Anyone moved to LED Lighting?

Walmart just introduced a line of LED lamps at cheaper prices than I have seen, so far. There was about a dozen different bulbs, I saw. The largest was 5 watts in a PAR38.

Now, for a question... I installed a 4 inch recessed light for an accent over a statue. I'd like to find an LED light that can screw into the fixture, and that has a focused light beam so that it will limit illumination to the statue. Ant suggestions?

-- Jim

Josepi wrote: LOL. Yup, economic OCD is difficult.

Walmart just introduced a line of LED lamps at cheaper prices than I have seen, so far. There was about a dozen different bulbs, I saw. The largest was 5 watts in a PAR38.

Now, for a question... I installed a 4 inch recessed light for an accent over a statue. I'd like to find an LED light that can screw into the fixture, and that has a focused light beam so that it will limit illumination to the statue. Ant suggestions?

-- Jim

Josepi wrote: LOL. Yup, economic OCD is difficult.

I see the guy recommends "QuoteFix" which is what I used years ago when I had Outlook Express as my newsreader. I don't understand why so many people are resistant to bottom posting and following Usenet conventions. Some folks are just contrary.

TDD

I don't mind top or bottom posting as long as I can figure out to whom I am responding. I usually snip all except the comments to which I am replying. I also like to leave just the person's name unless his sig itself is germain to my comment.

I hope that you are not referring to my own sig. I put enough info in it that people will know who I am and that I am in the alarm and home automation trade. There's a commercial side to that of course, but it's also fair to the reader be up front about it. Fair enough?

I agree with that. I prefer posting below the message (or relevant part if my reply applies only to part of the post) AND snipping enough the reply is visible without scrolling. I find neither top posting nor bottom posting nearly as bad as some of the nasty complaints people make about it.

As far as I can tell, your sig is formatted correctly and not too long. It's at the bottom of the message, where (regardless of reply location) the sig separator causes the proper action (sig is excluded from being quoted).

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." -- Apostle Paul

I like Jodie Foster. She's an incredibly talented actress. But for instruction in matters as important as the existence (or not) of God I'm not sure she's your best bet.

Merry Christmas, Mark.

The principle is different.

A prism refracts (bends) different wavelengths of light unequally.

A diffraction grating works with diffraction - light hitting or grazing small objects is bent or even reflected into random directions or a range of random directions. The grating has a large number of equally-spaced grooves. That causes the light to go only where the various paths (one for each groove) have distance from light source to destination differ from each other in length by only whole numbers of wavelengths, so that constructive interference occurs.

The effect remains similar to that of a prism. The biggest functional differences between a prism and a diffraction grating are:

1. It can be tricky or necessary to use additional optics to get a well-spread-out spectrum of good quality. A diffraction grating all by itself easily produces a nice spectrum.

1. With a prism, the violet end of the spectrum tends to get stretched outand the red end tends to get squished. Variation of refractive index of transparent materials with change in wavelength tends to be greater at shorter wavelengths than at longer wavelengths.

2. Some gratings are of reflective type. A CD or DVD is an example of a reflective grating.

Some "spindle packs" of recordable CDs or DVDs have a clear one at the top and sometimes the clear one has the grooves - and that makes that thing an example of a transmissive diffraction grating.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

How about when the heating is other than resistive electric heat or unneeded year-round, and therefore CFLs are more economical than incandescents year-round?

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Except most people on Usenet use news or email/news software.

I have yet to find any, not even that included in Netscape 4.7, designed to favor top or bottom posting one way or another. This means go with the flow - post bottom or interleaved!

Most Usenet posts I read are done by those with signature line count 5 or less, maybe majority have signature line count of 1. Usenet ettiquette sources advise to limit signature line count to 5 or 4.

Meanwhile, top-posting gets more complaints than long signatures. Top-posting often gets the new material not appearing adjacent to the material that it is in response to. Combine this with lack of a quotation symbol ("greater than symbol") added at the beginning of each line being quoted, and it makes reading your posts even more of a chore.

Now I gotta add below the ones you don't like to in order to make faster reading easier!

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

So you still think that people should post to Usenet with a "browser" as opposed to email/news or news software?

Meanwhile, his signature line is well within Usenet ettiquette - only 1 line more than the minimum of 1.

Furthermore, I notice now that your posts lack one more thing that usual news or email/news software adds: Mention of who wrote what you are responding to immediately before that gets quoted!

That makes the bad situation of lack of quotation symbols even worse for those who like to read Usenet newsgroups both expeditiously and effectively!

I add the follow>>Perhaps so, but someone who top posts, does not use quoting conventions,

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

As in supposedly understand what is posted by you by using your idea of a browser, as opposed to easily understanding what most others post because I use news software and I am used to the conventions of Usenet?

There you go again - at least easy to catch in this case - failing to add a quotation symbol, and I had to fix that.

At least this time, you noted who wrote what you were responding to.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

Now are you not only failing to add quotation symbols to lines you quote, you are rewriting some of them.

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

What - Outlook fails to follow quoting convention, while the email/news software in the Netscape 4.7 package does? (Not that I post much with that either...)

I did not know that since I never use Outlook for anything. For one thing, I have heard half a bazillion complaints over most of the past several years how it is more vulnerable to e-mail viruses than what I use for e-mail, including the mail/news software in Netscape 4.7 and webmail services and the mail software in my Unix shell account, or even Eudora.

If Outlook also fails to add quotation symbols in material being responded to, then I agree with calling it Outhouse!

- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)

In article , Mark Lloyd wrote in part:

Dog-gone it, my Unix shell account's news software (or the composer that it invokes) does not recognize the dash-dash-space sig-separator as beginning of quoted material to exclude. Since I normally only use one line for signature, no wonder I failed to get into the habit of dash-dash-space.

Maybe I need to try more modern news software such as Thunderbird?

I've been using Thunderbird as a newsreader for a while now and it does everything I want it to do. I don't use it for Email because all my Email accounts are web based, like G-mail, Hotmail, etc.

TDD

There is an infamous bellicose bore who posts to some of the other groups I peruse and this particular fellow has an obnoxious signature that takes up a page or more. He accuses anyone who disapproves of his sig or the contents of his posts of obsessing about him. It makes him so much fun to tease but he also occupies many kill files and kill filters.

TDD

A lot of those (web-based email systems) add spam to every message you send, making you look bad. That's one thing I WILL NOT tolerate for my email.

Also, some newsreaders will recognize quoted material (requiring the '>') and show it in a different color, so it's easier to find the original stuff. To make that easier, it helps to put blank lines before and after original material.

Faith is a good thing. The above doesn't refer to faith, but to "magical thinking", a quality of small children and those who fail to grow up.

Strange that you would assume I was using quotations for instruction.

Here's another that's not at all for that purpose:

god is real - unless declared integer

As to God, consider the difference between it and Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, The Invisible Pink Unicorn, Zeus, Last Thursday's Cat, The Great Pumpkin, and millions of other mythical beings.