sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Proview 986m 19" monitor - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d621145a2c682a26?hl=en
* Laptop not charging. - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/3f52116e8141f1a4?hl=en
* Eco - windmills ... (bit OT) - 8 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/a12dc199597830ae?hl=en
* 5v laptop hard drives in 3.3v laptops - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/90dba8ef5a3c66ab?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Proview 986m 19" monitor
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/d621145a2c682a26?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 3:26 pm
From: Meat Plow

On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 13:35:18 -0800, JR North wrote:

> Monitor erupted in much smoke and loud hissing. Video scrambled but
> stayed up. I lunged for the power cord behind it, and unplugged it
> within 2 seconds. I took it apart, confident in finding some burst cap
> or two. Nothing. Everything on close visual inspection looks good. No
> burned traces or bulging/fried components. The board fuse is OK. I've
> repaired this monitor twice since new in 2000. A couple caps in the PS
> (would't start), and reflowed neck board (video brightness up/down).
> Could a fbt do this, and not show any signs? Something definatly gassed
> out violently. It smelled more like burned insulation than the acrid
> fried cap smell. I'm not competent to power up the board with it apart.
> JR

Hiss usually = something formerly sealed discharging a gas. Maybe you
missed something in your visual.

--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 3:47 pm
From: JR North

Found it. C635 10uf 250V bulging slightly on top and tiny trace of
black at the X center.
JR

On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 13:35:18 -0800, JR North
<junkjasonrnorth@bigfoot.com> wrote:

>Monitor erupted in much smoke and loud hissing. Video scrambled but
>stayed up. I lunged for the power cord behind it, and unplugged it
>within 2 seconds. I took it apart, confident in finding some burst
>cap or two. Nothing. Everything on close visual inspection looks
>good. No burned traces or bulging/fried components. The board fuse is
>OK. I've repaired this monitor twice since new in 2000. A couple caps
>in the PS (would't start), and reflowed neck board (video brightness
>up/down).
>Could a fbt do this, and not show any signs? Something definatly
>gassed out violently. It smelled more like burned insulation than the
>acrid fried cap smell. I'm not competent to power up the board with
>it apart.
>JR

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 3:56 pm
From: Meat Plow

On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 15:47:28 -0800, JR North wrote:

> Found it. C635 10uf 250V bulging slightly on top and tiny trace of black
> at the X center.
> JR

I recently 'baked' a PNY video card to try to reflow some bad solder
joints. Ended up with some electrolytic s that had a black dot over the
X. Replace them and now the card works. It is an NVidia 8500 chipped card
with a BGA GPU. Most of the caps looked ok. I suspect the ones that
dotted were part of the problem. PNY isn't known to use reliable
components since their card was much less expensive than the real NVidia
counterpart.

--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Laptop not charging.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/3f52116e8141f1a4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 3:30 pm
From: T i m

On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:03:07 +0000, Baron
<baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:

>>>They put these "one wire" interfaces into the batteries too !
>>
>> No, really? ;-(
>
>So I understand.

Ok ta. I've asked on the Dell n/g if anyone can confirm if this
particular model / generation does so for sure, just in case it could
be summat else.
>
>>>I've had cheap Chinese made ones that wont charge in a Dell !
>>>Which sounds a bit like the one you refer to above.
>>
>> It does indeed. However, after Googling about it seems there may be
>> some hope in a BIOS update? It's currently A2 and I think there is an
>> A5 or 6 to be had. I just need a charged battery in there to do it.
>> I've ordered an external charger as I'm told the pinout of most of the
>> Dell batteries are the same
>
>Yes but they put the connector block in different places on the battery
>pack !

Yeahbut this charger is what I would call more of a tech / service aid
as the charging plug is floating on the end of a wire and (can be)
held against the battery with a Velcro tie. This morning I used it to
charge the battery from the Studio 1535 (and therefore was able to
apply the BIOS update) and currently I'm seeing if it can wake up the
old battery from daughter D510 Latitude (only to see if I / it can,
I'm pretty sure it's pretty low capacity now).

> You will have to let me know how it goes.

