On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
> > <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
> >> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
> >> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
> >> is the data input?
> >
> > "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
> >
> > DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
> > RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
> > equipment".
> >
> > Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
> > TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
> > these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
> >
> > RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
> beyond laughable.

The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.

I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.

--

Rick C.

-+--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:37:45 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/25/2023 7:26 PM, Rick C wrote:
> > Engineers design stuff. Technicians figure out how to make it work.
> And you apparently do neither. <frown>

You seem to have gone off the weird end. I wish GG had a kill file feature.. At least you managed to post without overflowing everyone's input buffers. You seem to have a penchant for using 100 words, when 20 will do.

Thanks for keeping this one brief.

--

Rick C.

-+-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
> > On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
> >> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
> >> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
> >> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
> >> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
> >> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
> >> etc.)
> >
> > This is the APC widget mentioned:
> > <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
>
> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
>
> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).

Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.

Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.

Thanks,

--

Rick C.

-+-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 3/26/2023 7:30 PM, Rick C wrote:
> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>> On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>>> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
>>>> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
>>>> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
>>>> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
>>>> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
>>>> etc.)
>>>
>>> This is the APC widget mentioned:
>>> <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
>> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
>> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
>>
>> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
>> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
>> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
>> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
>> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
>>
>> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
>> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
>> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
>> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
>> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).
>
> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
>
> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
>
> Thanks,

To show that if you buy something (or, in my case, RESCUE something with
*no* markings at all on it) for a KNOWN MARKET, then you can *infer* how
a responsible design would pin the connectors.

I rescued this item. I had no idea what sort of CPU was inside.
Nor memory. Nor pinouts of the DB9's (which I *assumed* would
be serial ports -- why? because the rest of the box LOOKED like
it was trying to be a PC, albeit in a very small form factor
and with a wonky power connector). Or, if the 8P8C was actually
a network port. Or, if the circular DIN was intended as a PS/2
keyboard. Or, the DE15 as a video port.

The markings by the connectors *suggested* these uses. And, it
seemed more likely than not...

With *no* documentation, I opted to plug in a monitor (largely
confident that the resolution would be supported by this
"unknown" box) and keyboard and poke around the SETUP screen
(which I *also* assumed would be available... somehow).

Why was I *not* surprised with that outcome?

You've posted a link to a device selected from a vendor
that I'm unfamiliar with and, you infer, insufficiently
documented (hey, at least you KNOW who made/makes your
device! That's more than *I* had to go on!).

Then, expect "us" to give you a definitive answer about
specifics related to that device. And, frown on those of
us that point this out to you as being "not helpful".

ALL ONE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A RANDOM DEVICE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE
SERIAL PORT(S) IS WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ABOUT THOSE PORTS,
THEIR GENDER AND THE SIGNALS ASSIGNED TO THE PINS AND THEIR
DIRECTIONS. I suspect more than a few people learned something
about the standard, here. And, the approach I have taken
to handle pinning differences (my "widgets").

Why aren't you talking to the vendor? Do you expect him/her
to be reading your posts, here?

Buy something that appears to be a PC. It won't succeed
in that ubiquitous market if it differs radically from
other devices that also claim to be PCs. So, you can,
/with a high degree of confidence/, expect the connectors
to be pinned the way a PC would pin them.

Or, buy from Joe's Garage Shop -- ask for Joe.

THIS example is a testament to how I was able to make use
of a COMPLETELY undocumented device simply by making a
good assumption about the intent of the product and the
logical conclusions that flow from that assumption. The
only examination required was trying to deduce the
connections to the power connector and the associated
voltages (but, I had a pretty good feeling it wouldn't
be 7.293VDC or 28V or... again, because of the likely market)

On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
>>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
>>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
>>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
>>>> is the data input?
>>>
>>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
>>>
>>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
>>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
>>> equipment".
>>>
>>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
>>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
>>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
>>>
>>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
>> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
>> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
>> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
>> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
>> beyond laughable.
>
> The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
>
> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.

No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.

In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
avoiding in favor of being argumentative)

You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?

Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
from the vendor leave you distraught.

On 27/03/2023 04:30, Rick C wrote:

> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
>
> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
>

Rick, why are /you/ here? You have been on Usenet for decades, but
still seem to struggle with the basics.

A group like this is a discussion group. It is not your personal
support channel. You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights
to the thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he
wants to ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice. Ignore
his posts if you don't like them.

You have spent this thread bullying and insulting people, pushing them
into doing your work for free. When it looks like some here might be
possible paid suppliers, you undermine and patronise them.

When you come looking for help and advice, it's fair enough to disagree
- but we can do without the sarcasm and belittlement of your responses.

And if you want to killfile me for writing some hard truths, go ahead.
But first you'll have to figure out how to use Usenet instead of blaming
Google Groups for your own problems.

On 3/26/2023 12:24 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> Hard to believe the long fossilized RS-232 horse can get all that
> beating again...

Some folks are slow to learn...

> Next thing let's beat the baud rate detection? :D

No, BREAK detection! :>

(Check your mail.)

