sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>: Jan 02 04:43PM > HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are > among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle > the performance of their smartphones."   False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no warning:   <https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130>   -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.   JR

"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 02 09:20AM -0800 You will learn two things about little Jimmy Newton very quickly:   1. It changes its name more often than a few here change their socks (those that wear socks).   2. It is looking for validation, not discussion.   Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

M.L. <me@privacy.invalid>: Jan 02 12:03PM -0600 >False. Android phones absolutely do throttle the CPU secretly with no >warning:   ><https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130>   <from the same stackoverflow thread RE: Samsung Galaxy S3 (9300)> "It turns out to be a thermal problem. As the app is running the android battery temperature is rising. At 48 degrees android os has throttled down the cpu from 1.4 Ghz to 0.8 Ghz."   The difference is that the throttling isn't permanent. Unclear if the same behavior exists for all Androids.

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>: Jan 02 06:19PM >>warning:   >><https://stackoverflow.com/q/11883404/6540130>   > The difference is that the throttling isn't permanenti   Nope; the Apple feature only activates when the OS detects the battery is unable to provide needed voltage, which fluctuates and is not permanent or even constant. You've been fed a lie.   -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.   JR

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>: Jan 02 01:38PM -0500 In article <i1in4ddkhgq8f5d3ndr0a6kht3v21fmtqs@4ax.com>, M.L. > android battery temperature is rising. At 48 degrees android os has > throttled down the cpu from 1.4 Ghz to 0.8 Ghz."   > The difference is that the throttling isn't permanent.   it's not permanent on iphones either.   only *peak* loads are limited, where the battery can't source the necessary current. had that not been done, the phone would likely suddenly shut down.   the rest of the time, when the battery is not being pushed hard, there's no throttling because the battery is capable of providing the needed power.   > Unclear if the > same behavior exists for all Androids.   all mobile devices vary cpu speed and other subsystems based on load.   to not do so is stupid.

harry newton <harry@at.invalid>: Jan 02 09:31PM He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:   > it's not permanent on iphones either.   Apple Apologists seem to believe in the battery fairy.

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>: Jan 02 04:44PM -0500 On 2018-01-02 01:38, harry newton wrote:   > I think that's wishful thinking (sans facts) for two big reasons: > 1. What you hope goes diametrically against what Apple actually said. > 2. Apple didn't change their power-hungry single-threaded architecture.   Apple made big changes starting with the 7 with low power and high power CPU cores, and with the 8/X, The CPU has more dynamic management of which core is used.   So with the 8/X, there is a possibility that the "power management" will just limit processes to the low power cores instead of throttling the CPUs.   Apple knows how many amps are needed to run the phone, and how many amps older batteries of certain size can supply. If the needed amps with low power cores is less than what battery can supply, then no need for further throttling.   > That article clearly says Apple "won't stop" throttling of *all* newer > iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.   Articles are speculation. And limiting access to high power cores is a form of throttling anyways (except it doesn't actually slow down the CPU).

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>: Jan 02 10:00PM > He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:   >> it's not permanent on iphones either.   > Apple Apologists   So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!   -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.   JR

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>: Jan 02 10:18PM > He who is nospam said on Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:38:29 -0500:   >> it's not permanent on iphones either.   > Apple Apologists blah blah blah blah blah.   The old man-child troll is a broken record.   -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.   JR