So far I'd say pretty well, insofar as it has allowed me to update the
BIOS and prove an unknown battery to be good even if not compatible
with the laptop. ;-(
>
>> (so it will cover a fair range of models
>> and we have a few between us) in case I can't access another machine
>> or a charged battery elsewhere.
>>
>> Might as well do the easy / non-invasive things first. ;-)
>>
>
>I couldn't agree more.

This 1 Wire stuff may well be there for good reason (?) but when
charging up old laptops with basic two wire connections and NiCd/NiMH
they just charge, even if they only last for 5 mins (enough time to
act like a UPS). If they don't a bench PSU might get you started ...
<sigh>

I'm now looking to see if I can borrow a battery for the 1535 before I
suggested they buy 'another/ batter but at least this time we will
know what questions to ask. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

p.s. I was wondering just how the original Dell battery declared
itself 'dead' and therefore, if I was to re-cell the original with the
cells from the clone, will it be happy (or have the electronics now
shut down for good)?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 3:35 pm
From: Jim Yanik

T i m <news@spaced.me.uk> wrote in
news:phlrk6taaau37uidklrcla4h0772rsu9rv@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:03:07 +0000, Baron
><baron.nospam@linuxmaniac.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>>>They put these "one wire" interfaces into the batteries too !
>>>
>>> No, really? ;-(
>>
>>So I understand.
>
> Ok ta. I've asked on the Dell n/g if anyone can confirm if this
> particular model / generation does so for sure, just in case it could
> be summat else.
>>
>>>>I've had cheap Chinese made ones that wont charge in a Dell !
>>>>Which sounds a bit like the one you refer to above.
>>>
>>> It does indeed. However, after Googling about it seems there may be
>>> some hope in a BIOS update? It's currently A2 and I think there is an
>>> A5 or 6 to be had. I just need a charged battery in there to do it.
>>> I've ordered an external charger as I'm told the pinout of most of the
>>> Dell batteries are the same
>>
>>Yes but they put the connector block in different places on the battery
>>pack !
>
> Yeahbut this charger is what I would call more of a tech / service aid
> as the charging plug is floating on the end of a wire and (can be)
> held against the battery with a Velcro tie. This morning I used it to
> charge the battery from the Studio 1535 (and therefore was able to
> apply the BIOS update) and currently I'm seeing if it can wake up the
> old battery from daughter D510 Latitude (only to see if I / it can,
> I'm pretty sure it's pretty low capacity now).
>
>> You will have to let me know how it goes.
>
> So far I'd say pretty well, insofar as it has allowed me to update the
> BIOS and prove an unknown battery to be good even if not compatible
> with the laptop. ;-(
>>
>>> (so it will cover a fair range of models
>>> and we have a few between us) in case I can't access another machine
>>> or a charged battery elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Might as well do the easy / non-invasive things first. ;-)
>>>
>>
>>I couldn't agree more.
>
> This 1 Wire stuff may well be there for good reason (?) but when
> charging up old laptops with basic two wire connections and NiCd/NiMH
> they just charge, even if they only last for 5 mins (enough time to
> act like a UPS). If they don't a bench PSU might get you started ...
><sigh>
>
> I'm now looking to see if I can borrow a battery for the 1535 before I
> suggested they buy 'another/ batter but at least this time we will
> know what questions to ask. ;-)
>
> Cheers, T i m
>
> p.s. I was wondering just how the original Dell battery declared
> itself 'dead' and therefore, if I was to re-cell the original with the
> cells from the clone, will it be happy (or have the electronics now
> shut down for good)?
>

maybe it's better to buy generic laptops instead of name brands,and then
you can use generic chargers and battery packs.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Eco - windmills ... (bit OT)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/a12dc199597830ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 4:01 pm
From: "William Sommerwerck"

>> Uh, huh. The free-market forces you praise -- which work very
>> well in the short term -- will almost always produce long-term
>> results that benefit only business.

> As if "business" is some enemy of the people.

It often is. You know little about history.

> They provide goods and
> services that the people want and consume.
> Businesses are owned either by private citizens or
> stockholders(IOW,citizens)Businesses are -US-,not some enemy.That's your
> socialism poking its ugly head again.
> Otherwise,they'd be OUT of business. (unless propped up by socialism;then
> they become antiquated and wasteful).

You just don't understand, do you?

