last one with a USENET client! I.e., you would have
to download EVERY message body and perform the search "locally". So, you
have to *rely* on folks to always put information that you might want to
search for in the *subject* line if you want to avoid looking through all
that body text! Search for "bug fix", "workaround", "update", "new
release",
etc.]


Thing is, I do not need to do fancy stuff with Usenet. NNTP does
everything I want and if I am happy with something I tend to keep it.


(POP can't do many of these but can do some -- with a bit of creative
coding.
NNTP can't do many of them, either.)


POP3 has worked great so far and I can live on with it. But I do see
some advantages in IMAP, potentially making a switch worthwhile.
However, first I'll research that because I don't want to get into a
nasty mess like I just did with the transition from XP to Windows 7. In
hindsight I should have stuck with XP. Learned a painful lesson there.

Ahm ...

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Convert_a_POP_account_to_a_IMAP_account

Quote "Thunderbird doesn't support converting a POP account to a IMAP
account. Its possible to hack the files in the profile to convert the
account, but its tricky and time consuming and requires knowledge most
users don't have".

I think I'll wait a while

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Les Cargill]

Martin Brown wrote:

On 05/01/2015 20:49, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Monday, January 5, 2015 7:35:48 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/5/2015 1:37 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:

A lot of people have looked at the future of computing. There are
things we don't know, and things we can be fairly confident of. And
the latter includes a massive increase in the automated use of
relatively trivial data to optimise the design and operation of most
things in life.

We also know that infrastructure keeps advancing - it inevitably
will in any developed country. The lack of nationwide fast broadband
in the 1st world is hampering business and thus economic
development, and large sums continue to be invested year on year in
improving this infrastructure. I dont see that about to stop any
decade soon.

People repeat that mantra to justify ever more spending on telecoms
infrastructure but I am not convinced it is true. The companies that
need ultrafast high speed broadband move to where it is available and/or
build their own private infrastructure. High frequency traders will
literally move heaven and earth to get a 2us edge on deals.

You dont need a crystal ball or to know all the details at this
point to be pretty confident that internet infrastructure will keep
spreading wider, getting faster and gaining more capacity.

It will up to a point but wireless will take up the slack in many areas.
Plenty of the third world have jumped from a rudimentary wired phone
system to modern digital mobile phones with no serious wired broadband.

I know some people who have a mobile and no landline in the UK now.

I am examining the possibility of using 4G with a fancy directional
aerial configuration to get superfast broadband where I live since there
is no prospect of wired VDSL provision ever coming here.

I'd venture that the situation with net provision today has a fair
bit in common with the electrification situation in the 1930s.

What you said was so broad and vague as to certainly be true... until
that last bit about the parallel with electrification. Universal
electrification happened because the government pushed it and made it
both a priority and a mandate to the monopolies as part of their
responsibility for operating a monopoly.

Government prioritised and pushed it because it made so much
difference to the economy and standards of living.

The same is true for the net when a significant % of the population
still crawls along with dialup - how can you do business via dialup?
Its a huge waste of time & restriction.

And as computing power grows, the desire/need for more bandwidth will
intensify greatly. Even today I wouldnt be prepared to go back to dialup.

I can't imagine going back to dialup but once consumers have enough
bandwidth to stream one or two HD movies in realtime and/or play Game of
Thrones without being killed due to latency they are satisfied.

Anything above 7Mbps will do this comfortably even ADSL2+ or HSPA.

This monopoly does not exist in Internet access and so there will be no
mandate or even "priority". It is all profit driven so that many parts
of the country will not see the large investments because there is
insufficient return. Heck, even in the second largest city in Maryland,
I can't get DSL because the phone lines are hobbled by 1970's
infrastructure Verizon won't replace because there is not sufficient
profit.

There already is significant investment in net infrastructure, every
single year. Its been going on for some time. As time goes on it'll
only get more important. And with rising wealth over time, corner
cutting policies become ever less accepted as decades go by.

3G and 4G cell provision and various local microwave based systems will
erode the wired and cable broadband market eventually.

I doubt it. Not only is is unlikely that the air interface will support
it, the backhauls almost certainly won't. The price of the data plan
all but precludes premium content unless you're up for a $300 and up
monthly bill.

