On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before joining
them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations so
that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this is
true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite a
few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal, when
mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are then
only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and a
chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from the
mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone bedside
alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery powered and so
are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are good, old
clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD or
LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there and it
makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end up
costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only having
electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of other
consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which appeals
to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too often
they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'


SteveW


--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people
by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are
poor.

Peter Thompson

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country that
all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before joining
them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations so
that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this is
true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite a
few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for most
of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the like
a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal, when
mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are then
only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and a
chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from the
mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone bedside
alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery powered and so are
purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD or
LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there and it
makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end up
costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only having
electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of other
consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of software,
to make everything massively over complicated, which appeals to low brow
users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too often
they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 06:46:49 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Not viable with a mobile phone.

Nobody talked to you, senile pest!

--
Richard addressing Rot Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite
a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are
then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and
a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery
powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are
good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there
and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so
they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of
other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotaryÂ* dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer. It depends on whether the
phone is 'asleep' or not when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

--
Max Demian

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before joining
them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations so
that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this is
true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite a
few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for most
of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal, when
mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are then
only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and a
chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery powered
and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are good, old
clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there and
it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so they
do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end up
costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of other
consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which appeals
to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too often
they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer.

Nope, what works for mobile phones with physical
buttons doesnt with modern touch screen phones.

It depends on whether the phone is 'asleep' or not
? when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

But that wont be the same across all mobile phone types.

And you need at least two separate operations too, one to answer
the call, another to send it to voicemail or reject the call.

On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite
a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are
then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and
a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery
powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are
good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there
and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so
they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of
other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotaryÂ* dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Eaiily viable to have one button that you press to 'lift handset'


--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

On 22/08/2019 22:45, Max Demian wrote:
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and
quite a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy
or light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals
are then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal
and a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery
powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks
are good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are
LCD or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is
there and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy)
and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is
that software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to
provide different options for different trim levels of cars or
levels of other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty.
Useless features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit
of software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotaryÂ* dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer. It depends on whether the
phone is 'asleep' or not when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

It's worse than that. It's user configurable I think.


--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 13:24:09 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


They could have a standard way to answer.

Nope

LOL

But

LOL

It's time you had another one of your many brain checks, you clinically
insane auto-contradicting asshole!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before joining
them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations so
that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this is
true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite a
few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for most
of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal, when
mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are then
only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and a
chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery powered
and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are good, old
clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there and
it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so they
do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end up
costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of other
consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which appeals
to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too often
they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Eaiily viable to have one button that you press to 'lift handset'

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 22:45, Max Demian wrote:
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations so
that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite
a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are
crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal, when
mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are then
only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and
a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery powered
and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are good,
old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there
and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so
they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of other
consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer. It depends on whether the phone
is 'asleep' or not when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

It's worse than that. It's user configurable I think.

No its not. Wish it was.

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:05:44 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


It's worse than that. It's user configurable I think.

No its not.

LOL Did you just get another one of your tiny miserable senile online
orgasms, you auto-contradicting senile asshole?

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:21 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Eaiily viable to have one button that you press to 'lift handset'

That¢s what the ones with physical buttons do have.

People wish you had a button with which to switch you off, you abnormal
trolling senile asshole!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 23/08/2019 09:04, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator
people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if
this is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and
quite a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy
or light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are
crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery
Radio ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and
the like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals
are then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal
and a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves
from the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just
stand-alone bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be
battery powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall
clocks are good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them
most peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are
LCD or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is
there and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy)
and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will
end up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor
and gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper
than proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is
that software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to
provide different options for different trim levels of cars or
levels of other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty.
Useless features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit
of software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as
they don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and
too often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotaryÂ* dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Eaiily viable to have one button that you press to 'lift handset'

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.
SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 23/08/2019 09:05, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 22:45, Max Demian wrote:
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the
country that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator
people are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power
stations so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if
this is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and
quite a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy
or light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about
a minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are
crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery
Radio ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartzÂ* on cookers and
the like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals
are then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal
and a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves
from the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just
stand-alone bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be
battery powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall
clocks are good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them
most peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are
LCD or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is
there and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy)
and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will
end up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor
and gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens?Â* Menus? because they are cheaper
than proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is
that software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to
provide different options for different trim levels of cars or
levels of other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty.
Useless features are added that dont cost anything more than a
bit of software, to make everything massively over complicated,
which appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as
they don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and
too often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr
'3 mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotaryÂ* dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer. It depends on whether the
phone is 'asleep' or not when it 'rings'. You touch something, or
swipe something /to the right/??

