Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 6 topics

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.

Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 24 updates in 9 topics

Adrian Caspersz <email@here.invalid>: Jan 01 07:03PM

> It's official. They are in a different time zone....
 
> Happy New Year martians !!!
 
https://www.ted.com/talks/nagin_cox_what_time_is_it_on_mars
 
--
Adrian C
rickman <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com>: Jan 01 04:42PM -0500

> I am wondering how this works. In these politically correct times, instead of AD (Anno Domini - Year of Our Lord), we have CE (common era). Ignoring what becomes "Year 1" and why, the Martian Year is 687 (earth) days.
 
Why do you call this "politically correct"? It's an issue of mixing
religion and science. The new terms were chosen to separate a single
religion from having defined notation for a scientific purpose. How is that
a matter of "political correctness"?
 
I have found the only time this term is used is when someone wants to
criticize something as being "politically correct" as if that automatically
makes it undesirable without actually discussing the facts.
 
--
 
Rick C
 
Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms,
on the centerline of totality since 1998
"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 01 02:22PM -0800

On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 4:42:59 PM UTC-5, rickman wrote:
> religion and science. The new terms were chosen to separate a single
> religion from having defined notation for a scientific purpose. How is that
> a matter of "political correctness"?
 
William of Occam figured (at least) this out a few centuries ago. Full Stop.
 
Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Jan 01 04:36PM -0600

> William of Occam figured (at least) this out a few centuries
> ago. Full Stop.
 
Pearls before swine.
 
--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com
bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: Jan 01 06:29PM -0500

On 01/01/2018 05:36 PM, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
>> William of Occam figured (at least) this out a few centuries
>> ago. Full Stop.
 
> Pearls before swine.
 
Nothing annoyed Christ more than feeling like he wasn't being given
enough attention. Imagine if he'd had access to Twitter
Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au>: Jan 02 10:32AM +1100


> Happy New Year!
 
> Peter Wieck
> Melrose Park, PA
 
**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?
 
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Mike Coon <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com>: Jan 02 12:07AM

In article <30ab58a7-efae-4c09-b854-26fb3256102b@googlegroups.com>,
pfjw@aol.com says...
 
> William of Occam figured (at least) this out a few centuries ago. Full
Stop.
 
Was that the paradox of the barber who shaved everyone who didn't shave
themselves? ;-)
 
Mike.
"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 02 04:27AM -0800

On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 7:07:47 PM UTC-5, Mike Coon wrote:
 
> Was that the paradox of the barber who shaved everyone who didn't shave
> themselves? ;-)
 
I believe that one was made popular by Bertrand Russell.
 
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
John Robertson <spam@flippers.com>: Jan 02 08:10AM -0800

On 2018/01/01 4:07 PM, Mike Coon wrote:
 
> Was that the paradox of the barber who shaved everyone who didn't shave
> themselves? ;-)
 
> Mike.
 
She didn't need to shave.
 
John ;-#)#
 
--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd.
MOVED to #7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
(604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."
"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 02 08:15AM -0800

On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 11:11:09 AM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
 
> She didn't need to shave.
 
> John ;-#)#
 
Which brings up a host of politically marginal issues.
 
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
"~misfit~" <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com>: Jan 02 06:16PM +1300

> for delivery or paying a thing. Or using a psu, or adding noise to
> your signal.
 
> NT
 
'RC's?
 
The point is easy adjustability, both frequency and volume of bass.
--
Shaun.
 
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
tabbypurr@gmail.com: Jan 01 11:12PM -0800

On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 05:16:23 UTC, ~misfit~ wrote:
> > your signal.
 
> 'RC's?
 
> The point is easy adjustability, both frequency and volume of bass.
 
both of which are easy with an RC filter.
 
 
NT
harry newton <harry@at.invalid>: Jan 02 03:14AM

Apple iOS 11.2.5 Release: It's A Big One
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2018/01/01/apple-ios-11-2-5-release-iphone-battery-problem-slow-down/#52fb94c53b5c>
 
Verbatim quotes:
"We expect the iPhone X to be throttled in late 2018 with replacement
batteries for it back to full price by January 2019."
 