From what I've seen, the backhauls will be challenged to keep up.

I'd crabwalk on this is there turned out to be some way to wirelessly
emulate the coax network.

Digging up the
street to put wires in is intrinsically expensive as are the long wires
or installed today fibres in sparsely populated regions.

I thought 80 inch TVs were ludicrous before I saw 4K 80 inch TVs. The
only content for them is "demo" content, SFAIK, but it's a
game-changer. It was better than a movie screen by quite a margin.

If there is still American football 5 years from now,
you'll want one when they become cheaper than a car. As it was,
they were selling well. I don't think big TVs help with baseball,
hockey or basketball, and know nothing of soccer.

Also video games are already encroaching on 4K.

--
Les Cargill

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:

On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:29:39 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:


whit3rd wrote:

On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 5:44:02 PM UTC-8, Joerg wrote:
whit3rd wrote:

Stagger-tuned IF transformers are better [for a receiver application]

Sure, but you cannot get them for 60kHz. They only come for 455kHz and
10.7MHz, anything else is boutique stuff.

Sad, that; I could grab an old 455 kHz model from the junk box
and swap capacitors on it to make a 60 kHz unit, but the convenience
of ordering them off-the-shelf is just... gone.

Even 455 kHz is now missing from Toko catalogs.

But one can fabricate these kinds of things, and the original poster
indicated multiple frequencies-of-interest (so "modern" ceramic
filters are also unavailable off-the-shelf).

http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/funwithtubes/IF_Can-1.html


Old Delco car radios used a 262.5 KHz IF for AM. They would be a lot
easier to move to 60 KHz. There used to be piles of the radios in
junkyards for a couple bucks, because no one wanted them. There are
people gutting these radios and installing an AM/FM board that only uses
the inductive tuner from the old radio guts. Gary Tayman, in Tampa, Fl.
is one of them.

In order to move a resonator from 262.5 to 60 kHz, you need to
increase _both_ the inductance and capacitance by 4.4 times. If you
intend to keep the coil unchanged, the capacitor needs to be increased
19 times and you have to check for the changed impedance levels in
amplifying stages ahead and after of this resonant circuit.

The point was that it would be easier to move the 262.5Khz than a
higher frequency. The bandwidth is adjustable, depending on how it is
aligned. If you want a really narrow 60 KHz amp, build a crystal filter.
Digikey has 60.000 and 60.020 hz crystals.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

 

[Don Y]

Hi Joerg,

On 1/7/2015 1:41 PM, Joerg wrote:

POP3 has worked great so far and I can live on with it. But I do see
some advantages in IMAP, potentially making a switch worthwhile.
However, first I'll research that because I don't want to get into a
nasty mess like I just did with the transition from XP to Windows 7. In
hindsight I should have stuck with XP. Learned a painful lesson there.

Ahm ...

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Convert_a_POP_account_to_a_IMAP_account

Quote "Thunderbird doesn't support converting a POP account to a IMAP
account. Its possible to hack the files in the profile to convert the
account, but its tricky and time consuming and requires knowledge most
users don't have".

This is an over-simplification intended to cover "all" possible cases.

POP and IMAP are just mechanisms for *communicating* with your mail server.
I.e., you could access your (single) email account from a mail client
that "talks POP" and, later, from another mail client that "talks IMAP"
(assuming the server understands both protocols).

But, as they support different features, you can end up in a "confused"
state.

For example, POP users tend to download their messages off the server
as they read them (this isn't a requirement but, as POP doesn't support
a way of marking messages ON the server as "read", "seen", "replied to",
etc., leaving them on the server means you keep seeing them as "new"
long after you've read and even replied to them!). Your mail client
can emulate these features with the *downloaded* copy of each message
(because it can tag them as read/unread, answered/unanswered, etc.
LOCALLY on your disk!)

The "sent" folder that you see in your POP email account is actually a
LOCAL folder on your disk drive. POP has no concept of folders so there
is no way to "store" your "sent" messages on the mail server (for later
reference). IMAP can "push" a copy of each message that you send *onto*
the mail server so you don't need to keep that copy on your local disk.
(i.e., you can send messages from 5 different PC's each accessing that
one IMAP account and be able to see all of the "sent" messages from
*any* of those PC's!)

