On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

John

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

I guess that you are blind as a bat. One leg of each device has a bead
clamp on it.

You cannot see them? Look closer.

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

Too far away from the devices.

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:52:54 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

I guess that you are blind as a bat. One leg of each device has a bead
clamp on it.

That sure looks like a big ring lug to me. If a ferrite made sense
anywhere, it would be on the gate, and the gates obviously don't have
beads.

I guess you are AlwaysWrong.


You cannot see them? Look closer.

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

Too far away from the devices.

What's too far? I didn't use ferrites here, I used gate resistors.

John

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

---
Not bad...

JF

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:05:08 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

Yeah, I saw that. It looked so similar to an amplifier I made some
years back, that with just a glance I thought I saw the same thing.
We had transzorbs on each device as well. Oh well... so much for quick
glances.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg


Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to). I had to
fire the damn browser up.


WTF? Has everyone turned into Luddite dip****s?

Let's see... wget requires that you type it all in by hand (or mark and
copy and paste. Browser = double click on link.

Which is easier, command line boy?

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:58:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

---
Not bad...

JF

We exploded a coffee mug full of fets before we found some that
survived. The power rails on this amp can go as high as +-200, and
peak output current is 120 amps. I don't really like doing big, heavy,
explodey stuff like this. The power transformer weighs more than my
smallest employee.

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/PP5.JPG

John

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg


Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to). I had to
fire the damn browser up.

Firefox views FTP files just fine. The FireFTP plugin is a very nice
drag-and-drop FTP client. I never learned how to type (does it show?)
so d+d works for me.

John

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:05:08 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

Yeah, I saw that. It looked so similar to an amplifier I made some
years back, that with just a glance I thought I saw the same thing.
We had transzorbs on each device as well. Oh well... so much for quick
glances.

Does that mean I'm *not* blind as a bat?

John

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:32:09 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:05:08 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

Yeah, I saw that. It looked so similar to an amplifier I made some
years back, that with just a glance I thought I saw the same thing.
We had transzorbs on each device as well. Oh well... so much for quick
glances.

Does that mean I'm *not* blind as a bat?

John

No, but if you think that "rackmount" "solution" you have where the
transformer weighs a bus load is a good design, you're nuts. It either
MUST be used as the bottom element in the rack. It should actually be
two rackmount modules, considering the fact that it is obvious that lead
length doesn't bother you. We had an amplifier module that had two 2kVA
units in the bottom of it. It was on wheels, and would never have been
considered as a rack mount capable installation, and those transformers
together weighed less than the monster you sport.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:06:13 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:29:33 -0700, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

WTF? Has everyone turned into Luddite dip****s?

Good grief! He's learned another insult!


Good grief? That is old, asshole. So was my "new insult" it has been
used for years here and fro decades out in the real world. That must be
the reason for your lack of knowledge about it.

Good grief? Gimmie a break, you big baby-fied pussy.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:06:15 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:


I knew that. I just prefer to use wget and get on with other things.
Firefox takes time to load, eats resources, and needs human intervention
in most cases, though not in this case, I'll admit.

Jeez... you are about as stupid as it gets. You do all of what... ONE
TASK at a time, and you think you need to worry about processes and such?
That is your bent brain using its "knowledge" in places where it is not
needed (or correct). ALL processes take up resources, idiot. And no,
properly set up, firefox DLs auto-magically to your selected folder. It
only prompts you if you have it set to do so. So, it requires no more
user operations than the other method does. Less even.

The ****ing reasons these loons come up with for NOT using the power of
their PC astounds me. How did you ever climb above user mentality level
one? Do you even know what a cursor key is or what it does or what it is
for?

Nice picture, anyway.

What a dope.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:28:20 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:58:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:


How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

---
Not bad...

JF

We exploded a coffee mug full of fets before we found some that
survived.

---
Hmm...

From:



You wrote:

"I *calculate* in advance if things will work, and
almost exactly how they will work."

Funny, I would have thought that "almost exactly" would have been a lot
fewer than a coffee mug full...

JF

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:06:24 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:28:20 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:58:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:


How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

---
Not bad...

JF

We exploded a coffee mug full of fets before we found some that
survived.

---
Hmm...

From:



You wrote:

"I *calculate* in advance if things will work, and
almost exactly how they will work."

Funny, I would have thought that "almost exactly" would have been a lot
fewer than a coffee mug full...

JF

Now, you are 'more experienced' with the personality that is John
Larkin.

