LT Spice flaws?...

[Pimpom]

On 8/1/2020 10:26 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

I think the only hotkey I use in LT is g for ground.

I use g, l, d, c and r regularly.

 

[server]

On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 11:07:47 +0530, Pimpom <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

On 8/1/2020 12:08 AM, Ricketty C wrote:

Many of the initial issues are not a big deal once you get used to them. My complain with LTspice is the difficulty with managing new device models. While there is info available on adding components to a given design, they nearly all talk about either adding the component to the master library or adding them to the local design library rather than a personal common library not part of any design.

That\'s what I like about CircuitMaker 2000. Creating a \"common
personal library not part of any design\" is straightforward,
especially for the PCB section. I\'ve been using my own footprints
exclusively for a decade and a half. Macros for the schematic
portion is somewhat more convoluted but not too bad.

We use PADS and use none of the standard library parts. We have our
own library, LIB3. We fill out a form to create a new part. That
identifies the author and checkers, makes and checks the PADS sch and
pcb decals, creates an inventory number, identifies the allowed
manufacturers and their part numbers, and tells purchasing to buy some
initial stock.

If we revise a part, it gets a new part creation form and a new name
in LIB3, like from THING to THING_A, and we usually delete the old
one.

Out inventory database names the PADS part for anything in stock and
stashes data sheets, links, test data, photos, and notes about any
part. Like _BUGGY_OPAMP.txt

Designs don\'t have to be part of a project. One can draw a
schematic or PCB layout and save it as a standalone file.

We have a class of projects called PROTOS, each with a project number
like Z372 or something. That\'s where we stash any casual PCB layouts,
breadboard documentation, test rigs, experimental data, whiteboard
scribbles, Spice stuff, pictures of Dremeled things, anything not
formally released but worth remembering. We have 317 folders in PROTOS
so far.

Our system works pretty well. Somebody could create a similar system
to manage an electronics company, with software, and sell it. Or just
write a book. I see all sorts of systems and non-systems being used.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Rich S]

On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 8:58:44 AM UTC, Terry Pinnell wrote:

I\'ve recently started using LT Spice. A great free tool, with the
overriding advantage of widespread use. (Unlike CircuitMaker 2000 Pro,
of which I seem to be the only current user on the planet.)

But LT\'s UI is not so good. Have there been any hacked versions that
attempt improvements? For example, using the more modern rectangular
resistors rather than zigzags? And I was surprised to find the wires of
my first schematic printout seemed about a single pixel in width, barely
readable.

I\'ve only used LT Spice a few times, but keep going back to MicroCap. I found
MicroCap more intuitive. It is also fully featured. You can edit parts and
shapes, e.g., tweak the standard schematic symbol. For example, I did not see
a symbol for a voltage comparator (the default looks like an op-amp), so I made
my own, using the built-in shape editor tool.
cheers, Rich S

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-08-01 00:56, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 20:06:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/31/2020 2:56 PM, Ricketty C wrote:
On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 1:03:29 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/31/2020 10:20 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 12:40:08 +0100, Terry Pinnell
me@somewhere.invalid> wrote:

Clive Arthur <cliveta@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

On 31/07/2020 09:58, Terry Pinnell wrote:
I\'ve recently started using LT Spice. A great free
tool, with the overriding advantage of widespread use.
(Unlike CircuitMaker 2000 Pro, of which I seem to be
the only current user on the planet.)

But LT\'s UI is not so good. Have there been any hacked
versions that attempt improvements? For example, using
the more modern rectangular resistors rather than
zigzags? And I was surprised to find the wires of my
first schematic printout seemed about a single pixel in
width, barely readable.


You\'ll find a rectangular \'European Resistor\' in Misc. I
only use them when I want to indicate a load, or
significant dissipation.

\'Pen thickness\' under control panel/drafting options can
make the lines thicker, and \'Hot Keys\' can configure the
keyboard option. I use R for rotate, W for wire ctrl-C
for copy, M for move D for drag etc.