[In Tbird, if you look under "Copies & Folders" for the account in
question, you can see that you have a choice as to where you want to keep
copies of "sent" messages -- in a "local folder" (i.e., "Other") *or*
in the "Sent" folder on <name of email account>]

Likewise, your "InBox" holds *the* copy of each received mail -- even
if you have NOT yet read/replied it. Think of it as walking to the
USPS mailbox each day and blindly taking all of your mail and dumping
it on the kitchen table in a pile. This can go on for *days* and, as
far as you are concerned, there is no difference between the stack of
mail on your table and leaving it in the mailbox where you only fetch
it once a week.

So, the first "problem" when trying to "convert" an account is:
"How do I push all of the messages that were previously *downloaded*
via the POP connection onto my local disk *back* onto the server?"

*If* you have diligently left *all* your messages in your InBox *on*
the server, then you can delete your local copies, change the connection
protocol to IMAP and now see those messages (still on the server) in
the "InBox" folder -- ON THE SERVER.

But, few folks do this as the mailbox grows quickly (and, gets cluttered
with lots of content).

I've never "converted" an account but frequently *cancel* accounts -- and
don't want Tbird to discard all of the messages that I've accumulated,
still have "pending", replies I've sent, etc.

So, prior to terminating the account (regardless of POP or IMAP), I create
a LOCAL folder called "Name of the account". Then, I drag all of the
"folders" (local or server side) from the account that I am canceling
*into* this local folder.

Once that is done, I clean off the folders on the server (make sure no old
mail lingers there) and delete the account (in Tbird *and* on the mail
provider).

If I want to preserve all of this content in some *other* account, I can
then move the folders (contents) to the new account -- drag and drop.
With an IMAP account, this results in the creation of a *real* folder
on the mail server! So, my local copy doesn't need to be saved.

[E.g., you could create a folder under IMAP called "My Music" and "upload"
your MP3's, there -- if you ran out of storage on your local disk (silly
idea but is intended to show you that IMAP folders are *real* folders
AS IF they resided on your computer!]

If the Tbird folks were more aggressive, they could automate this process.
But, it seems pretty low on the "needs" list -- you can effectively do
it all "manually". There are lots of little pitfalls that can screw you
over if you are trying to do this with "live" accounts. E.g., if Tbird
keeps checking the folder on your account while you're trying to drag files
into it, you can just end up re-downloading what you are trying to UPload.

The article you referenced suggests ways of manually moving the ("hidden")
folders ON your local disk to effectively perform the same operation as
"drag and drop" to the IMAP service does. It hardly seems worth the effort
unless you have a bunch of *huge* local folders that you wanted to preserve
*under* that account.

I think I'll wait a while

[...]

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Don Y wrote:

Hi Dimiter,

On 1/5/2015 7:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

That is a lot indeed, you can make a lemonade party for the
neighbourhood I guess (if there is no such thing like a lemonade party
then invent it ).

I use a lot of lemon juice in my tea. I think I've already consumed more
than a quart (~liter) -- a tablespoon (15ml) at a time -- of it in the few
weeks since I juiced them!

You could always donate some of them to a food bank, before letting
any go to waste.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 08/01/2015 00:30, Les Cargill wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

3G and 4G cell provision and various local microwave based systems will
erode the wired and cable broadband market eventually.

I doubt it. Not only is is unlikely that the air interface will support
it, the backhauls almost certainly won't. The price of the data plan
all but precludes premium content unless you're up for a $300 and up
monthly bill.

How much??? You are being royally ripped off!

All-you-can-eat mobile data in the UK starts from Ł40 ($60) per month
(including a high end phone). It is a lot more expensive on PAYG.
SIM only deals from Ł15 per month for 10GB. eg

http://store.three.co.uk/view/searchTariff?priceplan=&deviceType=SIM_ONLY_MBB

There are contention problems in busy areas particularly in bars when
everyone and their dog looks at the same cluttered web page at once!

I actually use 3GB/3 months introductory offer SIMs as my backup
connection and throw them away when they expire. Until very recently
this worked out much cheaper than any contract or PAYG topups.

> From what I've seen, the backhauls will be challenged to keep up.

