I just finished watching the latest episode of Picard so I feel like using a space analogy.

If this RoadTest were a moon, it is currently not orbiting the planet (i.e. technology) I am delving into.

As shabaz alluded to in his post doesn't plug into or interface with technology I am currently playing with. It would require a major mental shift, to shelve what I am working on to take up the project.

I think it also came at a bad time because of competing RoadTest that do fall into my technology road house.

I did read it and do some brain storming but couldn't find the time to commit. To fully understand it would have take some additional time to develop.

Hello,

I wanted to add my two cents even though I've been missing in action for long while now.

Speaking for myself and I think it has been brought up before is the issue of return on investment (ROI). For a kit like this the ROI is very now, but that not the whole issue. I have spent hours on small kits like this to ensure I give the best possible review. I often deal with the company behind the review to resolve issue and help give a better explanation of the product and its issues. I did this recently with the NXP motor Controller I reviewed.

For me the real issue comes with the lack of acknowledgment and progression with a kit like this. When I first started doing roadtests I was happy to just get selected with the idea that I would eventually graduate to bigger better and more interesting kits and even equipment. The concept of show what you can do and then you will be rewarded was how thought of this whole endeavor. This is not to say learning is not part of the adventure, but that learning bigger and more complex products would be in store after showing you can learn and review the smaller ones.

This never really happened. I've applied to a number of the larger more interesting roadtests but never seem to come out on top. Instead I see people selected that seem to only apply to these larger more complex and valuable roadtests winning. The idea then became, why give so much to a community that seems to only reward those that only enter for the good stuff and not those that put in a lot of efforts for the smaller stuff and are willing to start from the bottom. It was the same reason I disliked the "top member" concept, there are a lot of people that contribute here and help out but it seems there was an inner circle that you could not get into even with a  lot of dedication if someone on top felt you were not worthy.

In short, I stopped applying because I felt in some ways like the sucker taking the easy to get stuff and working twice as hard to get a decent review only to be passed over when it came to the more advanced and somewhat interesting gear.

That's my 2 cents

Kas

shabaz  wrote:

 

People (including non-TMs and TMs) all offered help if you wanted it, to write applications.

Here are some recent RoadTests:

 

Weller Solder Station - Five units, all non-TM roadtesters

Digilent OpenLogger - Five units, four non-TMs

Project14 RF Project - Four top prizes (Spectrum analyzer and portable 'scopes) - all non-TMs.

Weller Soldering Station -, not much interest to me, someone else can have it.

Digilent OpenLogger - want to roadtest this, but wasn't a good time

Project14 RF Project - Did enter this and all the other open contests around the same time, got absolutely nothing.

Here is the sort of kit I want to roadtest.

Infineon Gate Driver with Truly Differential Input

Couldn't apply as I don't have the Oscilloscope needed to evaluate it, there is not point asking for help with writing applications, when I can't test the kit anyway.

Come on - it's less than $100 to pick up an oscilloscope, used. I bought a new USB one for just over £100 GBP.

Prior to that, I had a 60 MHz cathode ray 'scope. I gave that away to an element14 colleague.

If there's the slightest bit of professionalism, you'll make an effort to acquire your own test gear.

There is NO used test equipment in Australia, EEVBlog knows that also.

Any cheap new stuff would be direct from China, of unknown calibration, and delayed anyway due to CoV 19.

I made a very big effort to get a somewhat expensive Oscilloscope, some unprofessional jerks didn't pay me for 6 months work, so that money all got spent on bills.

There is no one to hand me down anything I might need, I have to fight tooth and nail for everything around here.

This is why I'm so fed up with everyone at the moment.

Well station240, as a fellow Aussie - I do have a Rigol DS1102E 100Mhz dual-channel DSO with original probes and power cable sitting about from my PhD days (~ 6 years old). It's what I would consider an entry-level 8-bit scope with no bells and whistles - but I'm willing to part with it if you're willing to send me AU$20 to cover the postage. All I ask is that you'll give it a good home and use it responsibly.

It won't solve the issue of not being high end, of being "from China" and being "of unknown calibration", but it might be better than nothing. PM me (or reply) if you're interested.

- Gough

EDIT: Just tested it, seems to be working fine. Ran self-calibration, completed with no errors. Firmware upgraded to latest - even packed it nicely in a box. Even found the original USB-cable and calibration certificate from 2012.

If you want it and you get your physical address to me within a day or two, I will post it out right away, before I fly out on my one-month holiday, otherwise it could be a while before it gets to you ...

station240  wrote:

 

There is NO used test equipment in Australia, EEVBlog knows that also.

Any cheap new stuff would be direct from China, of unknown calibration, and delayed anyway due to CoV 19.

 

I made a very big effort to get a somewhat expensive Oscilloscope, some unprofessional jerks didn't pay me for 6 months work, so that money all got spent on bills.

There is no one to hand me down anything I might need, I have to fight tooth and nail for everything around here.

This is why I'm so fed up with everyone at the moment.

So use your initiative. I'm not going to hand-hold you further, you've taken up enough of my time today, and I've made several suggestions, yet you continue to complain that the stuff you're interested in, you don't have test equipment for.

EEVblog may help you for country-specific information. I don't live in Australia, but I have visited labs there, and they certainly used test equipment.

kas.lewis wrote:

...............................

For me the real issue comes with the lack of acknowledgment and progression with a kit like this. When I first started doing roadtests I was happy to just get selected with the idea that I would eventually graduate to bigger better and more interesting kits and even equipment. The concept of show what you can do and then you will be rewarded was how thought of this whole endeavor. This is not to say learning is not part of the adventure, but that learning bigger and more complex products would be in store after showing you can learn and review the smaller ones.

