Delivered-To: daveyxm@virginmedia.com Received: by 10.50.93.2 with SMTP id cq2csp67220igb; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:05:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.122.99 with SMTP id lr3mr6633875wjb.21.1377108351626; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com. [195.171.43.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id fx5si5052031wjb.84.1969.12.31.16.00.00; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) client-ip=195.171.43.25; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 195.171.43.25 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org) smtp.mail=owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1VCBx2-0001aj-DS for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:12:08 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1VCBx1-0001aa-QF for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:12:07 +0100 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1VCBwz-0003Fu-VR for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:12:06 +0100 Received: from 3capp-gmx-bs33.server.lan ([172.19.170.85]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx002) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lh9uT-1VpK7S02i7-00oUKm for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 19:12:01 +0200 Received: from [91.20.129.241] by 3capp-gmx-bs33.server.lan with HTTP; Wed Aug 21 19:12:01 CEST 2013 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: aot.aot@gmx.de To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 19:12:01 +0200 (CEST) Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: <1377100732.59433.YahooMailNeo@web133203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: , <1377100732.59433.YahooMailNeo@web133203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:HStDNVlGClPM0D/q2DuSZWRfJBBPUwMDy37HllAjhz3 p3M127/oWtb8TsfJ8YhrD7W4qlJ+YJi2yz+12u8h8bcF9kGoUz e2PGE1aVHB0LFlwZ87M9fNGJnNhhGkgn3jGYjMZXmCvygzryp3 vOEU1zfyM/TX6mI2vUZW8iVODMMyJpPrk20iHrLddiuPjtAEv7 +Rf/VmV0vnaN6ZjqAXULLyj/NmELLXv4ag7EtznTdCTkFCIUmI JVN4+n3760IapOwIOfgBCHSsdh4piuymaJ6WB/Wkg5Wh+/t3GQ Gg6cYE= X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Pete, did not want to offend you! I like tubes too! In my rx are 21 of them ;-) [...] Content analysis details: (1.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.227.15.19 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (aot.aot[at]gmx.de) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 1.1 MIME_HTML_ONLY BODY: Message only has text/html MIME parts X-Scan-Signature: 1bc6486c2865e7dc2ff7578e6d7fc226 Subject: Aw: Re: LF: PIC based designs Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY,NO_REAL_NAME,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 37
 
Pete,
did not want to offend you!
 
I like tubes too! In my rx are 21 of them ;-)
And my tx for HF works still with PL504 in pa...
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. August 2013 um 17:58 Uhr
Von: M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk>
An: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Betreff: Re: LF: PIC based designs
Christian
 
My secret is out, I confess I build tube projects, although I am not a total Dinosaur. I build SDR SMT and PIC projects. My rant was that I have found a project published by W3PM Gene. Nicely lay out but totally and utterly useless because there is no HEX code to go with the article. However I have found another of his articles publish which is a dead copy of Johan Bodin SM6LKM PIC project of a few years ago where Johan did publish all the PIC program details plus HEX code. So may be plagiarism is rife on the Interweb? 
 
Oh sorry Stefan 10nano Farads but you knew what I meant?
 
End of rant!
73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX
 
 
From: C. Groeger <aot.aot@gmx.de>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sent: Wednesday, 21 August 2013, 13:58
Subject: Re: LF: PIC based designs

Hi Pete,
I was thinking you're still working with tubes...;-)
73, df5qg

Christian Groeger

M0FMT <m0fmt@yahoo.co.uk> schrieb:

>Hi all
> 
>This is an open letter to all PIC based designers form a frustrated constructor.......
> 
>"....
> 
>
>As with all construction articles that contain a Micro Processor chip is that  the one vital ingredient to make it is the HEX code. It is as vital as the 0.01 mF decoupling capacitor that goes across the Vcc to ground.  
>
>It is IMHO and most guys I have spoken to over the air that a construction article that has a PIC in the BOM is so much wasted paper. The Radcom being a typical magazine that delights in publishing the schematic of a PIC based project but doesn't publish the Hex script. My guess is the so called editors have no construction experience and do not understand the significance of what they are publishing. I think peoples hearts sink when they look down the BOM and see 16F84 or what ever.
>
>The people who look at these sorts of articles are constructor like me not Code designers otherwise they wouldn't need a construction article at all, because they would be busily designing there own code .... wouldn't they. I have a G3---  friend who is a great constructor. Nothing in his shack is commercial ready made. He has a prodigious output of excellent TX and RX designs, keyers and SDR projects, nothing with a PIC. I have encouraged him to take advantage of the facility to be found in a PIC based project but he considers them black magic. Because of the RADCOM and other mags that trot these PIC based projects out with little concern if any one actually builds them they are referred to as space fillers of little interest and are intensely frustrating. This sort of incomplete article can be an ego trip for the writer with the publishing editor oblivious to what is in the big blank square in the middle of the schematic.
>
>So this mail is an appeal to you and all other PIC based designers please, please publish the HEX code. It doesn't take much space on a page and simple for someone to scan the code and use word recognition software to convert it along with a bit of manual editing if necessary. Otherwise I would say don't bother publishing your designs.
>
>Sorry for the venting but just going through yet another "Oh B*!$$er it's got a PIC in it" article that looked promising.
>
>73 es GL Pete M0FMT IO91UX