Microprocessor trainer for very intelligent youth

[[email protected]]

I found EMAC <http://www.emacinc.com/> has several 8085 based
trainers. Any recommendation on these?

Elenco <http://www.elenco.com/> has one 8085 based trainer, it appears
to be a good value for the money. Opinions?

Cygnal

has 8051 based trainers with varying configurations.

Flite <http://www.flite.co.uk/micros.html> has quite a few trainers,
including Motorola based 68x trainers. If my nephew does well with the
intel based trainers, I think he would be interested in these, but any
other recommendations?

I am curious which one you went with. I am considering EMAC's as it
seems to be the most advanced for the cost as it is only slightly more
expensive then Elenco's if you assemble it yourself.

Thanks,

Tom

 

[Rich Webb]

I am curious which one you went with. I am considering EMAC's as it
seems to be the most advanced for the cost as it is only slightly more
expensive then Elenco's if you assemble it yourself.

Ahh, must be from Google. A reply to a thread six months dead and with
a broken References line. Yup, Google indeed.

From http://www.google.com/governance/conduct.html

Our informal corporate motto is "Don't be evil."

Which is slightly out of date. I'm guessing that the current motto is
"Maximize shareholder return."

It certainly isn't "Respect the wishes of the usenet community."

 

[Michael Black]

Ahh, must be from Google. A reply to a thread six months dead and with
a broken References line. Yup, Google indeed.

From http://www.google.com/governance/conduct.html

Our informal corporate motto is "Don't be evil."

Which is slightly out of date. I'm guessing that the current motto is
"Maximize shareholder return."

It certainly isn't "Respect the wishes of the usenet community."

I've just realized what I'm going to do with messages posted via
google that are replies to old messages.

One thing they've added to the new interface is a "report abuse"
link. In keeping with there lack of distinction between "google
groups" and Usenet, most of the check boxes are about their
"google groups" but there is an "other" box. So I figure I'll
fill out one of those forms each time I see a reply to a message
older than a month (which was google's previous limits on replies),
especially when the poster doesn't bother to even quote the message
they are replying to.

If they get enough of such abuse messages (and I realize it's not quite
abuse to reply to an old message, but I'd say google is abusing Usenet
by the lack of a time limit for replies, and their blending of their
groups with Usenet), perhaps they will realize it is an error.

They've already messed up the historic archives (which they boasted
about when they added them back in 2001, and highlight some key posts
on a timeline) with this, since the equivalent of graffiti artists
have posted replies to some of the messages that google themselves
have listed as historic.

Michael

 

[[email protected]]

I use google because it's easy and everywhere I go. I've used Usenet
since the 80's. I do not understand why you feel it is wrong to reply
to an old topic. I genuinely wanted to know the answer and the author
said no e-mail.

It seems some people rather spend their time complaining then actually
communicating, which is what this for right? I can't think of any
better use than what I did, so I am lost why you feel this way.

 

[Rich Webb]

I use google because it's easy and everywhere I go. I've used Usenet
since the 80's.

I do not understand why you feel it is wrong to reply
to an old topic. I genuinely wanted to know the answer and the author
said no e-mail.

It's not "wrong" but posting via the new and "improved" Google Groups as
you did does not preserve any link to the earlier posts in the thread
except for the subject line. The un-named original poster may not even
remember that the quoted lines were his. Also, none of the other replies
will be threaded with your question by most usenet clients that use the
References line to thread postings, so the other earlier opinions on the
boards will be missing.

It seems some people rather spend their time complaining then actually
communicating, which is what this for right? I can't think of any
better use than what I did, so I am lost why you feel this way.

The feelings of ill-will are directed at Google, who seem to have
decided to appropriate the usenet as if it was a part of their "google
groups."

 

[[email protected]]

OK, I understand now. Yeah the new beta has some quirks I've noticed
too. It was really easy to see any topic I posted in, now it doesnt
work right. Some of the new features are cool, but wasn't aware of
this problem. Hope they get it right.

It IS beta afterall though. I tried it ONCE and now whenever I go
to just groups.google.com it uses the beta anyway. Cookies make no
difference. Oh well.

Thanks,

Tom