Richard Clark wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:52:20 -0500, jawod wrote:

Based upon your microscopic linguistic analysis,

It is a reciprocal (analysis/expression) characteristic inherent to
successful engineering; others use tea leaves (couched in trade argot)
to present results of dubious quality.

I imagine you use a
Microsoft product (at least conversing with you is similar to using
one).

Hi John,

You obviously have never read an Intel hardware manual (circa MDS-80).

BTW (seriously), will the new Mac products work with EZNEC?

This is something YOU should investigate. Mac now uses that
one-and-the-same Intel engine. It is suggested in the press that it
runs both operating systems. It costs more to do the same thing, but
you get that cool logo.

For everyone's notes: EZnec runs quite nicely on an Intel based iMac.


I prefer OpenSource servers, applications,
and Linux. I haven't bought a M$ product in this millennium having
experienced the Windows Me platform (Chairman Bill's fin du cercle
joke on us all).

I work both Microsoft, OSX, and am learning Linux.

Not that it was asked for, but my experience has been that MS OS is
great if you have paid support staff to make it run, Linux is nice, but
every once in a while, it kicks us back to 1985, (sorry - unforgivable
in 2006) and when I absolutely have to get it done with a minimum of..
what is the technical term? Oh yeah - with a minimum of peckering
around, I'll use OSX any day.

And my G5 Mac is cool to look at too - inside and out.




As I pointed out earlier, your question is answered in 10 minutes to
all variations that I offered. That analysis even gives degrees of
"better" as expressed in KHz and dB (quantifiable engineering terms
commonly used in serious antenna discussion).

Of course one can get the answer from a modeling program. Of course,
the modeling program won't tell *why*.

Here is a video of me trying to get a modeling program to tell me why my
antenna design worked like it said...

http://www.break.com/index/patiencechild.html



As a spoiler, I will
offer that the diagonal placement seriously disrupts both resonance
AND gain to the tune of 100s of KHz and 3-4 dB. Of course, the
qualifier "seriously" was meaningful only to me; that is, until I
quantified it.


Now that's better!

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Mr. Clark, me thinks you best get back on your medications om !!!!



--James--

Michael Coslo wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:52:20 -0500, jawod wrote:

Based upon your microscopic linguistic analysis,


It is a reciprocal (analysis/expression) characteristic inherent to
successful engineering; others use tea leaves (couched in trade argot)
to present results of dubious quality.

I imagine you use a Microsoft product (at least conversing with you
is similar to using one).


Hi John,

You obviously have never read an Intel hardware manual (circa MDS-80).

BTW (seriously), will the new Mac products work with EZNEC?


This is something YOU should investigate. Mac now uses that
one-and-the-same Intel engine. It is suggested in the press that it
runs both operating systems. It costs more to do the same thing, but
you get that cool logo.


For everyone's notes: EZnec runs quite nicely on an Intel based iMac.


I prefer OpenSource servers, applications,
and Linux. I haven't bought a M$ product in this millennium having
experienced the Windows Me platform (Chairman Bill's fin du cercle
joke on us all).


I work both Microsoft, OSX, and am learning Linux.

Not that it was asked for, but my experience has been that MS OS is
great if you have paid support staff to make it run, Linux is nice, but
every once in a while, it kicks us back to 1985, (sorry - unforgivable
in 2006) and when I absolutely have to get it done with a minimum of..
what is the technical term? Oh yeah - with a minimum of peckering
around, I'll use OSX any day.

And my G5 Mac is cool to look at too - inside and out.




As I pointed out earlier, your question is answered in 10 minutes to
all variations that I offered. That analysis even gives degrees of
"better" as expressed in KHz and dB (quantifiable engineering terms
commonly used in serious antenna discussion).


Of course one can get the answer from a modeling program. Of course,
the modeling program won't tell *why*.

Here is a video of me trying to get a modeling program to tell me why my
antenna design worked like it said...

http://www.break.com/index/patiencechild.html



As a spoiler, I will

offer that the diagonal placement seriously disrupts both resonance
AND gain to the tune of 100s of KHz and 3-4 dB. Of course, the
qualifier "seriously" was meaningful only to me; that is, until I
quantified it.



Now that's better!

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -
Mike,
That is about the funniest video I've seen in some time! In German, no
less!


Thanks

John
AB8O

jawod wrote in :

Michael Coslo wrote:

Some snippage

Of course one can get the answer from a modeling program. Of
course,
the modeling program won't tell *why*.

