about 90percent of the wholesalers ive been in dont know what it means, it seemed to be used more since GU10 came on the scene.
They should not be in the business if they don't know what they are selling.
about 90percent of the wholesalers ive been in dont know what it means, it seemed to be used more since GU10 came on the scene.
I don't think anybody is claiming that they do, except you, when you drop the word "electronic" which they put before "transformer" as if somehow you think that enough pretence from you will magically change what things are actually called.Manufacturers don't refer to DC power supplies as transformers
It isn't.Only part of it, so the whole device cannot be called a transformer.
In a sense they do know perfectly well what they are selling, and their customers know perfectly well what they are buying.They should not be in the business if they don't know what they are selling.
No matter what it actually stands for, if everyone who uses the term "MR16" thinks it also implies ELV operation and a GU5.3 base then that really is what it MEANS.
It isn't.
It's called an electronic transformer.
I know what the abbreviation MR16 stands for.Absolute rubbish. You know what MR16 means. I know what MR16 means. If others, that is not everyone, thinks it means something else that does NOT that is what it is. It means they are ignorant of the facts.
It means they are ignorant of the facts
So who's the secret Mod that's put Winston in his place
I always thought that an MR16 lamp was a Gu5.3 (or is that other way round), now, from BAS's eloquent description, I now understand it better.
I don't say that the term is not being misused - I take issue with the idea that meaning cannot exist when the usage is wrong, or that it can only be what the acronym stands for.I really do not understand your position given that you are usually such a stickler for accuracy and correcting people's mistakes.
If two people are communicating as you say, then the fact that they know what each other means does not alter the fact that they are both wrong - and, therefore, someone who does know what the terms stand for would NOT know what they mean.
So, which should change? The two who are wrong or the one who is right.
So who's the secret Mod that's put Winston in his place
That may be so but it is no way to carry on, is it?I don't say that the term is not being misused - I take issue with the idea that meaning cannot exist when the usage is wrong, or that it can only be what the acronym stands for.
Whatever it is.But what term do you think should be used to describe the envelope of a lamp like this:
Well yes, but it is not MR, so how can it be called that?It does not have a multifaceted reflector, but in every other respect it is just like an MR16 with a GU5.3 base,
It may be but are some not longer?and in respect of compatibility it is EXACTLY the same as an incandescent MR16 with a GU5.3 base.
Ones which are the same shape as MR16s.So what are we going to call it that will have meaning to people looking for lamps to go into luminaires designed to take MR16s?
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local