On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:18 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/26/2023 7:30 PM, Rick C wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
> >>> On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
> >>>> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
> >>>> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
> >>>> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
> >>>> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
> >>>> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
> >>>> etc.)
> >>>
> >>> This is the APC widget mentioned:
> >>> <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
> >> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
> >> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
> >>
> >> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
> >> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
> >> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
> >> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
> >> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
> >>
> >> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
> >> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
> >> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
> >> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
> >> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).
> >
> > Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
> >
> > Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
> >
> > Thanks,
> To show that if you buy something (or, in my case, RESCUE something with
> *no* markings at all on it) for a KNOWN MARKET, then you can *infer* how
> a responsible design would pin the connectors.
>
> I rescued this item. I had no idea what sort of CPU was inside.
> Nor memory. Nor pinouts of the DB9's (which I *assumed* would
> be serial ports -- why? because the rest of the box LOOKED like
> it was trying to be a PC, albeit in a very small form factor
> and with a wonky power connector). Or, if the 8P8C was actually
> a network port. Or, if the circular DIN was intended as a PS/2
> keyboard. Or, the DE15 as a video port.
>
> The markings by the connectors *suggested* these uses. And, it
> seemed more likely than not...
>
> With *no* documentation, I opted to plug in a monitor (largely
> confident that the resolution would be supported by this
> "unknown" box) and keyboard and poke around the SETUP screen
> (which I *also* assumed would be available... somehow).
>
> Why was I *not* surprised with that outcome?
>
> You've posted a link to a device selected from a vendor
> that I'm unfamiliar with and, you infer, insufficiently
> documented (hey, at least you KNOW who made/makes your
> device! That's more than *I* had to go on!).
>
> Then, expect "us" to give you a definitive answer about
> specifics related to that device. And, frown on those of
> us that point this out to you as being "not helpful".
>
> ALL ONE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A RANDOM DEVICE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE
> SERIAL PORT(S) IS WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ABOUT THOSE PORTS,
> THEIR GENDER AND THE SIGNALS ASSIGNED TO THE PINS AND THEIR
> DIRECTIONS. I suspect more than a few people learned something
> about the standard, here. And, the approach I have taken
> to handle pinning differences (my "widgets").
>
> Why aren't you talking to the vendor? Do you expect him/her
> to be reading your posts, here?
>
> Buy something that appears to be a PC. It won't succeed
> in that ubiquitous market if it differs radically from
> other devices that also claim to be PCs. So, you can,
> /with a high degree of confidence/, expect the connectors
> to be pinned the way a PC would pin them.
>
> Or, buy from Joe's Garage Shop -- ask for Joe.
>
> THIS example is a testament to how I was able to make use
> of a COMPLETELY undocumented device simply by making a
> good assumption about the intent of the product and the
> logical conclusions that flow from that assumption. The
> only examination required was trying to deduce the
> connections to the power connector and the associated
> voltages (but, I had a pretty good feeling it wouldn't
> be 7.293VDC or 28V or... again, because of the likely market)

You are off topic in this thread. Why not start your own thread, rather than polluting this one?

--

Rick C.

-++-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:20 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
> >>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
> >>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
> >>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
> >>>> is the data input?
> >>>
> >>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
> >>>
> >>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
> >>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
> >>> equipment".
> >>>
> >>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
> >>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
> >>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
> >>>
> >>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
> >> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
> >> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
> >> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
> >> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
> >> beyond laughable.
> >
> > The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
> >
> > I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.
> No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
> You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
> in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.
>
> In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
> THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
> avoiding in favor of being argumentative)
>
> You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
> to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?
>
> Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
> and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
> from the vendor leave you distraught.

Don, you very clearly have no understanding of the posts I have made. Please don't bother to reply until you do.

Thank you,

--

Rick C.

-++-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 5:03:06 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
> On 27/03/2023 04:30, Rick C wrote:
>
> > Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
> >
> > Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
> >
> Rick, why are /you/ here? You have been on Usenet for decades, but
> still seem to struggle with the basics.
>
> A group like this is a discussion group. It is not your personal
> support channel.

Correct, but it is not appropriate to hijack a thread. Doing that turns every group into s.e.d.

> You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights
> to the thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he
> wants to ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
> experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice. Ignore
> his posts if you don't like them.

Correct that I don't own the group or the thread. I'm simply pointing out that in contrast to convention and courteous behavior, Don is trashing this thread.

> You have spent this thread bullying and insulting people, pushing them
> into doing your work for free. When it looks like some here might be
> possible paid suppliers, you undermine and patronise them.

LOL! How on earth do you bully anyone in a newsgroup? You are just being silly now.

> When you come looking for help and advice, it's fair enough to disagree
> - but we can do without the sarcasm and belittlement of your responses.

I'm pretty sure Don is the only person I've been anything but polite to. That's because Don has been anything but polite. Don's posts have been like walking up to a couple of strangers on the street, having a conversation, and inviting himself to join in with comments that have nothing to do with what they were discussing. Not acceptable there, not acceptable here.

> And if you want to killfile me for writing some hard truths, go ahead.
> But first you'll have to figure out how to use Usenet instead of blaming
> Google Groups for your own problems.

Sounds like you are the one with complaints that would make you want to kill file someone.

Bye

--

Rick C.

-+++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 3/27/2023 17:11, Rick C wrote:
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 5:03:06 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
> ....
>
>> You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights
>> to the thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he
>> wants to ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
>> experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice. Ignore
>> his posts if you don't like them.
>
> Correct that I don't own the group or the thread. I'm simply pointing out that in contrast to convention and courteous behavior, Don is trashing this thread.

Oh stop it Rick. Your initial question - about board availability - was
valid, you must have googled, not found anything and asked here; so
far so good.
Then you started talking about signal polarities, RS-232 standards etc.,
things most people here have leaned how to deal with 30 or so years ago.
It does not get much lamer than that.
And now you complain you got too much detail or whatever, eventually
you discovered that only a wintel PC is your off the shelf option etc.
etc. lame stuff.
It was obvious after the first 2-3 posts you would not find what you
initially asked for as being mass produced, why all the whining now.

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 10:47:28 AM UTC-4, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> On 3/27/2023 17:11, Rick C wrote:
> > On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 5:03:06 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
> > ....
> >
> >> You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights
> >> to the thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he
> >> wants to ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
> >> experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice. Ignore
> >> his posts if you don't like them.
> >
> > Correct that I don't own the group or the thread. I'm simply pointing out that in contrast to convention and courteous behavior, Don is trashing this thread.
> Oh stop it Rick.

No, YOU stop it!

> Your initial question - about board availability - was
> valid, you must have googled, not found anything and asked here; so
> far so good.
> Then you started talking about signal polarities, RS-232 standards etc.,
> things most people here have leaned how to deal with 30 or so years ago.
> It does not get much lamer than that.
> And now you complain you got too much detail or whatever, eventually
> you discovered that only a wintel PC is your off the shelf option etc.
> etc. lame stuff.
> It was obvious after the first 2-3 posts you would not find what you
> initially asked for as being mass produced, why all the whining now.

Why do you feel you needed to post any of this? Why are you whining?

--

Rick C.

-++++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 27/03/2023 16:11, Rick C wrote:
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 5:03:06 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
>> On 27/03/2023 04:30, Rick C wrote:
>>
>>> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more
>>> description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of
>>> which are needed.
>>>
>>> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You
>>> have gone completely off topic.
>>>
>> Rick, why are /you/ here? You have been on Usenet for decades, but
>> still seem to struggle with the basics.
>>
>> A group like this is a discussion group. It is not your personal
>> support channel.
>
> Correct, but it is not appropriate to hijack a thread. Doing that
> turns every group into s.e.d.
>

I suspect you have been in s.e.d. too long, and other groups too little.
(To be fair, there's not a lot of traffic in many of the technical
groups.) You are a polite and respectful poster by s.e.d. standards,
but not by the standards of groups that remain technical.

