You can make money from your RSS feed, and I’ve discovered something very useful that will help you to do just that: -.

RSS Email 2.0

This is my unbiased review of Pawan Agrawal’s recent release of ‘RSS E-mail 2.0′

What is this all about..? What is RSS Email 2.0?

RSS E-mail 2.0 is a step-by-step tutorial kit containing 10 screen-capture VIDEO presentations on RSS e-mail subscription management for blog owners.

The feature I like most about it is the video tutorial format: Instead of reading a book, you could actually see how these "techie" stuff is done, right before your eyes as it were, with the result that it’s much easier to copy-cat the strategies revealed inside.

With RSS Email 2.0 you’ll be able to easily understand what you need to do in order to manage, monetise and profit from your RSS feed content . -

What that means is that once your blog is setup with these RSS settings, you could be making money pretty much on auto-pilot.

If you’re a bit lazy like me, and would prefer to just sit back while the money rolls in, then RSS E-mail 2.0 might provide you with the quick-fix solution,  although getting rich overnight will probably never happen. – That’s just far too much to expect from any single product, promotion, or effort.

What I like about this video package is the insider "secrets": For example, did you know you could get a new autoresponder account with AWEBER for just $1.00 [30-day trial]?

- Also, do you really know how to setup your first e-mail autoresponder list in 10 minutes or less?

- Or, do you know how to create a new blog broadcast so that your subscribers get free blog updates in their inbox?

RSS E-mail 2.0 explains that and more, walking you step-by-step throughout the entire process.

Believe it or not, an autoresponder list is even more powerful than a feed broadcast. Once you capture your visitor’s email address you can follow-up with your subscribers on a regular basis, thus increasing your clicks & sales…

You can send one-time broadcast messages and recycle traffic to whatever site or product you wish… day in day out!

On the down-side, one thing  I don’t like about this product is that they only share a few real-life RSS to Email case studies. I wish they’d included a lot more! But I guess beggars can’t be choosers all the time. – There’ll be a revision, no doubt.

It’s in your best interest to put your hands on RSS E-mail 2.0 today if your blog RSS feed content isn’t fully monetized yet. – You’re almost definitely leaving cash on the table and walking away if you don’t.

Check out the full product here http://www.maxblogpress.com/go.php?offer=shazoom101&pid=34 and download the videos today if it suits you!

This article is unconnected to the 1980s group Frankie Goes to Hollywood.

A lot of people go out and throw their money away on alcohol, which ends up as part of the contents of the local sewer system rather quickly, on a Friday night, particularly in the UK; but I prefer to stay in and expand my mind: No, not with some new-fangled narcotic substance. – Rather; with study and experimentation in the style of geeky-relaxation:

This particular Friday night in July it was a bit damp outside anyway with somewhat lower than average night-time temperatures for the time of year, so unless I had something amazing planned at some external venue, which I didn’t, I was definitely going to stay indoors. There was some good TV on that evening too, so I’d spend a couple hours watching that and then relax in front of and away from the computer.

I was starting to get a little vacant-minded eventually, and I started to doodle. Now when most people doodle they draw physical things or swirls or patterns or shapes or something similar. When I start to doodle then I usually start drawing an electronic circuit diagram. – Honestly I kid you not. – It’s usually something fairly simple like a Hartley oscillator or a single transistor emitter-follower output stage; but very occasionally I become fully alert while I’m doing it, realise what I’m drawing, and suddenly an idea pops into my head from which I develop something else or it takes me onto another level mentally.

This Friday night was one such event: I’d been contemplating the Darlington transistor in a kind of semi-conscious state, and went on to remark to myself inside my head on the surprising number of hits I’d had on my article regarding a Darlington-pair amplifier circuit. Still in a dreamlike state I put that thought on hold and went on to imagine ways to mix a timebase signal with a direct current to produce an alternating current using a matched pair of bipolar power transistors. – That’s when I realised that I was doodling again; and I’d started to draw a matched pair of bipolar Darlington transistors configured as a high-gain audio amplifier.

I recoiled a little with a start: That was something I’d never thought of before, despite the concept staring me in the face. I thought it might be worth taking further while the idea was fresh in my mind. I started consciously working further on what had been my doodle: I added extra decoupling to the ground points, controlled variable simultaneous negative feedback across both Darlington pairs, 2 sets of potential dividers for biasing the Darlington bases separately…

After faffing about for a while and drawing a circuit diagram with so many corrections it was barely legible, I transcribed the circuit to a fresh diagram in order that it would be legible to anyone else… Then I decided to blog it.