harry newton <harry@at.invalid>: Jan 03 05:15AM He who is Jolly Roger said on 2 Jan 2018 22:00:24 GMT:   > So few facts, so much time. Life's hard for an old troll!   Since you're an Apple Apologists, facts are invisible to you. You do believe in the battery fairy.   Meanwhile, the rest of us can see the fact that are *invisible* to Apple Apologists.   To wit... Apple Won't Stop Throttling iPhone Performance   <https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/261243-apple-cuts-battery-replacement-costs-wont-stop-throttling-iphone-performance>   That article clearly says Apple "won't stop" throttling of *all* newer iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.   "The effective cost of buying an Apple device is significantly higher than it used to be, at least for people who keep their hardware more than a year"   "Apple acknowledges that it failed to properly inform users about the changes made in iOS 10.2.1 and the introduction of this throttling."   Another fact that the Apple Apologists will hate is that this is an Apple-only problem.   "Apple tries to dodge responsibility for its own smartphone designs" "This is an Apple-only issue."   Everyone (but the Apple Apologists) already knew that this problem is an Apple-created Apple-design problem, where *all* the major Android manufacturers have gone on record publicy asserting   "Android phones do not perform this kind of throttling".   Remember, this is an Apple-caused Apple-designed Apple-only problem, despite nospam's clever hands-caught-in-the-cookie jar Apple Apologists' attempt at saying Android manufacturers also *secretly*, *permanently*, and *drastically* throttle CPU speeds of their phones after only one year of ownership.   Everything I state is a fact; but facts are invisible to Apple Apologists.

harry newton <harry@at.invalid>: Jan 03 05:15AM He who is JF Mezei said on Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:44:02 -0500:     > Apple made big changes starting with the 7 with low power and high power > CPU cores, and with the 8/X, The CPU has more dynamic management of > which core is used.   JF Mezei, You're one of the rare people on this newsgroup who can converse like an adult, so I appreciate that you bring up this great point.   There's *something* different about the iPhone 6's and 7's that Apple felt the need to secretly permanently reduce the CPU speeds to less than half the original in just a year - so - we would *hope* that Apple figured out what it is that only the Apple CPUs exhibit that kills the batteries in a year.   Let's *hope* they made those changes - but - if they did make those changes, then why do they definitely throttle the iPhone 7?   And why did they *say* they would throttle *all* their phones in the future?   Both those are facts.   So if Apple did "improve" the power - why are they still throttling and planning to throttle the exact phones you say have power improvements?   Those two facts don't mix well.   > So with the 8/X, there is a possibility that the "power management" will > just limit processes to the low power cores instead of throttling the > CPUs.   This would be *great* if it is true. I *hope* it is true.   But then we have to wonder why Apple clearly said they would throttle *all* their phones going forward.   Maybe ... and this is just conjecture ... Apple wants to settle the court cases out of court so they don't want to give the court cases ammo by admitting wrongdoing ... so maybe that's why Apple *said* they would throttle moving forward (as if that's "normal" for phones).   Dunno. All I can say is that if they did "fix" the power management, then they wouldn't need to throttle the newer phones - but they clearly said they would throttle them. So the facts don't line up.   > older batteries of certain size can supply. If the needed amps with low > power cores is less than what battery can supply, then no need for > further throttling.   I think Apple learned a lesson here which is they should test their phones in the real world - and where the real world happens to include weather colder than it gets in Cupertino and where the real world happens to be "aged" batteries of at least the warranty period of 1 or 2 years.   I'm with you that Apple will likely *fix* this problem because they know that people have to be thinking that they pay $1000 for an iPhone X and in just one year, it's an iPhone 1/2X in terms of CPU speeds. That's horrid.   Nobody wants half an iPhone X in just one year!   So Apple *has* to fix this problem. Remember, despite the FUD that the Apple Apologists (e.g., nospam & Jolly Roger) try to spew, this is an Apple-only problem.   So Apple needs to understand what they did wrong, and how to fix it.   To me, the Occam's Razor answer is they need more realistic battery sizing or actual "dynamic" (and not just "legally semantically dynamic that is actually permanent" speed optimization), but, we have to let Apple figure that one out for themselves.   >> iPhones after about one year to about half their original CPU speeds.   > Articles are speculation. And limiting access to high power cores is a > form of throttling anyways (except it doesn't actually slow down the CPU).   Actually, that's *not* speculation. Apple said it themselves. So it's just the article saying a fact which is what Apple said it would do.   I suspect that Apple is playing a clever game (as always), which is that they will vehemently deny wrongdoing all the while trying to combine the court cases into a single case that they can settle out of court.   I posit that once they settle out of court, they're free to actually finally admit the truth and fix the problem - but until then - they can't be open (because anything they admit will be used in court against them).   In the end, I think Apple has an *easy* problem to solve which is so easy to solve that it's not funny. But this is a long post so we can leave the solution to later.