"Samsung guarantees 95% battery capacity retention for the first
two years of ownership. Meanwhile LG and Google offer two year
warranties, which also cover the battery."
 
"Apple's promise of a limited time price reduction (11 months) on new
iPhone batteries doesn't cut it, particularly with the swap taking
three days and no further pledge from Apple to change anything
going forward."
 
"Apple has admitted it slows iPhones - and coincidentally just after
the release of each new generation - to protect their already degrading
batteries from shutting off if the phone were to continue operating at
full performance."
 
"Not only does the well promoted title of Performance Champ suddenly
ring hollow now we know this *only lasts for one year*, but we also
know this behaviour isn't normal. HTC, Motorola, LG and Samsung are
among the major brands quick to stress they see no reason to throttle
the performance of their smartphones."
bruce2bowser@gmail.com: Jan 01 09:56PM -0800

On Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 5:07:41 AM UTC-5, Harry Newton wrote:
> > because I was too busy and distracted at the time.
 
> And all this time I thought I was looking through the world with
> rose-tinted glasses!
 
Sometimes so-called 'Big Tech' is like that.
JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>: Jan 02 01:14AM -0500

On 2018-01-01 22:14, harry newton wrote:
 
> Verbatim quotes:
> "We expect the iPhone X to be throttled in late 2018 with replacement
> batteries for it back to full price by January 2019."
 
 
"exprect" is the keyword here. Speculation by some snews media. This is
not a statement from Apple and thus useless.
 
The product development of the X was done with knowl;edge of the
batterty problems for the 6s. So it is possible that it was fixed or
significantly reduced.
harry newton <harry@at.invalid>: Jan 02 06:38AM

He who is JF Mezei said on Tue, 2 Jan 2018 01:14:13 -0500:
 
 
> The product development of the X was done with knowledge of the
> batterty problems for the 6s. So it is possible that it was fixed or
> significantly reduced.
 
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.
 
Backing up those two facts is this recent article:
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.
 
Hence, the article makes the same claim that I do which is that Apple
iPhones effectively cost a *lot* more than just the sticker price:
 
"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"
 
And, the article reiterates that Apple outright lied to its customers:
 
"Apple acknowledges that it failed to properly inform users about the
changes made in iOS 10.2.1 and the introduction of this throttling."
 
Interesting fact, since the Apple Apologists still deny what Apple already
admitted. 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".
 
What's more interesting than that is where this article goes into decent
detail on the one thing that's different about Apple design:

"Single-threaded performance is the one area where Apple clearly
stands alone."
 
Interesting. The article posits that the Apple single-threaded design might
be the main reason why Apple batteries can't handle their phones:
 
"there's a strong relationship between power consumption and
architecture"
 
In summary, it's purely wishful thinking that Apple won't throttle *all*
their latest iPhones after one year because:
1. Apple themselves clearly said they'd throttle all their newest iPhones.
2. Apple didn't change their power-hungry single-threaded architecture.
 
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.
 
Everthing I state is a fact.
"~misfit~" <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com>: Jan 02 06:22PM +1300

Once upon a time on usenet Andy Burns wrote:
 
> My Sony Cyclenergy 2000 LSD cells retain more capacity after 8+ years
> than my LIDL Tronic "2400" LSD cells had the day they left the shop
> ...
 
Yep. I stick with Eneloop. They might only quote 75% of the power of some
brands but it's real capacity and is useful for hundreds of cycles.
 
I love my Maha MH-C9000 WizardOne charger. It cost me quite a bit back in
the day but it's still going strong and it keeps my cells in great
condition.
--
Shaun.
 
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
"~misfit~" <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com>: Jan 02 06:16PM +1300

Once upon a time on usenet Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> which is a German company but which makes big power factor correction
> capacitors for industrial applications that are unlikely to be found
> inside a Bose Wave CD player. Are you sure about the "Frakus" name?
 
