Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Fredxx wrote: On 15/06/2021 17:52, Peter Able wrote: On 15/06/2021 18:25, Fredxx wrote: I'm struggling to see this phrase. A word search finds 3 'year's as part of 2 'many years" and one "over the years". A search of '50' finds 4, none of which pertain to time. That is because it is not a quote. When I quote I follow the convention of quotation marks - so I might have quoted such technical expressions as "rubbish", "more rubbish", "unmitigated drivel", "frauds and charlatans". And you? I just don't get your point, "An article originated 2000, referring to a 50+ year old Op Amp design (great advance though it was) is the first hint". The uA741 is still in production, and the 741 is the ubiquitous op-amp. https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ua741.pdf "SLOS094G— NOVEMBER 1970 —REVISED JANUARY 2018" A bit like a 2N3055 is to a power bipolar npn transistor. Referring to circuits that have survived the test of time should give credibility to an article, not one that should be taken with a "pinch of salt". Please explain why this article should be taken "with a little pinch of salt"? Elliot's stuff may be a bit self opinionated, but generally sound advice for those they are written for. -- *I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|