>
>> You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights to the
>> thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he wants to
>> ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
>> experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice.
>> Ignore his posts if you don't like them.
>
> Correct that I don't own the group or the thread. I'm simply
> pointing out that in contrast to convention and courteous behavior,
> Don is trashing this thread.
>

I was turned off from joining in this thread by /your/ posts. Don's are
easy to ignore. His posts are often long and somewhat off-topic, and
people often skip them - that's not news to him or to anyone else here.
Read them if you are interested, skip them if you are not.

>
>> You have spent this thread bullying and insulting people, pushing
>> them into doing your work for free. When it looks like some here
>> might be possible paid suppliers, you undermine and patronise
>> them.
>
> LOL! How on earth do you bully anyone in a newsgroup? You are just
> being silly now.
>

Do you ever try reading the things you write? Perhaps trying to imagine
how they might be viewed by others? Perhaps, like many bullies, you
simply don't understand how you come across. Perhaps you really do view
everyone else as though they are here to do your bidding and answer your
questions.

>
>> When you come looking for help and advice, it's fair enough to
>> disagree - but we can do without the sarcasm and belittlement of
>> your responses.
>
> I'm pretty sure Don is the only person I've been anything but polite
> to. That's because Don has been anything but polite. Don's posts
> have been like walking up to a couple of strangers on the street,
> having a conversation, and inviting himself to join in with comments
> that have nothing to do with what they were discussing. Not
> acceptable there, not acceptable here.
>

Again, I think you are unaware of how Usenet works. It's more like a
coffee shop, or an office water cooler. Don's the old guy who always
seems to be there, sitting in the same seat. He's part of the
conversation whether he posts or not. Some people are interested in the
war stories he tells, others not - and for many, we find some of the
things he says interesting, and some things less so. He has helped out
a great many people over the decades, and I hope and expect he will
continue to do so. /You/ are the one who wandered in here looking for
help, and then chastise people for not concentrating fully on /your/
problems, or failing to read your mind regarding the answers you expect.

Don's posting behaviour is /entirely/ acceptable here. Yours is a lot
more on the edge, which is why I am making these comments. The hope is
that you will think a little about what you write, and moderate yourself
- then we can get back to politer technical discussions and enjoy their
wanderings, wherever they may lead.

>
>> And if you want to killfile me for writing some hard truths, go
>> ahead. But first you'll have to figure out how to use Usenet
>> instead of blaming Google Groups for your own problems.
>
> Sounds like you are the one with complaints that would make you want
> to kill file someone.
>
> Bye
>

On 3/27/2023 18:05, Rick C wrote:
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 10:47:28 AM UTC-4, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>> On 3/27/2023 17:11, Rick C wrote:
>>> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 5:03:06 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
>>> ....
>>>
>>>> You do not have any rights to the group, or any rights
>>>> to the thread. If Don wants to post here, he can post here. If he
>>>> wants to ramble or rant (and he does like doing that - he has a lot of
>>>> experience and likes to share), that's his right and his choice. Ignore
>>>> his posts if you don't like them.
>>>
>>> Correct that I don't own the group or the thread. I'm simply pointing out that in contrast to convention and courteous behavior, Don is trashing this thread.
>> Oh stop it Rick.
>
> No, YOU stop it!
>
>
>> Your initial question - about board availability - was
>> valid, you must have googled, not found anything and asked here; so
>> far so good.
>> Then you started talking about signal polarities, RS-232 standards etc.,
>> things most people here have leaned how to deal with 30 or so years ago.
>> It does not get much lamer than that.
>> And now you complain you got too much detail or whatever, eventually
>> you discovered that only a wintel PC is your off the shelf option etc.
>> etc. lame stuff.
>> It was obvious after the first 2-3 posts you would not find what you
>> initially asked for as being mass produced, why all the whining now.
>
> Why do you feel you needed to post any of this? Why are you whining?
>

Because I do read the group and your lame whining is a bit excessive.
Notice I kept silent before you got into abuse/whine mode.
You have been a whiner ever since I know you on Usenet, decades by
now. So I am not asking you to disappear, we are all different people,
just to tone it down.
You got *all* the answers to your questions here and you complain
you got too much information. Either do the work you seem to be trying
to do or just let it go, no more help for you here.

On 3/27/2023 7:05 AM, Rick C wrote:
> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:20 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
>>>>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
>>>>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
>>>>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
>>>>>> is the data input?
>>>>>
>>>>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
>>>>>
>>>>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
>>>>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
>>>>> equipment".
>>>>>
>>>>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
>>>>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
>>>>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
>>>>>
>>>>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
>>>> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
>>>> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
>>>> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
>>>> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
>>>> beyond laughable.
>>>
>>> The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
>>>
>>> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.
>> No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
>> You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
>> in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.
>>
>> In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
>> THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
>> avoiding in favor of being argumentative)
>>
>> You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
>> to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?
>>
>> Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
>> and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
>> from the vendor leave you distraught.
>
> Don, you very clearly have no understanding of the posts I have made. Please don't bother to reply until you do.

I suspect it is you who don't understand what you're saying.

"Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this device, which pin on
the DB9 connector is the data output and which is the data input?"

I gave you a very deliberate and accurate answer to this explicit question.

To paraphrase:

"If the person you are talking to gives you a pin number, you are talking to
the wrong person."

Think about it.

> Thank you,

Ah, Officer Rick has spoken! I;m shaking in my boots!

Here's a guy who rules out "a board and a box to be assembled"...
but is only making *20* of them!

Would plugging in a wall wart be too high of a burden, as well?

What about taking it out of the packing material?

Grow the f*ck up, "ricky". By *your* admission, you're neither an
engineer nor a technician. So, wander back to accounting school
and juggle some numbers in a book -- MAYBE you might have a
proclivity for that! Engineering? Not.