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 5:48 pm
From: "Arfa Daily"

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iijne2$joj$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Small changes over a long period of time can have a big effect.
>
>> Maybe, but the climate change scientists would have us believe
>> that we are causing all this in but a few years ...
>
> There has been a gradual warming since the Industrial Age. The apparently
> "sudden" change is supposedly due to a "tip over" effect.

That sounds like a high priest of MMGW's invention to make the facts fit the
model ... :-)

Arfa

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 5:51 pm
From: "Arfa Daily"

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iijki7$ac5$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> But I think that he was missing the point completely. He failed to
>> understand that it has become a religion, with its own mantras, and its
> high
>> priests are in fact very vocal at every opportunity, appearing on TV,
> radio
>> and in newspapers just about every day. They have this attitude of 'we're
>> right so you must be wrong', which is forced down the public's throat
>> continuously, through the media, and all this legislation which is
> depriving
>> us of 'comfort' items like incandescent light bulbs, and stopping our
> waste
>> bins from being emptied every week, and stopping the local tips from
> taking
>> any rubbish that they don't consider to be recyclable and so on. I think
>> what we are actually starting to see is a backlash from the public at
> having
>> their lives interfered with continuously, and they see this as a result
>> of
>> the preachings of the scientists.
>
> But what does that have to do with whether the scientists are right?
> Science
> is not "supposed" to be about what people -- especially the public --
> thinks, or would like to think.
>
> It's true that scientists are only slightly less irrational than your
> average idiot. That doesn't mean they're wrong, or that it's a bad idea to
> use less energy or recycle waste.

You too, appear to miss the point of what I was saying ...

Arfa

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 8:34 pm
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 01:42:53 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Wind
>turbines take a lot of manufacturing, shipping, installing and maintenance,
>all of which uses very substantial amounts of energy, and the returns from
>them are very small at best.

Well, when there's no wind, other uses for the device can be found;
<http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/01/base-jumping-off-wind-turbines-is-insane-video.php>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 8:46 pm
From: John Robertson

William Sommerwerck wrote:
> "Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
> news:ljfpk619pdh7ikkd4jdfuhrne50o93hf9v@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:45:42 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
>> <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't matter whether or
>>> not the rise in CO2 is the cause of warming.
>
>> Sure it does. No problem can be solved without first finding at least
>> one culprit to blame. Once the causes/culprits/conspirators/etc are
>> identified, we can then move forward towards a solution.
>> Unfortunately, most of the energy "solutions" offered are variations
>> on either austerity programs, genocide, redistribution of wealth, or
>> indirect self-enrichment.
>
...
>
>
>> Nobody has an easy answer to the energy problem that will scale well
>> and satisfy everyone's requirements. That means that the status quo
>> will remain until the day we run out of oil.
>
> Which is what the oil companies want. Why should we give into them, when
> there /are/ solutions?
>...

You know, all oil companies are publicly owned, which means if you want
to be heard by them you need to only buy stock in the company. All
companies are required to make a profit - but oil (or any company) can
be directed by the shareholders on how that profit is generated.

Note that I do not hold any shares in any oil companies that I am aware
of - no prospectus is mailed to me each year from my mutual fund
management company - but I am thinking of buying a few shares so I have
a voice there...you only need one share after all!

John :-#)#

--
(Please post followups or tech enquiries to the newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 9:31 pm
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 05:40:56 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
>news:ljfpk619pdh7ikkd4jdfuhrne50o93hf9v@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:45:42 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
>> <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> It doesn't matter whether or
>>> not the rise in CO2 is the cause of warming.
>
>> Sure it does. No problem can be solved without first finding at least
>> one culprit to blame. Once the causes/culprits/conspirators/etc are
>> identified, we can then move forward towards a solution.
>> Unfortunately, most of the energy "solutions" offered are variations
>> on either austerity programs, genocide, redistribution of wealth, or
>> indirect self-enrichment.
>
>I hope that's a joke.

I wish it were a joke. I've seen assignment of the blame take
precedence over a suitable solution enough times to make me suspect
that it's some component of human nature or element of bureaucracy.
Global warming is one of the best examples. The ratio of publications
dedicated to assigning the blame, versus investigating a solution, is
rather high. I recall watching a panel on TV, that was allegedly
looking into solutions for global warming. A few minutes were devoted
to several grandiose schemes, but the majority of the show was again
an attempt to fix the blame on everything from bovine flatulence to
industrialization. This was packaged as an attempt to "explain" how
global warming works, but was really a poorly disguised blame game.