Google did the same with me.
--
Shaun.
 
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
"Ron D." <ron.dozier@gmail.com>: Jan 01 07:37PM -0800

Both in stock at utsource.net. Nice place to deal with for obsolete parts.
"Ron D." <ron.dozier@gmail.com>: Jan 01 07:29PM -0800

Around here, When a dog poops and the neighbor doesn't clean it up, it winds up on their front step. No bag. Problem solved.
murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com: Jan 01 06:18PM -0800

Anyone know if there is a solution to low display brightness on a HP 54111D oscilloscope, like maybe power supply capacitor replacement?
 
The CRT power supply voltage described in the service manual is puzzlingly-low...only 120 VDC (?!?) The 300V switching supply is described as used for generating the 5V logic supply.
 
I haven't dug further, but wonder how a color CRT can get by with such a low voltage...or if the CRT module has an integral flyback supply for anode voltage, and repair being module-focused, isn't discussed.
 
The CRT thought led me to wondering if CRT rejuvenation was an option.
 
Thanks
 
Murray
"tom" <tmiller11147@verizon.net>: Jan 01 10:09PM -0500

<murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a75540be-6105-45b5-b8b1-cbbc1f723f2b@googlegroups.com...
 
> The CRT thought led me to wondering if CRT rejuvenation was an option.
 
> Thanks
 
> Murray
 
Hi Murray,
 
Do you have the CLIP for the 54111D available? Can you get hold of an ESR
tester? And where abouts are you located - 120 or 240 volt land?
 
You might go on the HP Yahoo group with the same request.
 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/hp_agilent_equipment/info
 
It does sound like one of the bulk capacitors has failed if the 300 volts is
that low.
 
You must get the power supply working first before any other diagnostics are
done.
tabbypurr@gmail.com: Jan 01 07:24PM -0800

On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 02:18:06 UTC, Murray atuptown wrote:
 
 
> The CRT thought led me to wondering if CRT rejuvenation was an option.
 
> Thanks
 
> Murray
 
Never do that. I've seen so many CRTs ruined by rejuving. Increasing heater voltage works better and stays good.
 
But if your PSU rail is way out of spec, surely it's obvious that CRT emission failure is not likely to be the cause of a dim screen.
 
 
NT
Murray atuptown <murrayatuptowngallery@gmail.com>: Jan 01 06:20PM -0800

Anyone have any experience with work on a 1960's HP 4800A Vector Impedance Meter?
 
Thanks
 
Murray
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.

Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 7 updates in 3 topics

oldschool@tubes.com: Dec 31 08:48PM -0600

It's official. They are in a different time zone....
 
Happy New Year martians !!!
bruce2bowser@gmail.com: Dec 31 09:07PM -0800

> It's official. They are in a different time zone....
 
> Happy New Year martians !!!
 
+1
"pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>: Jan 01 06:05AM -0800

I am wondering how this works. In these politically correct times, instead of AD (Anno Domini - Year of Our Lord), we have CE (common era). Ignoring what becomes "Year 1" and why, the Martian Year is 687 (earth) days.
 
So, 2018/4 = number of leap-years. (504.5). Round to 505 for a number of reasons.
 
Now, ((2018 x 365) + 505)/687 = number of Martian years. Or: 1072, about mid-October. Nothing quite yet the "New Year". Note that this is using earth-standard days. Martian standard days are 1:40, or 1480 minutes.
 
Starting Over: ((2018 x 365 x 24 x 60) + (505 x 24 x 60))/1480 gives us the number of Martian days involved. Comes to a little later in October of 1043. Months are named arbitrarily by dividing the Martian year into 12 segments assigning the same Earth-month name to that part of the cycle.
 
In any case, the actual Martian New Year is a movable feast, and in 2017, was celebrated on May 5,in Mars, Pennsylvania (where else?). The next one will be +/- March 3 of 2019.
 