Here is a video of me trying to get a modeling program to tell me why
my antenna design worked like it said...

http://www.break.com/index/patiencechild.html



As a spoiler, I will

offer that the diagonal placement seriously disrupts both resonance
AND gain to the tune of 100s of KHz and 3-4 dB. Of course, the
qualifier "seriously" was meaningful only to me; that is, until I
quantified it.



Now that's better!

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -
Mike,
That is about the funniest video I've seen in some time! In German,
no less!

I know quite a few people who cannot make it through the thing!

Thanks

Hey! BTW, once you get used to Richard's prose, he's enjoyable to
read, and there is truth in his ministrations.

73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Mike:

You may be quite right, Richard may not be all bad (I imagine a cadence
to his words--much like a drill instructors voice too!)

But anyone which likes Shakespeare? Ewwwwwww!

JS

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
6...
jawod wrote in :

Michael Coslo wrote:

Some snippage

Of course one can get the answer from a modeling program. Of
course,
the modeling program won't tell *why*.

Here is a video of me trying to get a modeling program to tell me
why
my antenna design worked like it said...

http://www.break.com/index/patiencechild.html



As a spoiler, I will

offer that the diagonal placement seriously disrupts both
resonance
AND gain to the tune of 100s of KHz and 3-4 dB. Of course, the
qualifier "seriously" was meaningful only to me; that is, until I
quantified it.



Now that's better!

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -
Mike,
That is about the funniest video I've seen in some time! In German,
no less!

I know quite a few people who cannot make it through the thing!

Thanks

Hey! BTW, once you get used to Richard's prose, he's enjoyable to
read, and there is truth in his ministrations.

73 de Mike KB3EIA -

"John Smith" wrote in news:ekj6ar$nfb$1
@news.ndhu.edu.tw:

Mike:

You may be quite right, Richard may not be all bad (I imagine a cadence
to his words--much like a drill instructors voice too!)

But anyone which likes Shakespeare? Ewwwwwww!


"Pause awhile, And let my counsel sway you in this case."


(whispering.... I think he might be an English Major)


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
Hey! BTW, once you get used to Richard's prose, he's enjoyable to
read, and there is truth in his ministrations.

Even the part about reflections from non-reflective
glass being brighter than the surface of the sun? :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
Hey! BTW, once you get used to Richard's prose, he's enjoyable to
read, and there is truth in his ministrations.

Even the part about reflections from non-reflective
glass being brighter than the surface of the sun? :-)

Don't recall that one, Cecil.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:


I work both Microsoft, OSX, and am learning Linux.

Not that it was asked for, but my experience has been that MS OS is
great if you have paid support staff to make it run, Linux is nice, but
every once in a while, it kicks us back to 1985, (sorry - unforgivable
in 2006) and when I absolutely have to get it done with a minimum of..

How so? Interested in your perspective on the 1985ish Linux issues.

And I have found that it takes less paid staff to support a number of
linux servers than the same number of 2K or 2K3 servers. Clicking is
much tougher to automate than simply writing scripts and adding them to
crontab.

tom
K0TAR

Tom Ring wrote in
:

Michael Coslo wrote:


I work both Microsoft, OSX, and am learning Linux.

Not that it was asked for, but my experience has been that MS OS
is
great if you have paid support staff to make it run, Linux is nice,
but every once in a while, it kicks us back to 1985, (sorry -
unforgivable in 2006) and when I absolutely have to get it done with
a minimum of..

How so? Interested in your perspective on the 1985ish Linux issues.


My perspective is that of an OS that occasionally makes me work as if it
was 1985. More on that below.



And I have found that it takes less paid staff to support a number of
linux servers than the same number of 2K or 2K3 servers. Clicking is
much tougher to automate than simply writing scripts and adding them
to crontab.

Ahh, the perspective issue! Agreed that getting to the command line
is a more efficient method, even on an Xserve. But I have to deal
with situations where I have to get a piece of hardware, anstall and
use it and any software needed, and meet a deadline.A real short
one. With the PC, we usually find that we have hardware limitations
(always cured by spending a few K), with Linux, we can spend a lot
of time looking for drivers, installing a program is always
exciting, and usually the deadline has come and gone in either case.

I use the Mac because I work with a computer, not get a computer to
work. I'll gladly concede that the other platforms/OS's are much
superior - certainly they must be, because they require a support
staff that knows many interesting and arcane things, and I just plug
away, meeting deadlines.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -