more EE Times nonsense
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 14 Apr 2010 11:07 On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:40:06 +0200, Jeroen Belleman <jeroen(a)nospam.please> wrote: >Bill Sloman wrote: >> [...] MIT was merely boasting about having >> developed the bit that would split off oxygen; the part that would >> split off hydrogen is still under development. > >Oh, I see, April fools day. > Yes, excellent point. John
From: Bill Sloman on 14 Apr 2010 13:30 On Apr 14, 4:24 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:26:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >On Apr 14, 1:58 am, John Larkin > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:17:55 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >On Apr 13, 7:58 pm, John Larkin > >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:01:43 -0700, "Joel Koltner" > > >> >> <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >"John Larkin" <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message > >> >> >news:hf29s5h2kq4vo7v5set9mmk60mon3hue1v(a)4ax.com... > >> >> >> Interestingly, the microwave mags (Microwave Journal, Microwaves and > >> >> >> RF) and the optics stuff (Photonics Spectra, Laser Focus World) are > >> >> >> still good > > >> >> >"High Frequency Electronics" is also decent (it's also microwave-oriented) > > >> >> Yes, I like that one. > > >> >> >> EET, ED, EDN are getting thinner and thinner. They just > >> >> >> don't get it. > > >> >> >I think they're no longer sure who their audience is. They never really > >> >> >targeted, e.g., IC designers and the number of discrete circuit designers is > >> >> >very low these days, so they're stuck often being little more than a > >> >> >photocopier for datasheet "application" circuits, which puts them only a notch > >> >> >or so above the hobbyist magazines like Nuts & Volts (which is actually quite > >> >> >useful if you're trying to do things *on the cheap!*). > > >> >> These mags (ED, EET, EDN) seem to be in a content death spiral. > >> >> Contrast that with Aviation Week: it costs $250 a year. When they > >> >> review, say, a new helicopter, they don't cut and paste press > >> >> releases, they go fly one. They know what the specs are, where the > >> >> money is, what the problems are, where the bones are buried. > > >> >> Electronics is a trillion-dollar business. We deserve better mags. > > >> >A very different kind of trillion-dollar business from than that > >> >covered by Aviation Week. Individual aircraft cost millions. Any > >> >electronic component that costs more than $10 is expensive. > > >> But we buy millions of them. > > >Collectively. It makes for a market with a very different structure. > > >> >Most of the circuits that we see and use were designed for people who > >> >could - and would - buy 100,000 in a batch. They don't need the trade > >> >magazines to tell them what's available; the trade magazines exist to > >> >tell us what the big boys have had made, serving a much lighter (and > >> >less influential) class of light-weights than Aviation Week gets to > >> >cater for. > > >> >Linear Technology wouldn't notice if Highland Technology and a > >> >thousand small manufacturers like it went belly-up. > > >> They visit us a couple of times a year, and I take them to Zuni Cafe. > >> They sure would notice if we quit doing that. > > >A couple of their marketing representatives would. > > I have no time for salesmen. These are serious tekkies who help decide > what they should design next. Or so they would like you to believe. > People like this visit us a lot, because > we're bleeding-edge mainiacs who are willing to talk about what we do. Self-congratulating egomaniacs, whose inflated egos can be further inflated by people who pretend to take you at your own valuation. You really are a sucker for flattery, and get quite peevish when your interactions don't leave your ego buffed and glowing. > And because we're in San Francisco. We get visits from TI, Hittite, > Nitronex, ADI, LTC, folks like that. Tons of samples, too. And so did Cambridge Instruments. It didn't mean anything, except that we bought enough compoentst for the distributors to notice. > >> I think I got them to do the new current source chip. I sure ragged > >> them about how the world needs one. > > >But how many have you bought? > > None so far. It was just announced, and is too expensive in my > opinion. We *are* using a lot of their land-grid integrated power > converters (with internal everything, Ls and Cs too) these days, and a > lot of their opamps and switchers. LTC makes great stuff, keeps making > them, and we get good support. All true - LTC does make good stuff and does give good support. > >> And I also told them to do a > >> 3-output power-module switcher for FPGAs: +5 to +24 in, 3.3 and > >> 2.5/1.8 and 1.2 out. We'll see how they do on that one. > > >We may find out if any of the high volume customers expressed a > >similar interest. > > You are so totally out of touch with the electronics industry that you > keep making these sour and absurd pontifications. It's getting sad, > actually. Dream on. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Larkin on 14 Apr 2010 14:21 On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:30:14 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 14, 4:24�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:26:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >On Apr 14, 1:58�am, John Larkin >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:17:55 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >On Apr 13, 7:58�pm, John Larkin >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:01:43 -0700, "Joel Koltner" >> >> >> >> <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >"John Larkin" <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >> >> >> >news:hf29s5h2kq4vo7v5set9mmk60mon3hue1v(a)4ax.com... >> >> >> >> Interestingly, the microwave mags (Microwave Journal, Microwaves and >> >> >> >> RF) and the optics stuff (Photonics Spectra, Laser Focus World) are >> >> >> >> still good >> >> >> >> >"High Frequency Electronics" is also decent (it's also microwave-oriented) >> >> >> >> Yes, I like that one. >> >> >> >> >> EET, ED, EDN are getting thinner and thinner. They just >> >> >> >> don't get it. >> >> >> >> >I think they're no longer sure who their audience is. �They never really >> >> >> >targeted, e.g., IC designers and the number of discrete circuit designers is >> >> >> >very low these days, so they're stuck often being little more than a >> >> >> >photocopier for datasheet "application" circuits, which puts them only a notch >> >> >> >or so above the hobbyist magazines like Nuts & Volts (which is actually quite >> >> >> >useful if you're trying to do things *on the cheap!*). >> >> >> >> These mags (ED, EET, EDN) seem to be in a content death spiral. >> >> >> Contrast that with Aviation Week: it costs $250 a year. When they >> >> >> review, say, a new helicopter, they don't cut and paste press >> >> >> releases, they go fly one. They know what the specs are, where the >> >> >> money is, what the problems are, where the bones are buried. >> >> >> >> Electronics is a trillion-dollar business. We deserve better mags. >> >> >> >A very different kind of trillion-dollar business from than that >> >> >covered by Aviation Week. Individual aircraft cost millions. Any >> >> >electronic component that costs more than $10 is expensive. >> >> >> But we buy millions of them. >> >> >Collectively. It makes for a market with a very different structure. >> >> >> >Most of the circuits that we see and use were designed for people who >> >> >could - and would - buy 100,000 in a batch. They don't need the trade >> >> >magazines to tell them what's available; the trade magazines exist to >> >> >tell us what the big boys have had made, serving a much lighter (and >> >> >less influential) class of light-weights than Aviation Week gets to >> >> >cater for. >> >> >> >Linear Technology wouldn't notice if Highland Technology and a >> >> >thousand small manufacturers like it went belly-up. >> >> >> They visit us a couple of times a year, and I take them to Zuni Cafe. >> >> They sure would notice if we quit doing that. >> >> >A couple of their marketing representatives would. >> >> I have no time for salesmen. These are serious tekkies who help decide >> what they should design next. > >Or so they would like you to believe. Gosh, they must be forging all their business cards. How could I have been so naive? > >> People like this visit us a lot, because >> we're bleeding-edge mainiacs who are willing to talk about what we do. > >Self-congratulating egomaniacs, whose inflated egos can be further >inflated by people who pretend to take you at your own valuation. And send us eval boards to reinforce our delusions. John