Now, I will leave it to others to calculate the same for the Chinese, Korean, Islamic, Jewish, Orthodox, Indian, Aztec, et. al. as they see fit. All God's Creatures have a place in the Choir - even Martians.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHayfrUIJDM About 4 minutes in.
 
Happy New Year!
 
Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>: Dec 31 10:04AM -0800

Motorola Moto G5 Android 7 single-SIM phone with a cheap prepaid
T-Mobile SIM. When I added the $20 500-MB/month-free-data-for-life
hotspot, the hotspot took over the 'phone' function and, being wifi
only, can't perform it. It provides wifi just fine, but I can't make
voice calls using the T-Mobile 'phone'.
 
When I try to phone, I get a Freedompop blue screen and the following
message:
 
"Unable to recognize SIM
Make sure FreedomPop SIM card is inserted properly and in the primary
slot if dual-SIM. Please contact customer support if you continue to
have issues."
 
There are [OK] and [Manual Login] buttons. Neither one helps. No
difference with the hotspot being on or off.
 
I also have a phone with a Freedompop SIM, and I think that somehow
SOMETHING is getting them confused.
 
FP responded to my email in 5 days with instructions for updating the
PRL, which made no difference. When I replied to their email, 3 days
later they sent the same instructions. Awaiting the third response.
 
I can't find any setting in the G5 that I might change/delete to
eliminate recognition of the hotspot.
 
If FP doesn't help, I'll phone Motorola next week. Worst case: factory
reset, which is NOT what I want to do under any circumstances.
 
The little hotspot is perfect for what I want it for -- occasional use
when I'm away from home or any other wifi source, which is rarely. NOT
at the cost of the phone function, though. I can use the google
hangouts dialer with the hotspot, but I'm willing to bet that T-Mobile's
coverage is better than whatever the hotspot uses, and I use the phone
only for 'emergency' calls ("Don't leave, I'm on my way..") rather than
ordinary usage.
 
The 99-cent FP SIM in the OTHER phone has been really useful (Gas Buddy
usage alone is well worth the price of admission!) , so FP provides an
amazingly good free service -- their CUSTOMER service, OTOH, is abysmal.
 
--
Cheers, Bev
"So I'm at the wailing wall, standing there like a moron,
with my harpoon." -- Emo Philips
Fox's Mercantile <jdangus@att.net>: Dec 31 03:36PM -0600

On 12/31/17 12:04 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> Worst case:  factory reset, which is NOT what I want to do
> under any circumstances.
 
I had to reset my LG Android twice now.
Once when the camera stopped working, the second time when
Whatsapp dropped dead.
 
The second time around, I figured out the correct method of
backing up my contacts list so I didn't have to re-enter them
all by hand.
 
 
--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com
The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>: Dec 31 03:01PM -0800

On 12/31/2017 01:36 PM, Fox's Mercantile wrote:
 
> The second time around, I figured out the correct method of
> backing up my contacts list so I didn't have to re-enter them
> all by hand.
 
Those and the apps are apparently backed up via google so it just takes
time, it's the settings and general personalization that cause trauma,
most especially the 'favorites' for the GPS apps -- Osmand and CoPilot
for instance.
 
--
Cheers, Bev
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are
going to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off."
-Elric of Imrryr
Rana Adhikari <rana.adhikari@gmail.com>: Dec 31 02:40PM -0800

I have a number of the Stanford Research Systems SR560 voltage pre-amplifiers in my labs. I also see them in use in my scientific labs around the world.
 
A common issue with them is the front-end gets noisy, going from an input referred noise of ~5 nV/sqrt(Hz) to ~50. In this case, what we usually do is scour the internet for some obsolete NPD 5565 (dual JFET) to swap in and this fixes the problem.
 
It seems to me like the LSK389 is a better part: its supposed have a voltage noise 5x smaller. Does anyone have any experience with this or possibly something similar when doing SR560 repair?
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.