Time to Upgrade ?:-}

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

You would. It's the right part for vanishing few jobs,
but some people have an exaggerated idea of virtues.
Click to expand...

Parts houses sell in "M" numbers.

The fact that these garner "B" level sales results per annum clearly
shows that you are clueless and are simply trying to make yourself
appear otherwise.
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

The device is still being bought - which is sort of
amazing when you realise how crummy it is
Click to expand...

Using a term like "crummy" when you are trying to foist your pathetic
opinion, is not providing the image you seem to think it is.

So far, everything you have stated has been buncome.
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.
Click to expand...
 
On Sunday, 16 August 2015 23:49:01 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

You would. It's the right part for vanishing few jobs,
but some people have an exaggerated idea of virtues.

Parts houses sell in "M" numbers.

The fact that these garner "B" level sales results per annum clearly
shows that you are clueless and are simply trying to make yourself
appear otherwise.
Click to expand...

Parts houses also sell millions of 741 op amps. The argument that this implies that the 741 is a good op amp or that the 555 is a useful device rests on the assumption that these parts were designed in recently.

In fact both are "legacy" parts, and their continuing consumption reflects history, not their current competitive status.

This is a more complicated idea than you can get your head around, and your failure to understand the implications just reminds us that you are the one who is clueless, and completely incapable of demonstrating the sort of comprehension that might let you claim any higher intellectual standing.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sunday, 16 August 2015 23:50:57 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
Click to expand...

<unmarked snip - from one of my negative comments about the NE555>

The device is still being bought - which is sort of
amazing when you realise how crummy it is

Using a term like "crummy" when you are trying to foist your pathetic
opinion, is not providing the image you seem to think it is.

So far, everything you have stated has been buncome.
Click to expand...

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bunkum

I'm not altogether surprised that you think what I've posted is bunkum - it's all been a bit above your intellectual level. The origin of the word - speaking for Buncombe - reflects an unfortunate political speech which wasn't well received. Applying it to rather different content that you don't understand reveals exactly how pathetic your own ill-informed opinions are.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Monday, 17 August 2015 08:31:06 UTC+10, John Fields wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, 16 August 2015 18:39:52 UTC+10, John Fields wrote:
Click to expand...

<snip>

It's not a single power transistor, it's a totem pole which can source
and sink enough current to drive decent loads.

For a very wimpy value of "decent load".

So you'd advocate driving a tank to the grocery store to pick up a
dozen eggs?

The 555 output can sink 10mA at 0.1V typ. 0.25V worst case. It can sink more current (and get hotter)if you can live with higher saturation voltages. There's a wide gap between that and any kind of "tank".

A "tank" is generally considered to be a resonant circuit due to its
ability to store energy for a time.

You take unwarranted liberties by trying to bend physics to your will.
Click to expand...

The word "tank" does have a number of meanings, most of which can be disambiguated by context. From the context above it is clear that both you and I had been referring to a large armoured military vehicle.

Your attempt to disregard this context and assert that the word could only mean a resonant circuit is a feeble and unwarranted joke.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:54:04 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
<PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.
Click to expand...

DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Slowman >:-}

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
 
On Monday, 17 August 2015 05:44:27 UTC+10, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:54:04 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.

DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Sloman >:-}
Click to expand...

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson gets it wrong again.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:44:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:54:04 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.

DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Slowman >:-}

...Jim Thompson
Click to expand...
JT is just too much of a (retarded) pussy to debate with someone, so
everyone who argues against the old git fuck gets called a troll.

He is the most pathetic Usenet user in existence.
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 15:56:45 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> Gave us:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:44:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:


DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Slowman >:-}

...Jim Thompson
JT is just too much of a (retarded) pussy to debate with someone, so
everyone who argues against the old git fuck gets called a troll.
Ooops.. left out... old DRUNKEN git fuck.

He is the most pathetic Usenet user in existence.
Click to expand...
 
On Monday, 17 August 2015 09:46:18 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

In fact both are "legacy" parts,

Nice try, loser.

It gets used in NEW designs every day.
Click to expand...