 

This never really happened. I've applied to a number of the larger more interesting roadtests but never seem to come out on top............................................

Hi Kas,

just curious, your sixth review was on a 6GHz spectrum analyser, worth $2500, I would not count that as low value non interesting stuf.

I remember I was a bit disappointed not being selected for that one as I had real use for it.

Gerrit

Paul,

I appreciate your participating in the discussion. But let's keep it professional and avoid calling people names.

People are chosen based upon their application, as well as their participation in the community. I have said this time and again.

The issue is many, many people send me applications that are incomplete, don't have a test procedure, or give me little indication that they can actually test the product. I get plenty of applications that are insincere.

Top members are generally not the primary reason I recommend someone to the sponsor. But I will say many of the top members write very detailed, information and compelling applications (or proposals, if you will). It's a competitive program. We do not hide that fact.

I generally read all the applications up to 3 times. There is no automated screening. I feel if you have spent the time writing an application, you deserve my time in reading it.

Often times, I have selected new people or new members who have not participated much. When one is selected, I send them an notification email. They never respond to me. Just happened in another roadtest. Would you send someone a $5000 piece of test equipment if they did not bother to respond to your email? The answer is self-evident.

When I need a roadtester because somone has not responded to me, I post a message saying I need another roadtester. Often times a member who frequently participates on the community responds to me.

I'd encourage you to apply, write a good application, and you have as much chance in being selected as an official roadtester as anyone.

Conversely, if one does receive the kit, and does not complete the review, that individual will no longer be able to participate in the program going forward. And that list unfortunately has grown recently.

Sincerely,

Randall Scasny

Roadtest Program Manager

rscasny response to your post caused me to take a second read. I had to laugh when I think I discovered what Randell took exception to. Of all the things I have been labelled, snob would be flattering, if it were but true. The words that you attribute to being a snob, can also carry a connotation of respect. The site respects the work of top members, it doesn't cow to them.

My post in this community, for the most part, come from a point of respect. The moderator has but once, called me to task on a post. I could blame it on a drunkin tirade but that would only be an excuse. The comments were crass and irreverent. I take those words as a badge of honor because I have earned them. After reviewing my posted comments, I chose to remove them rather than water them down. I offended someone and rather than defend the offence it was much easier to take them down and move on.

If you follow a few of the top members in this community, you may accumulate some knowledge, that may lead to the understanding of why they are top members.  Earning something. Developing a reputation. Working hard to be the best in your field or fields, doesn't make you privileged. Basking in your success doesn't make you titled. Leveraging your expertise to gather wealth is not always wrong. If we don't take time to celebrate our success, then what is in it.

I have posted questions and have thrown topics in a forum for discussion, that has garnered a top members response. I may not have liked their answer but they did respond to me.  Those responses have always been respectful. That is an characteristic of this site that few other public forums have. The elite, the top members, the privilege as you feel they are, treating others, especially below their station, with respect.

I accept there is a frustration in the community regarding RoadTests Review. I have tried to help with commentary and suggestion to remove that impediment. Competition, reward and return on investment is the RoadTest triad Randell juggles, in what appears to be on a daily basis. I have advised him the resources invested in the RoadTest whining, may have reach a point of diminishing return. Randell is altruistic. To his credit, continues to listen, monitor and respond if it has the potential to improve the program. Randell, in my opinion is one of those top members. Imagine, an individual that works for our benefit being a top member. Who would think such a thing as privileged.

The road test program is no a charity. If you think so, then this is a misconception which you need to correct for yourself. The road tests are a marketing instrument for E14, Farnell and the road test sponsors (the equipment manufacturers). Its intended as a win-win situation: you deliver something of value (a high-quality review and valuable feedback) to the manufacturer (cheaper that it would be otherwise), and in turn can keep the item for free instead of paying for it. There is no 'someone who needs it' part in there, and there never will.

OTOH I think that there is a class of items where the odds are skewed to certain members, which is why certain names seem to appear more often. When we are talking about high-end gear, which might be more specialized (who needs a spectrum analyzer every day?) or indeed needs some special equipment to review it properly, the number of potential road testers shrink quite a lot. And the resulting member are more likely to already own something similar - otherwise, where would they get the experience from to review it properly? (In addition, for items with a high price tag the sponsor surely want to make sure to get a high-quality review, so the selection is skewed towards members which already have proven that they can deliver one. And I think just doing that several times, and being active in the community too, makes you a top member...).

From the perspective of E14 and the sponsors, this is how you run such a program. From the perspective of someone applying for a RT because you really could use the item to be tested, I would hate it, because it really reduces your odds. You really need to put some work into the process - do contests, do smaller RTs to prove what you can do, seek active feedback. This is the only way to work yourself upwards. Its not for everybody - there are people who like doing this (and I'm always wondering how the top members are able to invest so much time in their hobby, and into E14).

hlipka  wrote:

 

I'm always wondering how the top members are able to invest so much time

This only works if things are efficient - I like to build stuff and experiment, but also try to solve technical problems... and it's a total waste of time when you lead someone down a path with suggestions to get them where they want to be, and it turns out there's no sensible resolution at all - actually, they just wanted a whinge at TMs.

hlipka  wrote:

 

I'm always wondering how the top members are able to invest so much time

This only works if things are efficient - I like to build stuff and experiment, but also try to solve technical problems... and it's a total waste of time when you lead someone down a path with suggestions to get them where they want to be, and it turns out there's no sensible resolution at all - actually, they just wanted a whinge at TMs.