Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Wolfgang Strobl <news51@mystrobl.de>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Suspension losses
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:57:24 +0100
Organization: @home
Lines: 247
Message-ID: <gps9oj9j428a2i8rf8ope35464dcuv5ffb@4ax.com>
References: <vlc9u5$kls5$2@dont-email.me> <b8jjnj14qbssjk34bvlpj3pgvmq6o1s2jq@4ax.com> <vlcoil$n7o7$1@dont-email.me> <dva1ojp9dah7npllc8qmukmndqih94sbtj@4ax.com> <vlqs89$3b77g$3@dont-email.me> <7ee2ojpq2b75m6gsd5svace02b19qassrk@4ax.com> <beh2ojhsarrl8p37i446fenvlm4sa4tac8@4ax.com> <vlsfta$a60l$1@dont-email.me> <led5oj98n5et2ocr2tgvdlp2683c3qe41l@4ax.com> <vlv3dq$r4s1$8@dont-email.me> <cn38ojd35canqdv4pq2sqrgo4pcuupsh3p@4ax.com> <vm1sds$1g6ul$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net asuRMv+KpVAJ/39CmdpjVggcqCGx6vYLAzYc/eL9SkcTrWncvP
X-Orig-Path: mystrobl.de!not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cN2hPv//gx12xjgJBECKfMkaDVY= sha256:QPEIuD2PpaiPcvihTQG3aQtj+Fx3c0hJh3PMS97LX5Q=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Bytes: 12616

Am Sun, 12 Jan 2025 21:05:47 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:

>On 1/12/2025 3:33 PM, Wolfgang Strobl wrote:
>> Am Sat, 11 Jan 2025 19:46:50 -0500 schrieb Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>> 
>>> To me, a big advantage is the ability to _look_ at a mechanical device
>>> and _see_ what's wrong....
>> 
>>> That, and the fact I can often affect a repair.
>> 
>> I prefer devices that don't need repair over their lifetime. 
>
>The weakness I see with that is the assumption that "lifetime" is 
>defined as "the amount of time it works." if something stops working, 
>its lifetime is over! Throw it out!

That's far too simplistic.

It depends.  For my purposes, I indeed prefer bicycles that may need
repairs and modifications over their lifetime, for various reasons. I
change over my lifetime, so do my bicycles.  But there are limits. Want
it cheap, longlived, lightweight and functional? Choose any two. 


>
>As I said, I hate the Kleenex ethic - "It's no good any more, just throw 
>it away."

A strawman isn't getting any more pretty, over time. You won't find many
complex products, machines, vehicles or components with an unlimited
lifetime.  Product lifetime has to be planned. There is innovation,
innovation means change.  There are technical limits. So far, I haven't
heard about bicycle tires that tolerate heavy use over a lifetime of 40
years, as you ask for.  To be precise, I don't know of any that I would
like to use or that I would risk using.

But I still prefer devices that don't need repair over their lifetime,
because all relevant components have an expected lifetime large enough
for the expected combined lifetime to exceed a large planned lifetime.  

Sometimes that goal is hard or expensive to archive. Take the example
above, tires.  If some necessary component has a limited lifetime,
standardize its interface, make it replaceable and guarantee that
replacements will remain available for the lifetime of the product.

Nothing stops people from repairing defective components, within limits.
But that isn't the point. I guess even you don't use retreaded tires on
your car, anymore. You probably won't repair a worn chain or chainring. 

Anyway, I see no reason why the wireless shifting of our bikes shouldn't
outlive a similar purely mechanical one, simply because it produces less
mechanical stress. Of course, SRAM or Shimano might artificially limit
the lifetime of those products. Software and forced updates make that
easier than it should be.  But nothing prevents them from doing that on
the mechanical side, either.  There is no reason to blame a technology
for that, just because you don't like it. 