The backhauls will be the problem but that could be solved more easily
than rewiring homes in sparsely populated areas stuck with decaying
ancient copper (and much worse aluminium) phone cables.

I'd crabwalk on this is there turned out to be some way to wirelessly
emulate the coax network.

Many countries don't have a coax network it is all fibre these days
except in a few legacy regions stuck on old technology.

Digging up the
street to put wires in is intrinsically expensive as are the long wires
or installed today fibres in sparsely populated regions.

I thought 80 inch TVs were ludicrous before I saw 4K 80 inch TVs. The
only content for them is "demo" content, SFAIK, but it's a
game-changer. It was better than a movie screen by quite a margin.

Large screen QHD TVs are fun but the content is all but non-existent and
you can see all the defects of bad camera work on HD broadcast material.
I am curious how little US originated HD content is shown
internationally - even Russia Today is now if full HD here but the US
channels are not even what we would consider basic 625 line resolution.

If there is still American football 5 years from now,
you'll want one when they become cheaper than a car. As it was,
they were selling well. I don't think big TVs help with baseball,
hockey or basketball, and know nothing of soccer.

I can't imagine ever voluntarily watching American football.

Also video games are already encroaching on 4K.

Gamers are always early adopters of bleeding edge kit.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Don Y]

On 1/8/2015 1:16 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

On 1/5/2015 7:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

That is a lot indeed, you can make a lemonade party for the
neighbourhood I guess (if there is no such thing like a lemonade party
then invent it ).

I use a lot of lemon juice in my tea. I think I've already consumed more
than a quart (~liter) -- a tablespoon (15ml) at a time -- of it in the few
weeks since I juiced them!

You could always donate some of them to a food bank, before letting
any go to waste.

Citrus *never* goes to waste, here! :>

[Well, actually, we end up with way more limes -- about 400 count
per crop -- than we can ever use. But, we bring those to the folks in
the "Laundry" at a local hospital. The workers there apparently love
them! Cut a wedge and let it sit *on* their teeth while they work.
Apparently destroys their tooth enamel in the process...]

A friend gifted us a "Juicerator" many years ago:

<http://www.amazon.com/6001-Juicerator-550-Watt-Extractor-Stainless/dp/B0028RXDFM>

(note the juicer attachment, below)

It makes (relatively) quick work of juicing the buggers. OTOH, when
you have several trees and several gallons of juice for each tree,
you can quickly grow weary of the process! Thankfully, each crop
comes due at slightly different times. E.g., the Valencia's won't
be ready to juice for another month or so...

There are some groups who will harvest (citrus) fruit that you'd
otherwise leave on the tree. But, IME, if you aren't planning on
harvesting the fruit, you probably haven't taken good care of it
through the growing season, anyway.

E.g., our limes are bigger than store-bought *lemons*; lemons bigger
than oranges; oranges bigger than grapefruit; etc. Neighbors, OTOH,
have little *dinky* fruit... why bother growing it if you aren't
going to grow it *well*?

<frown>

 

[Boudewijn Dijkstra]

Op Sun, 04 Jan 2015 18:33:44 +0100 schreef Joerg
<news@analogconsultants.com>:

Les Cargill wrote:
Don Y wrote:
On 1/3/2015 12:27 PM, Lanarcam wrote:

- Exploitability
Who cares? Become adept at filtering.

- Cost
Pay for your NNTP link, then stop worrying. I feel for people trying to
monetize fora, but not too much.

I pay all of $13 (10 Euros) per year for the news server. For that I do
not need to run any kind of filtering because they already take care of
hosing off spam.

I pay zero for the same amount of spam.
http://aioe.org/



--
(Remove the obvious prefix to reply privately.)
Gemaakt met Opera's e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com/mail/

 

On Tuesday, April 6, 2004 at 1:52:13 PM UTC+2, Xavier Llobet wrote:

Question for the old-timers:

Who came up with the concept of "cache" or "cached memory"? When? And
what is the first written reference to it?

I suspect it appeared in the 70's, but it could be older than this.

(Am I in the right newsgroup?)

--
_xavier
--
Only one "o" in my e-mail address
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

Cache memory was invented by Maurice Wilkes. It was intended to be used as a type of recent data safeguard between the physical memory and the processor.

http://www.answers.com/Q/Who_invented_cache_memory

 

[Don Y]

On 1/8/2015 5:37 PM, Joerg wrote:

On 1/8/2015 3:37 PM, Don Y wrote:

The "directed", one-to-one nature of email handles all of these cases
with a single interface.