But yes, the UI isn\'t its strong point.

Great, thanks Clive. I had scanned the settings but clearly
not thoroughly enough!

Terry

The HELP isn\'t very good. Some important things aren\'t
mentioned at all. Google often provides better help, and
there are some good tutorial/manuals online.

I use it sometimes just to create graphs for manuals, not
necessarily actual electronics, but you have to play with
settings to get a good image.




That is to say they could have kept the engine closed source
and used an off-the-shelf UI system like Qt to make it
intrinsically cross-platform and a nicer interface but didn\'t
do that for whatever reason.

It runs OK on linux under Wine but some things don\'t work quite
right e.g. copy and pasting across schematics is borked under
Wine on every Linux variant I\'ve tried it on.

Copy and paste is borked under Windows. You have to do the copy,
then you can only switch schematics one way or the command is
ended. I think it\'s with the TAB key. Click the mouse on the
tab and the command is ended. Lots of goofy little things like
this to learn.

What really bugs me though is the arcane details of modifying
symbols and adding new models. I recently had a lengthy
discussion about one way to do this where I was pointed to the
help file only to find the help file had rather misleading data.
Then people were other than polite discussing it as if the
confusion is the user\'s fault. After saying \"here\'s a way that
works\" and being shown it doesn\'t work the response was that the
behavior of the generated .net file command syntax is exactly as
documented even though .net file syntax was not part of the
original discussion. But that was the level of support in the
help file.

So be prepared to learn how the piston rings work if you want to
drive anywhere other than the corner market.


It annoys me when software developers don\'t follow the standard
conventions of the platform they\'re developing for like in most
Windows software undo is cntl + Z and cntl + Y. in Spice it\'s F9
and Shift + F9 problem is a lot of newer PCs have functions like
the backlight control bound to those keys and you have to press a
\"Fn\" button to activate the functions.

But LT Spice has an UNDO icon right in the toolbar. You don\'t have
to take your hand off the mouse.

I use only Trackpoint keyboards. There\'s no switching back and forth at
all. (Plus the Trackpoint was invented by a friend of mine.)

At least under Windows, copying a part or a chunk of circuit between
schematics is easy. No hotkeys, just the copy symbol on the toolbar.

I\'d go nuts if I had to use the mouse for everything. I\'ve been using
hotkeys since DOS 1.0, nearly 40 years ago, and IIRC I customized my
3270 terminal\'s key map a couple of years before that. (I was
timesharing on UBC\'s Amdahl 470 V/6 and V/8 running the Michigan
Terminal System [MTS]. Pretty cool for the day.)

I think the only hotkey I use in LT is g for ground.

I still do most of my drawing in Freelance 4.0+ for DOS. Hotkeys
galore. Just about all the figures in my book are from Freelance.
(Still true in the third edition, coming out some time early next year,
God willing.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-08-01 01:37, Pimpom wrote:

On 8/1/2020 12:08 AM, Ricketty C wrote:

Many of the initial issues are not a big deal once you get used to
them.  My complain with LTspice is the difficulty with managing new
device models.  While there is info available on adding components to
a given design, they nearly all talk about either adding the component
to the master library or adding them to the local design library
rather than a personal common library not part of any design.

That\'s what I like about CircuitMaker 2000. Creating a \"common personal
library not part of any design\" is straightforward, especially for the
PCB section. I\'ve been using my own footprints exclusively for a decade
and a half. Macros for the schematic portion is somewhat more convoluted
but not too bad.

It\'s trivial for LTspice as well. I have a biggish one that I just
append models to using a text editor (or even the Linux output
redirects). Every nontrivial schematic that\'s just for my use
references it.

<Ctl>s [up comes a text box]
..lib \\electronics\\designs\\PHParts.lib<enter>

Run simulation. No muss, fuss, or bother.

Designs don\'t have to be part of a project. One can draw a schematic or
PCB layout and save it as a standalone file.

