Guest
Where can I obtain schematics for the newer lcd and led flat screen TV's?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
T
Tim Schwartz
Guest
On 10/25/2014 5:48 AM, tyoung4639@comcast.net wrote:
authorized parts distributors. A specific make and model would be
useful info to post.
Regards,
Tim
In general, from the manufacturer's parts department, or one of theirWhere can I obtain schematics for the newer lcd and led flat screen TV's?
authorized parts distributors. A specific make and model would be
useful info to post.
Regards,
Tim
A
Arfa Daily
Guest
<tyoung4639@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:aa536ae3-f6c9-40de-bbae-706c95a0f4fc@googlegroups.com...
All over the place. Elektrotanya.com and eserviceinfo.com are first places
to check. Google is your friend ...
Use the words "free schematic download" when searching. That will usually
turn up service manuals if they're out there. Also learn to use the
exclusion and inclusion operators in the Google search field to weed out
irrelevant crap
Arfa
news:aa536ae3-f6c9-40de-bbae-706c95a0f4fc@googlegroups.com...
Where can I obtain schematics for the newer lcd and led flat screen TV's?
All over the place. Elektrotanya.com and eserviceinfo.com are first places
to check. Google is your friend ...
Use the words "free schematic download" when searching. That will usually
turn up service manuals if they're out there. Also learn to use the
exclusion and inclusion operators in the Google search field to weed out
irrelevant crap
Arfa
M
micky
Guest
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:48:42 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Alas, the exclusion operator - still works fine, but the required
inclusion operator + seems to have been abandoned by Google. Not just
seems. I read on some google page what + does and insist on inclusion
is not it.
I don't know what's wrong with them sometimes. They should have known
not to get rid of it.
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Use the words "free schematic download" when searching. That will usually
turn up service manuals if they're out there. Also learn to use the
exclusion and inclusion operators in the Google search field to weed out
irrelevant crap
Arfa
Alas, the exclusion operator - still works fine, but the required
inclusion operator + seems to have been abandoned by Google. Not just
seems. I read on some google page what + does and insist on inclusion
is not it.
I don't know what's wrong with them sometimes. They should have known
not to get rid of it.
C
c4urs11
Guest
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:46:12 -0400, micky wrote:
You can enhance inclusion by repeating a keyword three times.
Not the same as a + but definitely improving the results.
Cheers!
Alas, the exclusion operator - still works fine, but the required
inclusion operator + seems to have been abandoned by Google.
You can enhance inclusion by repeating a keyword three times.
Not the same as a + but definitely improving the results.
Cheers!
A
Arfa Daily
Guest
"micky" <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:vfts4a5q7h9aq760903n59seci0l5530kl@4ax.com...
You can force the search to only include sites with specific words by
enclosing them within double quotes i.e.
"Sharp" "free" "TV" "schematics"
returns only pages with those specific terms. There are better examples when
you are engaged in an actual search, but that will do to illustrate the
principle.
The + sign now seems to be something to do with returning Google+ pages. I
hadn't realised that had changed ...
Arfa
news:vfts4a5q7h9aq760903n59seci0l5530kl@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 13:48:42 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Use the words "free schematic download" when searching. That will usually
turn up service manuals if they're out there. Also learn to use the
exclusion and inclusion operators in the Google search field to weed out
irrelevant crap
Arfa
Alas, the exclusion operator - still works fine, but the required
inclusion operator + seems to have been abandoned by Google. Not just
seems. I read on some google page what + does and insist on inclusion
is not it.
I don't know what's wrong with them sometimes. They should have known
not to get rid of it.
You can force the search to only include sites with specific words by
enclosing them within double quotes i.e.
"Sharp" "free" "TV" "schematics"
returns only pages with those specific terms. There are better examples when
you are engaged in an actual search, but that will do to illustrate the
principle.
The + sign now seems to be something to do with returning Google+ pages. I
hadn't realised that had changed ...
Arfa
M
micky
Guest
On 27 Oct 2014 20:05:04 GMT, c4urs11 <c4urs11@domain.hidden> wrote:
I just had a good occasion to test this.
I wanted to find pump up the brakes and entering just that
gave 7.2 meg hits with my exact phrase not first, fourth, or fifth.
They didn't have the word up.
Using pump up up up the brakes I got 3.46 meg hits with all
the words** in the first 7 hits, Stopped looking at that point. But
by hit 6, they were not all in a row. Clearly better than the first
method, above. **Not counting "the".
Using pump "up" the brakes I got 3.57 meg hits, no "up" in hit
1, 3, or 5. At least not in the excerpt.
Using "pump up the brakes" I got only 32,700 hits with the first
55 hits in a row with all 4 (four) words, and I got tired of counting at
that point.
C4. using the word 3 times clearly helps, but Arfa has you beat.
Arfa, I tested quotes verus no quotes years ago but years after google
started and I got the same results with quotes or without. But either
I didn't choose the right search terms, or they've changed things. I
think I didn't choose the right terms, although maybe when they got rid
of + they improved "words". ??
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:46:12 -0400, micky wrote:
Alas, the exclusion operator - still works fine, but the required
inclusion operator + seems to have been abandoned by Google.
You can enhance inclusion by repeating a keyword three times.
Not the same as a + but definitely improving the results.
Cheers!
I just had a good occasion to test this.
I wanted to find pump up the brakes and entering just that
gave 7.2 meg hits with my exact phrase not first, fourth, or fifth.
They didn't have the word up.
Using pump up up up the brakes I got 3.46 meg hits with all
the words** in the first 7 hits, Stopped looking at that point. But
by hit 6, they were not all in a row. Clearly better than the first
method, above. **Not counting "the".
Using pump "up" the brakes I got 3.57 meg hits, no "up" in hit
1, 3, or 5. At least not in the excerpt.
Using "pump up the brakes" I got only 32,700 hits with the first
55 hits in a row with all 4 (four) words, and I got tired of counting at
that point.
C4. using the word 3 times clearly helps, but Arfa has you beat.
Arfa, I tested quotes verus no quotes years ago but years after google
started and I got the same results with quotes or without. But either
I didn't choose the right search terms, or they've changed things. I
think I didn't choose the right terms, although maybe when they got rid
of + they improved "words". ??
Guest
if you supply m model number i maybe able to help you as i am tv tech and have a lot of lcd/plasma manuals keep in mind i cant promise i will have the manual you need but mabye able to help you find it .
james
james