On 3/27/2023 7:04 AM, Rick C wrote:
> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:18 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/26/2023 7:30 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>>>> On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>>>>> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
>>>>>> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
>>>>>> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
>>>>>> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
>>>>>> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
>>>>>> etc.)
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the APC widget mentioned:
>>>>> <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
>>>> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
>>>> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
>>>>
>>>> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
>>>> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
>>>> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
>>>> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
>>>> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
>>>>
>>>> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
>>>> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
>>>> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
>>>> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
>>>> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).
>>>
>>> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
>>>
>>> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>> To show that if you buy something (or, in my case, RESCUE something with
>> *no* markings at all on it) for a KNOWN MARKET, then you can *infer* how
>> a responsible design would pin the connectors.
>>
>> I rescued this item. I had no idea what sort of CPU was inside.
>> Nor memory. Nor pinouts of the DB9's (which I *assumed* would
>> be serial ports -- why? because the rest of the box LOOKED like
>> it was trying to be a PC, albeit in a very small form factor
>> and with a wonky power connector). Or, if the 8P8C was actually
>> a network port. Or, if the circular DIN was intended as a PS/2
>> keyboard. Or, the DE15 as a video port.
>>
>> The markings by the connectors *suggested* these uses. And, it
>> seemed more likely than not...
>>
>> With *no* documentation, I opted to plug in a monitor (largely
>> confident that the resolution would be supported by this
>> "unknown" box) and keyboard and poke around the SETUP screen
>> (which I *also* assumed would be available... somehow).
>>
>> Why was I *not* surprised with that outcome?
>>
>> You've posted a link to a device selected from a vendor
>> that I'm unfamiliar with and, you infer, insufficiently
>> documented (hey, at least you KNOW who made/makes your
>> device! That's more than *I* had to go on!).
>>
>> Then, expect "us" to give you a definitive answer about
>> specifics related to that device. And, frown on those of
>> us that point this out to you as being "not helpful".
>>
>> ALL ONE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A RANDOM DEVICE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE
>> SERIAL PORT(S) IS WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ABOUT THOSE PORTS,
>> THEIR GENDER AND THE SIGNALS ASSIGNED TO THE PINS AND THEIR
>> DIRECTIONS. I suspect more than a few people learned something
>> about the standard, here. And, the approach I have taken
>> to handle pinning differences (my "widgets").
>>
>> Why aren't you talking to the vendor? Do you expect him/her
>> to be reading your posts, here?
>>
>> Buy something that appears to be a PC. It won't succeed
>> in that ubiquitous market if it differs radically from
>> other devices that also claim to be PCs. So, you can,
>> /with a high degree of confidence/, expect the connectors
>> to be pinned the way a PC would pin them.
>>
>> Or, buy from Joe's Garage Shop -- ask for Joe.
>>
>> THIS example is a testament to how I was able to make use
>> of a COMPLETELY undocumented device simply by making a
>> good assumption about the intent of the product and the
>> logical conclusions that flow from that assumption. The
>> only examination required was trying to deduce the
>> connections to the power connector and the associated
>> voltages (but, I had a pretty good feeling it wouldn't
>> be 7.293VDC or 28V or... again, because of the likely market)
>
> You are off topic in this thread. Why not start your own thread, rather than polluting this one?

You still fail to see how this applies to "determining which
pin is the output".

Wow, can a person get any denser?

Hey, rick, I've got a box here. It's got a DB25 connector on it.
Is it for a printer? Serial port? SCSI interface? I'd post a photo
of it but the only distinguishable feature is the connector...

Surely you should be able to answer this question!

BTW, Joe is still waiting for your call...

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:21:52 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/27/2023 7:04 AM, Rick C wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:18 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 3/26/2023 7:30 PM, Rick C wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >>>> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
> >>>>>> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
> >>>>>> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
> >>>>>> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
> >>>>>> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
> >>>>>> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
> >>>>>> etc.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is the APC widget mentioned:
> >>>>> <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
> >>>> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
> >>>> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
> >>>>
> >>>> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
> >>>> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
> >>>> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
> >>>> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
> >>>> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
> >>>>
> >>>> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
> >>>> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
> >>>> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
> >>>> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
> >>>> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).
> >>>
> >>> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed..
> >>>
> >>> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >> To show that if you buy something (or, in my case, RESCUE something with
> >> *no* markings at all on it) for a KNOWN MARKET, then you can *infer* how
> >> a responsible design would pin the connectors.
> >>
> >> I rescued this item. I had no idea what sort of CPU was inside.
> >> Nor memory. Nor pinouts of the DB9's (which I *assumed* would
> >> be serial ports -- why? because the rest of the box LOOKED like
> >> it was trying to be a PC, albeit in a very small form factor
> >> and with a wonky power connector). Or, if the 8P8C was actually
> >> a network port. Or, if the circular DIN was intended as a PS/2
> >> keyboard. Or, the DE15 as a video port.
> >>
> >> The markings by the connectors *suggested* these uses. And, it
> >> seemed more likely than not...
> >>
> >> With *no* documentation, I opted to plug in a monitor (largely
> >> confident that the resolution would be supported by this
> >> "unknown" box) and keyboard and poke around the SETUP screen
> >> (which I *also* assumed would be available... somehow).
> >>
> >> Why was I *not* surprised with that outcome?
> >>
> >> You've posted a link to a device selected from a vendor
> >> that I'm unfamiliar with and, you infer, insufficiently
> >> documented (hey, at least you KNOW who made/makes your
> >> device! That's more than *I* had to go on!).
> >>
> >> Then, expect "us" to give you a definitive answer about
> >> specifics related to that device. And, frown on those of
> >> us that point this out to you as being "not helpful".
> >>
> >> ALL ONE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A RANDOM DEVICE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE
> >> SERIAL PORT(S) IS WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ABOUT THOSE PORTS,
> >> THEIR GENDER AND THE SIGNALS ASSIGNED TO THE PINS AND THEIR
> >> DIRECTIONS. I suspect more than a few people learned something
> >> about the standard, here. And, the approach I have taken
> >> to handle pinning differences (my "widgets").
> >>
> >> Why aren't you talking to the vendor? Do you expect him/her
> >> to be reading your posts, here?
> >>
> >> Buy something that appears to be a PC. It won't succeed
> >> in that ubiquitous market if it differs radically from
> >> other devices that also claim to be PCs. So, you can,
> >> /with a high degree of confidence/, expect the connectors
> >> to be pinned the way a PC would pin them.
> >>
> >> Or, buy from Joe's Garage Shop -- ask for Joe.
> >>
> >> THIS example is a testament to how I was able to make use
> >> of a COMPLETELY undocumented device simply by making a
> >> good assumption about the intent of the product and the
> >> logical conclusions that flow from that assumption. The
> >> only examination required was trying to deduce the
> >> connections to the power connector and the associated
> >> voltages (but, I had a pretty good feeling it wouldn't
> >> be 7.293VDC or 28V or... again, because of the likely market)
> >
> > You are off topic in this thread. Why not start your own thread, rather than polluting this one?
> You still fail to see how this applies to "determining which
> pin is the output".
>
> Wow, can a person get any denser?

