recommend a good surge protector?

Again bud misrepresents figure 8. Somehow two TVs at 8000+ volts will
not be damaged? Well it is possible IF you are very careful AND even
if a kid with an Xbox is kept away from those TVs. Meanwhile, well
proven 'whole house' protectors make all that 'special care'
irrelevant. Kid with an Xbox need not cause that damage. Effective
protection makes that complication irrelevant. With a properly earthed
'whole house' protector, then Bud's complications are made irrelevant.

Bud promotes for plug-in protectors manufacturers. Therefore, he
still will not provide a single manufacturer numerical specification.
But again he ignores recommendations from IEEE Red Book and IEEE Green
Book. What do both standards recommend? Both define what is necessary
for protection: Earthing.

What does Bud say to promote his ineffective but so profitable
products?
> Earthing is secondary.

IEEE defines and recommends earthing as essential to protection.
Earthing is the most critical component in every protection system.
IEEE solution accomplishes two functions for protection: equipotential
and conductivity. Bud claims that equipotential alone - a protector
and two TVs at 8000+ volts - is sufficient. No wonder the plug-in
manufacturer does not even provide numbers in a numerical spec sheet.

Since IEEE recommendations (both Red Book and Green book) are so
damming, then Bud pretends quote does not exist. Bud needs you to
believe his misrepresentation (what is only a technical discussion) and
Bud needs you to ignore what IEEE recommends. Bud cannot even provide
a single manufacturer numerical specification. And Bud must ignore
recommendations from IEEE standards 141 and 142 that demonstrate why
plug-in protectors are ineffective. Quotes that Bud needs you to
ignore: from the IEEE Red Book:
> In actual practice, lightning protection is achieve by the
> process of interception of lightning produced surges,
> diverting them to ground, and by altering their
> associated wave shapes.

From IEEE Green Book (IEEE 142) entitled 'Static and Lightning
Protection Grounding' :
> Lightning cannot be prevented; it can only be intercepted or
> diverted to a path which will, if well designed and constructed,
> not result in damage.

Why does his plug-in protector not even claim protection in its
numerical specifications? No dedicated earthing wire. For about $1
per protected appliance, the informed homeowner purchases one 'whole
house' protector at Lowes, Home Depot, or any electrical supply house.
Effective protection that has the necessary earthing wire AND that
costs tens of times less money.

Protectors that fail - are undersized - do not provide effective
protection. Scary pictures demonstrate products that Bud recommends:
http://www.hanford.gov/rl/?page=556&parent=554
http://www.westwhitelandfire.com/Articles/Surge%20Protectors.pdf
http://www.ddxg.net/old/surge_protectors.htm
http://www.zerosurge.com/HTML/movs.html

The informed home owner gets a building's earthing upgraded to post
1990 National Electrical Code and installs an effective 'whole house'
protector.

bud-- wrote:
> On Oct 5, 6:15 am, "w_tom" <w_t....RemoveThis@usa.net> wrote:
> ...
> If you could read, you could figure out that fig 8 is part of an
> explanation fo how plug-in suppressors work.
>
> "Not a recmmentation"? To take only one example: the IEEE guide,
> chapter 6, "SPECIFIC PROTECTION EXAMPLES" shows 2 examples of surge
> protection. Both use SREs.
> Saying the guides take a lot of space describing, but not recommending
> plug-in surge protectors is stupid. Repeatedly making this claim
> requires willful stupidity.
>
>> IEEE does recommend effective protection in something called
>> *standards*.
>
> The 5 authors of the IEEE guide read all the IEEE standards.
> ...
>
> Actually they do have earthing connections, but as stated numerious
> times and explained by the IEEE guide, plug-in suppressors protect by
> CLAMPING the voltage on all wires to the common ground at the
> suppressor. Earthing is secondary.
> ...
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"w_tom" wrote:
> Bud promotes for plug-in protectors manufacturers.


What a lame-ass claim that is. Why are YOU extolling
the supposedly absolute virtues of "whole house protection
devices"?

*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:35:45 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels.TakeThisOut@NoSpamDot.com> wrote:


>> We can assume you were without a link Tim, because you are
>> the one claiming it's a problem.
>>
>> Otherwise, it would seem you were suggesting it's a problem
>> without any testing, without any evidence. That is typical
>> Tim style though, so which is it?
>
>
> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
> the ATX is "a problem" with a LINK to it. You can't even back
> up your off-topic dodges, much less the subject of a thread.

Are you participating in the same forum as the rest of us
Tim, because you are the one that lead the argument about
ATX problems, the most involved participant by far.

Are you just plain stupid?
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"kornball" wrote:
> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
>> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
>> the ATX is "a problem" with a LINK to it. You can't even back
>> up your off-topic dodges, much less the subject of a thread.
>
> Are you participating in the same forum as the rest of us
> Tim, because you are the one that lead the argument about
> ATX problems, the most involved participant by far.


Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
the ATX spec is "a problem". Provide a LINK, kornball,
or admit that you're just dodging and changing the subject
as is your perennial style.

*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:08:50 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels.DeleteThis@NoSpamDot.com> wrote:


> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
> the ATX spec is "a problem".

You already did, try to back it up and I discounted all your
wild claims so you went into troll mode. You do that so
often you probably don't even remember all the times.