It's worse than that. It's user configurable I think.

No its not. Wish it was.

https://mobileinternist.com/enable-s...droid-nougat-7


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 23/08/2019 04:24, Rod Speed wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer.

Nope, what works for mobile phones with physical
buttons doesnt with modern touch screen phones.

It depends on whether the phone is 'asleep' or not
? when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

But that wont be the same across all mobile phone types.

And you need at least two separate operations too, one to answer
the call, another to send it to voicemail or reject the call.

So have a green handset symbol that you touch to answer, and a red one
to reject the call.

--
Max Demian

On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Come off it rod, its easy as they have ear sensors and accelerometers in
them.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 09:04, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and quite
a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy or
light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are
crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals are
then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal and
a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery
powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks are
good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are LCD
or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is there
and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy) and so
they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is that
software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to provide
different options for different trim levels of cars or levels of
other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty. Useless
features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit of
software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Eaiily viable to have one button that you press to 'lift handset'

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 09:05, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 22:45, Max Demian wrote:
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 08:14, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/08/2019 07:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:32, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/08/2019 20:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@n
ezumi.demon.co.uk scribeth thus
On 20/08/2019 23:04, Max Demian wrote:
On 20/08/2019 19:21, Andy Burns wrote:
Max Demian wrote:

How do that with sodding great dynamos all round the country
that all
work in different ways?

By all running at 50Hz, and getting them into sync before
joining them
to the grid.

I heard on a radio programme recently that the generator people
are
relaxed about the overall synchronisation and they don't have
clocks
saying "electric time" and "actual time" in the power stations
so that
"cooker clocks" might not be reliable. Does anyone know if this
is true?
There must be loads of synchronous timeswitches about, and
quite a few
clocks - I think I saw one in a local hospital.

They are legally bound to keep the twenty four hour average
extremely
close to 50Hz - ISTR the exact tolerance is still an official
secret.

Excursions 0.1Hz either way are not uncommon at times of heavy
or light
loading. They play catchup in the night and run slow in daytime.

A synchronous motor mains clock could be running 0.2% slow for
most of
the working day so in an 8 hour shift it could drift by about a
minute
in the employers favour. These days most modern systems are
crystal
controlled and drift around 15s a month or less if trimmed.

Cooking wouldn't notice a 0.2% error in timing. GPS would!


Do that many clocks use the mains these days?, went to the leccy
wholesalers the other month quite a good range, all battery Radio
ones
and aren't they using much the same or quartz on cookers and the
like a
lot nowadays?..

Probably any mains powered clock. Why bother using the crystal,
when mains frequency (over time) is more accurate? The crystals
are then only used for battery back-up.

One very simple reason. Cost.

A synchronous motor and gearbox costs more than a quartz crystal
and a chip and a stepper motor. Or digital LCD display.

Most mains clocks are digital these days and do time themselves from
the mains. Built into ovens, cookers, boilers or just stand-alone
bedside alarms. Wall and mantlepiece clocks tend to be battery
powered and so are purely crystal based (although our wall clocks
are good, old clockwork).

I dont think most people undersatnd engineering cost, but them most
peole havent designed stuff to be mass produced and sold.

Most mains clocks are not run by synchronous motors now, they are
LCD or LED and controlled by a single chip. However, the mains is
there and it makes more sense to time from that (for the accuracy)
and so they do.

A crystal costs next to nothing. Why would they use mains?It will end
up costing more


One of the big drivers for electric car windows is that a motor and
gearbox and switch is a little bit cheaper than a handle.

Is it? Fair enough, but why did we have many years with cars only
having electric windows as optional extras or only in the front?


Manufcturers stuck in teh age of te dinosaur/EU

Why do we have touch screens? Menus? because they are cheaper than
proper controls.

Yes. Not just parts and production costs though. A big driver is
that software is easy and "cheap" to add new features to or to
provide different options for different trim levels of cars or
levels of other consumer goods.

Cost drives engineering development.

