Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?

On 5 Dec 2006 16:48:12 -0800, bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 4 Dec 2006 17:19:45 -0800, bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:


John Fields wrote:
On 3 Dec 2006 15:10:27 -0800, bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:

My own idea of my
attitude on this news group is "polite until provoked"

---
Which generally manifests itself as provocation = disagreement.
---

but John Larkin
does keep on finding insults in my posts that I could have sworn
weren't there when I composed them (and don't look much like insults to
me when I reread them).

---
Which is about the double standard you exact. If, in fact, your
posts are made without rancor, which is ridiculous on its face, you
insist that what must then be "carelessness" on your part be not
interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with
correspondence directed to you in order that you not interpret it as
insult.
---

Of course, if you could find an example where I was unreasonably easily
provoked, or "accidentally" produced a grievous insult, you'd quote it,
thus converting a pointless troll into something worth reading.

---
Just because I can't be bothered to slog through the morass of your
posting history in order to find an example of your nasty attitude
certainly doesn't mean there aren't thousands of examples out there.
---

Your search skills aren't exactly impressive, but the intelligent
reader will still conclude that there are many fewer than thousands of
examples out there, with the likeliest number being zero. Since I seem
only to have cranked out 6520 postings over the past ten years, there
is an upper limit to the examples that you could find.

---
With a total of 6520 posts under your belt, I'd be willing to bet
that at least one third of them contain slurs of one kind or
another, consciously or unconsciously made since you just can't seem
to help yourself.
---


Phil Allison would blame this on autism, but he
blames a lot of stuff on autism. He's not an expert psychologist,
unlike my wife's academic colleagues (who won't use me as a test
subject any more, because I know too much).

---
More than likely that's what they tell you in order to dismiss you
gracefully and to keep from hurting your wife, to whom you must
certainly be an embarrassment.

If you say so John - since you don't know my wife or her colleagues,
you are free to let your imagination run wild. Pity you haven't got an
imagination that can usefully exploit this lack of factual restraint,
let alone any more modern electronic component than the 555.

---
It's true that I don't know them, but knowing _you_ is enough to
know how they'd behave if they were nice people who had to but up
with an overbearing know-it-all like you.

They are (mostly) nice people, but probably even better-informed in
their subjects than I am in mine

---
LOL, how could they _not_ be?
---

not the sort of company that you
seem to keep, let alone know anything about.

---
Present company included, I'd have to agree with you.
---

I'm working on a project right now where I'm using an MC68HC908JL8.
And you?

You've got me there. I'm just flat hunting. On the other hand the
MC68HC908 is the 2002 version of Motorola's 8-bit microcontroller,
going back back via the 6805 to the original 6800 from 1975. RISC and
DSP seem to have passed you by.

---
??? What is it that makes you thing "right now" means the same as
"yesterday"?
---

Still hanging on to that pig-ignorant belief that a 555 is a "bad"
chip which no one should use because you won't? Even when it's the
perfect candidate for the job?

It isn't a "bad" chip, but very rarely an acceptable candidate for any
job in serious electronics these days.

---
LOL, what would _you_ know about serious electronics?

I mean, even for a hobby-like requirement you went for an unwieldy,
wasteful, expensive, two-chip "solution" for a problem posed right
here, remember?
---

There was a thread about this
here a while back, and the concensus was that most professional
electronic engineers don't seem to be using it any more.

---
You don't know what you're talking about.


--
JF
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
    ... John Fields wrote: ... interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with ... posting history in order to find an example of your nasty attitude ... job in serious electronics these days. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
    ... John Fields wrote: ... interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with ... posting history in order to find an example of your nasty attitude ... what would _you_ know about serious electronics? ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
    ... John Fields wrote: ... interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with ... posting history in order to find an example of your nasty attitude ... you are free to let your imagination run wild. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
    ... John Fields wrote: ... posts are made without rancor, which is ridiculous on its face, you ... interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with ... I'll see your electron beam microfabricator and raise you the system ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: How inaccurate is a 555 or 7555 REALLY?
    ... John Fields wrote: ... interpreted as insult, but that infinite care be taken with ... I'll see your electron beam microfabricator and raise you the system ... I spent a lot design time doing this on ...
    (sci.electronics.design)