Re: Problem with Scantronic avenger VI

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 27, 7:47=A0am, Jim Rojas <jro...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jim wrote:
> > On Aug 27, 12:29 am, Frank Kurz<t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> =A0wrote:
>
> >> That's not necessarily true in all cases. =A0You can't always equate a
> >> "hot" battery with "dead battery". =A0Considering the alarm panel is
> >> prehistoric however, I'm thinking the OP should follow the advice of o=
ur
> >> resident Technosaur and turf the battery. =A0I believe his problems wi=
ll
> >> become a thing of the past (just like his panel). =A0:-)
>
> > That's funny. ( Technosaur) Did you just make that up?
>
> As I remember, those panels were very troublesome, keypads wore out
> fast, and didn't handle static electricity very well. We replaced all of
> them within 5 years of their introduction back in the 1980's
>
> Jim Rojas
> Technical Manuals Online!http://www.tech-man.com
> 8002 Cornwall Lane
> Tampa, FL 33615-4604
> 813-884-6335

RHC: I've been following this thread with some interest. You have to
wonder why some people insist upon putting an old clunker like this
back in service especially if it's going on line with the authorities.
No one would try to keep a 386 computer in service today, especially
in a business application, but they'll try to keep an old alarm
clunker going forever. With panels and keypads available wholesale at
less than $100, you really have to wonder!!!!

The other thing I still haven't figured out after 20 years in the
business, is a customer will go out and spend $1000 on a big screen
TV, but not a penny on a decent alarm.....go figure