Maybe this 'experience' will enlighten him as to the efficacy and
importance of 'experimental discovery'.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:06:24 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:28:20 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:58:22 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:


How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

---
Not bad...

JF

We exploded a coffee mug full of fets before we found some that
survived.

---
Hmm...

From:



You wrote:

"I *calculate* in advance if things will work, and
almost exactly how they will work."

Funny, I would have thought that "almost exactly" would have been a lot
fewer than a coffee mug full...

JF

We did a bunch of safe-operating-area characterization of the best
fets (dynamic Tj measurements and tests to destruction) to develop a
thermal model of them. The amp has a microprocessor that measures
everything (namely all relevant voltages and current and heatsink
temperature) in real time, 2000 times a second, and dynamic-model
simulates actual junction temperatures. We shut down if simulated Tj
gets too high. This allows us to push the fets a lot more
intelligently than any simple current limit could do... especially
since we usually run into inductive loads.

So I let the uP do the safety calculations for me, in real time.

These are (were) all 300-watt rated fets. Note the variation in
silicon area.

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/ExFets.jpg

John

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:06:13 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:29:33 -0700, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

WTF? Has everyone turned into Luddite dip****s?

Good grief! He's learned another insult!

We can start calling him AlwaysLame.

John

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:02:24 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:32:09 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:05:08 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

Yeah, I saw that. It looked so similar to an amplifier I made some
years back, that with just a glance I thought I saw the same thing.
We had transzorbs on each device as well. Oh well... so much for quick
glances.

Does that mean I'm *not* blind as a bat?

John

No, but if you think that "rackmount" "solution" you have where the
transformer weighs a bus load is a good design, you're nuts. It either
MUST be used as the bottom element in the rack. It should actually be
two rackmount modules, considering the fact that it is obvious that lead
length doesn't bother you. We had an amplifier module that had two 2kVA
units in the bottom of it. It was on wheels, and would never have been
considered as a rack mount capable installation, and those transformers
together weighed less than the monster you sport.

It's for MRI, so my customers always buy and rack three at a time.

The leads are of course trimmed to length when the transformer is
wired up.

The checks do clear, so it's a good design.

John

John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:06:13 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:29:33 -0700, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

WTF? Has everyone turned into Luddite dip****s?

Good grief! He's learned another insult!

We can start calling him AlwaysLame.


Or NoNads.


--
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:09:54 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:02:24 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:32:09 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:27:19 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:05:08 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

---
Sorry, but those are ring-tongue terminals soldered around the emitters
of the transistors.

JF

Yeah, I saw that. It looked so similar to an amplifier I made some
years back, that with just a glance I thought I saw the same thing.
We had transzorbs on each device as well. Oh well... so much for quick
glances.

Does that mean I'm *not* blind as a bat?

John

No, but if you think that "rackmount" "solution" you have where the
transformer weighs a bus load is a good design, you're nuts. It either
MUST be used as the bottom element in the rack. It should actually be
two rackmount modules, considering the fact that it is obvious that lead
length doesn't bother you. We had an amplifier module that had two 2kVA
units in the bottom of it. It was on wheels, and would never have been
considered as a rack mount capable installation, and those transformers
together weighed less than the monster you sport.

It's for MRI, so my customers always buy and rack three at a time.

The leads are of course trimmed to length when the transformer is
wired up.

The checks do clear, so it's a good design.

John

Ours was 1000.00 Volts @ 1500 Watts and fed a CAT scanner transducer
set. It was a bank of about 18 FETs driving the output multiplier
transformer. I hand wound those on a two inch diameter pot core for the
prototypes and the first few production items, until we got the contract
Mfgr taught how to construct them properly, so they would not fail. We
got the noise figure down to well below the customer spec. That was
Philips. It was a real nice power supply. For all I know, they have
since sold hundreds of them.

I think we ended up at 17kHz (35kHz ripple peaks). Ripple was the
important factor, as was precise voltage regulation. Ripple voltage of
1mV, and 10mV regulation, and temperature coefficient of 2ppm/ºC over the
operating temperature range.

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 08:34:49 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 16:17:28 -0700, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 15:06:13 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:29:33 -0700, Archimedes' Lever wrote:

WTF? Has everyone turned into Luddite dip****s?

Good grief! He's learned another insult!


Good grief? That is old, asshole. So was my "new insult" it has been
used for years here and fro decades out in the real world. That must be
the reason for your lack of knowledge about it.

Good grief? Gimmie a break, you big baby-fied pussy.

