In alt.engineering.electrical Laurence Payne lpayne1NOSPAM@dsldotpipexdotcom wrote:
| On 26 Dec 2006 11:45:26 GMT, wrote:
|
|So what about their design makes it a problem for cooling to go from active
|to passive when the heating goes from active to none? It would seem to me
|that a slower cooling process would be less stressful. But apparently some
|aspect of it is a problem where temperature presumably will rise somewhere
|that active cooling would have prevented (e.g. cool parts adjacent to hot
|parts). Someone didn't consider thermal in the mechanical design.
|
| Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of equipment
| requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to it with your computer,
| your ink-jet printer. If they reckon the projector bulb will last
| longer with controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?

My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages with no problem
whatsoever. The printer seems to still be working fine, too (but I'm not
stressing it with a dozen reams a day).

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

On 27 Dec 2006 02:40:50 GMT, wrote:

| Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of equipment
| requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to it with your computer,
| your ink-jet printer. If they reckon the projector bulb will last
| longer with controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?

My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages with no problem
whatsoever. The printer seems to still be working fine, too (but I'm not
stressing it with a dozen reams a day).

Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data, or corrupt a
disk's file structure.

Are you sure you're not arguing your point a LITTLE harder than it
deserves? :-)

In alt.engineering.electrical Laurence Payne lpayne1NOSPAM@dsldotpipexdotcom wrote:
| On 27 Dec 2006 02:40:50 GMT, wrote:
|
|| Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of equipment
|| requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to it with your computer,
|| your ink-jet printer. If they reckon the projector bulb will last
|| longer with controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?
|
|My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages with no problem
|whatsoever. The printer seems to still be working fine, too (but I'm not
|stressing it with a dozen reams a day).
|
| Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data, or corrupt a
| disk's file structure.

Reiserfs is designed specifically to avoid that. Most partitions are in
that format. The ext2 partitions are mounted read/only.


| Are you sure you're not arguing your point a LITTLE harder than it
| deserves? :-)

I'm sure. Things _can_ be hardened again power outages.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message
On 27 Dec 2006 02:40:50 GMT,
wrote:

Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of
equipment requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to
it with your computer, your ink-jet printer. If they
reckon the projector bulb will last longer with
controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?

My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages
with no problem whatsoever. The printer seems to still
be working fine, too (but I'm not stressing it with a
dozen reams a day).

Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data,
or corrupt a disk's file structure.

Not with NTFS.

"Steve Stone" wrote ...
Richard,

I've been around since way before Fidonet linked up to the Internet.
My Google / Deja News tracks go back to 1992 and I've been in
telecommunications since the mid 1970's.
I know all the old war stories as well as the ancient edicts frowning
on HTML so that Apple, ATARI, Sinclair, Timex, TTY, IBM, UNIX, and
OUIJA boards could be on common ground.

I'm likely an older fart than you.
But being a whippersnapper doesn't qualify you (or anyone
else) to breeze through here ****ing on all the conventions.

It's the holidays. How about cutting us old farts some slack.

Its the holidays. How about being polite to others.

wrote ...
Richard Crowley wrote:
| wrote ...
| Still, IMHO, a bad design. Active cooling should not be needed
| when there is no active heating.
|
| Modern projectors (especially "road-warrior", portable type),
| servo-controlled lamps, etc. etc. would be non-viable in the
| modern market it they were designed large enough to allow
| unaided convection cooling. Furthermore the heat is so
| concentrated far inside that I question whether one could
| design such equipment for natural cooling regardless of size.

But wasn't the OP talking about a home display model?

How do you think they get that bright, large-area back-light
without what you call "active heating"? Even fluorescent
sources (and their ballasts, etc.) get pretty warm.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message
On 27 Dec 2006 02:40:50 GMT,
wrote:

Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of
equipment requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to
it with your computer, your ink-jet printer. If they
reckon the projector bulb will last longer with
controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?

My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages
with no problem whatsoever. The printer seems to still
be working fine, too (but I'm not stressing it with a
dozen reams a day).

Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data,
or corrupt a disk's file structure.

Not with NTFS.


And the Titanic wouldn't sink.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote
in message

On 27 Dec 2006 02:40:50 GMT,
wrote:

Or the punters demanded it small and cheap. Lots of
equipment requires a shut-down cycle. You're used to
it with your computer, your ink-jet printer. If they
reckon the projector bulb will last longer with
controlled cooling, why should we take an attitude?

My computer has survived dozens of sudden power outages
with no problem whatsoever. The printer seems to still
be working fine, too (but I'm not stressing it with a
dozen reams a day).

Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data,
or corrupt a disk's file structure.

Not with NTFS.


And the Titanic wouldn't sink.

The Titanic might not have sunk if built to the standards of NTFS. ;-)

On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 07:31:42 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Yeah, and mostly it will. But one day you'll lose data,
or corrupt a disk's file structure.