Then there is the fact that while there are multiple ways to do many
tasks, none of them are simple and/or obvious. The tool is highly
cranky about tiny details with little rhyme or reason.

That\'s what I think of as the Windoze approach.

There is a support group that has a handful of \"experts\" who often
start off with telling you to read the help file even though the help
file is very hard to search, hard to read and in some cases contains
incorrect or misleading info.

The old helicopter joke.


On the upside, once you get over the various \"humps\" it can be a very
useful tool for free.  Just learn to love the humps.

No argument there. I still have a lot to learn about LTSpice though.

The \"undocumented LTspice\" website is useful.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:21:00 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-08-01 00:56, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 20:06:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/31/2020 2:56 PM, Ricketty C wrote:
On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 1:03:29 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/31/2020 10:20 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 12:40:08 +0100, Terry Pinnell
me@somewhere.invalid> wrote:

Clive Arthur <cliveta@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

On 31/07/2020 09:58, Terry Pinnell wrote:
I\'ve recently started using LT Spice. A great free
tool, with the overriding advantage of widespread use.
(Unlike CircuitMaker 2000 Pro, of which I seem to be
the only current user on the planet.)

But LT\'s UI is not so good. Have there been any hacked
versions that attempt improvements? For example, using
the more modern rectangular resistors rather than
zigzags? And I was surprised to find the wires of my
first schematic printout seemed about a single pixel in
width, barely readable.


You\'ll find a rectangular \'European Resistor\' in Misc. I
only use them when I want to indicate a load, or
significant dissipation.

\'Pen thickness\' under control panel/drafting options can
make the lines thicker, and \'Hot Keys\' can configure the
keyboard option. I use R for rotate, W for wire ctrl-C
for copy, M for move D for drag etc.

But yes, the UI isn\'t its strong point.

Great, thanks Clive. I had scanned the settings but clearly
not thoroughly enough!

Terry

The HELP isn\'t very good. Some important things aren\'t
mentioned at all. Google often provides better help, and
there are some good tutorial/manuals online.

I use it sometimes just to create graphs for manuals, not
necessarily actual electronics, but you have to play with
settings to get a good image.




That is to say they could have kept the engine closed source
and used an off-the-shelf UI system like Qt to make it
intrinsically cross-platform and a nicer interface but didn\'t
do that for whatever reason.

It runs OK on linux under Wine but some things don\'t work quite
right e.g. copy and pasting across schematics is borked under
Wine on every Linux variant I\'ve tried it on.

Copy and paste is borked under Windows. You have to do the copy,
then you can only switch schematics one way or the command is
ended. I think it\'s with the TAB key. Click the mouse on the
tab and the command is ended. Lots of goofy little things like
this to learn.

What really bugs me though is the arcane details of modifying
symbols and adding new models. I recently had a lengthy
discussion about one way to do this where I was pointed to the
help file only to find the help file had rather misleading data.
Then people were other than polite discussing it as if the
confusion is the user\'s fault. After saying \"here\'s a way that
works\" and being shown it doesn\'t work the response was that the
behavior of the generated .net file command syntax is exactly as
documented even though .net file syntax was not part of the
original discussion. But that was the level of support in the
help file.

So be prepared to learn how the piston rings work if you want to
drive anywhere other than the corner market.


It annoys me when software developers don\'t follow the standard
conventions of the platform they\'re developing for like in most
Windows software undo is cntl + Z and cntl + Y. in Spice it\'s F9
and Shift + F9 problem is a lot of newer PCs have functions like
the backlight control bound to those keys and you have to press a
\"Fn\" button to activate the functions.

But LT Spice has an UNDO icon right in the toolbar. You don\'t have
to take your hand off the mouse.

I use only Trackpoint keyboards. There\'s no switching back and forth at
all. (Plus the Trackpoint was invented by a friend of mine.)