No, you can't. You completely fail to understand what is going on with this issue.

> Hey, rick, I've got a box here. It's got a DB25 connector on it.
> Is it for a printer? Serial port? SCSI interface? I'd post a photo
> of it but the only distinguishable feature is the connector...
>
> Surely you should be able to answer this question!

What does YOUR box have to do with my project? You are projecting your imaginings, onto a conversation that is very different from what you are talking about. But that's typical of you. At least your last few posts have not been a complete dump of every stray thought that you encountered while writing the post.

> BTW, Joe is still waiting for your call...

I'm sure he will wait a long time to come. He's probably waiting for you to stop posting off topic in this thread.

--

Rick C.

+---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:18:15 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/27/2023 7:05 AM, Rick C wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:20 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >>>> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
> >>>>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
> >>>>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
> >>>>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
> >>>>>> is the data input?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
> >>>>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
> >>>>> equipment".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
> >>>>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
> >>>>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
> >>>> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
> >>>> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
> >>>> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
> >>>> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
> >>>> beyond laughable.
> >>>
> >>> The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
> >>>
> >>> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.
> >> No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
> >> You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
> >> in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.
> >>
> >> In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
> >> THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
> >> avoiding in favor of being argumentative)
> >>
> >> You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
> >> to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?
> >>
> >> Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
> >> and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
> >> from the vendor leave you distraught.
> >
> > Don, you very clearly have no understanding of the posts I have made. Please don't bother to reply until you do.
> I suspect it is you who don't understand what you're saying.
> "Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this device, which pin on
> the DB9 connector is the data output and which is the data input?"
> I gave you a very deliberate and accurate answer to this explicit question.

Exactly. You gave a dissertation to answer a question that has not been asked. The worst part is, you can't understand why your answer is not relevant. That's because you are doing a great job of talking, but a crap job of listening. I seriously doubt you will review the thread. Even if you do, I expect you will continue to not understand the question.

> To paraphrase:
>
> "If the person you are talking to gives you a pin number, you are talking to
> the wrong person."

Even though, that is what I'm asking for, a pin number. See how you fail to comprehend the question?

> Think about it.

I'm trying to get you to do just that. But you are in output mode, and have ceased all input activities.

> > Thank you,
>
> Ah, Officer Rick has spoken! I;m shaking in my boots!

Now, you are just being weird.

> Here's a guy who rules out "a board and a box to be assembled"...
> but is only making *20* of them!

Again, you are projecting. You know virtually none of the facts, but you feel you know more about the problem than I do. Can you not understand your error?

> Would plugging in a wall wart be too high of a burden, as well?
>
> What about taking it out of the packing material?

Now you are just being silly, a silly, silly boy.

> Grow the f*ck up, "ricky". By *your* admission, you're neither an
> engineer nor a technician. So, wander back to accounting school
> and juggle some numbers in a book -- MAYBE you might have a
> proclivity for that! Engineering? Not.

Wow! Such a defensive attitude. Rather than ask a single question, to learn what you don't know, you insist on being silly.

So what do you think my background is, exactly?

Err... maybe I shouldn't be feeding the troll? Or can you actually answer the question with a reply intended to communicate?

Looking forward to your reply.

--

Rick C.

+---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 11:24:33 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> The unit only really needs one serial port, but it is more convenient to have two connectors, so I guess it needs to ports. One port will only receive and the other only transmit, no handshaking.
>
> The function is pretty simple. A sensor sends a line of about 50 chars, at 9,600 bps, once per second. This box counts 20 lines and adds a header. So nothing fancy is required of the MCU. There are parameters set when starting operation.
>
> The main thing I'm having trouble finding, is this needs to be in a box as a unit, not a board and a box to be assembled. Google hasn't been much help returning all sorts of things that aren't useful.
>
> Anyone know of such a box? The programming might be contracted out, if you are interested. There's a prototype using an Arduino nano, but some of them are flaky and it would not hurt to start over from scratch.

In case anyone is interested, I think I've found a good board level solution. Arduino Mega coupled to this board to provide RS-232.

https://leemangeophysical.com/product/rs-232-arduino-mega-xbee-data-shield/

It has no DB9 connectors, which is good, allowing them to be mounted in the case. Now I just need to procure a case. If I have to, I suppose I can design that myself and get a few made. Anyone knowledgeable in designing small cases? I'd love to have this be a turn-key purchase.

--

Rick C.
+--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

On 3/27/2023 10:09 AM, Rick C wrote:
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:18:15 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/27/2023 7:05 AM, Rick C wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:20 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>> On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
>>>>>>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
>>>>>>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
>>>>>>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
>>>>>>>> is the data input?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
>>>>>>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
>>>>>>> equipment".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
>>>>>>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
>>>>>>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
>>>>>> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
>>>>>> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
>>>>>> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
>>>>>> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
>>>>>> beyond laughable.
>>>>>
>>>>> The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.
>>>> No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
>>>> You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
>>>> in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.
>>>>
>>>> In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
>>>> THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
>>>> avoiding in favor of being argumentative)
>>>>
>>>> You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
>>>> to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?
>>>>
>>>> Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
>>>> and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
>>>> from the vendor leave you distraught.
>>>
>>> Don, you very clearly have no understanding of the posts I have made. Please don't bother to reply until you do.
>> I suspect it is you who don't understand what you're saying.
>> "Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this device, which pin on
>> the DB9 connector is the data output and which is the data input?"
>> I gave you a very deliberate and accurate answer to this explicit question.
>
> Exactly. You gave a dissertation to answer a question that has not been asked. The worst part is, you can't understand why your answer is not relevant. That's because you are doing a great job of talking, but a crap job of listening. I seriously doubt you will review the thread. Even if you do, I expect you will continue to not understand the question.

I gave the only answer that anyone COULD give to your silly question.
Were you hoping someone here was USING the exact same board AND had
explored that issue in enough detail to yield a pin number? Instead
of just "Gee, I dunno. It worked WHEN I PLUGGED IN THE CABLE!"

And, if you DID find such a person (to have done your work for you
so YOU wouldn't have to shell out a few bucks to do your own
exploration), would you then have asked about some OTHER board?

Or, inquired as to whether it supported XON/XOFF flow control?

Or, whether the vendor supplied driver could control the direction
of a transceiver?

Or...

