开云体育

On 12/10/23 11:48, Jim Adney wrote:

Long term sustainability is the most important factor. In my mind, the critical part of this is that there are at least TWO people who control it, and that's two people who don't live together but have a long term friendly relationship. This is necessary, because bad things happen to people. There needs to be a way to continue even if the unthinkable happens to the key person.

I agree, but there have been no volunteers yet.

There needs to be a way to pay for this continuation, even if it seems to be free now. I get requests for donations from WikiPedia maybe once a year. I give generously to those drives, simply because I believe it deserves my, and many other's, support.

Hey, don't get me wrong, if people want to send me cash I'll never turn it down. But there are no financial costs associated with this project.

A continuation after my death may change that, but I'm folding it in with another organization that is designed to continue past my death. Those legal arrangements are not yet complete, but they're being worked on, and hopefully that won't be an issue for a while yet. (I'm 54)

Finally, a comment on the 5005A. It's fine for something to be in two, or more, categories, but there should not be duplicate listings. If this is how things are now, it's a mistake. Redundancy can be tempting, but in cases like this, it is crippling, because it means that someone has to remember to make edits to both, or several, so you never know which is correct. [A man with two watches is never sure of the correct time.] Multiple pointers pointing to a single entry is fine, but having multiple entries quickly goes bad.

Pete set up multiple pointers to a single entry. If he hadn't, I'd have requested that he change it. (I do understand data, and so does Pete)

I have not been to the HP Wiki yet, because the TekWiki is already soaking up too much of my time, but I'm sure I'll get there eventually, and I hope I'll be able to contribute what I can, when I can.

That would be great.

This is a worthy effort, long overdue.

Thanks, and I agree. I don't recall this degree of scrutiny and negativity (not from you, but from others) being aimed at TekWiki when it started, but these are all very valid questions, especially with the ephemeral nature of so many things on the net today, and so many people who don't know what they're doing starting big projects. I believe I've set things up the correct way. I come from the startup company world; I know how to set things up to be inexpensive and resilient.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

I've been a contributor to TekWiki for awhile now. It's a beautiful resource and I'm pleased to hear that something similar is happening for HP products. I like to add my 2 cents on a couple of things.

Long term sustainability is the most important factor. In my mind, the critical part of this is that there are at least TWO people who control it, and that's two people who don't live together but have a long term friendly relationship. This is necessary, because bad things happen to people. There needs to be a way to continue even if the unthinkable happens to the key person.

There needs to be a way to pay for this continuation, even if it seems to be free now. I get requests for donations from WikiPedia maybe once a year. I give generously to those drives, simply because I believe it deserves my, and many other's, support.

Finally, a comment on the 5005A. It's fine for something to be in two, or more, categories, but there should not be duplicate listings. If this is how things are now, it's a mistake. Redundancy can be tempting, but in cases like this, it is crippling, because it means that someone has to remember to make edits to both, or several, so you never know which is correct. [A man with two watches is never sure of the correct time.] Multiple pointers pointing to a single entry is fine, but having multiple entries quickly goes bad.

I have not been to the HP Wiki yet, because the TekWiki is already soaking up too much of my time, but I'm sure I'll get there eventually, and I hope I'll be able to contribute what I can, when I can.

This is a worthy effort, long overdue.

I suspect that AT6 was supplied seperately to the unit see item 10 of accessories supplied.


Robert.

I picked up a physically damaged HP 8513A Trans/Refl test set (surprisingly in a garage sale!) to harvest some RF components
According to the service manual there must be a 8493C-10dB attenuator (designated by AT6) in the unit but I cannot find where it is
The block diagram in the manual is poorly drawn and misses all attenuators except one. Does anybody know if the 10dB pad
even exist in 8513A and if so where it is located?
I am sure I have looked everywhere. The RF parts are all visible so I am guessing the service manual is wrong

Interested in that. Let me know.?
Best regards

On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 08:46 AM, Dave McGuire wrote:

On 12/9/23 10:44, n4buq wrote:

I notice the 5005A is listed twice (under different categories). Is that intentional?

I don't know, I wasn't the one who added it. But it does fit into both of those categories.

-Dave

I uploaded the 5005A, a year or two ago I think. I deliberately put it in both categories - it is a multi-purpose instrument.

Pete

I've signed up, going to need to learn how to use DokuWiki, but editing to correct an error was easy enough.

David

On 12/9/23 13:17, Reginald Beardsley via groups.io wrote:

But you "question" a piece of software because of the color of the buttons?
Seriously?

I have dry macular degeneration. Contrast is a *MAJOR* issue. I am quite certain I'm not alone. Glaucoma doesn't make it any easier. Not being able to find the edit box is a daily experience. So yes, I do take it very seriously.