So – fresh out of my mind, totally unrevised and untested, I present to you my idea for a single-channel monaural audio amplifier with gain controlled by means of negative feedback utilising a ganged potentiometer.

I think it’ll work, but I have no idea how well. It’s one of these ideas I draw up that I never actually build, and it remains a theoretical triumph of unstarted construction in my head to times unlimited. Here it is anyway: -

There seems to be an error in the diagram: It appears that I’ve drawn D2 the wrong way round.

If you’re qualified in electronics please feel free to criticise, critique, comment, other words starting with C; even build it and/or improve on the design if you like: ‘Your choice. (I deliberately left the circuit diagram small enough so that you could hopefully get it all in a single browser window in FireFox at a resolution of 1024 x 768 px.)

I didn’t choose any component values other than those of the 10 nanofarad capacitors across the base and emitter of Q1 and Q3: Including them like this does actually increase audio frequency response at bass frequencies. I heard about it somewhere ages ago and have actually tried it to prove that it works: It does; to a limited extent.

Having blogged that I’m now going to get a coffee and do something else. I’ll decide exactly what as I drink the coffee.

Tatty-bye for now.

There are several types: The main two, in layman’s terms, are a light dependant resistor – LDR  – the resistance of which increases with the amount/type of light falling on it; and conversely one the resistance of which decreases with the amount of light falling upon it.

One of the main uses for these devices is in switching on street lighting. Rumour has it that a timer mechanism was originally used for the purpose, before the LDR’s invention. That’s maybe a sound idea if the light happens to be situated at or near the Equator; where the seasonal variations between night and day are minimal. However when you start getting as far away from the Equator, even as “close” as Southern England – Where night can come as early as 3:50PM in the depths of winter; yet as late as 10:40PM in the heights of summer: The timer would require resetting at least weekly. I honestly can’t envisage electricians running round the country resetting street lamp timers every week. Having said that though; there were people who went around the major English cities in the evenings and mornings lighting and extinguishing gas street lamps in the Victorian era.

Thankfully technology has moved on a bit since then.

See the Wikipedia article hyperlinked above from the letters LDR for a full description of the component.

You may notice that, on the circuit below, I use a non-standard symbol for an LDR which is completely different from the standard symbol. The one that I use (A zig-zag line with two arrows pointing towards it.) is a shorthand circuit-diagrammatical representation. It’s the old symbol for a resistor with the two arrows indicating that its value is dependant upon the amount/type of light falling upon it. Similarly with the fixed-resistors in the circuit; a zig-zagged line without the arrows. The symbol used as standard for a resistor is a rectangular box with leads either end. i find this too much hassle and too time-consuming to draw; therefore I resort to my shorthand: I understand it even if not all other people do.

So how does the device work in-circuit? The circuit-diagram below shows a very basic circuit incorporating 2 fixed resistors, a transistor, and a light-emitting diode to display the output. The LDR is an inverse-effect type. That is to say its resistance decreases as more light is shone on its surface.

The LDR , along with R1, acts as a potential-divider, biasing the base of Q1. As the light shining upon the LDR gets brighter, so its resistance drops, and thus the voltage at Q1’s base drops via R3. (See “Ohms Law and the Potential Divider”. Also see “Base Voltage”) When the base voltage drops below 0.7 Volts the transistor switches off and the LED goes out.

The function of the circuit can be reversed by replacing R1 with the LDR and vice-versa: In that case as the light shining upon the LDR increases, so its resistance drops and the voltage at Q1’s base rises via R3. When the base voltage rises above 0.7 Volts the transistor switches on and the LED lights up.

This circuit does work; in fact I memorised it from my early self-tuition in electronics, as well as from college. (Where I gained C&G 300, 301: Analogue and digital electronics certificates. ( I also retook a Maths exam as I had a cold on the day of my original exam twenty-something years ago and didn’t do as well as I’d have liked. – I passed; but my grade wasn’t as good as I’d hoped for, and I knew that I could get a better result.))

You might like to experiment with different values of resistor for R1, although a kilohm is probably the lowest value you should use in this case. You could also try replacing R1 with a 1K resistor and a 10K linear potentiometer connected in series. I’ll leave you to experiment.

