Bill (WL) Boulton wrote:

> I'd like to make a couple of points for clarification:

  And so would I!

> 1. My comments were ... intended for those who have to buy (at least
> on occasions) over the counter at the local Tandy or DSE.

  Oh come on!  These outlets are NOT, whichever way you look at it,
suppliers for electronics designers or indeed, experimenters, nor indeed
for equipment repairers.  For the former group I must confess, I'm not
sure who is.  Most repairers use WES and similar suppliers and perhaps
these are appropriate for the experimenter/ developer group also.

  Sadly, Geoff Wood folded a year or so back.  Dunno what George Brown
is/ was doing.

  The "fun" stuff was covered by Sheridan in Sydney (sorry if I omit
other capitals) but they faded away (to Asia as it happens).
Fortunately there is a new incarnation;
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~oatley/ who are doing a marvellous job, and
in Melbawn, http://www.rocom.com.au/ and their various permutations (I
don't understand them at all) seem to be "running with the ball".

  For PICs, (ON topic) there's http://www.dontronics.com/ of course, and
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~microzed/ and others.

  Sorry about the rave, but classing the original nominated franchises
with these is just not meaningful as I see it.  (Situation may differ
in other countries by all means!)  Chalk and cheese for sure.

> 2. Lazer & fiber optics comms have less in common with opto couplers
> than does chalk with cheese. They aren't in the same league by any
> stretch of the imagination.

  Perhaps not, but nowadays they MAY well represent an alternative
approach.  It's just a matter of manufacturing volume, like microchips
and disk drives.  High end networks use fibre optics, why shouldn't
board-to-board comms if cheap plastic encapsulated components were
available?  It could well happen.  Perfect for industrial comms.

  Cheers,
        Paul B.