I'm sorry to hear it. I'm pretty sure there are accessibility tools out there for contrast enhancement, etc, in web browsers.

But "I question using" is a strange way to express "I have visual limitations which make this difficult". It's an unfortunate fact thatbut very little of the Internet is structured for accessibility for the disabled.

All I wanted to do is hire some people in Argentina who are dealing with inflation greater than Zimbabwe make some money by uploading HPAK manuals and datasheets to HPwiki.org. As I had proposed spending several thousand USD paying to have the files archived on Dave's server I had expected a bit more cooperation.

By "cooperation" you wanted to change the nature of the project in impractical and unsustainable ways. And, once again, "Dave's server" is not a file archive site. Uploading files is a small fraction of this project. There are already file archive sites, the most popular being KO4BB. Availability of files is not a problem that this community has.

Oh, well. I'll find another project for the money.

That's your prerogative.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

I forgot to mention: the 3335A is fed from a distribution amplifier and that source is rock solid (I checked.)? The unit also does the same when using it's internal reference.

Hal

My 3335A recently developed an jitter in it's output.? I first noticed it on a counter and then verified it on a 'scope.? I then looked at the output on my 53310A and saw it was primarily a variance of +- a couple KHz or less across all frequency outputs.? I'm attaching pics of the 53310A screen along with a listing of measured output - the curve shown on the screen shot is mostly the same across all frequencies.? Further there is a copy of the SA output for a 50MHz input - again, the same response across varying frequencies.? The 3335A is not the simplest or easiest animal to troubleshoot so I am asking here in the hopes that someone else has experience that might narrow down the problem area before I start.

Thanks to all!

Hal

On Sat, Dec 9, 2023 at 10:04 AM, Dave McGuire wrote:

But you "question" a piece of software because of the color of the buttons?
Seriously?

I have dry macular degeneration. Contrast is a *MAJOR* issue. I am quite certain I'm not alone. Glaucoma doesn't make it any easier. Not being able to find the edit box is a daily experience. So yes, I do take it very seriously.

All I wanted to do is hire some people in Argentina who are dealing with inflation greater than Zimbabwe make some money by uploading HPAK manuals and datasheets to HPwiki.org. As I had proposed spending several thousand USD paying to have the files archived on Dave's server I had expected a bit more cooperation.

Oh, well. I'll find another project for the money.

Reg

You're welcome Barry, and I'm glad you like it. These sorts of things are always a slow process.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

According to this compatibility matrix:

? https://www.keysight.com/us/en/assets/9018-06749/reference-guides/9018-06749.pdf

it's just the 16500C.? The 16500A and 16500B don't support the 16534A module.

-mark

Now the predictable stone-throwing begins. Perhaps someday I'll learn that no good deed goes unpunished.

For others here, I'll note that Reg, privately, wanted to start a funded effort to do this, then sought to make wholesale (and in my opinion unsustainable) changes to how it works. Our last communication was my rejecting some of those ideas. Now this.

On 12/9/23 10:32, Reginald Beardsley via groups.io wrote:

I'm the other half of the off-list discussion.

1/5th of it. You're not the only person involved here.

First of all, there is *very* little usable content at HPwiki.org (which is the more easily remembered address).

As far as "*very* little usable content", HPWiki is new. It is a community effort that has to start somewhere. I and about fifteen others have put effort into what's there. Because you didn't find your favorite instrument there does not mean it's useless to everyone.

You could contribute instead of complaining.

It's a Potemkin village littered with incorrect photos and most commonly no usable information. If you don't believe me search Duckduckgo for "hpwiki". Then do the same for "tekwiki". Take a page by page tour of hpwiki.org.

TekWiki was also new at one time; it did not magically warp into existence with a thousand pages. People (myself included) contributed to its development.

And yes, a few people made messes, you and I discussed that privately. You fixed a few, I fixed the rest. This is the nature of a community-based documentation effort.

Further, and to be very clear about this: This is not a popularity contest. It is a shared, community-driven information resource.

I've used MediaWiki, but never DocuWiki.

I've hosted dozens of MediaWiki sites over the years. It is a can of worms that requires lots of maintenance and is fraught with security problems. I made a conscious, informed decision to not use it.

DokuWiki is simpler, faster, safer, and requires much less maintenance. If you learned MediaWiki, you can learn DokuWiki. Read the documentation.

I can upload a file, but how to control where it goes or how I reference it on a page is opaque.

You could read the documentation.

It appears that the uploaded files all go in a single directory.

Wrong. Read the documentation.

That will collapse very fast if several thousand files are dumped in one directory.

Of course it would. I do know how to run a network, thanks. Read the documentation.