I.e., all of the questions you should be able to answer FOR YOURSELF?

You're that client who invites you to lunch to discuss a project.
And then just wanders around trying to sort out what he actually
*wants* -- expecting YOU to be able to read his mind. And, guarantee
success in *his* market.

Best bet, enjoy the meal. Toss him a few bones. Help yourself to
a big slice of pie. Thank him as you depart. And, when he calls
about starting the project a week or two later, "be unavailable".

>> To paraphrase:
>>
>> "If the person you are talking to gives you a pin number, you are talking to
>> the wrong person."
>
> Even though, that is what I'm asking for, a pin number. See how you fail to comprehend the question?

See how you fail to understand the answer?

Did you not understand the reference to the "box with a DB25 on it"?

>> Think about it.
>
> I'm trying to get you to do just that. But you are in output mode, and have ceased all input activities.

I've already showed that I understand the problem. I've acknowledged how
*I* have addressed the problem over the years. Do you think I would
build "widgets" for a problem that didn't exist? Instead of just using
an RS232 patch box?

Clearly I've faced this issue more times than you have as I seem to have
the skills to get to the answer I need without whining to USENET for
someone *else* to do that homework!

>>> Thank you,
>>
>> Ah, Officer Rick has spoken! I;m shaking in my boots!
>
> Now, you are just being weird.

Well, it was YOU who declared this to be YOUR thread and set about
creating policy for who can and who can't post, here...

Would you prefer to be called USENET Bouncer?

>> Here's a guy who rules out "a board and a box to be assembled"...
>> but is only making *20* of them!
>
> Again, you are projecting. You know virtually none of the facts, but you feel you know more about the problem than I do. Can you not understand your error?

No, can you not see how your "Give me a cookie cuz I'm too lazy to get up
and get it for myself" attitude comes across?

I volunteered an accurate answer to a specific question that you asked.
I previously offered up the idea of one/two-port terminal servers
controlled by a (remotable) PC. Also, not acceptable.

You want a box, sitting on a shelf, that says "For Rick". And,
will probably complain of the color scheme chosen!

>> Would plugging in a wall wart be too high of a burden, as well?
>>
>> What about taking it out of the packing material?
>
> Now you are just being silly, a silly, silly boy.

Exactly! That's how you come across. "Mommy, can you get me
a cookie?"

"The cookie jar is right on the counter, ricky. Help yourself"

"But I'm eating my lunch..."

>> Grow the f*ck up, "ricky". By *your* admission, you're neither an
>> engineer nor a technician. So, wander back to accounting school
>> and juggle some numbers in a book -- MAYBE you might have a
>> proclivity for that! Engineering? Not.
>
> Wow! Such a defensive attitude. Rather than ask a single question, to learn what you don't know, you insist on being silly.

You're the one asking the question -- about something you can sort out
for yourself. Did you recently break both arms in an auto accident?
Are you typing with a mouthstick?

> So what do you think my background is, exactly?
>
> Err... maybe I shouldn't be feeding the troll? Or can you actually answer the question with a reply intended to communicate?

You've not sorted out who the troll is in this thread, rick.
Most others apparently have!

How long are you going to hang around waiting for an answer that
is more to your liking?

Why not call the vendor? (use the mouthstick to dial the phone)

> Looking forward to your reply.
>

On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 3:16:29 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 3/27/2023 10:09 AM, Rick C wrote:
> > On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:18:15 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 3/27/2023 7:05 AM, Rick C wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:20 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >>>> On 3/26/2023 7:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:25:49 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >>>>>> On 3/25/2023 6:42 PM, George Neuner wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:21:21 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
> >>>>>>> <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Excellent Don. Now, please tell me which unit is the DCE and which is
> >>>>>>>> the DTE? Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this
> >>>>>>>> device, which pin on the DB9 connector is the data output and which
> >>>>>>>> is the data input?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Terminal Equipment" (TE) vs "Communications Equipment" (CE).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> DTE is the computer (terminal), DCE is the modem. To adhere to the
> >>>>>>> RS-232 conventions, your external device has to be "communications
> >>>>>>> equipment".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Don explained the cables and how the signaling works. DTE transmits on
> >>>>>>> TxD, and receives on RxD. DCE does the reverse. Which physical pins
> >>>>>>> these are on depends on the form factor: DB9 or DB25.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> RS-232 pinout diagrams are very easy to find. Try Google.
> >>>>>> Rick doesn't understand how the Standard is interpreted solely as
> >>>>>> "guidance", in the real world. The idea that someone ELSE could
> >>>>>> examine *his* choice of device from *his* chosen vendor and
> >>>>>> comment, in any meaningful way, suggests a naivite that's
> >>>>>> beyond laughable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The comedy here, is that both of you think I was saying anything about RS-232 being useful here, as other than a voltage level standard. I expect that of you. I don't know George so well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.
> >>>> No, YOU haven't. I twice made the statements about the standard.
> >>>> You didn't get the hint. Instead, you assumed I would engage you
> >>>> in a pointless discussion about what the pinout *could* be.
> >>>>
> >>>> In plain english: THERE IS NOTHING ANYONE HERE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT THE DEVICE
> >>>> THAT *YOU* SELECTED. (unless they want to do the work that you seem to be
> >>>> avoiding in favor of being argumentative)
> >>>>
> >>>> You're the one who picked the device. Did you *expect* it to adhere
> >>>> to a standard? ANY standard? If so, why? If not, why not?
> >>>>
> >>>> Spend a few dollars (as you've likely spent that much in *time*)
> >>>> and buy one to examine -- if your attempts at getting answers
> >>>> from the vendor leave you distraught.
> >>>
> >>> Don, you very clearly have no understanding of the posts I have made. Please don't bother to reply until you do.
> >> I suspect it is you who don't understand what you're saying.
> >> "Or better yet, just answer the question asked, on this device, which pin on
> >> the DB9 connector is the data output and which is the data input?"
> >> I gave you a very deliberate and accurate answer to this explicit question.
> >
> > Exactly. You gave a dissertation to answer a question that has not been asked. The worst part is, you can't understand why your answer is not relevant. That's because you are doing a great job of talking, but a crap job of listening. I seriously doubt you will review the thread. Even if you do, I expect you will continue to not understand the question.
> I gave the only answer that anyone COULD give to your silly question.
> Were you hoping someone here was USING the exact same board AND had
> explored that issue in enough detail to yield a pin number? Instead
> of just "Gee, I dunno. It worked WHEN I PLUGGED IN THE CABLE!"