There are a few and there will be more posts on the subject of basic practical electronics in this blog. if you’re interested in the subject then do look further into the content. It’s not all listed at time of writing so Google is your friend; use it. (Or Windows Live Search, Ask, Yahoo… whatever: I’m not biased or sponsored by Google. I prefer to use Google myself as I find the GUI simple to use and the listings useful. Your opinions may vary.)

If you build the circuit and experiment with it please do tell me your results. I’ll be interested to know.

Analogue amplification stages incorporating just a single active device, such as a transistor or op-amp, – as in a DC amplifier -  usually allow amplification of either the negative-going or the positive-going part of an AC waveform alone; basically cutting out half of the cycle and therefore causing immense distortion. There are two ways of overcoming this: Those being amplifying both halves of the waveform separately and recombining them at the output; perhaps at a decoupling transformer, (Too much copper wire, inductance, and consequential weight for my liking.) or by using two interconnected active devices to amplify both halves of the waveform at once, before passing the full AC waveform on to the next stage.

The latter method can be achieved with a push-pull amplifier.

Pictured below is a circuit diagram of a very basic push-pull amplification stage. (Please excuse the freehand drawing.)

The input signal; an alternating waveform, is fed via capacitors 1 & 2 to the bases of Q1 and Q2. The functions of C1 & 2 individually and collectively are two-fold: The first is that they individually shield the base connections of their respective transistors from any stray DC voltages from a previous stage, also they separate any DC potentials present at the base junctions of Q1 & 2; therefore preventing unintentional and accidental biasing of one another.

Resistors 3 & 4 act as a potential divider biasing the base of Q1 to 0V7. Resistors 1 & 2 have the a similar effect effect on the base of Q2: However since Q2 is a PNP transistor, the values of resistor used in the case of the R3,4 pair are reversed; therefore giving the base of Q2 a negative bias with respect to that of Q1.

Preset potentiometers PR1 & 2 set the potential of the transistor-pair with respect to the supply rails; and consequently the swing-maximum of the output-waveform. Resistors R5 & 6 are a precaution to avoid the peak output level colliding with the supply voltage and therefore causing distortion.

Capacitor C3 provides AC decoupling for the transistor pair.

Note that the emitters of the transistors are connected together and the output taken from that connection. This allows the inclusion of the traditional collector load resistance in both cases.

A waveform appearing at the input flows through both C1 and C2 to the base of the individual transistors. If the waveform is on the positive-going half of the cycle it lowers the conduction of Q2 and raises the conduction of Q1. If the waveform is on the negative-going half of the cycle the reverse occurs: Hence the output polarity mirrors the input polarity to whatever degree of amplification is involved.

A Little Background Information:

Prior to the advent of digital electronics, this type of circuit configuration was widely used in analogue receiving and amplification devices throughout the 1950s, 60s, and to some extent even the 70s. Back in the 1950s before the transistor became widely used in electronic circuitry, they would use a pair of triode or pentode  thermionic valves in the place of the transistor pair. As technology developed the manufacturers developed smaller valves with two triode or pentode sections for the purpose, screened from one another by a metal electrode.

(Example: ECC82 (European Nomenclature), or equivalent 12AU7 (American nomenclature.) AF double-triode with a 6.3 Volt heater supply. The European equivalent with a higher heater voltage was the UCC82 which required a 32 Volt heater supply.)

Valves were also manufactured with a pre-amplification or oscillator stage included, usually a triode; along with a main amplification device, usually a pentode. (Example ECL85 (6.3V heater supply), UCL85(32 V heater supply), and PCL85 (17.5 Volt heater supply, commonly used in the audio output stages of televisions. – Right up until around 1973.))

During the late 1960s/early 70s, valves began to be excluded from the designs of electronic devices, in preference for the transistor; which was lighter, lasted a lot longer, required less voltage to function, and didn’t require an internal heater powered from an external source to make it work.

(There was a period at the very end of the 1960s which lasted a little way into the 70s where equipment manufacturers would produce valve/transistor hybrids, especially in the case of televisions. These exhibited a few benefits over valve-only technology; such as they took less time to warm up before they started working, and the amount of mains-hum distortion was reduced to a large extent.)