I seriously question using a wiki which uses grey on grey icons to communicate, e.g. the "edit pencil". especially when text says to click the edit buttons at the top and bottom of the page.

I understand that you don't like DokuWiki, but it seems as though your only reason is that it differs from MediaWiki. DokuWiki is not intended to be a clone of MediaWiki. As I explained above, I made a conscious, informed decision to use DokuWiki.

But you "question" a piece of software because of the color of the buttons? Seriously?

I've uploaded all the 3458A manuals and datasheet, but do not understand how to reference the files I uploaded in the wiki page which are named using HPAK numerical part numbers. That's good, but needs indexing.

You could read the documentation.

If someone who knows DocuWiki and the HPwiki.org instance well enough to fill out the 3458A page with sufficient comments so it's clear how to populate the wiki with all the documentation available from Keysight I'd like to ire a handful of Argentinians to work uploading manuals and datasheets to HPwiki.

As I stated privately, I think that would be a mistake. But how you contribute, should you choose to do so, is up to you.

Note, though, that there's more to this than uploading manuals and datasheets. Take a look at TekWiki; that's the model we're following. The manuals there are a small part of what's there. HPWiki is not intended to be a manual archive site. See KO4BB for that.

The only way to ensure preservation of all this vital data is to create multiple replications, both online and offline. At the moment we are in a precarious place dependent on a very few repositories. I want to populate HPwiki.org and make creating local clones simple. I have too much other stuff going on to do this myself. But I'm willing to throw some money at making it happen. If it takes a new site, so be it. I hope that is not the case.

HPWiki itself, while being new, is far from precarious. The network it lives on predates the existence of ALL commercial hosting services; and predates the existence of Google and even Yahoo.

Other repositories, KO4BB for example, have been around for a very long time.

Funding such a site is a non-issue. Sell links to T&M dealers on a per instrument basis.

That will not happen.

This vintage of equipment is the end of user repairable T&M gear.

To be clear, HPWiki is not for "vintage" equipment. It's for HP/Agilent/Keysight equipment, of any age.

VLSI has made repair of modern instruments increasingly impossible. It's all on 4 chips which may not be available. And the packaging just makes it worse. HPAK equipment made of primarily discrete components are a shrinking resource which will shrink faste without documentation.

I repair it all the time. It's different, yes, and in many cases a unit is a lot less repairable at the component level. But I guess you're in the mood to throw stones at both HPWiki AND modern test equipment.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

Dave,

Good deal. I like the looks of the new site. Clean. Should be fun to watch the various instruments being added and filled out.

Thanks for doing this.

Barry - N4BUQ

On 12/9/23 10:44, n4buq wrote:

I notice the 5005A is listed twice (under different categories). Is that intentional?

I don't know, I wasn't the one who added it. But it does fit into both of those categories.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

I notice the 5005A is listed twice (under different categories). Is that intentional?

Thanks,
Barry - N4BUQ

I'm the other half of the off-list discussion. First of all, there is *very* little usable content at HPwiki.org (which is the more easily remembered address). It's a Potemkin village littered with incorrect photos and most commonly no usable information. If you don't believe me search Duckduckgo for "hpwiki". Then do the same for "tekwiki". Take a page by page tour of hpwiki.org.

I've used MediaWiki, but never DocuWiki. I can upload a file, but how to control where it goes or how I reference it on a page is opaque. It appears that the uploaded files all go in a single directory. That will collapse very fast if several thousand files are dumped in one directory. I seriously question using a wiki which uses grey on grey icons to communicate, e.g. the "edit pencil". especially when text says to click the edit buttons at the top and bottom of the page.

I've uploaded all the 3458A manuals and datasheet, but do not understand how to reference the files I uploaded in the wiki page which are named using HPAK numerical part numbers. That's good, but needs indexing.

If someone who knows DocuWiki and the HPwiki.org instance well enough to fill out the 3458A page with sufficient comments so it's clear how to populate the wiki with all the documentation available from Keysight I'd like to ire a handful of Argentinians to work uploading manuals and datasheets to HPwiki.

The only way to ensure preservation of all this vital data is to create multiple replications, both online and offline. At the moment we are in a precarious place dependent on a very few repositories. I want to populate HPwiki.org and make creating local clones simple. I have too much other stuff going on to do this myself. But I'm willing to throw some money at making it happen. If it takes a new site, so be it. I hope that is not the case.

Funding such a site is a non-issue. Sell links to T&M dealers on a per instrument basis.

This vintage of equipment is the end of user repairable T&M gear. VLSI has made repair of modern instruments increasingly impossible. It's all on 4 chips which may not be available. And the packaging just makes it worse. HPAK equipment made of primarily discrete components are a shrinking resource which will shrink faste without documentation.