You still don't get it. In the post you replied to, there was a board referenced. It even gave the same general info YOU provided in response, about TXD, RXD, DTE and DCE. BUT IT DIDN'T SAY DIDDLY ABOUT WHICH PIN WAS INPUT AND WHICH WAS OUTPUT!

You just keep repeating the same stuff over, and over, without any idea of how to answer the question asked, "which pin is output"?

> And, if you DID find such a person (to have done your work for you
> so YOU wouldn't have to shell out a few bucks to do your own
> exploration), would you then have asked about some OTHER board?
>
> Or, inquired as to whether it supported XON/XOFF flow control?
>
> Or, whether the vendor supplied driver could control the direction
> of a transceiver?
>
> Or...
>
> I.e., all of the questions you should be able to answer FOR YOURSELF?
>
> You're that client who invites you to lunch to discuss a project.
> And then just wanders around trying to sort out what he actually
> *wants* -- expecting YOU to be able to read his mind. And, guarantee
> success in *his* market.
>
> Best bet, enjoy the meal. Toss him a few bones. Help yourself to
> a big slice of pie. Thank him as you depart. And, when he calls
> about starting the project a week or two later, "be unavailable".

Now you are ranting about bones. I guess you are upset by the fact that you could not answer the question, because you never understood the question.

> >> To paraphrase:
> >>
> >> "If the person you are talking to gives you a pin number, you are talking to
> >> the wrong person."
> >
> > Even though, that is what I'm asking for, a pin number. See how you fail to comprehend the question?
> See how you fail to understand the answer?
>
> Did you not understand the reference to the "box with a DB25 on it"?

Which reference? There is no DB25 connector anywhere in the system being discussed.

> >> Think about it.
> >
> > I'm trying to get you to do just that. But you are in output mode, and have ceased all input activities.
> I've already showed that I understand the problem. I've acknowledged how
> *I* have addressed the problem over the years. Do you think I would
> build "widgets" for a problem that didn't exist? Instead of just using
> an RS232 patch box?

No, you've shown a wide knowledge of RS-232 and related issues, but a complete failure of understanding the question being asked. Please go back to the original post you replied to and see what the question is.

> Clearly I've faced this issue more times than you have as I seem to have
> the skills to get to the answer I need without whining to USENET for
> someone *else* to do that homework!

LOL You are a trip. I don't think I've ever seen anyone so wrapped around the axle, even on usenet.

> >>> Thank you,
> >>
> >> Ah, Officer Rick has spoken! I;m shaking in my boots!
> >
> > Now, you are just being weird.
> Well, it was YOU who declared this to be YOUR thread and set about
> creating policy for who can and who can't post, here...

I asked you to stop posting off topic. Most people respond to that appropriately. You were trying to educate me, without understanding what I had even asked, which is not at all uncommon for you. Your posts are typically very long, somewhat rambling, nearly a stream of consciousness and a bit hard to follow. Then someone else engages with you on the same level and the thread is forever lost.

Is it any wonder that c.a.e is virtually a ghost town?

> Would you prefer to be called USENET Bouncer?

I don't care what I'm called it you leave this thread. Although, it doesn't really matter. You've pretty much ruined it for anyone looking for info on the original subject.

> >> Here's a guy who rules out "a board and a box to be assembled"...
> >> but is only making *20* of them!
> >
> > Again, you are projecting. You know virtually none of the facts, but you feel you know more about the problem than I do. Can you not understand your error?
> No, can you not see how your "Give me a cookie cuz I'm too lazy to get up
> and get it for myself" attitude comes across?
>
> I volunteered an accurate answer to a specific question that you asked.
> I previously offered up the idea of one/two-port terminal servers
> controlled by a (remotable) PC. Also, not acceptable.

