[The Phantom]

I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double click on
part 1.

As before, if you can't get it, post an email address and I'll send it to
you.

It's about 3 megabytes, so be sure your email system can accept such a
large attachment.

You will probably need to use a recent version of Acrobat reader to view
it.

[Robert[_6_]]

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double click on
part 1.


Thank you Phantom. But unfortunately, part 1 is an .EXE !

I don't .exe as I cannot .exe in a Linux box. ( I could
using WINE but I don't want to, same as MAC-users )

Besides the OS differences, also Windows users should not
be tempted to download something from usenet and then execute !

Even more so when the RAR format can do without !

Robert

[The Phantom]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:06:41 +0200, Robert wrote:

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double click on
part 1.


Thank you Phantom. But unfortunately, part 1 is an .EXE !

I don't .exe as I cannot .exe in a Linux box. ( I could
using WINE but I don't want to, same as MAC-users )

If you have a version of WINRAR that will run on a MAC, you can extract the
file from the archive without executing the .exe (part 1). I made it self
extracting for the convenience of those who don't have WINRAR on their
computers.

And Windows users who have WINRAR can extract the .pdf file without using
the self-extracting feature; they need not execute the .exe.


Besides the OS differences, also Windows users should not
be tempted to download something from usenet and then execute !

Most Windows users are wise enough by now to know that they should virus
check whatever they download before they execute it.


Even more so when the RAR format can do without !

Robert


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

[Robert[_6_]]

The Phantom wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 09:06:41 +0200, Robert wrote:


If you have a version of WINRAR that will run on a MAC, you can extract the
file from the archive without executing the .exe (part 1). I made it self
extracting for the convenience of those who don't have WINRAR on their
computers.

And Windows users who have WINRAR can extract the .pdf file without using
the self-extracting feature; they need not execute the .exe.


Most Windows users are wise enough by now to know that they should virus
check whatever they download before they execute it.

As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

I am the Linux user and yes I can use ZIP and RAR and many many other
formats. It's just the .exe that scares me.

Robert

[Ian Thompson-Bell]

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double click on
part 1.

As before, if you can't get it, post an email address and I'll send it to
you.

It's about 3 megabytes, so be sure your email system can accept such a
large attachment.

You will probably need to use a recent version of Acrobat reader to view
it.

I am very interested in that article. Can you email it to me please at
ianbellATukfsnDOT org

Cheers

Ian

[Paul Babiak]

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double click on
part 1.

As before, if you can't get it, post an email address and I'll send it to
you.

It's about 3 megabytes, so be sure your email system can accept such a
large attachment.

You will probably need to use a recent version of Acrobat reader to view
it.

Another Linux user here....

please email article to soundtech_at_teksavvy.com

Thanks.

[JohnnyCanuck]

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers
over on alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

It's in 5 pieces. Download the 5 into a temp directory and double
click on part 1.

As before, if you can't get it, post an email address and I'll send
it to you.

It's about 3 megabytes, so be sure your email system can accept such a
large attachment.

You will probably need to use a recent version of Acrobat reader to
view it.

Yes, please. I don't have access to that NG. Please make the necessary
changes to the email address below.

morrisDOTturpinATgmailDOTcom

[Robert[_6_]]

The Phantom wrote:
I've posted another old paper on the topic of feedback amplifiers over on
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic

well, I started it.
so please send me anything but MS-owned formats at:

ideezet like the first triode build by Philips
at their Eindhoven factory in about 1918.
g they did it on order by Mr. Idzerda, a
mail and telecommunication engineer who started
dot his own radio-factory and the worlds first
com previously announced broadcasting.

Thank you

Robert

[John Byrns]

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader. That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[The Phantom]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:12:24 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader.

It wasn't split into two parts by me, and it didn't appear as two parts when I
downloaded it. Could that have been done by your newsreader?

I split the larger one in order to keep the parts less than 1 megabyte each.
Some people have complained about binaries over 1 MB on other newsgroups. I
probably should have split the corrective network paper because it's 1.3 MB.
Maybe that's why it appeared split to you, perhaps a particular property of your
IP/newsreader combination. It didn't appear split to me.

That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?

I am unaware that RAR is a Windows only format; it's very common on binary
newsgroups. Robert says he can deal with it, and he's a Linux user.



Regards,

John Byrns

[John Byrns]

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:12:24 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader.

It wasn't split into two parts by me, and it didn't appear as two parts when
I
downloaded it. Could that have been done by your newsreader?

