On 5/27/2014 3:38 PM, wrote:
On 5/27/2014 2:14 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 5/27/2014 1:22 AM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 5/26/2014 1:17 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 5/25/2014 10:18 PM, wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 5/25/2014 12:03 PM, wrote:
gareth wrote:
wrote in message
...
CD-1 Color Bar and Dot Generator

The one item in your list that no longer has any use!

I've got one of those, but not Heathkit, and PAL not NTSC

Closed Circuit TV is still mostly analog.




That's changing. We install much more digital (IP-based) systems than
analog, nowadays, including updating old analog systems.

Analog is still out there - but as the price of digital cameras comes
down, analog is fading.

Yes, new systems are predominantly digital, however there is a HUGE
installed base of analog no one is going to replace just because, though
some are replacing the recording/viewing portion with digitizers.

If you have to dig up and replace miles of cable to have digital cameras,
the cameras are likely to stay analog for a long time.



That's where you're wrong. Probably 1/3 of our installs is replacing
old analog systems with digital. The higher quality of a digital
picture is the main selling point, although the digital recording also
helps.

I am describing systems I personally know of and deal with, so no, I am
not "wrong".


I am describing systems my company interacts with daily. And yes, you
are "wrong".

You are talking about what you are involved in and I am talking about
what I am involved in.

From my perspective it is YOU that is wrong.


Just because you don't know what you're talking about doesn't make you
right.

I know very well what I am talking about because I am intimately involved in
it.

Your basic problem is that you feel only the things YOU are involved with
are "correct" or "right" and can not seem to understand that the Universe
does NOT revolve around you and your experiences.


No, YOUR mistake is to think that your little world is indicative of the
rest of the world. You can be assured it is NOT.

You are the one that continues to insist that your little world is indicative
of the rest of the world, not me.

I have repeatedly stated that my experiences reflect my experiences and that
yours may be different.

The fact that my experiences differ from yours see ms to have gotten your
patties all in a knot far beyond all reason.


Yes, you have a very limited experience. It's not your (lack of)
experience that bothers me. It's the fact YOU think that YOUR
installation is the slickest thing since snot on a doorknob.

Let me clue you in - it isn't. And while the rest of the world moves
into the 21st century, you're still stuck back in the 20th.


snip

The total number of cameras is currently somewhere around 1,000.


Only 1,000 cameras? A rather small installation, indeed.

Covering an area of about 250 X 750 miles?

Yeah, compared to the state of Alaska, I guess that is small.


1,000 analog camera to cover an area of 187,500 square miles? ROFLMAO!
Homeland Security could use your "expertise" in securing our borders!

That would be one camera for every 18.75 square miles. There is NOT
analog (or digital, for that matter) camera which could cover 1% of that
area!

You've just once again proven how full of $h!t you are.

snip

So, you should be able to answer the question - camera and amplifiers
makes and models, for instance. How many times the signal is amplified
(pay attention to the fact that EVERY amplifier distorts an analog
waveform and introduces noise into the system, degrading the picture).

Once again, it is not up to me to either specify or install the
infrastructure; there are several teams of people who do that.

While I do talk to those people, my primary involvement is where all the
cables come together.


So once again you are an "expert" - but you don't even know what
equipment is being used. Some "expert" you are. More like "ex" =
has-been, "spurt" - a drip under pressure.

Come out with some FACTS and we can believe you.

I'd love to see the specifics on how you're getting an analog signal 25
miles. Oh, and of course, your company must be a common carrier -
required in the United States for crossing public land such as streets
and highways.

Nope, close but wrong again.

snip


So you admit your company is violating federal regulations and crossing
public lands despite not being a common carrier? Where can you be
(except maybe in Alaska - and even then I'm not sure you can find that
big of an area) can you not cross public lands.

I knew you would try to weasel out of answering the question. It just
goes to show how full of it you are. You claim all this knowledge - but
in fact know nothing.

Once again, it is not up to me to either specify or install the
infrastructure; there are several teams of people who do that.

While I do talk to those people, my primary involvement is where all the
cables come together.

snip


Once again you claim to be an "expert" - but you have no idea what
equipment your company is using. Some "expert" you are.

Interesting that the only camera you can specify a model for is out of
business (and has been for a number of years).

Once again, it is not up to me to either specify or install the
infrastructure; there are several teams of people who do that.

While I do talk to those people, my primary involvement is where all the
cables come together.

When the people who's job it is to specify such stuff come up with new
equipment they provide me with the command set for the camera.


And once again you claim to be an "expert" - but you can't even tell us
what equipment you are using. Not much of an "expert".

But then neither Pelco nor Cohu have PTZ's which can be controlled over
a 1200 baud line. But you should be able to specify exactly which
cameras you are using.