Learn to distinguish between "another", and "new"

Except that you missed that one too. I have used it for years, so it
isn't "another" for me either. Just because I quoted your dumb remark
incorrectly does not change the meaning of the retort.

English Comprehension - ungraded.

You are the retard here, boy.

On 3/20/2010 6:06 PM, Fred Abse wrote:
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:31:07 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg


Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to). I had to
fire the damn browser up.

Firefox views FTP files just fine. The FireFTP plugin is a very nice
drag-and-drop FTP client. I never learned how to type (does it show?)
so d+d works for me.

I knew that. I just prefer to use wget and get on with other things.
Firefox takes time to load, eats resources, and needs human intervention
in most cases, though not in this case, I'll admit.

Nice picture, anyway.


Might be a firewall config issue--active vs passive?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

"John Larkin" wrote
in message ...
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to).
I had to fire the damn browser up.

Firefox views FTP files just fine. The FireFTP plugin is a very nice
drag-and-drop FTP client. I never learned how to type (does it show?)
so d+d works for me.

John

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

Bill

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, "Bill Garber"
wrote:


"John Larkin" wrote
in message ...
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to).
I had to fire the damn browser up.

Firefox views FTP files just fine. The FireFTP plugin is a very nice
drag-and-drop FTP client. I never learned how to type (does it show?)
so d+d works for me.

John

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

Bill



I guess pushing that "mouse" thing twice _is_ an excessive amount of
work.

John

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:46:29 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

This news client doesn't automatically reference ftp links, only http.

I *could* have used gftp, or plain old command line ftp, or even link
John's ftp directory tree into my own tree, using the file manager and
just copy across. However, I *wanted* to use wget, since it's quick and
clean. Firefox was the next least labor-intensive way, copy-click- paste.

Bet you don't have a file manager that does ftp ;-)

Using the Agent newsreader, I can double-click on a web or ftp link in
a usenet post or in email, and it launches a Firefox tab and opens the
thing. This is under XP.

John

"John Larkin" wrote
in message ...
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:46:29 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

This news client doesn't automatically reference ftp links, only http.

I *could* have used gftp, or plain old command line ftp, or even link
John's ftp directory tree into my own tree, using the file manager and
just copy across. However, I *wanted* to use wget, since it's quick and
clean. Firefox was the next least labor-intensive way, copy-click- paste.

Bet you don't have a file manager that does ftp ;-)

Using the Agent newsreader, I can double-click on a web or ftp link in
a usenet post or in email, and it launches a Firefox tab and opens the
thing. This is under XP.

John

But John, all of that mouse button clicking. Wouldn't you rather type
everything in on a command line, and possibly hit wrong keys and have
to go back over it several times to locate your errors? 8^)

Bill

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:21:52 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, "Bill Garber"
wrote:


"John Larkin" wrote
in message ...
On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 08:10:48 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:17:58 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:00:08 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:38:45 -0500, John Fields
wrote:

Excellent proper use of a ferrite bead on one leg of each device.

Ferrite beads? Where?

How about this...

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Amp.jpg

Your FTP server wouldn't let me have it using wget (it used to).
I had to fire the damn browser up.

Firefox views FTP files just fine. The FireFTP plugin is a very nice
drag-and-drop FTP client. I never learned how to type (does it show?)
so d+d works for me.

John

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

Bill



I guess pushing that "mouse" thing twice _is_ an excessive amount of
work.

John

There are news reader clients that use active links in Linux as well.

You guys are like kids out on the playground... the dumb ones that
take longer to figure everything out.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:46:29 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

This news client doesn't automatically reference ftp links, only http.

I *could* have used gftp, or plain old command line ftp, or even link
John's ftp directory tree into my own tree, using the file manager and
just copy across. However, I *wanted* to use wget, since it's quick and
clean. Firefox was the next least labor-intensive way, copy-click- paste.

Bet you don't have a file manager that does ftp ;-)

Actually, the file explorer has no problem doing it. The thing is that
it now simply spawns an Iexporer session instead of resolving it the way
it used to.

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:23:16 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:46:29 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 16:33:26 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

I was able to get it via double-click from Outlook Express' newsreader
option, and also via WS-FTP95 using the information given by anonymous
access. I didn't need to "FIRE-UP" any browser at all. 8^)

This news client doesn't automatically reference ftp links, only http.

I *could* have used gftp, or plain old command line ftp, or even link
John's ftp directory tree into my own tree, using the file manager and
just copy across. However, I *wanted* to use wget, since it's quick and
clean. Firefox was the next least labor-intensive way, copy-click- paste.