And in te comnsumert market, creeping featursim and novelty.
Useless features are added that dont cost anything more than a bit
of software, to make everything massively over complicated, which
appeals to low brow users.

I am perfectly happy to have lots of extra features, as long as they
don't get in the way of the basic, day-to-day operation - and too
often they do.

Exactly.

I simply cant be arsed to learn how to set a modern microwave fpr '3
mintes at half power please' when its all buttons and menus,

Its 1 second on two rotary dials here.

Commercial microwaves have knobs

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer. It depends on whether the
phone is 'asleep' or not when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

It's worse than that. It's user configurable I think.

No its not. Wish it was.

https://mobileinternist.com/enable-s...droid-nougat-7

Thats not worse, its better.

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 05:29:28 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


https://mobileinternist.com/enable-s...droid-nougat-7

That¢s not worse, its better.

That's not for a psychopathic senile fool to decide!

--
dennis@home to retarded senile Rot:
"sod off rod you don't have a clue about anything."
Message-ID:

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 05:27:13 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

You can shove your smartphone, your icon and your touch screen up your
senile arse, senile arsehole!

--
"Anonymous" to trolling senile Rot Speed:
"You can **** off as you know less than pig **** you sad
little ignorant ****."
MID:

On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or shaking
the thing volently and throwing it against the wall


--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

On 23/08/2019 11:41, Max Demian wrote:


So have a green handset symbol that you touch to answer, and a red one
to reject the call.


Yes, I have one like that, missed a few calls before I worked it out.

--
djc

(–€Ì¿Ä¹Ì¯–€Ì¿ Ì¿)
No low-hanging fruit, just a lot of small berries up a tall tree.

On 23/08/2019 21:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or shaking
the thing volently and throwing it against the wall

All the mobile interfaces are obscure. I bought a (very non-smart) phone
in 2003 and had to go back into the shop to ask how to turn it on. You
press *and hold* the red "hang up" button. Who would think of that?
(There was a 1/0 power symbol on the button but it was *very* tiny.)

--
Max Demian

"Max Demian" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 23/08/2019 04:24, Rod Speed wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer.

Nope, what works for mobile phones with physical
buttons doesnt with modern touch screen phones.

It depends on whether the phone is 'asleep' or not
? when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

But that wont be the same across all mobile phone types.

And you need at least two separate operations too, one to answer
the call, another to send it to voicemail or reject the call.

So have a green handset symbol that you touch to answer, and a red one to
reject the call.

The better designs like the iphone use the physical power button to send
the call to voicemail, so you can so it entirely by feel and dont even need
to take your phone out of your pocket to send the call to voicemail.

"Max Demian" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 23/08/2019 04:24, Rod Speed wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

The prize for the worst user interface in te workld gose to smart
phones

I missed about 30 calls before I worked out how to answer it

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

They could have a standard way to answer.

Nope, what works for mobile phones with physical
buttons doesnt with modern touch screen phones.

It depends on whether the phone is 'asleep' or not
? when it 'rings'. You touch something, or swipe
something /to the right/??

But that wont be the same across all mobile phone types.

And you need at least two separate operations too, one to answer
the call, another to send it to voicemail or reject the call.

So have a green handset symbol that you touch to answer, and a red one to
reject the call.

Not viable with a touch screen phone, too easy to touch the wrong
one when getting it out of your pocket when the phone is ringing;

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 22/08/2019 21:46, jeikppkywk wrote:

What ever happened to 'lift handset and talk'

Not viable with a mobile phone.

Come off it rod, its easy as they have ear sensors and accelerometers in
them.

Its not viable to do it that way because many
want to lift the phone, see who is calling and
decide whether to answer the call or not.

Not because they phone can't do it.

I have mine show the main screen when I lift it but
it isnt viable to answer all incoming calls that way.

Eat sensors arent viable for those who
normally use speakerphone mode.

On 23/08/2019 22:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 23/08/2019 21:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or
shaking the thing volently and throwing it against the wall

All the mobile interfaces are obscure. I bought a (very non-smart) phone
in 2003 and had to go back into the shop to ask how to turn it on. You
press *and hold* the red "hang up" button. Who would think of that?
(There was a 1/0 power symbol on the button but it was *very* tiny.)

There is no such thing as an 'intuitive' user interface to anything.