At least under Windows, copying a part or a chunk of circuit between
schematics is easy. No hotkeys, just the copy symbol on the toolbar.

I\'d go nuts if I had to use the mouse for everything. I\'ve been using
hotkeys since DOS 1.0, nearly 40 years ago, and IIRC I customized my
3270 terminal\'s key map a couple of years before that. (I was
timesharing on UBC\'s Amdahl 470 V/6 and V/8 running the Michigan
Terminal System [MTS]. Pretty cool for the day.)


I think the only hotkey I use in LT is g for ground.

I still do most of my drawing in Freelance 4.0+ for DOS. Hotkeys
galore. Just about all the figures in my book are from Freelance.
(Still true in the third edition, coming out some time early next year,
God willing.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Well, you must be one of those fancy-schmantyz people who learned how
to type.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:25:21 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-08-01 01:37, Pimpom wrote:
On 8/1/2020 12:08 AM, Ricketty C wrote:

Many of the initial issues are not a big deal once you get used to
them.  My complain with LTspice is the difficulty with managing new
device models.  While there is info available on adding components to
a given design, they nearly all talk about either adding the component
to the master library or adding them to the local design library
rather than a personal common library not part of any design.

That\'s what I like about CircuitMaker 2000. Creating a \"common personal
library not part of any design\" is straightforward, especially for the
PCB section. I\'ve been using my own footprints exclusively for a decade
and a half. Macros for the schematic portion is somewhat more convoluted
but not too bad.

It\'s trivial for LTspice as well. I have a biggish one that I just
append models to using a text editor (or even the Linux output
redirects). Every nontrivial schematic that\'s just for my use
references it.

Ctl>s [up comes a text box]
.lib \\electronics\\designs\\PHParts.lib<enter

Run simulation. No muss, fuss, or bother.


Designs don\'t have to be part of a project. One can draw a schematic or
PCB layout and save it as a standalone file.

Then there is the fact that while there are multiple ways to do many
tasks, none of them are simple and/or obvious. The tool is highly
cranky about tiny details with little rhyme or reason.

That\'s what I think of as the Windoze approach.

There is a support group that has a handful of \"experts\" who often
start off with telling you to read the help file even though the help
file is very hard to search, hard to read and in some cases contains
incorrect or misleading info.

The old helicopter joke.


On the upside, once you get over the various \"humps\" it can be a very
useful tool for free.  Just learn to love the humps.

No argument there. I still have a lot to learn about LTSpice though.

The \"undocumented LTspice\" website is useful.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I\'ve discovered (is it new?) that if you, for example, change the name
of a mosfet to JLFET or something, and JLFET.mod is in the same folder
as the .asc file, it finds JLFET and uses it. That\'s handy.

 

[Ricketty C]

On Sunday, August 2, 2020 at 6:03:27 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:25:21 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-08-01 01:37, Pimpom wrote:
On 8/1/2020 12:08 AM, Ricketty C wrote:

Many of the initial issues are not a big deal once you get used to
them.  My complain with LTspice is the difficulty with managing new
device models.  While there is info available on adding components to
a given design, they nearly all talk about either adding the component
to the master library or adding them to the local design library
rather than a personal common library not part of any design.

That\'s what I like about CircuitMaker 2000. Creating a \"common personal
library not part of any design\" is straightforward, especially for the
PCB section. I\'ve been using my own footprints exclusively for a decade
and a half. Macros for the schematic portion is somewhat more convoluted
but not too bad.

It\'s trivial for LTspice as well. I have a biggish one that I just
append models to using a text editor (or even the Linux output
redirects). Every nontrivial schematic that\'s just for my use
references it.

Ctl>s [up comes a text box]
.lib \\electronics\\designs\\PHParts.lib<enter

Run simulation. No muss, fuss, or bother.


Designs don\'t have to be part of a project. One can draw a schematic or
PCB layout and save it as a standalone file.

Then there is the fact that while there are multiple ways to do many
tasks, none of them are simple and/or obvious. The tool is highly
cranky about tiny details with little rhyme or reason.

That\'s what I think of as the Windoze approach.

There is a support group that has a handful of \"experts\" who often
start off with telling you to read the help file even though the help
file is very hard to search, hard to read and in some cases contains
incorrect or misleading info.

The old helicopter joke.


On the upside, once you get over the various \"humps\" it can be a very
useful tool for free.  Just learn to love the humps.

No argument there. I still have a lot to learn about LTSpice though.

The \"undocumented LTspice\" website is useful.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I\'ve discovered (is it new?) that if you, for example, change the name
of a mosfet to JLFET or something, and JLFET.mod is in the same folder
as the .asc file, it finds JLFET and uses it. That\'s handy.

What does that mean to \"change the name\"??? The symbols in LTspice have attributes. One is called \"value\" and is the one typically displayed on the schematic, however any or all attributes can be changed.

To point the symbol to a new file requires entering the file name either in the SpiceModel attribute or the ModelFile attribute which can only be accessed from the symbol editor, not the schematic editor.

Then there are crazy things like, if you use the SpiceModel attribute to define the file name and include a description, the attributes can not be edited on the schematic at all. Or some combination like that. I wanted to use one model file for the TLV333 family of parts (TLV333 single, TLV2333 dual, TLV4333 quad) and just change the displayed name on the symbol. Never found a way to do that. The help file \"clearly\" explains something that is far to arcane for me to recall right now that means you can\'t use the attributes in this way.

When using the ModelFile attribute to point to the model file the SpiceModel attribute is then used to point to the model within the file. The Value attribute is then used as the displayed value on the schematic... or so you would think. The reality is that both the SpiceModel attribute and the Value attribute are entered on the command line in the .net file. Insanely enough the Value attribute is listed first and the SpiceModel attribute is listed last, both preceded by the parameters. The result is if the Value model does not match the SpiceModel the SpiceModel is taken as the model name and the Value is treated as a net name causing an error.

The help file is little use in matters like this. Instead of telling you what time it is, the help tells you about the metallurgy required to make the gears in a variety of timing mechanisms which can potentially be used to keep time.

The support group at groups.io is often helpful, but often not. They seem unwilling to acknowledge any of the limitations of LTspice and the documentation and so are not willing to help in meaningful ways, but are surely well intentioned by starting out with a cry of \"read the help file\" without even an indication of which of the hundreds of sections.

One day when I have nothing else to do I might try some experiments to learn first, what are all the variables that must be controlled. Once that is done, perhaps I have a chance of analyzing the FSM that exists to define the interface.

Once someone pointed out that a computer is a FSM consisting of potentially 2^N states where N is the number of bits in the CPU and memory. Debugging a program could be defined as determining which of those state bits start in the wrong state.

An LTspice design has a lot of state bits and a very poorly defined state machine. Do the math.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-08-02 17:58, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:21:00 -0400, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2020-08-01 00:56, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 20:06:35 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/31/2020 2:56 PM, Ricketty C wrote:
On Friday, July 31, 2020 at 1:03:29 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/31/2020 10:20 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 12:40:08 +0100, Terry Pinnell
me@somewhere.invalid> wrote:

Clive Arthur <cliveta@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:

On 31/07/2020 09:58, Terry Pinnell wrote:
I\'ve recently started using LT Spice. A great free
tool, with the overriding advantage of widespread use.
(Unlike CircuitMaker 2000 Pro, of which I seem to be
the only current user on the planet.)

But LT\'s UI is not so good. Have there been any hacked
versions that attempt improvements? For example, using
the more modern rectangular resistors rather than
zigzags? And I was surprised to find the wires of my
first schematic printout seemed about a single pixel in
width, barely readable.


You\'ll find a rectangular \'European Resistor\' in Misc. I
only use them when I want to indicate a load, or
significant dissipation.