Bet you don't have a file manager that does ftp ;-)

Using the Agent newsreader, I can double-click on a web or ftp link in
a usenet post or in email, and it launches a Firefox tab and opens the
thing. This is under XP.

John

It spawns from within agent, so the OS matters not. You could do it in
a DOSBox window inside Linux, and it would spawn whatever the Internet
browser client you set it up to spawn.

The setting is within agent, ya dope.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:32:14 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:43:10 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

But John, all of that mouse button clicking. Wouldn't you rather type
everything in on a command line, and possibly hit wrong keys and have
to go back over it several times to locate your errors?

No typing everything. This ain't Windows ;-)

Swipe - hit copy - slide over to next desktop where the terminal is - type
"wget " - hit paste - hit enter.

And now the file is on a hard drive somewhere. Next step is to find an
app to open it.

John

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:32:14 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

Swipe - hit copy - slide over to next desktop where the terminal is - type
"wget " - hit paste - hit enter.


Swipe. In Linux, once highlighted, it is generally already in the paste
queue. There are a few applications and times when it does not
auto-magically perform a copy as soon as you mark it... in Linux.

Middle mouse button pastes it in after you type in wgetspace or bring
it up using the cursor history.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:34:56 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:32:14 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:43:10 -0400, Bill Garber wrote:

But John, all of that mouse button clicking. Wouldn't you rather type
everything in on a command line, and possibly hit wrong keys and have
to go back over it several times to locate your errors?

No typing everything. This ain't Windows ;-)

Swipe - hit copy - slide over to next desktop where the terminal is - type
"wget " - hit paste - hit enter.

And now the file is on a hard drive somewhere. Next step is to find an
app to open it.

John

In Linux? Usually, the user's home directory.

"Fred Abse" wrote in message
news
Bet you don't have a file manager that does ftp ;-)

Windows does FTP natively. You can connect network addresses in your
Network Neighborhood.

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

"Fred Abse" wrote in message
news
If you say so, I wouldn't gainsay that, since I know squat about Windows.

Do you mean that it will do a "proper" FTP connection, using ports 20 and
21, to any anonymous FTP site out there and display that site as part of
its tree?

It does, in a manner. See attached. However, I don't think I can mount it
as a network drive, or access it from the command line ("CMD does not
support UNC paths as current directories.").

Still, if you don't mind using explorer (notice it's basically piped through
Internet Explorer, since IE and the Windows interface are practically one in
the same), you get almost the same functionality as from regular windows.
One major difference: the shell menu (right-click) only has simple options,
you can basically only download files and that's it (or upload / move /
delete if you have access, which Anonymous of course does not). That's what
FTP does, so I suppose it's not too bad.

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:00:26 -0500, "Tim Williams"
wrote:

"Fred Abse" wrote in message
news
If you say so, I wouldn't gainsay that, since I know squat about Windows.

Do you mean that it will do a "proper" FTP connection, using ports 20 and
21, to any anonymous FTP site out there and display that site as part of
its tree?

It does, in a manner. See attached. However, I don't think I can mount it
as a network drive, or access it from the command line ("CMD does not
support UNC paths as current directories.").

Still, if you don't mind using explorer (notice it's basically piped through
Internet Explorer, since IE and the Windows interface are practically one in
the same), you get almost the same functionality as from regular windows.
One major difference: the shell menu (right-click) only has simple options,
you can basically only download files and that's it (or upload / move /
delete if you have access, which Anonymous of course does not). That's what
FTP does, so I suppose it's not too bad.

Tim


Whip the Llama's ass?

Bwuahahahaha!

"Tim Williams" wrote in message
...
It does, in a manner. See attached. However, I don't think I can mount it
as a network drive, or access it from the command line ("CMD does not
support UNC paths as current directories.").

You might try out 4NT (http://www.jpsoft.com/) some day -- it's perfectly
happy to "change [the current working] directory" to a UNC path, an FTP site,
etc.

Hey, do you *like* TeX or are you just being made to use it? :-)

"Fred Abse" wrote in message news
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:00:26 -0500, Tim Williams wrote:

It does, in a manner. See attached.

So it appears to do. Quite different from
the Windows I knew and hated ;-)

I see there's still "My Computer". That always
grated on me, sounds childish and patronizing.

Seems there isn't much that 'doesn't' grate on you,
and have you ever considered renaming it? It doesn't
need to be named 'My Computer'.

Bill