I hope this is a heartening economic sign...
in [Design]
|
Prev: No current sense resistor required for MOSFET switch protection
Next: John Larkin = Criminal LIAR
From: MooseFET on 6 Apr 2010 21:02 On Apr 6, 8:44 am, n...(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: > MooseFET <kensm...(a)rahul.net> wrote: > >On Apr 5, 5:45=A0pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...(a)On-My- > >Web-Site.com> wrote: > >> I hope this is a heartening economic sign (just received from > >> MOSIS)... > > >> "MOSIS foundry partners report that they are running at full capacity. > >> As a consequence we anticipate delays in wafer starts. These delays > >> cannot be recovered during fabrication and will impact the amount of > >> time it takes for MOSIS to deliver parts to customers. =A0Although some > >> lots may have normal turnaround, others may take longer, perhaps five > >> to six weeks added time, compared to prior runs. These longer > >> fabrication times are being seen at all foundries, not just those that > >> work with MOSIS." > > >My wife works for a company related to the chip industry. They have > >increased > >their staff by about 3X over the last 4 months. The chip industry is > >heating > >up. > > The chip industry is not heating up. The chip industry has created > artificial shortages by laying off more people and closing more > factories than necessary. If that were the case, my wife's company would not be busier now than it was in 2005. Their market is a leading one because they sell and service the sort of stuff you need to get a line working. The packaging business will lag because the chips have to be made before they are packaged. My industry is normally a lagging one. This recovery is somewhat unusual. I suspect that this is largely an effect of the stimulus being applied to the building of infrastructure. Normally spending on infrastructure lags. > -- > Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply > indicates you are not using the right tools... > nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) > --------------------------------------------------------------
From: JosephKK on 7 Apr 2010 07:17 On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:17:38 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >Jim Thompson wrote: >> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:02:23 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >> wrote: >> <snip> >>> So what's left of the good old AMI Plant? If they bulldozed the only HV >>> fab they had I think ON shot themselves into the foot. >> >> Naaaah! HV isn't done that way anymore... takes too much chip area. >> > >Nah, they could do it. Look here: > >http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/content.do?id=16622 > >Then, quote "Let our system architects introduce you to the world of >mixed-signal" while they didn't even bother to answer a lucrative sales >lead I had handed them on a silver platter. Pathetic. > > >> Take a look, for example, at XFAB XC10xx, XDM10, XH035 and XT06 >> processes... mixed low and high voltages devices residing on the same >> chip. >> > >Yep, they sure are a good company. AFAICT the only one remaining in the >US would be Supertex. In my young buck days we also used Telmos but IIRC >they are long gone. > >>> >>>> And the chip business is showing signs of heating up... overseas... >>>> but US business is pathetic. >>>> >>> Can't say that. A client will be doing a pretty challenging chip this >>> year, and that's a US company. US-owned as well. >>> >>> What do you think of LTC? I don't like they P/E much, a bit high at 24 >>> but the fundamentals look pretty good. But that's IMHO only for long >>> term investing. >> >> Do they offer foundry services ?:-) >> > >AFAIK they don't, I was just thinking about IRA investments here. They >do have some really nice HV products. Expensive, but worth it. Plus >nobody can rival the killer advantage they've got: LTSPice. And >absolutely stellar application support people. TI has its own spice variant and a host of tools, too bad they don't support them like Linear does.
From: Joerg on 7 Apr 2010 12:35 JosephKK wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:17:38 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Jim Thompson wrote: >>> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:02:23 -0700, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>> wrote: >>> > <snip> >>>> So what's left of the good old AMI Plant? If they bulldozed the only HV >>>> fab they had I think ON shot themselves into the foot. >>> Naaaah! HV isn't done that way anymore... takes too much chip area. >>> >> Nah, they could do it. Look here: >> >> http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/content.do?id=16622 >> >> Then, quote "Let our system architects introduce you to the world of >> mixed-signal" while they didn't even bother to answer a lucrative sales >> lead I had handed them on a silver platter. Pathetic. >> >> >>> Take a look, for example, at XFAB XC10xx, XDM10, XH035 and XT06 >>> processes... mixed low and high voltages devices residing on the same >>> chip. >>> >> Yep, they sure are a good company. AFAICT the only one remaining in the >> US would be Supertex. In my young buck days we also used Telmos but IIRC >> they are long gone. >> >>>>> And the chip business is showing signs of heating up... overseas... >>>>> but US business is pathetic. >>>>> >>>> Can't say that. A client will be doing a pretty challenging chip this >>>> year, and that's a US company. US-owned as well. >>>> >>>> What do you think of LTC? I don't like they P/E much, a bit high at 24 >>>> but the fundamentals look pretty good. But that's IMHO only for long >>>> term investing. >>> Do they offer foundry services ?:-) >>> >> AFAIK they don't, I was just thinking about IRA investments here. They >> do have some really nice HV products. Expensive, but worth it. Plus >> nobody can rival the killer advantage they've got: LTSPice. And >> absolutely stellar application support people. > > TI has its own spice variant and a host of tools, too bad they don't > support them like Linear does. Yes, TINA. But engineers don't want umpteen simulators, they want one. And LTSpice clearly took the cake, there is nothing that others can do to undo that. Unless someone furnishes a freebie SW that has nicer schematic capture with netlisting capability. The worst are canned programs like WebBench. For me it never worked, not once. "Cannot be designed ... blah, blah, blah". All in production now :-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: MooseFET on 7 Apr 2010 21:17 On Apr 7, 9:35 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: [...] > Yes, TINA. But engineers don't want umpteen simulators, they want one. > And LTSpice clearly took the cake, there is nothing that others can do > to undo that. Unless someone furnishes a freebie SW that has nicer > schematic capture with netlisting capability. LTSpice does make a spice netlist. A few of the folks I work with have suggested making a prgram to convert the spice netlist to a PCB layout package version. Is this what you have in mind? If so, maybe I can do something.
From: Joerg on 7 Apr 2010 22:50
MooseFET wrote: > On Apr 7, 9:35 am, Joerg <inva...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > [...] >> Yes, TINA. But engineers don't want umpteen simulators, they want one. >> And LTSpice clearly took the cake, there is nothing that others can do >> to undo that. Unless someone furnishes a freebie SW that has nicer >> schematic capture with netlisting capability. > > LTSpice does make a spice netlist. A few of the folks I work with > have > suggested making a prgram to convert the spice netlist to a PCB layout > package version. Is this what you have in mind? If so, maybe I can > do > something. It's a bit more intricate than that. It would need a real schematic editor similar to Orcad or Eagle, part fields, footprint info, and so on. It's something LTC really doesn't need so probably never going to happen. For example, without footprint info you cannot generate a useful netlist for a layouter. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. |