>You expect "the market" -- which is driven more by profit than altruism --
>to provide a useful solution?

You expect the government, which is driven more by establishing and
growing a power base, than doing anything useful for its constituents,
to provide a useful solution?

Ok, answering a question with a question is not really an answer, but
I couldn't resist. Lacking any better alternatives, I do think the
market will save our collective posteriors once again as it has
countless times in the past. I'll spare you the standard lecture on
greed and need. Suffice to say that if we run out of fossil fuels,
numerous enterprising entrepreneurs will provide a variety of
alternatives. The winners will be what the consumer buys, not what
the government mandates. I have a wild enough imagination to suggest
many alternatives, none of them ideal, but all of them better than not
having any sources of usable energy. And yes, they will be dirty,
have numerous side effects, probably pollute the hell out of some
corner of the planet, and possibly even kill a few early adopters, but
it will work and sell.

>Where do you come off claiming most of the solutions involve "austerity
>programs, genocide, [or] redistribution of wealth". (I'm not sure what you
>mean by "indirect self-enrichment". Dale Gribble selling carbon offsets?)

Austerity programs are those that offer either a penalty for over-use,
or an incentive or subsidy for switching to alternatives. Neither
method will survive for long. Subsidizing solar installations is fine
for the short term, but cannot be supported for maybe a few more years
as solar adoption grows. All incentives seem to do is accelerate the
process of adoption. If you want real accelerated conversion, just
watch what happens when you run out of oil or turn off the
electricity.

Genocide has been mentioned in this thread. It's more politically
correct packaged as "population reduction" or "birth control". Judging
by the increasing world population, neither is working. Eventually,
someone is going to implement a short cut, and that's genocide.

Redistribution of wealth is simply taxes. At this time, taxes are a
big chunk of the cost of gasoline. In California, it's about
$0.40/gallon, which sells for about $3.20/gallon. There are
"conservation" solutions advocated that would provide a counter
incentive to consumption by taxing the hell out of gasoline, while
using the revenue to fund "research" into alternatives. This might
actually work, if the "research" offered any worthwhile solutions to
investigate.

I don't really know much about selling carbon credits. My premature
conclusion is that it's a great way for high consumption countries and
industries to continue belching greenhouse gasses.

>How does the gradual replacement of carbon-producing energy sources with
>carbon-neutral or low-carbon sources induce "austerity" or "genocide"?

<http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/post-hoc/>
There's no connection. I've already covered austerity and genocide.
Which low carbon sources are you suggesting? None of the major
alternatives offered (except nuclear) will scale to the current
consumption levels. Hydrogen is a bad joke. Compare costs. If we
don't change consumption, and simply replace coal fired generation
with solar, the resultant electricity will optimistically cost 5 times
as much. Can you say "redistribution of wealth"?

Some relative costs of generation:
<http://nuclearfissionary.com/2010/04/02/comparing-energy-costs-of-nuclear-coal-gas-wind-and-solar/>

>> Nobody has an easy answer to the energy problem that will scale well
>> and satisfy everyone's requirements. That means that the status quo
>> will remain until the day we run out of oil.
>
>Which is what the oil companies want. Why should we give into them, when
>there /are/ solutions?

That is what the people (consumers) also want. Nobody is going to
adopt a more expensive or inconvenient solution until they're force to
do so. Price and profit drives the market, not a fiat decision by the
oil cartels. To be fair, they're trying to stretch the supply as long
as possible, and delay the inevitable oil wars, where the consuming
countries do battle over what's left. Need a really great incentive?
Just start another war over oil.

>> We've also been here before. During the 17th century, England had an
>> energy crisis of sorts when it ran out of wood, which was needed for
>> ship construction and heating. That's when the 14th century ban on
>> coal burning was magically lifted and England switched to coal.
>>
><http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/offbeat-news/environmentalism-in-1306/725>\

Comments? It's a perfect example of running out of an energy
producing resource and substituting a not so convenient and more dirty
alternative. We've done it once before and will do it again.