The vendor can "broadcast" announcements to all "interested parties"
(i.e., those who have subscribed to the "product-announce" mailing
list).

I usually rather quickly unsubscribe from those. Too much noise and fluff.

Participants can similarly "broadcast" questions (or replies) to those
"members" interested in questions of a particular type (based on the
mailing list chosen -- e.g., "product-new-users", "product-advanced-users",
"product-suggestions", etc.).

Participants can reply "off list" *through* the list server to other
"members" -- so your email address never has to be disclosed, publicly
(e.g., this is also how "web portals" operate).

Participants can sanction "misbehavers" -- and, have their sanctions
visible so they can be sanctioned by other participants if they
get too aggressive (this is also available in web portals -- but not
in unmoderated USENET).

I thoroughly detest such censorship. Just like I despise the concept of gated
communities. I would never live in one.
---------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ah, enforcing AUP's is "censorship". But, spam filtering *isn't*? I
guess the spammers don't have the same rights as folks who want to
post off-topic, distribute copyrighted materials, hijack threads, post
HTML, etc.

Wikipedia claims:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other
information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive,
politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media
outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.
I.e., a vendor-supported forum in which the vendor effectively eliminates
criticism of itself or its products.

You'd also lump activities that chastise participants who use that forum
for activities other than those laid out in its AUP. E.g., posting
video clips of cats chasing their tails in a forum dedicated to a particular
eCAD product. Or, posting original song lyrics in a forum devoted to
supporting bug reporting in <your_favorite_OS>.

So, is there even a *concept* of an AUP in your universe? Or, is *everything*
legitimate? (if so, why discriminate against "spam"?)

It seems that CADsoft has a pretty blatant expression of how *they* handle
violations of their AUP (they call them "Guidelines"):
11. Messages found in violation of these guidelines are subject to
cancellation without notice
Censorship?? I guess you already live in that gated community -- *and*
PAID MONEY to gain entry!! (yet, if I opt to give the *participants*
that same sort control/influence, it's "censorship??)

Cf. <http://www.cadsoftusa.com/community/guidelines/>

Ah-ha! I've got it! I'll just call THOSE behaviors "spamming" and then we'll
be in complete agreement! And, let the list provider do all this filtering
UNILATERALLY instead of leaving it to the discretion of the list
participants! I.e., just like *your* USENET provider!

"Resources" can be made available over the same medium by the vendor
(Subject: New FAQ available. Reply to this message to automatically
have a copy of the new FAQ emailed to you!)

Resources can be tailored to the individual querant because your email
address uniquely identifies *you*. So, folks who own a model 123
AND ONLY THOSE FOLKS can receive a directed broadcast pertinent to
that product (Subject: New Model 123 Firmware available. Reply to this
message to automatically have a copy of the new firmware emailed to you
along with instructions for its installation.)

That an ordinary mailing process and I sometimes use that. Very sporadically
and only if it's very low traffic. Mailing lists are not low traffic.

That depends entirely on the list. As I said previously, mailing lists
are much finer-grained. Some with hundreds of messages per month, others
with a handful.

I've already indicated that an IMAP account can *appear* identical to a
user compared to a USENET account (in terms of the UX). So, you're willing
to ignore a similar amount of USENET traffic but *not* the same volume
of email traffic?

And, all of this is "invisible" to search engines, etc. (unless someone
explicitly posts the content to a web site that *they* choose to maintain!)

Best of all, you can administer and implement this through a tiny pipe.
No need to set up a web server that is online (and available for attack)
24/7/365. Just set up *an* email account and arrange to pull messages
off of it regularly, process them and push replies back!)

I first implemented this for a "beta" product. It was amazingly
successful.
The folks testing it (the product) were probably more highly motivated than
"casual users" (selected expressly for that reason). And, really enjoyed
being able to share their thoughts "in private" (i.e., amongst the group
and ONLY the group) as well as "one-on-one" (i.e., message each other
directly without the rest of the list seeing the conversation).

