"OP did not even mention what they were using ? Nor what they were expecting ? nor what they were willing to pay? All kind of irrelevant till we know these things."
I HAVE 2X CTX A RACER 2 AN F75 LTD AND A BLISSTOOL V3
What was I expecting? A rational discussion about possible new technologies.
Money isn't the issue.
"You obviously weren't using metal detectors in the 1970s in order to make such a ridiculous claim."
CORRECT, but you missed the point.
"Even the cheapest, entry level detector today is a vast improvement over the top of the line technology from the 1970s."
Agreed BUT it's still VLF and pulse.
"I don't think you understand the basic principles of technology you seem to think should be combined with metal detectors.
"X-Rays? First, beyond the extreme danger of such things, there MUST be a receiver on the opposite side to receive and create the image, so that makes this impossible to incorporate."
Traditional X-rays need a receiver. Perhaps there could be modifications, there could be subs for a reciever.
"Molecular analysis?!?!! Seriously, wtf? first, you have to HAVE THE OBJECT to perform such anaylsis and second, those already exist and are hella expensive.
Look this up on yout*be:
Optical Emission Spectrometers for Metal Analysis - UAE
It may not be "Molecular analysis" but it's a stepping stone.
"How is this going to improve metal detectors?"
Not to be mean but, use your imagination.
"Sadly, tech research is extremely expensive and most companies do ZERO research. They are happy to continue re-boxing the same old tech with new decals and many people are happy to keep buying it."
Agreed.
"A true discriminating PI will be a huge next step and if it's true that Whites is about to release one, that will be a game changer and Whites will dominate the market very quickly. IF, IF it's true. I'm always hesitant to believe the hype until I see it for sale."
Agreed
"B, the last time you posted this exact same suggestion, I replied "GPR is available right now, you can take it for a test drive." Have you done that? If GPR is what you think you want, why not just buy the durn thing and stop complaining?"
Because it isn't refined enough. It isnt practical in it's current form.
"I love it when folks who have no experience of the realities of the marketplace - much less of the tough process of design and development - accuse companies of "holding back" breakthrough technology so they can sell old tech."
It is well known that companies are all about "the bottom line", otherwise they wouldn't survive. As Jason keenly pointed and, and you had as well in the past, R&D is expensive and directly affects "the bottom line". IF that isn't "conspiracy" enough to "hold back" tech, then IDK what is. I may not own a company, but I have work for some, and while I don't have much experience in the marketplace, I have an idea of it.
"It's real easy for md'rs to dream and throw out $20 technology words. Dreaming up "conspiracies" or " manufacturer laziness" as the reason Star Trek inventions are not on Supermarket shelves. If only it were that easy.
Because then he'll discover that pixel sizes are at the smallest: 1" across. Hence anything he/we look for (coins, rings, etc...), are ...... doh ... all "one pixel".
Then he'll complain that technology should be able to make the pixels 100x smaller. To which someone will tell him that this hits the laws of physics (info that is able to bounce off of objects in solid ground). And even IF you got the pixel size down to 1/100 of what they are now, you would STILL only have "a mess of blotchy pixels". Not some sort of magical TV image.
Nonetheless, the mantra will continue, and you'll keep repeating yourself, to no avail.
But your observations will likewise fall on deaf ears.
In fact, I think you and Carl are all just shills, sent here by "those lazy engineers" who "just don't feel like spending money". It's all a grand conspiracy, because the manufacturers are making money re-packaging current technology each year, so why should they get off their duff and make new tech ?
So you and Carl are sent here, as nothing but shills, as part of the conspiracy. We're on to you ! 'Fess up ! "
Tom such vitriolic and angst filled posts toward me are not necessary. The sarcastic overtone in them are to the point were it is insulting and offensive. I simply tried to get some creative minds and ideas flowing and to discuss possible technologies. I am surprised and rather upset at your comments. I always thought we were on good terms, sure we disagree sometimes, but I always appreciated your input and opinion, until these, what I perceive as hateful and targeted, "rants".
Perhaps maybe it is a bit arrogant and "dreamer" like of me to suggest that there is a general malaise when it comes to "break-through" technology in the metal detecting world. All I wanted to do was to discuss ideas and raise some eyebrows in regards to creating something different.
Having said that, I feel that maybe this isn't the place to share and discuss ideas. I apologize if I offended anyone with my series of posts and I think I learned my lesson here.