No, how could my newsreader have split it when I was at the downloading
end? Neither I nor my newsreader would have any control over the
splitting of a binary on the news server. All my newsreader did was to
automatically combine the two pieces into a single binary file for me.
It would have to have been done by either your newsreader while
uploading, or by my ISP after your uploaded file was propagated to it.
I know that newsreaders can split files while uploading them, but I
don't have a clue whether or not news servers can split the file after
it has been up loaded, perhaps we have a usenet expert in the group that
knows? I tried a couple of experiments up loading your "Corrective
Networks for Feedback Circuits" file to alt.binaries.pictures.radio to
see if I could get it there in one piece, unfortunately I found that the
splitting mechanism in my newreader won't allow a single encoded file of
greater than 10,000 lines which is roughly 0.6 MB as an encoded ASCII
file. Unfortunately that isn't big enough to determine if it was likely
your newsreader that automatically split up the file when you uploaded
it, or if it was the news server used by my ISP that split your file.

I split the larger one in order to keep the parts less than 1 megabyte each.
Some people have complained about binaries over 1 MB on other newsgroups. I
probably should have split the corrective network paper because it's 1.3 MB.
Maybe that's why it appeared split to you, perhaps a particular property of
your
IP/newsreader combination.

Yes, the resulting "pdf" file is 1.3 MB, the two ASCII encoded files on
the news server my ISP uses were each just a tad short of 1.0 MB each.

It didn't appear split to me.

That probably depends on how your news reader displays the message list
and or how your preferences are set.

That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?

I am unaware that RAR is a Windows only format; it's very common on binary
newsgroups. Robert says he can deal with it, and he's a Linux user.

That may be, I don't know, but why complicate things when the
newsreaders already handle this problem without adding an extra layer of
formats and conversions?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[The Phantom]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:44:17 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:12:24 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader.

It wasn't split into two parts by me, and it didn't appear as two parts when
I
downloaded it. Could that have been done by your newsreader?

No, how could my newsreader have split it when I was at the downloading
end? Neither I nor my newsreader would have any control over the
splitting of a binary on the news server. All my newsreader did was to
automatically combine the two pieces into a single binary file for me.
It would have to have been done by either your newsreader while
uploading, or by my ISP after your uploaded file was propagated to it.
I know that newsreaders can split files while uploading them, but I
don't have a clue whether or not news servers can split the file after
it has been up loaded, perhaps we have a usenet expert in the group that
knows? I tried a couple of experiments up loading your "Corrective
Networks for Feedback Circuits" file to alt.binaries.pictures.radio to
see if I could get it there in one piece, unfortunately I found that the
splitting mechanism in my newreader won't allow a single encoded file of
greater than 10,000 lines which is roughly 0.6 MB as an encoded ASCII
file. Unfortunately that isn't big enough to determine if it was likely
your newsreader that automatically split up the file when you uploaded
it, or if it was the news server used by my ISP that split your file.

I split the larger one in order to keep the parts less than 1 megabyte each.
Some people have complained about binaries over 1 MB on other newsgroups. I
probably should have split the corrective network paper because it's 1.3 MB.
Maybe that's why it appeared split to you, perhaps a particular property of
your
IP/newsreader combination.

Yes, the resulting "pdf" file is 1.3 MB, the two ASCII encoded files on
the news server my ISP uses were each just a tad short of 1.0 MB each.

It didn't appear split to me.

That probably depends on how your news reader displays the message list
and or how your preferences are set.

That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?

I am unaware that RAR is a Windows only format; it's very common on binary
newsgroups. Robert says he can deal with it, and he's a Linux user.

That may be, I don't know, but why complicate things when the
newsreaders already handle this problem without adding an extra layer of
formats and conversions?

You say "...newsreaders already handle this problem...". Apparently whatever
some newsreaders may or may not do automatically doesn't always work for all
newsreaders. I have had people complain when I uploaded a multi-megabyte file.
There are reasons that the binary newsgroups that have the huge video files
split them, one such reason being that some ISP's just won't pass through large
files on USENET.

It doesn't seem like very much of a complication given the ubiquitous nature of
the RAR compression format. It easily obtainable, and as I said it is quite
common on many binary groups that offer binaries much larger than a megabyte or
two.

As an experiment, I'll re-upload the "stability problem" paper all in one chunk
and see what happens.



Regards,

John Byrns

[John Byrns]

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:44:17 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:12:24 -0500, John Byrns
wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into
parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader.

It wasn't split into two parts by me, and it didn't appear as two parts
when
I
downloaded it. Could that have been done by your newsreader?

No, how could my newsreader have split it when I was at the downloading
end? Neither I nor my newsreader would have any control over the
splitting of a binary on the news server. All my newsreader did was to
automatically combine the two pieces into a single binary file for me.
It would have to have been done by either your newsreader while
uploading, or by my ISP after your uploaded file was propagated to it.
I know that newsreaders can split files while uploading them, but I
don't have a clue whether or not news servers can split the file after
it has been up loaded, perhaps we have a usenet expert in the group that
knows? I tried a couple of experiments up loading your "Corrective
Networks for Feedback Circuits" file to alt.binaries.pictures.radio to
see if I could get it there in one piece, unfortunately I found that the
splitting mechanism in my newreader won't allow a single encoded file of
greater than 10,000 lines which is roughly 0.6 MB as an encoded ASCII
file. Unfortunately that isn't big enough to determine if it was likely
your newsreader that automatically split up the file when you uploaded
it, or if it was the news server used by my ISP that split your file.

I split the larger one in order to keep the parts less than 1 megabyte
each.
Some people have complained about binaries over 1 MB on other newsgroups.
I
probably should have split the corrective network paper because it's 1.3
MB.
Maybe that's why it appeared split to you, perhaps a particular property
of
your
IP/newsreader combination.

Yes, the resulting "pdf" file is 1.3 MB, the two ASCII encoded files on
the news server my ISP uses were each just a tad short of 1.0 MB each.

It didn't appear split to me.

That probably depends on how your news reader displays the message list
and or how your preferences are set.

That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?

I am unaware that RAR is a Windows only format; it's very common on binary
newsgroups. Robert says he can deal with it, and he's a Linux user.

That may be, I don't know, but why complicate things when the
newsreaders already handle this problem without adding an extra layer of
formats and conversions?

You say "...newsreaders already handle this problem...". Apparently whatever
some newsreaders may or may not do automatically doesn't always work for all
newsreaders. I have had people complain when I uploaded a multi-megabyte
file.
There are reasons that the binary newsgroups that have the huge video files
split them, one such reason being that some ISP's just won't pass through
large
files on USENET.

I think you missed my point, I understand that some files need to be
split, I'm simply saying that news readers already can do this, although
it may require configuring, so why add yet another level of complication
to solve a problem that news readers already have the capability of
dealing with?

It doesn't seem like very much of a complication given the ubiquitous nature
of
the RAR compression format. It easily obtainable, and as I said it is quite
common on many binary groups that offer binaries much larger than a megabyte
or
two.

If the problem is already solved by the news reader splitting and
reassembling the file, any added complication is too much, unless ones
thing is complication.

As an experiment, I'll re-upload the "stability problem" paper all in one
chunk
and see what happens.

That will be interesting, I found that I couldn't turn the splitting off
on my news reader, and the largest posted file size, one of the split
parts, I could set it for is about 0.6 MB.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[The Phantom]

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:44:12 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:44:17 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:12:24 -0500, John Byrns
wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:


As a MAC user, what method would you prefer to break the file into
parts
for posting? Can you deal with .zip files?

What was wrong with the way you posted "Corrective Networks for Feedback
Circuits"? That file was split into two parts which are automatically
spliced together by the newsreader.

It wasn't split into two parts by me, and it didn't appear as two parts
when
I
downloaded it. Could that have been done by your newsreader?

No, how could my newsreader have split it when I was at the downloading
end? Neither I nor my newsreader would have any control over the
splitting of a binary on the news server. All my newsreader did was to
automatically combine the two pieces into a single binary file for me.
It would have to have been done by either your newsreader while
uploading, or by my ISP after your uploaded file was propagated to it.
I know that newsreaders can split files while uploading them, but I
don't have a clue whether or not news servers can split the file after
it has been up loaded, perhaps we have a usenet expert in the group that
knows? I tried a couple of experiments up loading your "Corrective
Networks for Feedback Circuits" file to alt.binaries.pictures.radio to
see if I could get it there in one piece, unfortunately I found that the
splitting mechanism in my newreader won't allow a single encoded file of
greater than 10,000 lines which is roughly 0.6 MB as an encoded ASCII
file. Unfortunately that isn't big enough to determine if it was likely
your newsreader that automatically split up the file when you uploaded
it, or if it was the news server used by my ISP that split your file.

I split the larger one in order to keep the parts less than 1 megabyte
each.
Some people have complained about binaries over 1 MB on other newsgroups.
I
probably should have split the corrective network paper because it's 1.3
MB.
Maybe that's why it appeared split to you, perhaps a particular property
of
your
IP/newsreader combination.

Yes, the resulting "pdf" file is 1.3 MB, the two ASCII encoded files on
the news server my ISP uses were each just a tad short of 1.0 MB each.

It didn't appear split to me.

That probably depends on how your news reader displays the message list
and or how your preferences are set.

That is the way to go, why get
involved with all these complex windows only formats?

I am unaware that RAR is a Windows only format; it's very common on binary
newsgroups. Robert says he can deal with it, and he's a Linux user.

That may be, I don't know, but why complicate things when the
newsreaders already handle this problem without adding an extra layer of
formats and conversions?

You say "...newsreaders already handle this problem...". Apparently whatever
some newsreaders may or may not do automatically doesn't always work for all
newsreaders. I have had people complain when I uploaded a multi-megabyte
file.
There are reasons that the binary newsgroups that have the huge video files
split them, one such reason being that some ISP's just won't pass through
large
files on USENET.

