On 10/8/24 10:56, Jim Ford wrote:
> The test equipment in my garage lab I consider tools, and as such is
> subject to change (purchase, sale, exchange, repair, give away, etc.).?
> It is not a collection of museum pieces!? A wise person once said that
> we should love people and use things and not the other way around.?
> Collecting goes against that great advice.? I have absolutely no qualms
> about modifying any piece of test equipment I own if it improves its
> performance.? Can't be sentimental about it.
? I'm sentimental about a lot of things; I won't be "upgrading"
anything in my HP 200A for example.? But most of the equipment in my lab
are tools; I use them to make a living.? If there's something that can
be done to improve the performance or reliability of an instrument upon
which I depend for my livelihood, I think it'd be pretty dumb for me to
not perform the modification.
? But this is one of those instances where people don't understand that
there are different groups of people on this mailing list, whose goals
are different.? There are the collectors, the "vintage tech" people, the
working engineers, the ham radio people...I see it because I fall into
all of those groups. (though I've not been an active ham in decades)
? In the same vein as "three engineers walk into a bar": Just say three
people here have the same instrument, and a thread pops up about a
modification:
? The collector might say "Noooo, that will destroy the originality!"
? The working engineer might say "I'm going to do it; it will improve
reliability."
? The ham radio guy's response might be "I'll do that because it'll
make it cheaper."
? Who is "right"?? I say they all are.? They are each acting in the
best interest of their own use cases.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? -Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