There: A free history-lesson along with the main subject. There’s value-for-money; even though there was no charge in the first place.

Personally Speaking:

Just in case you’re wondering, I do just about remember those old days mentioned; especially the latter valve/transistor technology. I was just getting into electronics in those days. – And yes I was rather young to be messing about inside televisions et al. I practiced hobby electronics until fairly recently, when I got qualifications in the subject after a crash-refresher course at college. I became interested in computers in the late 1970s, around the time the Commodore Pet was released to market. Upon leaving school I followed the arts for a while, at the same time as running a small hobby-enterprise in analogue electronics, until I got back into both computers and digital electronics in the late 1990s.

(Oh yes. – Just in case you were wondering; I do remember the large B9D-base line-output pentode valve used in some televisions right into the 1980s; although I can’t remember the alphanumeric designation offhand. It started with a “P”, but that’s pretty obvious. – Most television valves did, other than maybe the HF triode-pentodes in the UHF/VHF tuners of some 1960s models. – Apart from some of the B8A valves of the early 1960s with the metallic base. – Now that is going back a bit too far.)

Ah I just remembered: PL504.  

. . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I was just proof-reading after writing this lot and I remembered; I need to hyperlink. There is so much I should hyperlink. If this article takes longer than expected to produce then that’s part of the reason why.

Oh wow; this’ll be fun!

Advertisment : Word Press Link Cloak: Easily disguise and protect your affiliate links to increase your revenue. Click Here!

As I often do on this blog; I’m going to once again give my readers something for free. This is a bit of a double-edged sword in fact; as the advice comes from me. This part is free. That will hopefully lead you onto part 2, which will involve you shelling out a few dollars to someone else for the purpose of hopefully ensuring that you are recession-proofed.

"Recession-proofed? What on earth is she on about?" You ask.

In answer to that I’ll share with you an email which I received today from David Risley. I’ve added some commentary to intersperse the text for further explanation so that you can follow the drift of what he’s saying: -

"News From Dave

As we move into 2009, we all think about our New Year’s resolutions…What are your resolutions for 2009?

This … newsletter was written in advance because, as you get this, I’m on a cruise. My wife and I finally took a vacation – our first since our honeymoon. We went straight into parenthood after we tied the knot, and kids have this funny habit of anchoring you to home when they’re young."

[Maybe it would have been an idea to tie a knot in... 'Never mind. - Moving on: - ]

"I’ve also been working very hard, and 2009 is going to be even more fast-faced. While I am pursuing other projects, too, the PCMech Premium membership program is certainly a top priority…"

[The PCMech Premium membership is something I need to explain to you:-

PCMech, if you haven't heard of it, is David Risley's internet brainchild. It's a blog that was started a number of years ago as a hobby; but over the last few years has become not only one of the web's top-rated technology information and online-career-building sites; but also David's source of income for him and his immediate family, from which he lives comfortably.

He continues: - ]

"You guys [and girls] saw me do several videos last week about our membership program. This week, while I’m gone, I have all channels open to make sure that people know that they can sign up for our premium program at the old, 2008 rates. See, once I get back into town, I’m turning off registration to our program. During that time, I’ll be re-working some things in order to execute my 2009 enhancements to the program. When I reopen the doors, the price will be higher to reflect the increased value to our program."

[I hear brains ticking over: Some thinking "I like the sound of this. - It must cost a fair bit!"

That's not actually the case with this. - Not yet anyway. How much it does actually cost depends on when you sign up for it: Like David said earlier, - and I can vouch that this is quite genuine: "The price will be higher to reflect the increased value to our program."

When will the price be higher? Looking at the countdown; 4 days, 18 hours, 14 minutes, and 2 seconds ...At time of writing. 'Less now.]

"2009 is a recession year. It is time to put the pedal to the metal, to learn new skills, and to take action. If you learn the right skills and follow the right strategies, you can come out the other end of 2009 doing very well. This time next year, we can all be taking cruises!

…You’ve gotta DO it. And this year, I plan to work closely with PCMech Premium members to do exactly that.

‘You onboard?"

"Yeah, right. – All to make you some money eh?"

