|
EZNEC and Linux
On Feb 22, 7:27 am, Bob Miller wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:16:27 -0800, David Ryeburn wrote: ... Ironically if I were to get an Intel Mac, one of the programs I could no longer use is the lean, mean 1992 Mac version of MS Word 5.1a, still working nicely after 15 years on my year 2001 computer. This program runs faster and better under Classic (i.e. Mac OS 9) within Mac OS X than it ever did in the old days. Two layers of emulation are going on here -- OS X is emulating OS 9, and the PowerPC version of OS 9 is emulating a 680x0 CPU on a PPC chip (G5, G4, G3, or earlier) -- Word 5 was written before the days of the PPC chips. Classic is not readily available for Intel Macs (there are semi-satisfactory hacks which make it sort of work). David, ex-W8EZE I remember Word v. 5; now, if you could get Wordstar 3.3 to run on a Mac, that'd be something :-) bob k5qwg I'm still using netscape 3.01 to read my e-mail... I like the lesser amount of clutter vs the bloated new versions of readers. Also, fairly immune to the security problems that can plaque MS exploder. But I'm pretty much a windows user...XP at the moment.. No plans to get Vista anytime soon.. The main reason I'm stuck to windows is the flight simulator requires it. But.. I also like it because all my sound card programs, etc run off the same sound config. No swapping around junk like the old DOS days. My puter is also my TV/Video recorder, etc too these days.. All windows based.. I've never once run Linux yet.. They never had any app's that were interesting to me.. Or at least nothing that wouldn't run on windows. Neither it, or Mac runs a decent flight sim.. And like I say, my puter is 79% airplane... In fact, the flight sim is why I first bought a computer in the first place. I never really had much use for one before that. I'm running a P4 at 3.15 ghz, and to me, it's a dated system... :/ I'm nearing upgrade time again. Course now, it's a duo core, etc, vs the usual ramp up in clock speed you used to do.. I'm waiting as long as I can.. Maybe end up with a quad core or whatever.. The longer I wait, the more I get for my $$$.. I also need a lot of drive space since I started recording loads of video. I have 240 gig's, and it's always full.. I need about 500 gigs more just to get a little breathing room. My problem is, I'm lazy, and I record more movies than I edit and burn to disk.. So they stack up on me.. Editing and burning gets to be a time consuming chore I don't really like too much.. Or at least, I can think of better things to do. MK |
EZNEC and Linux
art wrote:
The bottom line should be is EZNEC accurate? Has the programming been held within the confines provided by the original provider' the U.S. government. Who overseas the content of this so called program. If it has a patent then all would or should be revealed in the patent disclosure. No. A patent must disclose enough of the method so that someone "versed in the art" of programing could reproduce it. That's pretty vague. I might be able to look at the patent and reproduce or better the process easily, while you look at it and scratch your head. Or vice versa. Obviously the more complete a patent application is and the simpler it is to understand, the more likely it is to be granted and the easier it will be to explain to a jury in an infringment case. It does not need to be simple or easy to understand and most are not. Then as you alluded to later in your comments, there is the whole problem of implementation. Without a lot of effort, a home computer version of most scientific programs will produce meaningless results due to lack of precision. Experienced scientific and engineering programers know this and compensate. "Teach yourself Visual whatever in a week" programmers don't. The biggest problem with visual whatever programmers is they tend to be seduced by the flashy interface and ignore the substance under it. Caveat Emptor. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 Fax ONLY: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ |
EZNEC and Linux
|
EZNEC and Linux
|
EZNEC and Linux
"art" wrote in message oups.com... On 1 Mar, 06:41, Jon Kåre Hellan wrote: John Smith I writes: Dan Andersson wrote: ... So if someone sits on the VB code for EZNEC, just rebuild it .Mono on Linux BUT LINK IT STATICALLY! This means the code will run on almost all varietys of Linux! //Dan, M0DFI My gawd man. Let us hope no serious program is ever written in Visual Basic! Oh, I forgot, some idiots did do that, didn't they? I don't think that was called for. We may like Linux, but programming just for Windows doesn't make somebody an idiot. 73 de LA4RT Jon, Trondheim, Norway The bottom line should be is EZNEC accurate? Has the programming been held within the confines provided by the original provider' the U.S. government. Who overseas the content of this so called program. If it has a patent then all would or should be revealed in the patent disclosure. Has anybody taken this for his own use for the advancement of science which is the reason for patents? Has anybody upgraded the assigned patent for the sake of science or has something not been disclosed to prevent true examination and as such invalidates the patent? Does the government have the option of review of all algorithms or are they in the same position the country is with voting machines? Basically the purchaser is really in the position of caveat emptor especially since all programs provide different results! Art Art, wouldn't it be better if you picked knitting or bird watching? You would not have to deal with all of us morons and overseas governments that don't get your brilliance. bada BUm |
EZNEC and Linux
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: I'm still using netscape 3.01 to read my e-mail... I switched from Netscape when they dropped the newsreader function. I now use Thunderbird and I like it. T-bird is the bomb! The mail/news/rss reader--NOT the drink! JS -- http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com |
EZNEC and Linux
On 1 Mar, 23:47, Owen Duffy wrote:
(Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote : ... Experienced scientific and engineering programers know this and compensate. "Teach yourself Visual whatever in a week" programmers don't. The biggest problem with visual whatever programmers is they tend to be seduced by the flashy interface and ignore the substance under it. As an experienced scientific / engineering software developer, I suggest that much the same issues exist in a conventional 3GL language as in the "Visual xxx" environment. Good software doesn't just happen, it takes (aside of the relatively trivial task of writing the functional elements), huge effort in dealing with exceptions, and testing, testing, testing. If you dig deep into the source of Fortran programs, you will often find the heritage of small memory and slow processors in days gone by, where implementers used COMMON for variables to reduce memory use, and used COMMON for passing parameters to avoid the overhead of parameter passing function calls. This practice was, IMHO, the greatest risk to accuracy in such programs, and the area that demanded the greatest attention to design and documentation. The public NEC2 code uses COMMON, and the last bug that I demonstrated in a C port of the code was related to messed up parameter passing in COMMON. So, the old 3GL world wasn't that good anyway! Owen All very interesting Geoffrey and Owen and really it all adds up that we need more supervision of programmers when they pupport to be experts. I have used AO for many many years all with the understanding that the author had his work hacked that forced him to give up merchandising the effort. So for many years I used the program on the basis if I didn't like the answer then ignor the result. Time has shown that with all these so called antenna programs all users are doing the same thing.....if you don't like the response then it is garbage in garbage out and I was as guilty as everybody else.It was for that reason I put a program test on this newsgroup such that the results given normally would raise eyebrows. Even asked Arie to check his but only silence reigned which emphasises that people are just lazy or choose to remain silent when un unsuitable answer occurrs.( This also emphasises what a great job W4RLN is doing for ham radio where he points out where all the programs differ and who he perceives as correct To me it shows that the human mind really only believes what he wants to believe so a program with high gain results is the best seller even tho inaccurate. Art |
EZNEC and Linux
John Smith I wrote:
T-bird is the bomb! Is a bomb good or bad? :-) -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
EZNEC and Linux
Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote: T-bird is the bomb! Is a bomb good or bad? :-) Is bad good or bad? ;^) - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:25 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com