Roy Lewallen wrote in message
...
If any EZNEC customer is interested in the answers to these or other
questions about EZNEC, please email me and I'll be glad to answer them.
(My only request is that before asking any question about EZNEC, you
make an honest effort to find the answer in the manual. That's the only
way I can possibly provide the level of support my customers deserve.)

I have the strong feeling that Chuck isn't nearly so interested in the
inner workings of EZNEC as he is in simply being as big a nuisance to me
as he can. After all, he's said how horrible he thinks the EZNEC
interface is, and has never purchased it. And I've been guilty of
encouraging his being a nuisance by responding. I apologize to the other
readers for this.

I've wasted much more time with Chuck than he deserves. From here on,
let Chuck, Art, Chip, and Yuri will have to vent their frustrations
without me. I will continue to try to contribute positively to the
newsgroup as I have (tried) in the past. Ignoring Chuck is a necessary
step in doing so.

Good grief, Roy...

I asked honest and valid questions,
seeking honest and valid answers.
Instead, I get this pejorative, and rather
disingenuous diatribe.

My obtaining a legal copy of your
software - with your full knowledge, I
might add - was for evaluation purposes
only. It is common opinion, that your
DOS interface was less then desirable.

Considering this highly unusual reaction
to my questions, It's not unreasonable
for me to now assume that you left out
the thin-wire model. Surely you weren't
thinking it was superfluous and no one
would really need to use it. Perhaps you
were just concerned about speed and
memory back in the days of the 80386.

* [p 72, NEC2d documentation] "The
* explicit transmission line model is, of
* course, less efficient in computer time
* and storage because of the additional
* segments required."

I have for a long time, suspected there
was a tx line modeling problem in NEC.
Now, it is apparent this problem exists
only in your EZNEC.

Tort liabilities aside (that's not my
concern here) let me suggest that it
may be in your best interest to address
this issue, not covertly as you seem to
be suggesting, but openly, in a way that
will illuminate your honesty and integrity.

73 de Chuck, WA7RAI