>
>>>> Don't know.  We use devices like the blue one in the following picture.
>>>> <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/W%C3%A4rmflasche1.jpg>
>>>> and better isolating blankets. No electricity necessary. :-)
>>>
>>> :-) But you imply that _I'm_ the one insufficiently modern?
>> 
>> No. I doubt that "being modern" is a reasonable benchmark or measure.
>> This cuts both ways. :-)
>> 
>>>> A few lights in our house are switched by set of 2 x 3 inexpensive
>>>> wireless sockets including two remote controls, that I bought eleven
>>>> years ago. I've still to replace the batteries. Two of the sockets are
>>>> still spares, I have a replacement cell for the remote controls stored
>>>> which might live even longer. Standard type, used in garage openers and
>>>> burglar alarms, too. Selecting a channel and paring one of the four
>>>> buttons of a remote control with one or more of the sockets is as easy
>>>> as pie, using a line of dip switches inside those devices.  Quite
>>>> similar to pairing switches and derailleur on our bicyles.
>>>>
>>>> While I avoid having essential functionality in my house depend on
>>>> wireless connections, I enjoy having the option, for certain use cases,
>>>> though.
>>>
>>> Yuck.

I really enjoy that I don't have to walk down two stairs just for the
light I forgot to switch of in the living room.  There have been other
occasions when I was very happy to be able use a lamp whose switch I
could not reach.


>> 
>> You don't have a single remote control in your house? Not even for the
>> TV? That's rare.
>
>I've got more remotes than I want. 

We aren't using those that came with our TV and those from our stereo
system and amplifier, either.  Our TV actually is a large monitor
connected to a PC serving both as a DVB-T receiver and for internet
streaming - viewing public television programs, that is. The monitor has
an IR remote, but the remote control in use for the TV is just a
wireless keyboard with a touchpad from Logitech.  In the living room, to
play a CD, listen to the radio, or play music from my cell phone,
laptop, etc., I simply walk to the closet where the amplifier is
located.  If I'm lazy, I just use the phone and the BT connection to the
amplifier.


>The TV's power button and channel 
>changing buttons are not even visible. They're hidden and practically 
>un-labeled on the back edge of the device, so a remote is necessary to 
>even turn it on. 

There was a similar problem with our TV, too many separate components. I
solved that by using a power strip combined with a separate central
switch at an easy to reach location.  Powering on/off needs two actions:
central switch plus a button on the PC, powering off is done via
keyboard and central switch.  That way, all that stuff doesn't consume
standby power, when not in use.


>I pump the TV sound through our stereo amplifier, which 
>has its own remote (whose volume control seems to have stopped working), 
>the CD/DVD player has a separate remote, etc. etc. If we had a friend 
>house sit for us, I'd have to write a manual on how to run the system.

This can actually be automated quite easily for devices with IR remote
controls. However, it does require a little programming and soldering
work.

>
>A couple years ago we were given a Christmas gift of battery powered LED 
>"candles." The could change colors - by use of a remote! Why should a 
>candle need a remote?

Because you don't want to need a ladder to reach the point where it
stands, just to operate the on/off switch?

>
>Same for a ceiling fan. Ours change speed by use of a pull chain. I'll 
>never lose the pull chain. I would certainly misplace a remote.

I've seen many such fans, radiant heaters and the like, where the pull
chain or drawstring had been lost or damaged. But I have rarely
misplacted an IR remote, simply because there is no point in moving it
out of the room where the controlled device is located. 

>
>> I still have a box of old, but still working IR remote controls,
>> from devices that broke many years ago.  I collected these to control
>> gadgets like this one
>> <https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/basteleien/microcontroller/ws2812/DSC_3564-DSC_3566_fused.JPG>
>> Can you guess what this blinkenlight does?
>
>Nope.

It plays Mastermind faster and better than I do.  

>
>> Parts a an IR receiver, a PIC 12F1840 microcontroller, a stripe of eight
>> RGB LED, and a remote control from a CD Player that broke long before
>> 2014, when I built that gadget.  The aforementioned $1.50 controller
>> (single quantity, digikey) does everything from IR decoding to
>> controlling the LED stripe.
>> 
>> Somewhat later, I built something larger using a different part (an
>> ESP8266) for illuminating the house bar of one of our kids, using about
>> one meter of densely placed RGB LED, controlled via WIFI, doing a whole
>> series of different colorful light effects. Extendable with new effects
>> by uploading short LUA snippets, of course. :-) I was told that it was
>> used again at a New Year's celebration, so obviously it is still
>> working.
>
>There's a part of me that wishes I had your skills and knowledge. I 
>occasionally dream up little electronic projects that I lack the 
>knowledge to design or build. I've thought about educating myself, but 
>soon realized there are many other things I'd prefer to learn.

I got the basic skills and knowledge while we programmed mainframes
using IBM ASM F assembler, in my job. Doing it minimalistically on the
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========