[TowerTalk] InnovAntennas contact info

[David Gilbert]

That's hardly the case, and it's laughable for you to toss it off as 
being an entitlement attitude prevalent in modern society.  If Ford 
advertised that one of their cars was faster in the quarter mile than 
one of Honda's cars I'd want to know which car they were comparing 
themselves to and I'd want to see the actual data before I made a 
purchasing decision based upon that claim.  I certainly wouldn't want to 
have to search for it elsewhere, and I certainly wouldn't want to have 
buy a subscription to Car and Driver to see if Ford was lying or not.

So if you're going to go that far afield to argue with me, please don't 
bother.

Dave  AB7E



On 3/20/2013 12:35 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
> When the information is in the public domain it is not the job of
> any vendor to regurgitate it in the form and place you want.  Just
> because an antenna manufacturer chooses not to reprint Kraus, et. al.
> or J. C Maxwell on his web page doesn't mean that the designs derived
> from their work and others are not valid or verifiable.
>
> The mindset of so many people that they are *entitled* to personal
> answers to every question the moment and in the form they desire just
> because they choose to question rather than seek the information on 
> their own.  This is so symptomatic of the ills of modern society.
> Just a few years ago rather than demand "push" information, someone
> with a real interest in the subject would have gone to the library and
> read the journals where they would have found the answers in articles
> reviewed by editors of the caliber of G(M)3SEK and other experts.
>
> 73,
>
>    ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
> On 3/20/2013 2:51 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> Uhh ... the burden is NOT on me to substantiate any vendor's claims for
>> performance.  It's on him, and until he does so, I will remain the
>> skeptic when I see things that have generally been debunked elsewhere,
>> such as the claim that a loop driven element significantly reduces
>> reception of man-made noise.
>>
>>  From http://www.g0ksc.co.uk/intro-lfa.html :
>>
>> "Additionally, the close (sic) loop at the feedpoint deems the LFA less
>> susceptible to man-made noise and static."
>>
>> 73,
>> Dave   AB7E
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/20/2013 11:13 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>
>>>> If these antennas have been so extensively modeled and optimized,
>>>> there should be a clear comparison available that would tell us
>>>> whether the difference warrants the hype.
>>>
>>> Do just a little literature search for yourself rather than expect
>>> that UPS will deliver a box of books customized for your skepticism.
>>> There have been dozens of patterns posted on Justin's personal web
>>> site over the last couple years as well as journals in the area and
>>> web sites of other antenna developers.  The data is out there but
>>> nobody is going to spoon feed the skeptics.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>>    ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TowerTalk mailing list
>> TowerTalk at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>