If it's a small circle of professionals I can see that work well. But not with
hundreds. There I prefer properly threaded discussions.

Again, email allows threading. Just tell your client to do so. Or not.
Click on; click off.

It is much superior to a simple "support" web site as you (the vendor) can
hear what people are saying about your product -- instead of just looking
at "hit counters" and "download counts". Allowing resources to be
delivered via that same channel (there is a "command" that facilitates
this)
gives the functionality of a browsable web site yet the directness of an
email link (also has the advantage of letting the vendor schedule when the
"replies" are sent instead of having to deal with huge variations in
"web traffic")

As I said, earlier, I suspect the complaint from the client that sparked
this
thread is largely bogus (I don't watch his mailing list to know for sure if
folks are *really* griping about the issue he mentioned).

I'm confident enough in the technology that I've started designing a
"How-to-manage-a-support-site-from-your-smartphone" document in much
the same way that the original Majordomo release was described. An
interesting twist on modern technology!

Everybody has their preference. The newsgruops format is my preference so I
gravitate towards vendors that use it.

Well, it's unlikely you would have participated in the lists I've set up thus
far. One was for a "niche" product; another for very high end kit (a few
year's net income). And, if I adopt this approach for my home automation
system, you've previously indicated your dislike for automation, so... :>

[and, I'm reasonably *sure* you aren't writing code for any of the FOSS OS's
(all of which use mailing lists) or larger FOSS projects...]

I figure you probably want to go send a note to the CADsoft folks to complain
about their censorship policies, now... And, maybe vote with your wallet and
find another CAD vendor that *doesn't* engage in this!

 

[Les Cargill]

Martin Brown wrote:

On 08/01/2015 00:30, Les Cargill wrote:
Martin Brown wrote:

3G and 4G cell provision and various local microwave based systems will
erode the wired and cable broadband market eventually.

I doubt it. Not only is is unlikely that the air interface will support
it, the backhauls almost certainly won't. The price of the data plan
all but precludes premium content unless you're up for a $300 and up
monthly bill.

How much??? You are being royally ripped off!

To clarify: I am paying nothing like that. I don't even have a data
plan. I think we pay $50 a month plus long distance for two
or three dumb phones

A Verizon 50GB plan is $225 a month. Cable TV-only runs $75sish
with non-premium movie channels ( read: no HBO, Showtime, but Starz and
the like .)

But the horrendous cost of data is legendary in the US.

All-you-can-eat mobile data in the UK starts from Ł40 ($60) per month
(including a high end phone). It is a lot more expensive on PAYG.
SIM only deals from Ł15 per month for 10GB. eg

http://store.three.co.uk/view/searchTariff?priceplan=&deviceType=SIM_ONLY_MBB


There are contention problems in busy areas particularly in bars when
everyone and their dog looks at the same cluttered web page at once!

I actually use 3GB/3 months introductory offer SIMs as my backup
connection and throw them away when they expire. Until very recently
this worked out much cheaper than any contract or PAYG topups.

I am sure. I can't even determine what a data plan will actually cost.
And I don't *WANT* a data plan.

From what I've seen, the backhauls will be challenged to keep up.

The backhauls will be the problem but that could be solved more easily
than rewiring homes in sparsely populated areas stuck with decaying
ancient copper (and much worse aluminium) phone cables.

They are pedalling as fast as they can.

I'd crabwalk on this is there turned out to be some way to wirelessly
emulate the coax network.

Many countries don't have a coax network it is all fibre these days
except in a few legacy regions stuck on old technology.

I expect the rollout cost of fibre isn't nearly the bottleneck we think
it is.

Digging up the
street to put wires in is intrinsically expensive as are the long wires
or installed today fibres in sparsely populated regions.

I thought 80 inch TVs were ludicrous before I saw 4K 80 inch TVs. The
only content for them is "demo" content, SFAIK, but it's a
game-changer. It was better than a movie screen by quite a margin.

Large screen QHD TVs are fun but the content is all but non-existent and
you can see all the defects of bad camera work on HD broadcast material.

No, I mean watching things like sports or great movies - imagine a David
Lean film in 4K. Just Blu-Ray alone changed how I saw
"Lawrence of Arabia". I was too young to have seen it in 70MM
when it ran.