They did have for years. In fact, Cohu for years supported the installed
Javelin base with a camera that emulated the Javelin.

Cohu recently (in terms of years) decided that market was too small to
continue, thus those people who's job it is to specify such stuff are
starting to use Pelco and stock Cohu because they were basically forced
to by what is available on the market.


Neither Pelco nor Cohu have PTZ's which can be controlled over a 1200
baud line. So even those companies agree your "equipment" is so out of
date it isn't even worth supporting.

As new contruction adds TCP/IP connected cameras over fiber, the program
has also been modified to allow TCP PTZ control in addition to legacy
serial.


I don't know why you would need to modify a program when both Pelco and
Cohu and be controlled over fiber with existing equipment.

Once again, the control is through a custom program written for HPUX
Unix and the control is integrated into a larger system where the CCTV
stuff is but a small part.

snip


And again, I don't know why you would need to modify a program when both
Pelco and Cohu can be controlled over fiber. And BTW, Pelco's control
codes are proprietary, and they do NOT give them out. So what did you
do - reverse engineer them (against your license agreement)?

And unlike you, I DO know what I'm talking about. Pelco is one of the
cameras we use regularly.

I knew this was coming. You can't back up your "facts", so you have to
resort to personal attacks.

You are the one that started the personal attacks by saying that I don't
know anything about a system that I have been working with for about
20 years.

snip


I just observed how little you really know for someone who claims to
have been working on a system for over 20 years.

The fact is - you are a little boy in a very enclosed environment, with
no view of the rest of the world. Yet you think your little corner is
representative of EVERYONE.

You are the one claiming that YOUR little corner of the world is
represenative of EVERYONE while I in fact have repeatedly stated that
your experience may be different than mine.


Nope. I told you how the world is going. You can stay in the 20th
century. I really don't care.

Let me clue you - it is not.

And BTW - I NEVER SAID that what we do is appropriate for EVERYONE. I
just said that that's the way the intelligent people in the world are
going. You can stay in the stone age as long as you want. It's not
skin off of my back.

Then why do you have your panties in such a twist over it that you HAVE
to try to sharpshoot every little detail?


Because you are so full of $h!t and claim the world is NOT doing what I
have seen it to be.

And I have stated several times that the existing infrastructure is so
large and expensive that it is not realistic to upgrade it just because
there is new technology.


1,000 cameras is NOT a "large infrastructure". Medium at best. Even
some hotels have more cameras.

But you seem to be the only one who believes they can cover 187,500 sq.
mi. with 1,000 cameras.

It IS going to all TCP/IP over fiber with TCP control and digital video
slowly through attrition and new construction as I have stated several
times now and this process will likely take another decade.



Ah, so you admit I am right - you ARE going to IP-based cameras.

I know why you wouldn't say so in the first place, though. Like all
trolls, you're looking for an argument. This isn't the first time
you've done this, either - as others in this newsgroup can attest.

Reminds me of the old story: "Never wrestle with a pig. You'll only get
yourself dirty, and the pig enjoys it".

Well, I'm through wrestling with the pig.



--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

Yes, you have a very limited experience. It's not your (lack of)

You have no way of knowing what my total experience is and are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

experience that bothers me. It's the fact YOU think that YOUR
installation is the slickest thing since snot on a doorknob.

I never said the installation had any particular qualtities other than
it works and has been around a long time and again you are just blowing
hot air out of your ass.

Let me clue you in - it isn't. And while the rest of the world moves
into the 21st century, you're still stuck back in the 20th.

The B-52 was designed in 1946 and will continue to be in service until
at least 2040 and likely 2045.

By your wierd everything has to move to the latest technology view point,
the USAF should have retired the B-52 in the mid 60's and ignored the fact
that the airplane is STILL remains an effective and economical heavy bomber.

snip

1,000 analog camera to cover an area of 187,500 square miles? ROFLMAO!
Homeland Security could use your "expertise" in securing our borders!

I never said anything about the individual camera coverage area or the
coverage area of interest.

Again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

That would be one camera for every 18.75 square miles. There is NOT
analog (or digital, for that matter) camera which could cover 1% of that
area!

Actually, the cameras are spaced at intervals of .5 to 1.5 miles in the
areas of interest.

Again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

You've just once again proven how full of $h!t you are.

You haven't a clue what the application is and again you are just blowing
hot air out of your ass.

snip

So once again you are an "expert" - but you don't even know what
equipment is being used. Some "expert" you are. More like "ex" =
has-been, "spurt" - a drip under pressure.

I never said I was an expert, I related how it is actually done by those
that actually do the nuts and bolts of the system. Again you are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

Come out with some FACTS and we can believe you.