\'Pen thickness\' under control panel/drafting options can
make the lines thicker, and \'Hot Keys\' can configure the
keyboard option. I use R for rotate, W for wire ctrl-C
for copy, M for move D for drag etc.

But yes, the UI isn\'t its strong point.

Great, thanks Clive. I had scanned the settings but clearly
not thoroughly enough!

Terry

The HELP isn\'t very good. Some important things aren\'t
mentioned at all. Google often provides better help, and
there are some good tutorial/manuals online.

I use it sometimes just to create graphs for manuals, not
necessarily actual electronics, but you have to play with
settings to get a good image.




That is to say they could have kept the engine closed source
and used an off-the-shelf UI system like Qt to make it
intrinsically cross-platform and a nicer interface but didn\'t
do that for whatever reason.

It runs OK on linux under Wine but some things don\'t work quite
right e.g. copy and pasting across schematics is borked under
Wine on every Linux variant I\'ve tried it on.

Copy and paste is borked under Windows. You have to do the copy,
then you can only switch schematics one way or the command is
ended. I think it\'s with the TAB key. Click the mouse on the
tab and the command is ended. Lots of goofy little things like
this to learn.

What really bugs me though is the arcane details of modifying
symbols and adding new models. I recently had a lengthy
discussion about one way to do this where I was pointed to the
help file only to find the help file had rather misleading data.
Then people were other than polite discussing it as if the
confusion is the user\'s fault. After saying \"here\'s a way that
works\" and being shown it doesn\'t work the response was that the
behavior of the generated .net file command syntax is exactly as
documented even though .net file syntax was not part of the
original discussion. But that was the level of support in the
help file.

So be prepared to learn how the piston rings work if you want to
drive anywhere other than the corner market.


It annoys me when software developers don\'t follow the standard
conventions of the platform they\'re developing for like in most
Windows software undo is cntl + Z and cntl + Y. in Spice it\'s F9
and Shift + F9 problem is a lot of newer PCs have functions like
the backlight control bound to those keys and you have to press a
\"Fn\" button to activate the functions.

But LT Spice has an UNDO icon right in the toolbar. You don\'t have
to take your hand off the mouse.

I use only Trackpoint keyboards. There\'s no switching back and forth at
all. (Plus the Trackpoint was invented by a friend of mine.)


At least under Windows, copying a part or a chunk of circuit between
schematics is easy. No hotkeys, just the copy symbol on the toolbar.

I\'d go nuts if I had to use the mouse for everything. I\'ve been using
hotkeys since DOS 1.0, nearly 40 years ago, and IIRC I customized my
3270 terminal\'s key map a couple of years before that. (I was
timesharing on UBC\'s Amdahl 470 V/6 and V/8 running the Michigan
Terminal System [MTS]. Pretty cool for the day.)


I think the only hotkey I use in LT is g for ground.

I still do most of my drawing in Freelance 4.0+ for DOS. Hotkeys
galore. Just about all the figures in my book are from Freelance.
(Still true in the third edition, coming out some time early next year,
God willing.)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Well, you must be one of those fancy-schmantyz people who learned how
to type.

I was a 10-fingered hunt-and-peck typist as a grad student, and decided
to force myself to learn touch typing by writing my thesis without
looking at the keyboard.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 03/08/20 01:00, Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 2020-08-02 17:58, John Larkin wrote:
Well, you must be one of those fancy-schmantyz people who learned how
to type.


I was a 10-fingered hunt-and-peck typist as a grad student, and decided to force
myself to learn touch typing by writing my thesis without looking at the keyboard.

Difficult to touch type on an ASR33; two-fingered hunt-and-peck
was all I could manage.

A semblance of touch typing only happened after the cursor and
insert/delete keys became available.

But then my first professional program was entered on the hex
keypad of Acorn\'s first product. Fortunately I only had to
demonstrate the product principle, because it had to be
re-entered every time it was used. Nonetheless it shortened
the development time from 6 months to 3 weeks