Re: New readers, wireless is junk

[-pull@shoot]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:14:27 -0500, "Robert L. Bass"
<robertlbass@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> ah...a wackoshamster? I thought there was
>> a modicum of reality here...guess not.
>
>The reality is that every time you or anyone else answers him or makes a
>comment about him, even a negative comment, it encourages him to continue.
>That's not a judgment or flame against you.  It's just an observation based
>on his activities.  I don't care if people answer him or not, but if you
>want to be rid of him -- ignore the guy.

Easiest way, ignoring to provide a decent answer / argumentation...
You have NO CARTS to play with in your hands, that's the problem and
is why the replays only spew nonsences and insults.

Anyhow Robert I recommend, like you, that those "low level pro's"
avoid to post, I will be free to show to the owners and future owners
the unreliability problem with "Wireless Alarm Systems" due to RFI
who:
- can't be avoided;
- nor can't be detected.

Its amazing to see that when my header specify NEW READERS that still
the same ignorant pro's TRY to oppose... What?... nothing but
nonsences.

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 04:53:54 +0100, I wrote:

>"So called pro's" in that alarm business obviously don't possess the
>meager intellectual capacity required to understand the basic
>concepts of wireless data exanche principles, so please don't overestimate
> theyre talent to judge others.
>
>Its now since 4 years that i first mentioned:
>-  Wireless Alarm Systems are UNRELIABLE during
>    Radio Frequency Interferences (RFI);
>-  Theyre is no warning that the wireless system is muzzled to dead.
>
>Some "so called" Pro's come to the conclusion:
>1. RFI exist and can't be avoided;
>2. There is a RFI detection in the "modern" wireless alarm systems.
>3. The wireless alarm systems are working fine, no RFI detected
>   since 20+ years and 100000+ systems;
>4. They have no RFI reliability measurement tools except theyre
>   on site experience;
>5. There is no manufacturer support on that RFI subject.
>
>Even if a "unsupported by manufacturers" RFI detection exist(?) its
>strange that they have NO RFI alert/warnings.
>
>Instead of having a closer look to the problem (Pro's discovered it
>for the first time when i mentioned it 4 years ago), no they prefere
>to act theyre way with  insults, by denigrating, attempt to spoil my
>posts with out of context posts, attempt to avoid my posts by calling
>my provider, ++
>
>How is it possible that they are so UNprofessional. Why do they not
>call the manufacturers?