If you can, go stare at an 80 inch 4K demo some time for a while. I
had the experience of almost being actually immersed in it. This
nearly never happens to me.

I am curious how little US originated HD content is shown
internationally - even Russia Today is now if full HD here but the US
channels are not even what we would consider basic 625 line resolution.

Most original US content is in full HD. It's apparently not that when it
gets to you. Maybe a boat sank

If there is still American football 5 years from now,
you'll want one when they become cheaper than a car. As it was,
they were selling well. I don't think big TVs help with baseball,
hockey or basketball, and know nothing of soccer.

I can't imagine ever voluntarily watching American football.

We have a head injury fetish. "Oooh look, he's got a concussion!"

It's taken me 30 years to explain the game to my wife, and she
grew up here and was in marching band. So I can sympathize.

I can't imagine voluntarily watching British football. What
we call soccer is just brownian motion to me. I am completely
incompetent at watching it.

After all, the chance of head injury is so slight. What's the
point?

Also video games are already encroaching on 4K.

Gamers are always early adopters of bleeding edge kit.

Always.

--
Les Cargill

 

[Dimiter_Popoff]

Hi Don,

On 06.1.2015 Đł. 05:27, Don Y wrote:

Hi Dimiter,

On 1/5/2015 7:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
......

Whoa, half a ton oranges (well, kilogram but sounds pretty huge
to me ).

Yeah, they're pretty big. Lemons were big as well -- 60 pounds off the
little 3 ft tree! No idea what we'll do with all the juice when it
"grows up"!

That is a lot indeed, you can make a lemonade party for the
neighbourhood I guess (if there is no such thing like a lemonade party
then invent it ).

I use a lot of lemon juice in my tea. I think I've already consumed more
than a quart (~liter) -- a tablespoon (15ml) at a time -- of it in the few
weeks since I juiced them!

Oh you are lucky we live at the other side of the globe, I would have
insisted on a lemonade party were we somewhat closer .

Dimiter

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Don Y wrote:

On 1/8/2015 1:16 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
On 1/5/2015 7:05 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

That is a lot indeed, you can make a lemonade party for the
neighbourhood I guess (if there is no such thing like a lemonade party
then invent it ).

I use a lot of lemon juice in my tea. I think I've already consumed more
than a quart (~liter) -- a tablespoon (15ml) at a time -- of it in the few
weeks since I juiced them!

You could always donate some of them to a food bank, before letting
any go to waste.

Citrus *never* goes to waste, here! :

[Well, actually, we end up with way more limes -- about 400 count
per crop -- than we can ever use. But, we bring those to the folks in
the "Laundry" at a local hospital. The workers there apparently love
them! Cut a wedge and let it sit *on* their teeth while they work.
Apparently destroys their tooth enamel in the process...]

A friend gifted us a "Juicerator" many years ago:

http://www.amazon.com/6001-Juicerator-550-Watt-Extractor-Stainless/dp/B0028RXDFM

(note the juicer attachment, below)

It makes (relatively) quick work of juicing the buggers. OTOH, when
you have several trees and several gallons of juice for each tree,
you can quickly grow weary of the process! Thankfully, each crop
comes due at slightly different times. E.g., the Valencia's won't
be ready to juice for another month or so...

There are some groups who will harvest (citrus) fruit that you'd
otherwise leave on the tree. But, IME, if you aren't planning on
harvesting the fruit, you probably haven't taken good care of it
through the growing season, anyway.

E.g., our limes are bigger than store-bought *lemons*; lemons bigger
than oranges; oranges bigger than grapefruit; etc. Neighbors, OTOH,
have little *dinky* fruit... why bother growing it if you aren't
going to grow it *well*?

frown

IOW: Go big, or go home!


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:03:26 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:

Keep warm. We harvested the Navel oranges a few days ago (weather turned
cold enough to put the fruit at jeopardy). Thankfully (?) a small crop
(in terms of NUMBERS). But, they're all *huge* -- at least a pound (500g)
each! So, they effectively take up a lot of space regardless...

--don

I just finished installing my spiffy new waterproof 12-volt LED
RatLamp (tm).

The critter had been skinning our Meyer lemons

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Food/Lemons_Post-Rat.JPG

and the light seems to keep them away.






--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com