![]() ![]() The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. I like this book, so I will also soon be publishing a couple of chapters from it on EDN with McGraw Hill’s permission in the near future. ![]() I would definitely recommend this book to novices and all hobbyists and engineers who have not have much practical exposure to radio design and development. I found myself coming up to speed again with the many types of radio architectures, their advantages and disadvantages and giving the reader a technical grasp of the blocks of different architectures with which they are built. ![]() Quan spans radios from basic radio electronics up through software-defined radios. This is especially evident in Chapter 23 “Learning by doing”, which outlines some simple equipment needed to build and test some key radio circuits (Even a free spectrum analyzer S/W program for your PC). It is even a good source for a designer who has to design a radio and has never done so before. I agree with Quan’s comments and after reviewing his book, I must add that this book was a great refresher for me and for any engineer who has not designed a radio in a while. Quan comments, “For the engineer who has seen transistor amplifier analysis, this book will cover both small- and large-signal behavior, which also includes harmonic and intermodulation distortion.” He goes on to say, “Therefore, this book can be used as a complement to textbooks….” But do the leaders of your business see things this way as well? Or do they still see things in terms of an earlier frame of reference where “digital” was a goal unto itself? I’ll let you think about this while I turn on my transistor radio and see if I can find something good to listen to….Thanks to that original October 2011 blog, Rako helped him contact McGraw Hill, and his book on building radio circuits has been published and I have read it. If you’re one of the folks who’ve been doing strategy work these days, you’re probably thinking this way already. This would help us align our digital implementation with all other aspects of our service model. Instead of building our strategy around “mobile apps”, we would be better served by a strategy whose explicit focus is to enable our customers/sales associates/employees to do business when and where they want and need to. Instead it should be one of several perspectives through which we lens our goals. But digital should not be our strategic goal. Digital is an essential viewpoint that must be considered in every aspect of our business strategies. Does this mean we should ignore digital aspects of business, or assume that all the challenges associated with digital have been solved? Of course not. If we focus too much on digital, we risk losing the bigger picture of customer engagement or other critical business capabilities that should drive our strategies, roadmaps, programs and projects. So why do we so often use the term “digital” when we talk about strategy? Only the smallest or the most conservative companies aren’t integrating these “digital” technologies into their day-to-day business. There’s virtually no part of business that doesn’t involve the things we consider digital (customer experience via smartphones, tablets, social media, search optimization, customer analytics, etc.). Sometimes I wonder if we’re doing something like this today when we talk about “digital” strategy or “digital” business.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |