Prev: I will renew all of my works books. I am Isaac Newton, have you already drawn a comet on your eggs on Easter?
Next: I hope this is a heartening economic sign...
From: John Fields on 8 Apr 2010 17:47
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:55:13 -0700 (PDT), "oparr(a)hotmail.com"
<oparr(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>>He's cagey enough about
>>it that either (a) he thinks it's a genuine crown jewel or (b) he
>>doesn't want to get his tailfeathers singed by bragging about a kluge.
>
>I haven't the faintest idea as to what my "circuit" is being likened
>to.

---
So far, since you won't show what you've got, it's being likened to
vaporware.
---

>This thread is a followup (sort of) to an earlier thread "High
>side current monitor with latch" in which Joerg gives me some advice
>(albeit old school) regarding MOSFET protection.

---
What's that "old school" slur about?

If he helped you, he helped you.

Was his advice unsound in some way or did you just feel that there are
newer and better ways to do what you want and you're grousing about how
you could put a better edge on a katana if only someone would show you
how?
---

>After throughly investigating the characteristics of MOSFETs, it
>dawned on me that they are probably the easiest of all transistors to
>protect. It also dawned on me that others, including Joerg, were
>probably aware ot this already but have decided to keep this to
>themselves. Hence this thread.

---
OK then, assuming you're right and that those who've captured the cat
and haven't decided to let it out of the bag are derelict in their duty
to disclose everything they know, why don't you show them up for the
frauds they are and untie the bag?
---

>It is my opinion, based on both characteristics and test results, that
>a MOSFET can be operated very close to its absolute maximum
>thresholds, without damage, when used in conjunction with a single
>small signal BJT. Not being one to ever give anything on a silver
>platter (too expensive), that's about all you need to know from me.

---
Au contraire.

if you have an opinion, then publish it and claim that it's fact, in
order to be believed you must supply evidence instead of whining about
that others are hiding what you think you've discovered.
---

>Furthermore, I'm convinced that "regulars" like Joerg etc. are the
>ones who should be imparting this knowledge.

---
What "knowledge"?

You claim that you're now privy to what they've been hiding, so why not
blow the lid off the whole nasty business and publish your findings?
---

>I'm just an occasional
>visitor

---
Aww...

Poor baby.
---

>and already a "John Fields" seems to be on the verge of "death
>threats" over this.

---
I'm not at all interested in causing your physical demise, in any way,
since I do enjoy laughing at you when you've haughtily painted your mind
into a corner you can't get out of.
---

----
Fix your newsreader. The following is out of time:
----

>On Apr 8, 12:10�pm, Phil Hobbs
><pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>

JF
From: John Fields on 8 Apr 2010 18:15
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:07:16 -0700 (PDT), "oparr(a)hotmail.com"
<oparr(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>>I very much doubt that you have anything to worry about.
>
>What! Me worry? We're just playing mind games with each other. I have
>something some want

---
Who?
---

>and another set hoping and praying that I keep my
>mouth shut.

---
Who?
---

>>So go ahead and post it.
>
>All out of silver platters.....Sorry!

---
If you have something worthwhile to say, then say it and send an invoice
instead of pretending that you do and insisting on being paid up front
for saying it.

BTW, what's the following, more of your header manipulation?
---

>On Apr 8, 1:33�pm, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net>
>wrote:

---
JF
From: John Larkin on 8 Apr 2010 18:34
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:15:13 -0700 (PDT), "oparr(a)hotmail.com"
<oparr(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>>More likely an amateur with a silly circuit.
>
>Put your sour grapes to good use....A new exotic wine perhaps.

Yet another amateur idiot who thinks he's invented something new, and
keeps it a secret because he thinks it's worth something. Wrong and
wrong.

John

From: John Fields on 8 Apr 2010 18:36
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:11:43 -0700 (PDT), "oparr(a)hotmail.com"
<oparr(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Apr 8, 4:44�pm, John Fields <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> wrote:
>>

>>The following should be at the top, immediately preceding my post:
>
>Well it ain't. End of story.

---
Nope, it ain't, but you'd like for it to be, wouldn't you, since that'd
leave you on your perceived top of the heap?

Here you are, a mosquito flitting around the arena who wants to suck on
the big boys, and all you've got going for you is...

Not much, from my point of view.

Care to comment?

JF
From: krw on 8 Apr 2010 18:42
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:15:13 -0700 (PDT), "oparr(a)hotmail.com"
<oparr(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>>More likely an amateur with a silly circuit.
>
>Put your sour grapes to good use....A new exotic wine perhaps.

Nah, your whine has spoiled the crop.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Prev: I will renew all of my works books. I am Isaac Newton, have you already drawn a comet on your eggs on Easter?
Next: I hope this is a heartening economic sign...