If your newsreader isn't set to retain a few days worth of
messages so you can't find your posts anymore, I suggest you
first learn how to use your newsreader.
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"kornball" wrote:
> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
>
>
>> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
>> the ATX spec is "a problem".
>
> You already did, try to back it up and I discounted all your
> wild claims so you went into troll mode. You do that so
> often you probably don't even remember all the times.
>
> If your newsreader isn't set to retain a few days worth of
> messages so you can't find your posts anymore, I suggest you
> first learn how to use your newsreader.


That's what I thought! You can't find any links, references,
or postings that show that your cockamammy off-topic
dodge is even true. In short, kornball, you're a fake.

*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 22:47:53 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels RemoveThis @NoSpamDot.com> wrote:

>"kornball" wrote:
>> "Timothy Daniels" wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
>>> the ATX spec is "a problem".
>>
>> You already did, try to back it up and I discounted all your
>> wild claims so you went into troll mode. You do that so
>> often you probably don't even remember all the times.
>>
>> If your newsreader isn't set to retain a few days worth of
>> messages so you can't find your posts anymore, I suggest you
>> first learn how to use your newsreader.
>
>
> That's what I thought! You can't find any links, references,
> or postings that show that your cockamammy off-topic
> dodge is even true. In short, kornball, you're a fake.


It was only a few days ago, this is ridiculous.
This is off-topic though, so go back to that thread if you
want to pretend you didn't mean what you wrote.
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"kornball" gets petulant:
> "Timothey Daniels" wrote
>>>> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
>>>> the ATX spec is "a problem".
>
> It was only a few days ago, this is ridiculous.


If it was just a few days ago, what's riduculous is that you
can't produce a link or a quote. Try Google, kornball.

*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:06:17 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels DeleteThis @NoSpamDot.com> wrote:

>"kornball" gets petulant:
>> "Timothey Daniels" wrote
>>>>> Back up your cockamammy off-topic claim that I said that
>>>>> the ATX spec is "a problem".
>>
>> It was only a few days ago, this is ridiculous.
>
>
> If it was just a few days ago, what's riduculous is that you
> can't produce a link or a quote. Try Google, kornball.


Do you deny citing problems with ATX?

Oh wait, I really don't care anymore Tim... guess why?

Because I can use ATX fine, and because you have no interest
except arguing for the sake of it.
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"kornball" wrote
> Do you deny citing problems with ATX?
>
> Oh wait, I really don't care anymore Tim... guess why?


Because you realize you're mistaking me for
another poster, you putz.


*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 19:44:17 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels.TakeThisOut@NoSpamDot.com> wrote:

>"kornball" wrote
>> Do you deny citing problems with ATX?
>>
>> Oh wait, I really don't care anymore Tim... guess why?
>
>
> Because you realize you're mistaking me for
> another poster, you putz.


Tim, are you schizophrenic?

You have writting all of the following (and probably more
but I'm not going to spend the time find or link the rest).

"The ATX design is old. The heat loads from
CPUs and graphic cards have climbed hugely. What worked
in 1998 doesn't work so well now. Meanwhile, Apple has
gone to ducting and channeling and zoned cooling. But
Kone-head? He's still defending the ATX design."

> How many times does it need to be repleated, that
> MILLIONS OF ATX SYSTEMS PROVE IT WORKS.


" Only most of the time, and components still suffer
shortened lives from prolonged high temperatures.
But your geriatric brain says "If it don't fail immediately,
it's gotta be good". "

> MILLIONS OF ATX SYSTEMS PROVE YOU WRONG!

" Not in the least. What is old in PCs is overdue for a
revaluation, not blind adherence that disregards
changing conditions. Admit it, Kone-head, heat loads
have changed, sizes of components and their heatsinks
have changed. But you haven't. You've just gotten
older along with your ATX design."


So sorry Tim!
You can't have it both ways. If you think ATX is old and
needs improved, it could only be because you find it
problematic. It's not surprising that you find it
problematic though, because you can't even grasp basic
cooling issues and go off half-cocked about creating
turbulence.

So it seems you are so engrossed in your own ego that it
prevents you from using the proven cooling methods. Instead
of accepting this, you go on and on and on about some grand
change being needed and become your own worst enemy when it
comes to setting up system cooling.

Yes a change is needed, you need to accept that when you
fail, the variable is what you are doing differently than
those who don't think it "doesn't work so well now".

It's your quote Tim, you're the one who can't see how to
make ATX work.
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

"kornball" tries diversion with ATX and cooling:

Nice try, kornball. ATX is a "problem" if you're
unwilling to modify it to evolve with the electronics,
just as cooling can be a problem if you strive to
make the air flow laminar. But all your off-topic
references are just evidence that your arguments
about surge protection are still completely lame.

*TimDaniels*
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector? 

On Sun, 8 Oct 2006 03:58:33 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
<TDaniels RemoveThis @NoSpamDot.com> wrote:

>"kornball" tries diversion with ATX and cooling:
>
> Nice try, kornball. ATX is a "problem" if you're
> unwilling to modify it to evolve with the electronics,
> just as cooling can be a problem if you strive to
> make the air flow laminar. But all your off-topic
> references are just evidence that your arguments
> about surge protection are still completely lame.
>


So you're now admitting again that you can't get an ATX
system to run properly, and apparently blocking a large % of
the air passageways in an attempt to cause turbulence.

What does 1 + 1 equal?

Would you speculate for us (if it's not too much of a
bother, I wouldn't want to imposition you in your fragile
state) whether you might be inclined to deny it again in a
few days and insist on another link?

This is hilarious.
 >> Stay informed about: recommend a good surge protector?