I realise that the first thing you’ll think is that I get paid for introducing people; therefore I’m not giving you "free" advice exactly. Honestly this is really totally free advice: Due to circumstances beyond my control, the corresponding affiliate program that I signed up to last year was deactivated, – The program itself, that is; not just my membership. – in anticipation of reactivation in a better format prior to this date. It didn’t happen as planned, and I was informed, so i haven’t been cheated in any way. However this opportunity that I’m telling you about is permanently advertised only on pcmech.com . There are various tweets about it on Twitter, which find their way onto FriendFeed, and onto David’s profile on Facebook. -But if you don’t use Twitter or FriendFeed, aren’t David’s friend on Facebook, and have never visited pcmech.com; you’ll be left completely in the dark, will never hear about it, and will miss the chance of taking advantage of this opportunity. – And time is ticking away as you’re reading this.

- That’s why I’m advertising this to you. I’d have liked to have made money from telling people about it; but it wasn’t to be. Nevertheless I choose to advertise it regardless. I want to bring my readers value. I’m doing so now by telling you about this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

‘More from David: – ]

"PCMech Premium is like no other membership program on the Internet. We combine insider tools and tactics in the world of computers and technology with powerful information on using the Internet to make money and improve your life. You will not find this mix of information anywhere else. It reflects MY approach to the world of technology. I make my entire living on the Internet as a professional blogger. I am a geek, a computer enthusiast, but I am also an online entrepreneur. Together we can live the ultimate, high-tech lifestyle. Learn More About PCMech Premium.

David Risley

Click here to to learn more about the premium program for 2009. "

Because I’m not getting paid for this, – David Risley had no idea that I was going to write this article either. Neither did I until a couple of hours ago – I can honestly say in a totally unbiased and from-the-heart manner that the only person who’ll be missing out is you yourself if you don’t take advantage of this offer. If you don’t believe me then don’t sign up through any links in this article: Go directly to http://www.pcmech.com by typing that URL into your browser-bar and sign up there if you distrust me that much. It makes no difference to me any way you do it or don’t do it.

Why am I advertising this for free? I want my blog to be known as a blog that provides real value to my readers, as I already said. This value is in the form of an amazing offer from someone else: if you hadn’t read this article you possibly wouldn’t be any the wiser. – I want my blog to have that reputation so that my traffic increases: That’s my ‘selfish’ motive. Also I feel that this is an opportunity that nobody should miss out on the chance of taking at an incredibly-low price.

  Hmm…Convince me some more.

"Incredibly-low price eh?" You ask in a suspicious manner. "Exactly what is this "incredibly-low price"? – $400, $300, $250?"

I’ve been a member of PCMech Premium, in its previous incarnation if you like, for 6 months so far. I can quite honestly value the program as it was then at somewhere around those figures; put very loosely. However you’d be mightily surprised to learn that a year’s membership is currently less than $100 (£69) - Considerably less in fact.

‘Not convinced? Go see for yourself: http://www.pcmech.com . Near the top of the page you’ll see a countdown sequence, ticking away: That’s how long you’ve got left in real time.

If you missed it I’m afraid to tell you that the countdown has ended and all PCMech Premium registrations are currently closed. You can, however, set up a free, restricted, account and go on a waiting list in anticipation of registration reopening. (Target date 30th January 2009.)

Here’s what David Risley himself wrote: -

“I invite you to sign up for our waiting list. If you raise your hand and tell me you’re interested (by signing up for the mailing list), I will provide you first crack at registration when I relaunch the program. I might even throw you a little bonus (hint hint)!”

To get onto the waiting list and show willing, click here

I have a feeling you might be lucky and get in at 2008 prices IF you join this waiting list; but please don’t hold me to that.

A transistor is an electronic component. It is defined as an "active" electronic component because it is able to perform more than one function at more than a single level.

The most basic of transistors is the bipolar transistor. It has three connections; those being the base, collector, and emitter. A circuit-diagrammatical representation of the bipolar transistor is shown in Fig.1 below. The collector is the connection at the top, the base is the one in the middle, and the emitter is the one at the bottom with the arrow on it. In addition to the transistor’s amplification factor, the base and emitter act as a diode. (See Fig.2 (i) and (ii).)

The direction of the arrow indicates whether the type of bipolar transistor is NPN or PNP. (Which stands for Negative Positive Negative or Positive Negative Positive.) The difference amounts to the way that the transistor is connected in a circuit with regard to the DC polarity. This polarity is caused by the transistor’s substrate layers being doped with a P-type and an N-type substrate. (See table of links.)