Not with NTFS.

Oh yes it can. And, occasionally, does.

Arny Krueger wrote:

And the Titanic wouldn't sink.

The Titanic might not have sunk if built to the standards of NTFS. ;-)


It would have sank before they could hit it with the bottle. I have
seen a lot of NTFS crashes, both with mechanical, and solid state disk
drives. The drive is writing a file as the power supply drops below the
critical level, and it is trashed. I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash. Sometimes it was the
OS that was damaged, other times it was the system's software, but we
were required to reformat the drive, run full diagnostics, then
reinstall everything.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so often?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."

A. Einstein

Bob Cain wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so often?


Not me, but it looks like the drive was writing a file as the power
failed. A lot of corrupted files on the drives, and none of the systems
were connected to the outside world.


--
My sig file can beat up your sig file!

Bob Cain wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so often?
Bob


Well, Bob, your mind isn't the only one that boggles. My mind boggles
too. Somehow, I can't seem to comprehend how someone like you, a
self-proclaimed scientist and engineer, needs to go to sci.physics for
help in solving a junior college level partial differential equation.
Worst yet, you were lead by the hand by Zigoteau over several posts,
and finally told that you clearly don't know what you are doing.


"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."

A. Einstein

That idiotic quote, which you have fabricated and attribute to
Einstein, has about as much depth as **** on a flat rock, as does
virtually everything that you have to say.

"Bob Cain" wrote in message

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so often?

Good question. NTFS has specific safeguards against this sort of thimg
happening.

I pull the plug (literally) on booted XP systems all the time. They reboot
fine.

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Bob Cain" wrote in message


Michael A. Terrell wrote:


I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so often?


Good question. NTFS has specific safeguards against this sort of thimg
happening.

I pull the plug (literally) on booted XP systems all the time. They reboot
fine.



Perhaps the write cache is enabled? If it loses power before flushing
the cache, data can be corrupted. NTFS is certainly much more robust
than the earlier MS file systems though, I haven't had much trouble with
it myself.

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:13:11 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I pull the plug (literally) on booted XP systems all the time. They reboot
fine.

You do this on purpose? Or are you VERY careless?

"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:r00lh.9257$kD4.5353@trndny06
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Bob Cain" wrote in message


Michael A. Terrell wrote:


I've lost track of the hundreds of
times I've reinstalled OS with NTFS after a crash.

The mind boggles. How do you crash the hardware so
often?

Good question. NTFS has specific safeguards against this
sort of thimg happening.

I pull the plug (literally) on booted XP systems all the
time. They reboot fine.

Perhaps the write cache is enabled?

Which one?

IME NTFS is generally robust regardless of write caching.

If it loses power
before flushing the cache, data can be corrupted.

The nature of life is such that one usually pulls the plug on an idle
system.

NTFS is
certainly much more robust than the earlier MS file
systems though, I haven't had much trouble with it myself.

IME there is no serious comparison between NTFS and FAT32. NTFS is *that*
much more robust.

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 22:13:11 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I pull the plug (literally) on booted XP systems all the
time. They reboot fine.

You do this on purpose?

When I do it on purpose, I do it on purpose. ;-)

Or are you VERY careless?

No, I think that an NTFS computer should be able to tolerate having its
power dumped like this, and verify it empirically fairly often.

Its been a while since I posted this question. I never did hear an
answer about whether a stepped sine wave UPS would bother my TV. In the
interim the thread dissolved into ad hominen attacks between various
posters, debates about which O/S or File system was bogus, and the
expected debates about SHOUTING and Usenet etiquette. Thankfully no one
slammed me for "top posting".

It is now 3 months later and I finally got around to ordering the
battery for my UPS from Battery Wholesale Distributors, without whom, I
would not be able to keep my APC UPS's running!

I will soon know if the UPS works as I intend to simply plug it in and
hope for the best.

Malissa Baldwin wrote:

Stick with the better brands and it will not be a problem anyway.




I thought you said that brands didn't matter you midget smoker.




--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"©

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

"Follow The Money" ;-P

**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** wrote:
Its been a while since I posted this question. I never did hear an
answer about whether a stepped sine wave UPS would bother my TV.

I think LCD TVs pretty much exclusively use switching-mode power
supplies. Switching supplies don't care much what the input waveform
looks like, so you should be fine. Consider that computers, which are
what these UPSs were made to run, also use switching supplies.

Thanks!

David Brodbeck wrote:

**THE-RFI-EMI-GUY** wrote:


Its been a while since I posted this question. I never did hear an
answer about whether a stepped sine wave UPS would bother my TV.



I think LCD TVs pretty much exclusively use switching-mode power
supplies. Switching supplies don't care much what the input waveform
looks like, so you should be fine. Consider that computers, which are
what these UPSs were made to run, also use switching supplies.



--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"©

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

"Follow The Money" ;-P