etpm@whidbey.com: Jan 02 12:33PM -0800 So I took apart the case of the Bose so I could clean and lube the laser assembly. Also used some canned blow off gas to blow any dust out of the area between the laser and the underside of the lens. After reassembly the player worked beautifully. The one particular CD played right off the bat. But after swapping it or another CD, which also played, and then putting the stubborn CD back in, it refused to play. I noticed that when blowing out the laser assembly the lens would move down because of the pressurized gas blowing between the lens and laser. So I pressed down on the lens and tried the CD again. Worked great. After stopping the player and re starting the CD wouldn't play. Pressing down the lens carrier on the left hand side of the lens carrier and then trying to play the CD works. After stopping and then starting the CD won't play. But then pressing down the lens carrier on the left side makes the CD play again. Anybody have any guesses why this is happening? It looks to me like the lens carrier is just suspended by 4 spring wires. But maybe there is something else that might be dragging. Anybody know how the things are really made? Thanks, Eric

oldschool@tubes.com: Jan 02 05:23PM -0600 >might be dragging. Anybody know how the things are really made? >Thanks, >Eric   There are two simple solutions:   1. A record player with a good cartridge and needle (stylus).   2. A MP3 player.   If you really are madly in love with CDs, just buy a cheap external CD player and plug it into the AUX input. My experience with CD players is this: When they die, they are dead forever..... There is no one on earth who can fix em'. (Probably why they are becoming obsolete).   If however it's just that one CD that is causing problems, REPLACE the CD.

Terry Schwartz <tschw10117@aol.com>: Jan 02 04:42PM -0800 Your obviously very LIMITED experience.

Sofa Slug <sofaslug@invalid.invalid>: Jan 02 04:24PM -0800 >> That's almost as good as wrapping up a box of dog crap, and leaving >> it out as a trap. :)   > True story: The last place we lived in before leaving NYC was on 190th Street not far from the Cloisters. Our neighbor had a very elderly German Shepherd, and she was quite elderly herself. One sad day, her dog died, and the only place she could take it (in Manhattan) was down towards Battery Park. So, she bundled the dog into a large suitcase - as people were wont to own back in the 1960s. Getting into the subway at 190th Street (A-line) is not so hard as there is an elevator from the street to the platform (well before ADA). However, at South Ferry, not so much. She faced these steps with an 80 pound dog. What should happen, but a "Nice Young Man" offered to carry it up the steps for her. And, promptly ran off with it.   > There is justice in this world.   > Peter Wieck > Melrose Park, PA   Great Story!   That reminds of something a friend of mine did with an old water heater at his father's suburban Fresno, Ca. home. He and his dad had previously replaced the unit, as it leaked from a small hole near the bottom on one side.   They both dragged this thing out onto the lawn near the street and carefully positioned it so the hole wasn't obvious. My friend then placed a sign on it reading "$50". When he checked later that afternoon, the water heater was gone.

Murray atuptown <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com>: Jan 02 10:39AM -0800 Thanks for the replies.   120 v ac   OK on thumbs down to rejuvenation...     I overly simplified the comments on the power supply which was evidently more confusing than accomplishing a summary.   Based on the service manual's description of how the voltages are produced, I offered two distractions. The overview described the +300 V supply as being used for producing the +5 VDC logic supply and the CRT supply as they name it is only +120 VDC. I didn't mean to sound like only measures 120 instead of 300.   There was an implied question-how the heck do they run a CRT on 120 VDC? I didn't (yet) see further explanation of internal functions on the CRT ass'y. I hope it's an assembly with the ability to produce all support voltages for a CRT.   The diagnosis for CRT problems, as well as other modules, often ends with 'replace the module'...I get 'why?', during the product's heyday, but that leads to a 'problem' period (for wannabe users/restorers) in the future...which is now.   I haven't measured anything yet...it's usable, but I'm just snooping around for answers for that day when all the room lights have to be off to see anything. If I'm going to commit space to such a large (and loud!) I'm trying to be proactive.   I'll read up on what I can measure without service accessories like extender board etc.   Thank you

Murray atuptown <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com>: Jan 02 10:43AM -0800 Tom - not sure CLIP is. ESR measurements- yes, if I remove parts & take them to someone else (have access).