I already gave you the facts; that you are so hung up on what YOU do to
see that there are other situations out there in the world is not my problem.

snip

So you admit your company is violating federal regulations and crossing
public lands despite not being a common carrier? Where can you be
(except maybe in Alaska - and even then I'm not sure you can find that
big of an area) can you not cross public lands.

My god are you dense.

You haven't a clue what kind of system this is and again you are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

snip

Once again you claim to be an "expert" - but you have no idea what
equipment your company is using. Some "expert" you are.

I never claimed to be an expert and never claimed I had anything what so
ever to do with the selection of equipment.

Again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

snip

And once again you claim to be an "expert" - but you can't even tell us
what equipment you are using. Not much of an "expert".

I never claimed to be an expert and never claimed I had anything what so
ever to do with the selection of equipment.

Again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

snip

Neither Pelco nor Cohu have PTZ's which can be controlled over a 1200
baud line. So even those companies agree your "equipment" is so out of
date it isn't even worth supporting.

Again, I have said many times the system is old and as a matter of fact
Cohu does still support serial cameras.

snip

And again, I don't know why you would need to modify a program when both
Pelco and Cohu can be controlled over fiber. And BTW, Pelco's control
codes are proprietary, and they do NOT give them out. So what did you
do - reverse engineer them (against your license agreement)?

First, you have been told many times the system is old.

There are in fact still Javelin cameras out there that have not yet failed.

There are still a LOT of cameras on serial lines.

It ALL has to be supported.

And you have also been told several times the whole thing, old cameras and
new, are controlled by a custome application that is a small part of a
much bigger application.

As for Pelco's control being proprietary, either the manufacturer discloses
the codes or the cameras are not purchased.

Have you ever heard of a nondisclosure agreement?

And unlike you, I DO know what I'm talking about. Pelco is one of the
cameras we use regularly.

Whooptee ****ing doo.

snip

Nope. I told you how the world is going. You can stay in the 20th
century. I really don't care.

Then why do you have your panties in such a wad?

Go rant at the USAF for wanting to keep the B-52 for 90 years.

snip

Because you are so full of $h!t and claim the world is NOT doing what I
have seen it to be.

Again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

I have said many, many, many times now that your experience may be different.

It is you that is claiming that what I say is being done is actually being
done.

snip

1,000 cameras is NOT a "large infrastructure". Medium at best. Even
some hotels have more cameras.

It is when the spacing between camera is measured in miles.


But you seem to be the only one who believes they can cover 187,500 sq.
mi. with 1,000 cameras.

I never said that and again you are just blowing hot air out of your ass.

snip

Ah, so you admit I am right - you ARE going to IP-based cameras.

Look you flaming ass hole, I have said many times that the system was
slowly being upgraded but you turned flame on and keep insisting that
the bulk of existing cameras can not be analog with serial control.

I know why you wouldn't say so in the first place, though.

I did several times ass hole, you were just too busy blowing hot air out
of your ass to read it.


--
Jim Pennino

wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

Yes, you have a very limited experience. It's not your (lack of)

You have no way of knowing what my total experience is and are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

Guys, can you take this to personal email or a bar or something? It's
kind of cluttering up the newsgroup and it really doesn't have to do with
ham radio except in that it sounds like the discussions I hear on 75M phone.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 5/28/2014 9:44 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

Yes, you have a very limited experience. It's not your (lack of)

You have no way of knowing what my total experience is and are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

Guys, can you take this to personal email or a bar or something? It's
kind of cluttering up the newsgroup and it really doesn't have to do with
ham radio except in that it sounds like the discussions I hear on 75M phone.
--scott


Scott,

Don't worry. I'm not going to wrestle the pig any more. Unfortunately,
I let myself get caught up in trying to have another intelligent
discussion with him. I already know it doesn't work.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:

snip

Yes, you have a very limited experience. It's not your (lack of)

You have no way of knowing what my total experience is and are just
blowing hot air out of your ass.

Guys, can you take this to personal email or a bar or something? It's
kind of cluttering up the newsgroup and it really doesn't have to do with
ham radio except in that it sounds like the discussions I hear on 75M phone.
--scott

Sorry about that, but when I make a few simple statements about something
I have worked with for decades and this self centered ass wipe starts
his wild ass suppostions and accusations I can't help but to respond to
his utter stupdidity.



--
Jim Pennino

I am interested in the V7A VTVM. I sent you a note on another newsgroup.
Price and how you want me to pay.
Dave Thompson

wrote in message
...
Is there any interest in this newsgroup in Heathkits that are NOT amateur
radio products?

I have some that I no longer want:

AR-15 Stereo Receiver
QM-1 Q Meter
CD-1 Color Bar and Dot Generator
IT-12 Signal Tracer
V-7A VTVM

All are clean, include manuals, and were working when last used.

John
--
Please reply in this newsgroup. I never post my true
email address to prevent spam. Thank you.