On 3/27/2023 9:56 AM, Rick C wrote:
> On Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:21:52 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/27/2023 7:04 AM, Rick C wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 11:31:18 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>> On 3/26/2023 7:30 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:52:48 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/26/2023 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/26/2023 1:23 PM, Don Y wrote:
>>>>>>>> I build these into connector shells that are designed to support a
>>>>>>>> pair of back-to-back connectors (DB9 or 25) and then affix a label
>>>>>>>> telling me the device that it is intended to normalize (e.g., I have
>>>>>>>> one at my feet that "fixes" APC's UPS serial port) *or* the function
>>>>>>>> it is intended to perform (gender change, NULL modem, NULL 'terminal'!,
>>>>>>>> etc.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is the APC widget mentioned:
>>>>>>> <https://mega.nz/file/J35SBBob#FtQznCDovhBZHJdA5OspHdMo6_DiDMjQwtCqnh3Oa54>
>>>>>> And this is the COTS *PC* that I use as a name server:
>>>>>> <https://mega.nz/file/Fi4hEACJ#YgVZ5tdZBjTcwW76gXC2vdgv5M6u4lTpUDAwu53Z9n8>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note the *two* serial ports (DTE as the standard dictates), 100BaseT
>>>>>> network connection (it's just a name server, it doesn't need to
>>>>>> have high throughput), PS/2 keyboard and VGA (cuz it's a PC!),
>>>>>> wifi and USB. The four mounting holes visible are the VESA standard
>>>>>> (I have these mounted between my monitor and support arm)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As an ISA PC, it will run damn near any OS intended for such
>>>>>> a platform (I run NetBSD on this box). So, all of the PC hosted
>>>>>> AND TARGETED tools are available (I have a LFC monitor wired to
>>>>>> one of the serial ports to discipline my time service as that
>>>>>> was easier/cheaper to implement than any other solution!).
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow! He's gone from making overly verbose posts with far more description than needed, to making replies to himself, neither of which are needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don, why are you here? Why are you posting in this thread? You have gone completely off topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>> To show that if you buy something (or, in my case, RESCUE something with
>>>> *no* markings at all on it) for a KNOWN MARKET, then you can *infer* how
>>>> a responsible design would pin the connectors.
>>>>
>>>> I rescued this item. I had no idea what sort of CPU was inside.
>>>> Nor memory. Nor pinouts of the DB9's (which I *assumed* would
>>>> be serial ports -- why? because the rest of the box LOOKED like
>>>> it was trying to be a PC, albeit in a very small form factor
>>>> and with a wonky power connector). Or, if the 8P8C was actually
>>>> a network port. Or, if the circular DIN was intended as a PS/2
>>>> keyboard. Or, the DE15 as a video port.
>>>>
>>>> The markings by the connectors *suggested* these uses. And, it
>>>> seemed more likely than not...
>>>>
>>>> With *no* documentation, I opted to plug in a monitor (largely
>>>> confident that the resolution would be supported by this
>>>> "unknown" box) and keyboard and poke around the SETUP screen
>>>> (which I *also* assumed would be available... somehow).
>>>>
>>>> Why was I *not* surprised with that outcome?
>>>>
>>>> You've posted a link to a device selected from a vendor
>>>> that I'm unfamiliar with and, you infer, insufficiently
>>>> documented (hey, at least you KNOW who made/makes your
>>>> device! That's more than *I* had to go on!).
>>>>
>>>> Then, expect "us" to give you a definitive answer about
>>>> specifics related to that device. And, frown on those of
>>>> us that point this out to you as being "not helpful".
>>>>
>>>> ALL ONE CAN TELL YOU ABOUT A RANDOM DEVICE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE
>>>> SERIAL PORT(S) IS WHAT THE STANDARD SAYS ABOUT THOSE PORTS,
>>>> THEIR GENDER AND THE SIGNALS ASSIGNED TO THE PINS AND THEIR
>>>> DIRECTIONS. I suspect more than a few people learned something
>>>> about the standard, here. And, the approach I have taken
>>>> to handle pinning differences (my "widgets").
>>>>
>>>> Why aren't you talking to the vendor? Do you expect him/her
>>>> to be reading your posts, here?
>>>>
>>>> Buy something that appears to be a PC. It won't succeed
>>>> in that ubiquitous market if it differs radically from
>>>> other devices that also claim to be PCs. So, you can,
>>>> /with a high degree of confidence/, expect the connectors
>>>> to be pinned the way a PC would pin them.
>>>>
>>>> Or, buy from Joe's Garage Shop -- ask for Joe.
>>>>
>>>> THIS example is a testament to how I was able to make use
>>>> of a COMPLETELY undocumented device simply by making a
>>>> good assumption about the intent of the product and the
>>>> logical conclusions that flow from that assumption. The
>>>> only examination required was trying to deduce the
>>>> connections to the power connector and the associated
>>>> voltages (but, I had a pretty good feeling it wouldn't
>>>> be 7.293VDC or 28V or... again, because of the likely market)
>>>
>>> You are off topic in this thread. Why not start your own thread, rather than polluting this one?
>> You still fail to see how this applies to "determining which
>> pin is the output".
>>
>> Wow, can a person get any denser?
>
> No, you can't. You completely fail to understand what is going on with this issue.
>
>
>> Hey, rick, I've got a box here. It's got a DB25 connector on it.
>> Is it for a printer? Serial port? SCSI interface? I'd post a photo
>> of it but the only distinguishable feature is the connector...
>>
>> Surely you should be able to answer this question!
>
> What does YOUR box have to do with my project? You are projecting your imaginings, onto a conversation that is very different from what you are talking about. But that's typical of you. At least your last few posts have not been a complete dump of every stray thought that you encountered while writing the post.
>
>
>> BTW, Joe is still waiting for your call...
>
> I'm sure he will wait a long time to come. He's probably waiting for you to stop posting off topic in this thread.

Wow, had you put this much effort into YOUR problem, you could have put
a SoC on a board and written the page of code it would take to suit your
problem. The BALANCE of the time, you could have ASSEMBLED the boards
into boxes!

It's now 27 March. Your initial post was 17 January. A productive two months
for you, eh?

On 3/27/2023 1:03 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>>>>>> I was playing the game, where questions are asked, until the other person sees the absurdity of

-------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\

Ah, so you're not an engineer. Not a technician. Comedian??

> what they were saying. You still haven't figured that out.

>> I gave the only answer that anyone COULD give to your silly question.
>> Were you hoping someone here was USING the exact same board AND had
>> explored that issue in enough detail to yield a pin number? Instead
>> of just "Gee, I dunno. It worked WHEN I PLUGGED IN THE CABLE!"
>
> You still don't get it. In the post you replied to, there was a board referenced. It even gave the same general info YOU provided in response, about TXD, RXD, DTE and DCE. BUT IT DIDN'T SAY DIDDLY ABOUT WHICH PIN WAS INPUT AND WHICH WAS OUTPUT!

And my answer fits that dfescription.

Here, Master Rick. Please, in clear English sentences of no more than
3 syllables, explain what you want from us. And, WHY YOU EXPECT SOMEONE HERE
to have that information.

Do you think one of us designed the board?

Do you think the vendor watches s.e.d for questions that might be pertinent?

Do you think our accesses to the site serve up DIFFERENT information?

Do you want one of us to buy a board and 'scope the pins?

Do you want us to consult a Quija board? Seer? Tea leaves?

HOW do you expect one of us to answer this -- when you clearly can't (won't)?

> You just keep repeating the same stuff over, and over, without any idea of how to answer the question asked, "which pin is output"?

See above. It's been answered -- as correctly and thoroughly as can be done
WITH THE INFORMATION THAT *YOU* PROVIDED!

You keep asking the same question without telling us how you expect US
to have the answer when we have LESS THAN the information that YOU have.

Or, do you just want someone to get that cookie for you?

Soon, the need will have passed and it will be a moot point, eh?

On 3/26/2023 7:28 PM, Rick C wrote:
> On Sunday, March 26, 2023 at 4:37:45 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/25/2023 7:26 PM, Rick C wrote:
>>> Engineers design stuff. Technicians figure out how to make it work.
>> And you apparently do neither. <frown>
>
> You seem to have gone off the weird end. I wish GG had a kill file feature. At least you managed to post without overflowing everyone's input buffers. You seem to have a penchant for using 100 words, when 20 will do.

Says a guy who spawned a 2.5 month long thread OVER A PINOUT!

Wow! I wonder how long the thread will be about power supply voltages...

> Thanks for keeping this one brief.
>

On 2023-03-27, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
> On 3/27/2023 9:56 AM, Rick C wrote:
>>
>> I'm sure he will wait a long time to come. He's probably waiting for
>> you to stop posting off topic in this thread.
>
> Wow, had you put this much effort into YOUR problem, you could have put
> a SoC on a board and written the page of code it would take to suit your
> problem. The BALANCE of the time, you could have ASSEMBLED the boards
> into boxes!
>
> It's now 27 March. Your initial post was 17 January. A productive two months
> for you, eh?

That was my thought wwwwaaaayyyy back!