Fullscreen HTML5Med Res (??MB)HTML4

but we are unable to help you on this point. Normally, you should be able to print the READ.ME file by typing “COPY READ.ME LPT1” and then ENTER. If you can no longer do this and you can no longer read the file using the TYPE command, it suggests that the file has been corrupted. If you wish to run a program written in C on your computer, you must have a C compiler, such as Turbo-C or Turbo-C++ by Borland in order to run it. All programs, no matter what language they are written in, require an interpreter (such as is used in the Basic package on your machine) or a compiler. Programs writ­ten in C do not run using interpreters so a compiler is the only way. In effect, a compiler converts high level language to ma­chine language which can be “understood” by the microprocessor. Needs circuit for a BWD scope I am writing to you in the hope you or one of my fellow readers can help me. I have a BWD 539D oscilloscope which is out of order and need a circuit diagram. I need to know where I can get in touch with the distributors, or if any reader could help with a copy or the original service manual for which I would be happy to pay. (Bob Riding, 65 Pacific Bay, Fingal Bay, NSW 2315). Notes & Errata Remote Control Extender for VCR’s; April 1994: the panel mount DC socket for the plugpack should be an insulating type to prevent the negative pin shorting to the case. This is shown in the photograph on page 21 of the article in the April issue. Induction Balance Metal Locator; May 1994: The parts list should indicate 5 rather than 4 0.1µF MKT capacitors. The extra capaci­tor is shown on the overlay but not on the circuit. It is used as a bypass to ground for the +7V supply near VR1. The .001µF ca­ pacitor shown on the overlay next to VR1 should be .01µF. Champ Audio Amplifier; February 1994: the text on page 47 regard­ing the “blurt” test should read “You do this by winding the trimpot anticlockwise and then putting your finger on the input”. SC The Emperor’s New Clothes: from page 29 understanding. Many idiosyncratic system behaviours that plague us are actually cracks in the thin veneer of standards compliance infrastructure through which the designers actual implementation shows through. It’s a bit like catching a glimpse of the puppeteer pulling the strings behind the ‘Punch & Judy’ show. Second, people take short cuts. Ever noticed how some of your old software suddenly stopped working when you compressed your hard drive with Dos 6.2? All those programmers were too clever by half and decided to bypass the service routines provid­ed and run their own show. The tendency to take short cuts is partly due to the unseemly haste with which products have to be brought to a fad driven market and partly due to a basic flaw in human nature. It goes something like this. A committee (a group hell bent on detailing the creation out the door, there isn’t much motivation for anyone to tidy up the blueprint. So what do you do if you see a “dinner retrieval kit com­plete with burger cam”? Ask yourself the question, “Do I really need this?” If yes, then comes, “Have I seen one of these actual­ ly working in the real world?” If no, then “What background do my associates and I have with this technology”. If you actually purchase the thing, unwrap it very careful­ly. That way you can always put stuff back just like it was when you can’t get it to perform. Now return it and make out like you never really had time to try it anyway. Act casual, disinterested even. Popular culture dictates the more aloof and distant you are, the more in control you must be. If they get stroppy, remind them about current consumer legislation regarding the onus to source goods of merchand­ isable (read: it should work) quality. The Emperor’s new clothes are indeed magnificent. Not only are they grand but they are mix and match. “The tendency to take short cuts is partly due to the unseemly haste with which products have to be brought to a fad driven market and partly due to a basic flaw in human nature.” a camel when the specification calls for a horse) decides on a procedure or protocol, an agreed way of doing things. Before they have even finished their deliberations, usually, the wider community of participants has figured out a better way of doing things. If the new way is really spiffy, everyone just ignores what the committee says and the improved approach becomes the de facto standard. But often the new approach is more human ego than efficacy. It’s a little bit better or just a bit quicker, con­formity sacrificed on the altar of that perverse human need to “do it my way”. Lastly, there is the problem of documentation. This relates again to the factors mentioned previously, human nature and haste. Most design teams start out with a blueprint of what they want. They build it and it doesn’t work. So they spend ages tinkering with the entrails until it does work. Then in the frantic scramble to get “This goes with that,” all inter-connectable, compatible and groovy because of the underlying open architecture of structure and function. Everyone agrees that it must be so. The collective will of all those people makes it the case. I rest my case. I scanned in a little pic for this article but the scanner software won’t load it today. It loaded fine yesterday. But then I’ve done a tape backup in the interim. I really do use my scanner and tape backup so I’ll have to pursue the issue. Of course, the suppliers can’t help so I’m on my own again. Mind you, I’m lucky this time, I think I know what’s actually going on with this one. I should have it sorted in SC no time. *Kris McLean is the principal of McLean Automation, a firm special­ is­ing in data transfer technology. June 1994  93