I think you missed my point, I understand that some files need to be
split, I'm simply saying that news readers already can do this,

I didn't miss that point at all. I question how you know that ALL newsreaders
can do this. I've had complaints about it, which leads me to believe that SOME
newsreaders can't.

although
it may require configuring, so why add yet another level of complication
to solve a problem that news readers already have the capability of
dealing with?

Again, when you say "news readers", you are assuming that ALL newsreaders have
that capability. How do you know this?


It doesn't seem like very much of a complication given the ubiquitous nature
of
the RAR compression format. It easily obtainable, and as I said it is quite
common on many binary groups that offer binaries much larger than a megabyte
or
two.

If the problem is already solved by the news reader splitting and
reassembling the file, any added complication is too much, unless ones
thing is complication.

Apparently it isn't solved by ALL news readers, and those people who have the
deficient news readers won't see it as a complication, but a necessity.


As an experiment, I'll re-upload the "stability problem" paper all in one
chunk
and see what happens.

That will be interesting, I found that I couldn't turn the splitting off
on my news reader, and the largest posted file size, one of the split
parts, I could set it for is about 0.6 MB.


Regards,

John Byrns

[John Byrns]

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:44:12 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

If the problem is already solved by the news reader splitting and
reassembling the file, any added complication is too much, unless ones
thing is complication.

Apparently it isn't solved by ALL news readers, and those people who have the
deficient news readers won't see it as a complication, but a necessity.

I didn't say "ALL" newsreaders do it, however Outlook Express does it,
does anything else matter? The newsreader I use also does it, as does
any other self respecting newsreader.

I don't even know what "RAR" means, let alone how to decode it, what was
wrong with the old "ZIP" files? When an "RAR" comes along I have to
assign the decoding job to my son, otherwise I would have to do without.
Even "ZIP" files sometimes get large enough to require splitting, what
keeps an "RAR" from requiring splitting, as one of your recently posted
"RAR" files did require? "RAR", whatever it is doesn't seem to solve
the splitting problem at all, it just postpones it a bit, or would that
be a kilobyte?


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

[The Phantom]

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:22:24 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

In article ,
The Phantom wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:44:12 -0500, John Byrns wrote:

If the problem is already solved by the news reader splitting and
reassembling the file, any added complication is too much, unless ones
thing is complication.

Apparently it isn't solved by ALL news readers, and those people who have the
deficient news readers won't see it as a complication, but a necessity.

I didn't say "ALL" newsreaders do it, however Outlook Express does it,
does anything else matter?

"Does anything else matter?" Are you saying you don't care about the concerns
of people who don't use OE?

The newsreader I use also does it, as does
any other self respecting newsreader.

I don't even know what "RAR" means, let alone how to decode it,

It's time to learn. RAR is right up there with ZIP in popularity.

what was wrong with the old "ZIP" files?

I got this comment a few years ago as a result of posting a ZIP file:

"When you gonna stop posting these damn .ZIP files?"

I'm sure that person could tell you what was wrong with ZIP files.

I guess it's not possible to make everybody happy.

If you know how to use ZIP, you can learn RAR in a jiffy.

When an "RAR" comes along I have to
assign the decoding job to my son, otherwise I would have to do without.

No you wouldn't. I went to the trouble to make the parts self-extracting so
those few people who don't already have WINRAR wouldn't be inconvienenced.
After downloading the parts, a single double click retrieves the .pdf file; not
really complicated.

Or you could get and learn to use WINRAR, just like you learned how to use ZIP.
That's what I did the first time I saw a RAR file.

Even "ZIP" files sometimes get large enough to require splitting, what
keeps an "RAR" from requiring splitting, as one of your recently posted
"RAR" files did require?

Nothing prevents that. I already said that I probably should have split the
"corrective networks" file, which is over a megabyte. If a ZIPed version of
some big .pdf file required splitting, then the RARed version would also. RAR
isn't intrinsically any better than ZIP. It's just more popular these days, and
WINRAR, a utility which encodes and decodes RAR files, is handier to use, which
probably accounts for its popularity.

"RAR", whatever it is

Apparently your son knows what it is; I'm sure he wouldn't mind explaining it to
you.

doesn't seem to solve
the splitting problem at all,

It most certainly does solve it. It allows splitting a large file and putting
it back together again.

it just postpones it a bit,

Just because the solution to a problem is postponed doesn't mean that the
problem isn't solved.

For those people whose newsreaders don't automatically solve the problem, RAR
solves it. Of course, any other compression format, such as ZIP, 7ZIP, GZIP,
etc., that supports splitting the archive, would also work. I chose RAR because
of its popularity.

or would that
be a kilobyte?


Regards,

John Byrns