By "legacy" designers, who keep on implementing design solutions which worked back in the 1970's and keep on working now. They aren't the cheapest or best solutions any more (if they ever were), but they still work. There are some designers who still design in 741 op amps too. I can't imagine who'd hire them.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, 16 August 2015 18:39:52 UTC+10, John Fields wrote:
My point, which you either missed or decided to trample, was that if a
555 is perfect for a given application - with due diligence paid to
the optimization required for the task - then overoptimization is
gilding the lily since it serves no useful purpose and is wasteful of
resources.

This requires that the 555 be "perfect" for the application in the first place - which it hardly ever is.

Since you're not in a position to know all of the applications for
which a 555 is perfect, nor the situations determining what makes it
perfect for that application, you're really not in a position to make
that judgement call with any authority.

That's a hoot. The 555 is a mediocre timer and an a pathetic NPN power switch on one package. It was good enough for a lot of applications back in 1971, but the competition got better rapidly.
Click to expand...

Is that an alien concept to you?

The alien concept is of the 555 being perfect for any purpose.

More sophistry.

The sophistry is in the claim that the 555 is "perfect" for any purpose. You've got to be deludedly infatuated with the part to have made the claim in the first place.
Click to expand...

---
Heh...

For a baseline, the claim I made was that the 555 is perfect for
_some_ applications, not for all.

Your allegation that: "The alien concept is of the 555 being perfect
for any purpose." can be interpreted in at least two ways.

The first is that my claim was fallacious because I claimed that the
555 can be can be used in any application at all, which is manifestly
false.

The second is that my claim that a 555 is a perfect fit for some
applications was fallacious because it's perfect for none.

Again manifestly false as evidenced by your inability/reticence to
provide proof instead of: "because I say so"

But... perhaps I was wrong in giving you credit for the rather
seemingly clever attempt at subterfuge and should, rather, chalk it up
to serendipity.

John Fields







I'm sure that if you slice and dice your applications sufficiently
finely you will find one or two where the defects of the 555 don't
matter much, but the reality is that it's mostly used where better
solutions exist and the designer is too lazy implement them or too
ignorant to realise that they exist.

I believe that rather than ignorance ruling, pig-headed stubbornness
keeps some from using a 555 when it's the right part for the job.

You would. It's the right part for vanishing few jobs, but some people have an exaggerated idea of virtues.

Hans Camenzind mentioned the thing he could have done better in his book
and it's stuck with a pathetic power transistor for doing the switching.

And had he not mentioned it, would you have been able to "fix" his
original design and hit the same performance, cost, and scheduling
targets he had to meet? I think the answer to that question is a
resounding "NO!"

Sure. It was a useful device at the time, largely because he managed to squeeze the function down to eight pins - a point he makes in his book. That time was 1971, a while ago now.

And the device is still amazingly useful, as its astounding sales
show.

The device is still being bought - which is sort of amazing when you realise how crummy it is - but less amazing when you see how many 741's are still being sold, which are at least as crummy.

It's not a single power transistor, it's a totem pole which can source
and sink enough current to drive decent loads.

For a very wimpy value of "decent load".

So you'd advocate driving a tank to the grocery store to pick up a
dozen eggs?

The 555 output can sink 10mA at 0.1V typ. 0.25V worst case. It can sink more current (and get hotter)if you can live with higher saturation voltages. There's a wide gap between that and any kind of "tank".

Or are you talking about the discharge transistor?

Obviously not.

Not obvious at all since you wrote: "a pathetic power transistor"
which is, obviously, singular.

In almost all application, it's the current sinking capacity that matters. The discharge transistor is only slightly more pathetic than NPN part of the output stage, but it is adequate for it's (more restricted) purpose.
Not that you will have let that inhibit your misplaced ingenuity..
Click to expand...
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 05:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, 16 August 2015 18:39:52 UTC+10, John Fields wrote:
My point, which you either missed or decided to trample, was that if a
555 is perfect for a given application - with due diligence paid to
the optimization required for the task - then overoptimization is
gilding the lily since it serves no useful purpose and is wasteful of
resources.

This requires that the 555 be "perfect" for the application in the first place - which it hardly ever is.

Since you're not in a position to know all of the applications for
which a 555 is perfect, nor the situations determining what makes it
perfect for that application, you're really not in a position to make
that judgement call with any authority.

That's a hoot. The 555 is a mediocre timer and an a pathetic NPN power switch on one package. It was good enough for a lot of applications back in 1971, but the competition got better rapidly.

