Amperage pull of a computer?

Sure. You've proven that you don't. Ross and Daestrom did a the job this time. Hey, I can't always be at the ready with the cluestick!

Sounds fairly normal to me. It would be a pretty lame PC application that would just spin a mindless loop sucking up the processor needlessly. I've seen some pop-up adds that are pretty good at it though.

^ grammar

Just to point it out before DimBulb's bong goes dry.

Either you lie or haven't a clue what you're talking about. My vote is for both. A 15W processor is a laugh!

What an intelligent response! ...but the content was expected.

Nope. Unlike you, I have blue eyes.

Again, my eyes are blue.

Evidently not, because many here have been trying (in vein) to try to teach you *something*. It hasn't worked.

You're the one in the alternative universe, not I.

Yikes! I guess! I've had pop-unders that have sucked the system dry.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:58:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:

No, it is not. A DMM in current mode puts 3 resistive elements into the circuit to be tested.

Two leads in series with the shunt. The mistake was placing the lead resistances INSIDE the loop when I did my calculation.

The two lead resistances are OUTSIDE the loop of the DMM current test function, but ADD to the resistance of the circuit tested as series elements, and do offset results.

I never said you do. I tried to explain to the RossTard that using a DMM is less accurate than using the shunt, and measuring voltage across it. You need to learn to read.

Look, dipshit:

Precision shunt:

Resistor only thing added to circuit under test.

Problems: None. Zero error, and circuit under test is changed only by value of shunt, not shunt and leads together. Most accurate method.

DMM ammeter:

Two leads in series with internal low to medium quality resistor shunt added to circuit under test.

Problems: Circuit is changed by lead resistance, AND the resistance of the leads introduce two errors. One in the ammeter as calibration is offset by it, and the other in the circuit under test's total true load condition. Yet another is a safety factor when anywhere near the full scale end of the range of the meter.

Answer... Use the shunt.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:58:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:

You are too goddamned retarded to grasp the FACT that I never said to use it that way, dipshit. With a shunt, one must use the volt reading ranges. Get a clue.

If you are going to break the line on a high current device like a power strip, you should install something that CAN handle what you are measuring, THEN take a reading.

Opening the line, then installing a friggin' DMM chincy lead, series current meter is asking for trouble, and errant readings.

The fact is, you shouldn't have stuck yer nose into the thread without reading the thread. Your half assed glance at one post makes you almost as retarded as the retard you are supporting.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:02:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:

If your retarded ass had enough brains to have READ THE THREAD, you would have noted where I said that I use special, shortened 6" silver plated heavy leads for the task.

But noooooooo! You want to be a goddamned retard, like the KeithTard, and the RossTard.

That must make you Tardstrom!

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:02:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:

No, you retarded BASTARD!. YOU apparently think that. YOU and YOU alone!

I never proposed any such thing, you jack-off!

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:02:36 GMT, "daestrom" Gave us:

I didn't say a goddamned thing about using a current meter incorrectly, you retarded bitch!

I SAID that using one correctly STILL has error. Get a clue, f*****ad! Stop making bullshit claims about people!

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:20:57 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

And you couldn't be more retarded about the whole subject.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 03:22:47 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

But YOU are a retard!

Big difference.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 03:22:47 GMT, "Anthony Fremont" Gave us:

I don't need your bullshit qualifiers or your bullshit attempts to disqualify my readings OR my methods. I am an order of magnitude smarter than you are on thermals, boy.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:32:27 -0500, Keith "Tard Boy" Williams Gave us:

Wrong, tard boy. I never said it either. Only you wittle twoll bastards make up petty baby bullshit, when your arguments fall apart.

I merely stated what is. I never said to put a current meter across a shunt, dipshit. Not ever. For you and your troll wussy boy friends to spew that I did proves that you can't defend the RossTard position.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:51:00 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:

I am looking right at my own machine. You know... the one which you have no clue about!

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:51:00 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:

If you actually had read the thread which we had this argument in, your retarded ass would have seen where I already stated this, but you were too busy trolling.

The argument is about a machine that IS running, not a machine that is in ANY sleep mode of ANY kind. Got clue?

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:51:00 -0500, Keith R. Williams Gave us:

You're a goddamned idiot.