From: Bill Sloman on 14 Apr 2010 17:15 On Apr 14, 8:21 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:30:14 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >On Apr 14, 4:24 pm, John Larkin > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:26:35 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >On Apr 14, 1:58 am, John Larkin > >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:17:55 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >On Apr 13, 7:58 pm, John Larkin > >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 10:01:43 -0700, "Joel Koltner" > > >> >> >> <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >"John Larkin" <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message > >> >> >> >news:hf29s5h2kq4vo7v5set9mmk60mon3hue1v(a)4ax.com... > >> >> >> >> Interestingly, the microwave mags (Microwave Journal, Microwaves and > >> >> >> >> RF) and the optics stuff (Photonics Spectra, Laser Focus World) are > >> >> >> >> still good > > >> >> >> >"High Frequency Electronics" is also decent (it's also microwave-oriented) > > >> >> >> Yes, I like that one. > > >> >> >> >> EET, ED, EDN are getting thinner and thinner. They just > >> >> >> >> don't get it. > > >> >> >> >I think they're no longer sure who their audience is. They never really > >> >> >> >targeted, e.g., IC designers and the number of discrete circuit designers is > >> >> >> >very low these days, so they're stuck often being little more than a > >> >> >> >photocopier for datasheet "application" circuits, which puts them only a notch > >> >> >> >or so above the hobbyist magazines like Nuts & Volts (which is actually quite > >> >> >> >useful if you're trying to do things *on the cheap!*). > > >> >> >> These mags (ED, EET, EDN) seem to be in a content death spiral. > >> >> >> Contrast that with Aviation Week: it costs $250 a year. When they > >> >> >> review, say, a new helicopter, they don't cut and paste press > >> >> >> releases, they go fly one. They know what the specs are, where the > >> >> >> money is, what the problems are, where the bones are buried. > > >> >> >> Electronics is a trillion-dollar business. We deserve better mags. > > >> >> >A very different kind of trillion-dollar business from than that > >> >> >covered by Aviation Week. Individual aircraft cost millions. Any > >> >> >electronic component that costs more than $10 is expensive. > > >> >> But we buy millions of them. > > >> >Collectively. It makes for a market with a very different structure. > > >> >> >Most of the circuits that we see and use were designed for people who > >> >> >could - and would - buy 100,000 in a batch. They don't need the trade > >> >> >magazines to tell them what's available; the trade magazines exist to > >> >> >tell us what the big boys have had made, serving a much lighter (and > >> >> >less influential) class of light-weights than Aviation Week gets to > >> >> >cater for. > > >> >> >Linear Technology wouldn't notice if Highland Technology and a > >> >> >thousand small manufacturers like it went belly-up. > > >> >> They visit us a couple of times a year, and I take them to Zuni Cafe. > >> >> They sure would notice if we quit doing that. > > >> >A couple of their marketing representatives would. > > >> I have no time for salesmen. These are serious tekkies who help decide > >> what they should design next. > > >Or so they would like you to believe. > > Gosh, they must be forging all their business cards. How could I have > been so naive? Business cards are cheap. > >> People like this visit us a lot, because > >> we're bleeding-edge mainiacs who are willing to talk about what we do. > > >Self-congratulating egomaniacs, whose inflated egos can be further > >inflated by people who pretend to take you at your own valuation. > > And send us eval boards to reinforce our delusions. And you find the attention flattering. -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: John Larkin on 14 Apr 2010 18:04
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:15:29 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> Gosh, they must be forging all their business cards. How could I have >> been so naive? > >Business cards are cheap. > >> >> People like this visit us a lot, because >> >> we're bleeding-edge mainiacs who are willing to talk about what we do. >> >> >Self-congratulating egomaniacs, whose inflated egos can be further >> >inflated by people who pretend to take you at your own valuation. >> >> And send us eval boards to reinforce our delusions. > >And you find the attention flattering. When people fly here to see us, from all over the USA, and Germany/UK/Italy/France/Canada/Japan, to sell us stuff or ask us to design stuff? Flattering? Yes, absolutely. And if they bring us really interesting problems, even better. I suppose every "artist" thinks, deep in his soul, that his art is intrinsically good. But in real life, it sure validates that feeling if serious people buy it. John |