Is that an alien concept to you?

The alien concept is of the 555 being perfect for any purpose.

More sophistry.

The sophistry is in the claim that the 555 is "perfect" for any purpose. You've got to be deludedly infatuated with the part to have made the claim in the first place.

I'm sure that if you slice and dice your applications sufficiently
finely you will find one or two where the defects of the 555 don't
matter much, but the reality is that it's mostly used where better
solutions exist and the designer is too lazy implement them or too
ignorant to realise that they exist.

I believe that rather than ignorance ruling, pig-headed stubbornness
keeps some from using a 555 when it's the right part for the job.

You would. It's the right part for vanishing few jobs, but some people have an exaggerated idea of virtues.

Hans Camenzind mentioned the thing he could have done better in his book
and it's stuck with a pathetic power transistor for doing the switching.

And had he not mentioned it, would you have been able to "fix" his
original design and hit the same performance, cost, and scheduling
targets he had to meet? I think the answer to that question is a
resounding "NO!"

Sure. It was a useful device at the time, largely because he managed to squeeze the function down to eight pins - a point he makes in his book. That time was 1971, a while ago now.

And the device is still amazingly useful, as its astounding sales
show.

The device is still being bought - which is sort of amazing when you realise how crummy it is - but less amazing when you see how many 741's are still being sold, which are at least as crummy.

It's not a single power transistor, it's a totem pole which can source
and sink enough current to drive decent loads.

For a very wimpy value of "decent load".

So you'd advocate driving a tank to the grocery store to pick up a
dozen eggs?

The 555 output can sink 10mA at 0.1V typ. 0.25V worst case. It can sink more current (and get hotter)if you can live with higher saturation voltages. There's a wide gap between that and any kind of "tank".
Click to expand...

---
A "tank" is generally considered to be a resonant circuit due to its
abilty to store energy for a time.

You take unwarrented liberties by trying to bend physics to your will.
---
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

>In fact both are "legacy" parts,

Nice try, loser.

It gets used in NEW designs every day.
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:33:31 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

>I'm not altogether surprised that you think what I've posted is bunkum

snipped further buncombe.
 
On Monday, 17 August 2015 12:06:58 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:00:00 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Monday, 17 August 2015 09:46:18 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

In fact both are "legacy" parts,

Nice try, loser.

It gets used in NEW designs every day.

By "legacy" designers,

Says Bill Sloman, legacy s.e.d. dumbfuck.
Click to expand...

Not an honour I can aspire to. There's much too much competition for that position for me to be in contention. I imagine that it's only modesty that prevents you from putting yourself forward - Skybuck Flying may have a stronger claim, but you definitely deserve it for being remarkably persistent and assertive in your stupidity.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:00:00 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Monday, 17 August 2015 09:46:18 UTC+10, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:22:55 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

In fact both are "legacy" parts,

Nice try, loser.

It gets used in NEW designs every day.

By "legacy" designers,
Click to expand...

Says Bill SlowBoy, legacy s.e.d. dumbfuck.
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 15:56:45 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 12:44:22 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:54:04 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.

DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Slowman >:-}

...Jim Thompson
JT is just too much of a (retarded) pussy to debate with someone, so
everyone who argues against the old git fuck gets called a troll.
Click to expand...

You are the very definition of a troll.

He is the most pathetic Usenet user in existence.
Click to expand...
 
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 16:44:32 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, 17 August 2015 05:44:27 UTC+10, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 18:54:04 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 09:46:40 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:28:35 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
pommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:16:52 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:02:21 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@dsl.pipex.com> Gave us:


As a janitor

Go away, janitor... You are not wanted, nor is your pathetic tripe
needed.

Answer the question, imbecile. Post a design of yours.

Back in the seventies, they had "Janitor in a Drum".

You are "Janitor in a Newsgroup".
You are an imbecile.

DecadentLoser is lower pond-scum than Sloman >:-}

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson gets it wrong again.
Click to expand...

---
If he got it wrong, then you must be lower pond-scum than DLUNO.

John Fields
 
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 13:40:28 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:


Please stop feeding the trolls.

...Jim Thompson
Click to expand...

Whenever you see one of those long Sloman/Fields/AlwaysWrong
sequences, just ignore the whole sorry mess. It's always the same
geezer bickering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top