Reg

On 12/9/23 03:40, swake001@... wrote:

Thank you for this initiative. It is certainly very interesting and actually astonishing that something similar didn't exist yet. I'm willing to contribute and will be happy to do so.

You're welcome, I am happy to do it for the community. It's great that you'd like to be involved.

However, at least for me, first there are some things that need to be cleared. The main question I have is "How is the future of that wiki resource guaranteed?"
- From an organizational perspective, what happens if you're not in the possibility anymore to maintain it, even for a short period of time? Or not willing to do it anymore for whatever reason?

It is a community project; people like you and I maintain the data. As with any wiki, all contributors are involved in its maintenance. If I start a page for an instrument and you find an error in it, fix it.

As far as system-level maintenance, like backups etc, that's taken care of by the existing infrastructure, which is much larger than one wiki. The data itself lives as flat files in a directory hierarchy, not in a database, so maintenance requirements are low.

- From a financial perspective, how is this supported and how is that funding guaranteed? Hosting can turn out very expensive. The files are not small and I bet there will be a lot of people that will consult this wiki and even rely on it.

The hosting cost is zero; the storage and bandwidth requirements are inconsequential in relation to the existing infrastructure. Note well that, by "cost is zero", I'm not saying that we're using some "free" hosting service. It is hosted by an existing organization within an existing infrastructure that is already paid for.

- From a content perspective. What files can be hosted, or not? Was 'HP' contacted and are they supportive of this initiative? After all, most of these manuals are their copyrighted material.

No, HP was not contacted. However, as you're no doubt aware, they've released a great many of their manuals for free, with no restrictions on their distribution.

Otherwise, the Contribution Guidelines stipulate that contributors refrain from uploading copyrighted material.

- Have you thought about a more formal non-profit organization?

That's overkill for a web site. However, when the need arises, the ownership will transfer to LSSM, which is a nonprofit organization. Maintaining such a site is within its scope.

What I say is that I don't want to invest time in something that is not lasting. There are many examples of excellent initiatives that for some reason went wrong or are not available anymore while many have contributed in some way and are sometimes even relying on it somehow.

Yes, this happens more often than not. A lot of people who don't know what they're doing start things and get in over their heads. This is not my first barbecue, however.

The last one that comes to mind is the situation at xDevs with a ton of documentation that all of a sudden was made unavailable and is now behind a registration, al be it apparently still free. They most probably had good reasons to do so. However this is something I don't what to deal with. My mind is an 'open source' mind and I also believe such a resource doesn't have to be completely free, a paid for registration can be acceptable if the amount is reasonable and directly goes to the initiative.

I generally agree. While I don't know Ilya personally, It's my understanding that xDevs is his personal (but business) website, intended to document his own work, but people started treating it like a free manuals download site. About the time he locked it down, I know of several people who did a wholesale recursive wget on the site, which likely put a significant dent in his bandwidth. That's a crappy thing to do in general, and while I don't know his reasoning, I don't blame him for locking it down. The critical difference here is that HPWiki is intended to be a community effort to share information, not a personal or company web site to document projects.

Your concerns are valid and I appreciate your bringing them up. Rest assured that these issues have been considered, and most of the standard concerns do not apply here due to the somewhat unusual resources that are being leveraged. That's why I did it; it would've been a waste of time otherwise.

-Dave

--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

Dave,

Thank you for this initiative. It is certainly very interesting and actually astonishing that something similar didn't exist yet. I'm willing to contribute and will be happy to do so.

However, at least for me, first there are some things that need to be cleared. The main question I have is "How is the future of that wiki resource guaranteed?"
- From an organizational perspective, what happens if you're not in the possibility anymore to maintain it, even for a short period of time? Or not willing to do it anymore for whatever reason?
- From a financial perspective, how is this supported and how is that funding guaranteed? Hosting can turn out very expensive. The files are not small and I bet there will be a lot of people that will consult this wiki and even rely on it.
- From a content perspective. What files can be hosted, or not? Was 'HP' contacted and are they supportive of this initiative? After all, most of these manuals are their copyrighted material.
- Have you thought about a more formal non-profit organization?

What I say is that I don't want to invest time in something that is not lasting. There are many examples of excellent initiatives that for some reason went wrong or are not available anymore while many have contributed in some way and are sometimes even relying on it somehow. The last one that comes to mind is the situation at xDevs with a ton of documentation that all of a sudden was made unavailable and is now behind a registration, al be it apparently still free. They most probably had good reasons to do so. However this is something I don't what to deal with. My mind is an 'open source' mind and I also believe such a resource doesn't have to be completely free, a paid for registration can be acceptable if the amount is reasonable and directly goes to the initiative.

Best regards, Swa.