Fig.3 shows a PNP transistor connected into a basic circuit. Fig 4 shows an NPN transistor connected into an equivalent circuit. The resistors in the circuit limit the current flowing through the device and set the device’s voltage potential point with respect to the supply rails. The capacitor drawn in with dotted lines is a decoupling capacitor which, along with R3, decouples the collector (PNP) or the emitter (NPN) to ground; limiting distortion in the output and/or compensating for any residual ripple present in the supply rails – depending upon its value combined with that of R3 giving a certain AC reactance. (A subject beyond the scope of this article.)

Resistor, R1, is connected as a DC current-limiting resistor in both cases, to the base of the transistor; limiting the base current which in normal operation should not rise above approximately 1/10th of the current flowing between collector and emitter. (As low as 1/100th is the preferred quiescent value for maximum amplification in most high-gain devices.) The differential between the two sets the transistor’s working amplification factor or beta. This is limited by the actual electrical characteristics of the chosen device itself.

This article cannot hope to go into the full details and various functions of the bipolar transistor under all conditions, and even the AC amplification operations of said device are far too in-depth to discuss in the space allocated.

For further information on this device please visit links in the table of links below.

Table of Links:

Connecting two transistors as a Darlington pair by connecting the emitter of the first transistor directly to the base of the second transistor multiplies the beta of the first transistor by the beta of the second transistor to give an extremely high-gain device.

Imagine, for instance; two NPN devices, each with a maximum gain of 50, connected in such a way, giving a device with a maximum gain of 2500: This would be useful for boosting the output of a piezo-microphone for example; notorious for its low output.

In the basic circuit-diagram of a Darlington amplifier below; the input is DC decoupled by C1, resistors R1 and 2 form a potential divider biasing the base of Q1 at exactly 0.7 Volts, R3 is the load resistor on the collector of Q1 – which drives the base of Q2; R4 restricting its collector load, and the R4/C2 combination decoupling its emitter to ground.

Since the base of Q1 is at 0.7 Volts, both Q1 and 2 will be in an “always on” state, and sensitive to any tiny ripple passing through the input capacitor C1.

Bearing in mind that the input ripple will probably be of only a few microamperes; the R1,2 pair should be selected with as high a resistance as possible – Within the megohm range to limit the current already present on the base of Q1 to a fraction of a microampere if at all possible.

Q1 should be chosen such that its base current need only be negligible for it to respond. With a beta of 50 the resistance of R3 should be within the range of around -2 to -40 times that of R1, so as not to drive the transistor into saturation.

Again, having a beta of 50; Q2 should be run ideally at between 2 and 40 gain.

Suggested component values to run the circuit at a voltage of 1.5 Volts are as follows:-

R1: 2M2, R2:(1M with 250K Lin. Preset in series.) R3: 100K, R4: 22K, R5: 110R

C1: 1uF 10V Elect., C2: 100uF 10V Elect., C3: 10uF 10V Elect.

Q1: BC107B, Q2: BC109C

Note: I haven’t built this circuit myself; and it’s been drawn up for demonstration purposes only: It’s very basic and wouldn’t give brilliant sound quality anyway, but should nevertheless “work”.

Latest reports appear to indicate that Apple  aren’t quite as bad as it seems; in fact it might appear at first sight that they had a windfall.

That’s not exactly the case though: Despite news of their taking top customer-satisfaction honours among personal computer manufacturers, as released on Tuesday of this week, there are two things you should note before assuming that Apple are the tops and that this blog is heavily biased against them:

Firstly nobody even thought to ask Kustom Komputa if they even wanted to be included in this award; probably because they knew Kustom Komputa would trounce Apple into second place. On a more serious note, though, the index measures results only for the three-month period ended in June – Before the crap began to hit the fan for Apple, starting with the release of the iPhone.

Also on Tuesday; Apple admitted that a software update for their much troubled iPhone only partly fixes the connection problems it has had in connecting to 3G networks: In other words; honestly this time: “FAIL: We scratched again.”

It has been reported that it isn’t only Apple’s buggy software that’s to blame: There have been reports that the Infineon Technologies 3G chipsets used in the iPhone are faulty. That could mean that no matter how good the software, the hardware issue might cause the problem to never totally go away.