Incidentally, the English crown did a land grab of most of the forests
in England in order to insure that there would be enough big trees
needed for ship building. Meanwhile, the peasants froze during the
worst part of the little ice age. We're going to have more of the
same when we run out of oil.

>> I suspect something similar will happen with nuclear power. When the
>> demand appears, the "problems" with nuclear will magically disappear.
>
>They apparently already have. See...
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor

Yep. I like pebble bed reactors. Obviously, I have had no experience
with one, but from what I read, they seem a good solution. The rest
is politics and perception. Perception is the big problem. Like
dirty coal in 17th century England, nuclear is perceived as being
inherently dangerous and polluting. The perception will need to
change before there's going to be any wide spread conversion. My
guess is that the 3rd world countries will lead the conversion,
leaving the major powers behind.

>Of course, very little is being done about it.

Yep, because there's little (financial) incentive to do anything
different at this time. I got a good hint in 1974, when I decided
that the energy crisis of 73-74 would produce a market for a better
electric vehicle. So, I designed and partially built what I
considered to be a better machine. There was considerable interest
until the day the Arabs turned the oil back on, when all interest
evaporated. Lesson learned... nobody wants a solution to a
non-existent problem.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 9:49 pm
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 11:32:03 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

>>> Uh, huh. The free-market forces you praise -- which work very
>>> well in the short term -- will almost always produce long-term
>>> results that benefit only business.
>
>> Uh, William, that's how it's SUPPOSED to work.

>Where does that leave the consumer?
>I'm not in this world to make someone else rich.

Invest in business. Why remain a victim when you can join the
exploiters?

I got the clue in 73-74 when the Arabs turned off the oil and we had
an energy crisis. The press was full of conspiracy theories
suggesting that the evil oil companies were conspiring to raise prices
and soak the public. So, I investigated the owners of the major oil
companies and found (for example) that the largest stockholder in
Standard Oil was the Chicago school teachers retirement fund. Somehow,
I had a difficult time believing that they would force Standard Oil
management to precipitate an energy crisis in order to increase their
profits.

The problem was that the very consumers that were complaining about
the availability, and later the price, of gasoline would not allow
Standard Oil to sell gas for less than its cost. They were
stockholders and they needed to make a profit on the stock. So,
Standard Oil was effectively forced by its stockholders to soak the
public and make obscene profits. It doesn't matter as long as someone
else pays. The various oil companies had so much cash on hand after
the energy crisis that they went on a major buying spree of energy
related and mineral companies. Only threat of a government monopoly
investigation slowed them down.

No, you're not in this world to make someone else rich. But, in a
capitalist economy, some transactions are simply not going to be
equally beneficial to all concerned. Sometimes, radically unequal. In
the case of oil, the supply and demand price curve is extremely steep.
Very small changes in supply produce huge changes in price. This is
something that commodity market investors simply cannot resist. You
can make or lose a fortune overnight. If you think you have a handle
on the energy market, then try your luck. (I did and lost most of my
investment). It's like riding a bucking horse. One mistake and you
get trampled. Good luck.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 9:59 pm
From: Jeff Liebermann

On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 21:31:54 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:
>Redistribution of wealth is simply taxes. At this time, taxes are a
>big chunk of the cost of gasoline. In California, it's about
>$0.40/gallon, which sells for about $3.20/gallon.

I erred. Total gas taxes in Calif are about $0.60/gallon or about 19%
of the cost.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 5v laptop hard drives in 3.3v laptops
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/t/90dba8ef5a3c66ab?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sat, Feb 5 2011 5:19 pm
From: "Gareth Fimlinson"

I don't have an electronics background..

I have read in a number of places, that a 5V 2.5" IDE laptop hard
drive, can be fed 3.3V if you remove pins 41 and 44.

People do it to use such hard drives in low power laptops that feed
3.3V into hard drives.

Is this bad for the hard drives?

Is it enough power?

And why does this work?

When I look at a pinout, I see pin 41(Logic) and 42(Motor) are both 5V
and pin44 is labelled TYPE 0-ATA. Nothing about making it 3.3V.
And he just bends pin41 not pin42. and he bends pin 44. why those
pins and how do they let it take 3.3v?

People find they have problems without doing this mod.

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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sci.electronics.repair"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.repair/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en