Its all convention.
But smart phones are probably te worst piece of tech to surface yet


--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon,

Those dont work when getting the phone out of your pocket.

On 24/08/2019 07:30, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon,

Those dont work when getting the phone out of your pocket.


Why not?


--
"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch".

Gospel of St. Mathew 15:14

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 22:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 23/08/2019 21:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or shaking
the thing volently and throwing it against the wall

All the mobile interfaces are obscure. I bought a (very non-smart) phone
in 2003 and had to go back into the shop to ask how to turn it on. You
press *and hold* the red "hang up" button. Who would think of that?
(There was a 1/0 power symbol on the button but it was *very* tiny.)

There is no such thing as an 'intuitive' user interface to anything.

Yes there is with catching something coming towards you.

Its all convention.

Most, but not all.

But smart phones are probably te worst piece of tech to surface yet

Even sillier than you usually manage and thats saying something.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 24/08/2019 07:30, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon,

Those dont work when getting the phone out of your pocket.


Why not?

Because its too easy to press on the icon accidentally
when you can't see the screen when it is still in your
pocket and you are taking it out of your pocket.

Thats why you have to swipe to initiate the action
you want and trivial to label the entire screen with
that information so the only time that doesnt work
is with the blind etc.

On 24/08/2019 07:05, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 22:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 23/08/2019 21:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or
shaking the thing volently and throwing it against the wall

All the mobile interfaces are obscure. I bought a (very non-smart)
phone in 2003 and had to go back into the shop to ask how to turn it
on. You press *and hold* the red "hang up" button. Who would think of
that? (There was a 1/0 power symbol on the button but it was *very*
tiny.)

There is no such thing as an 'intuitive' user interface to anything.

Its all convention.
But smart phones are probably te worst piece of tech to surface yet



Too smart for you?

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 10:06:59 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

So have a green handset symbol that you touch to answer, and a red one to
reject the call.

The better designs like the iphone

I told you already, senile cretin, you can shove your idiotPhone up your
senile arse, you Australian arsehole!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 10:55:30 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Not viable with a touch screen phone, too easy to touch the wrong
one when getting it out of your pocket when the phone is ringing;

For a decrepit senile trolling asshole like you, yes!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 16:38:32 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:

There is no such thing as an 'intuitive' user interface to anything.

Yes there is with catching something coming towards you.

In auto-contradicting mode again, you abnormal 85-year-old senile pest? LOL

--
"Anonymous" to trolling senile Rot Speed:
"You can **** off as you know less than pig **** you sad
little ignorant ****."
MID:

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 16:30:39 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon,

Those don¢t work when getting the phone out of your pocket.

We should try to get the **** out of your head, senile ****head!

--
dennis@home to retarded senile Rot:
"sod off rod you don't have a clue about anything."
Message-ID:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 24/08/2019 07:30, jeikppkywk wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

That's what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon,

Those don't work when getting the phone out of your pocket.


Why not?
Do you mean why is that mode chosen, or do you mean how is it achieved?

--

Roger Hayter

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 16:45:30 +1000, jeikppkywk, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rodent Speed, wrote:


Why not?

Because its too easy to press on the icon accidentally
when you can't see the screen when it is still in your
pocket and you are taking it out of your pocket.

Well, for a senile idiot like you with handicapped motoric functions and a
big mouth, you 85-year-old trolling senile arsehole!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 11:20:58 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Come off it rod, its easy as they have ear sensors and accelerometers in
them.

Its not viable to do it

LOL Auto-contradicting senile idiot!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 22:36:40 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:

On 23/08/2019 21:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/2019 20:27, jeikppkywk wrote:

Thats what the ones with physical buttons do have.

Not viable with a touch screen tho.

SO DONT HAVE JUST A TOUCH SCREEEN

NOT A VIABLE WAY TO DO A SMARTPHONE.

Makes more sense to swipe an icon on the touch screen.

No, It makes no more sense than tapping a button, or an icon, or shaking
the thing volently and throwing it against the wall

All the mobile interfaces are obscure. I bought a (very non-smart) phone
in 2003 and had to go back into the shop to ask how to turn it on. You
press *and hold* the red "hang up" button. Who would think of that?
(There was a 1/0 power symbol on the button but it was *very* tiny.)


Like you got to Start to shut Windows down then.

--
AnthonyL

Why do scientists need to BELIEVE in anything?