It has been reported that it isn’t only Apple’s buggy software that’s to blame: There have been reports that the Infineon Technologies 3G chipsets used in the iPhone are faulty. That could mean that no matter how good the software, the hardware issue might cause the problem to never totally go away.

The crap certainly has been hitting the fan lately for Apple; and maybe rightly so too: It seems that Steve Jobs has always been a bit of a dreamer;   and now incarnated as “Jobsweh”; the god of all things Apple; it appears that the power has gone to his head and mingled with his dreams, turning his wallet into a bottomless pit that seeks filling with loot, no matter what the cost.

As reported here on kkomp.com; Apple were recently forced to extend the free trial of MobileMe in a face-saving operation.

“We have already made many improvements to MobileMe, but we still have many more to make.” Said Apple.

To me that sounds like: “We did it again by releasing a service well ahead of schedule in order to market before the competition: It wasn’t actually ready to be released; but we did so out of a case of having to. We hope we can eventually get it to work.”

If they don’t it’ll end up costing them a few dollars more; which could incur the wrath of Jobsweh!

In the same email Apple stated “We know that MobileMe’s launch has not been our finest hour.” ROFLMAO – You’re telling me! What exactly has been Apple’s finest hour during the past two months? Steve Jobs seems to think he’s Apple’s answer to Bill Gates of late. The question is; is Jobsweh, the god with the bottomless pockets, fit to run Apple any longer? Should someone more competent and less greedy take over?

Fire Your Computer Technician!

A computer technician spills the beans and makes available the knowledge he has charged clients hundreds in service fees for.

CLICK HERE

When designing a single-transistor-amplifier stage; be it an AF, RF, IF, whatever project, one must always take into account the gain of the transistor in question and design for it accordingly. It’s best not to attempt to utilise the full amount of available gain as the transistor will probably saturate and cause distortion. In fact a tri-stage amplifier with negative-feedback, (The subject of a later article maybe.) with only half the available gain of each transistor used will produce a much better and less distorted output than a single-transistor stage utilising all of the available gain.

For now, however, I’m going to concentrate on just a single-transistor stage, and on correctly biasing the transistor’s base proportional to its base/collector.

Let’s assume that our subject transistor has a voltage-gain of 20, and a Vb(max) of 3.3V. Let’s place it in circuit:

Ignoring the type and strength of input signal as far as this example is concerned, we intend to bias the base of the transistor from the supply rails using a straightforward potential divider (R1 & 2). We know that the base voltage must not exceed 3.3V, and we’re running the circuit from a 6 Volt rail. We use the equation V=Vin (+Vcc in this case, using a NPN transistor.) X R2 / (R1 X R2). In the example above, (Which is an example only rather than a functional circuit.) I’ve taken a guess and used a 1K negative resistor (R2) and a 2.7K resistor (R1) to the rail. This gives a working base voltage of 2.223 Volts. In most cases we’d tweak that voltage, by altering the resistance values, to as near 0.7 Volts as possible. (The transistor’s transconductance threshold, assuming that we are using a silicon rather than a germanium transistor.) For this example we’ll leave it at 2.223 Volts.

Note the use of resistances in the kilohm range: This is for the purpose of limiting the base current. Although we haven’t specified a current for the input signal we’re assuming that it’s in the several-tens-of-milliamperes range. When dealing with even smaller input signal currents use higher resistance to limit the biasing current further so as not to interfere with the input signal.

We can work out the base-bias current precisely using Ohm’s Law: I=V/R; 6 volts divided by (R1 + R2 = 3700Ohms) = 1.62 milliamperes: We’d therefore be looking for a gain of about 10, driving the transistor at half-available-gain, so it would be fair to say to use a total DC resistance of 100 Ohms in the emitter circuit, and a total DC resistance of 270 Ohms in the collector circuit, ignoring any reactance from any decoupling capacitor (Such as C3 in the second circuit.) in the emitter circuit.

Looking at that second circuit we note that there are DC decoupling capacitors (C1 & C2) on the input and output of the stage: these are included to prevent any DC component bleeding back into the stage before, as well as bleeding off from the collector circuit into the following stage. Note that I’ve sketched in a decoupling capacitor into the base circuit using a broken line: This may or may not be a good idea depending upon many factors; and that’s well beyond the scope of this post.

Advertisment : Word Press Link Cloak: Easily disguise and protect your affiliate links to increase your revenue. Click Here!