"tom" <tmiller11147@verizon.net>: Jan 02 01:56PM -0500 "Murray atuptown" <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com> wrote in message news:46113352-8c9e-482c-a5b7-18319465a999@googlegroups.com... > Tom - not sure CLIP is. > ESR measurements- yes, if I remove parts & take them to someone else (have > access).   CLIP is Component Level Information Package. Has all the schematics.   You can buy a copy - pdf - from artekmedia.com   Good quality scans and will not break the bank.   Regards

Murray atuptown <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com>: Jan 02 11:00AM -0800 Tom- Not sure what CLIP is but I see it discussed on a 54111D thread on Yahoo group-thanks,   I'll have to lurk...9 years of blocked Yahoo password change access by AT&T and 9 years of grief led me to kill all Yahoo-owned accounts and now AT&T.   Nobody needs to hear that story.   That scope is heavy and obnoxiously loud. Sounds like it's awaiting clearance for takeoff, but my basement isn't long enough for a twin-propeller scope to

Murray atuptown <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com>: Jan 02 11:02AM -0800 I think I better restrict my posting to a computer. I'm on my phone now and have no idea where my previous drafts are (I hope not posted...apologies if they are!)

tabbypurr@gmail.com: Jan 02 12:32PM -0800 On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 18:40:02 UTC, Murray atuptown wrote:   > I haven't measured anything yet...it's usable, but I'm just snooping around for answers for that day when all the room lights have to be off to see anything. If I'm going to commit space to such a large (and loud!) I'm trying to be proactive.   > I'll read up on what I can measure without service accessories like extender board etc.   > Thank you   There's all manner of reasons why it might be dim, including muck on the screen. Let us know when you've got some facts we can work with.     NT

redfish1857@gmail.com: Jan 02 11:03AM -0800 Can't figure out how to unlock channels on my fisher tv pc9327.

"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 02 11:29AM -0800 > Can't figure out how to unlock channels on my fisher tv pc9327.   18 years ago. That is one vintage TV, by now. Typically locked-out channels are a function of the cable box, not the TV. But, if on-board the TV, you will need the password.   http://reboot.fcc.gov/parents/tv-and-parental-controls   Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA

"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 02 09:04AM -0800 On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 6:33:02 PM UTC-5, Trevor Wilson wrote:   > **Should we not be counting time from the initial event (aka: The Big > Bang)? Or, perhaps, as fundamentalist Christians would have it, some > 6,000 years ago?   Of course we should. But, consider the Golden Rule - those what have the gold makes the rules (forgive the vernacular).   As English is the language of Air Traffic Control, As Greenwich is O Meridian,   Initial Events may start as cultural, but as soon as a certain level of commerce and process uses them, momentum does the rest. The first railroads were in Great Britain and the US, and drove the concept of Time Zones and shared standards.   Commerce and banking drive years, dates, days, weeks and so forth.   Air Traffic Control as it is used today largely developed in WW-II to manage goings and comings on Aircraft Carriers. Although actual formal air-ground communications began in the 1930s in Cleveland of all places. Only the US had any Carriers of any consequence - the system developed, in English, largely in the 1950s with practical and highly efficient radar systems - also developed in/for the military. It is quite likely that "Earth Time" (UTC) will be used (eventualy) for space travel - and for the same reasons. Time Dilation will be an interesting twist on this, however.     6:00 p.m. Saturday, October 23, 4004 BC being the actual date-of-creation, we need to do a reset.

Mike Coon <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com>: Jan 02 06:10PM In article <QtSdnR7aTP2OMtbHnZ2dnUU7-VmdnZ2d@giganews.com>, spam@flippers.com says...   > > Mike.   > She didn't need to shave.   > John ;-#)#   Not sure anything was actually said about shaving beards...   Mike.

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.