Companies that went bankrupt over bad decisions...

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.
I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.
They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.
They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

SNIPPERMAN, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about. A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.
I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.
They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.
They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Sloman, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.

> A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.
I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.
They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.
They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

SNIPPERMAN, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.
A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.
Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

Hey SNIPPERMAN, who says that I DIDN\'T know that? You, as usual, jumped to conclusions (not that you can jump all that high). What you DON\'T KNOW is that the automotive specifications are much more strict than the industrial, which includes FAR MORE than just temperature.

He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

Oh, what YOU know is from the 70\'s. Newsflash: that was FIFTY YEARS AGO! You, as usual, KNOW NOTHING!

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.
I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.
They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.
They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Sloman, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.

A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

Hey Sloman, who says that I DIDN\'T know that?

You did. You seemed to think that Texas Instruments selling into the automotive market made them uniquely special.

> You, as usual, jumped to conclusions (not that you can jump all that high). What you DON\'T KNOW is that the automotive specifications are much more strict than the industrial, which includes FAR MORE than just temperature.

What makes you think that? I posted a link to a website that made exactly the point about other temperature ranges, so I didn\'t need to spell it out.

The temperature differences are the obvious difference - hermitic packages can survive in tougher environments than plastic packages, and we all know about that too (and have done for decades).

He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

Oh, what YOU know is from the 70\'s.

Some of it is.

> Newsflash: that was FIFTY YEARS AGO! You, as usual, KNOW NOTHING!

Flyguy doesn\'t seem to learn stuff as he gets older. Newsflash - most of us haven\'t got Flyguy\'s problems. There wasn\'t any programmable logic around in the 1970\'s, and a neat idea that I had back then didn\'t get reduced to practice until 1993, when I finally got my hands on an ICT Place PA7024 which was (just) big enough to accommodate what I\'d wanted to do back then

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:16:12 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.
I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.
They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.
They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

SNIPPERMAN, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.

A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

Hey SNIPPERMAN, who says that I DIDN\'T know that?

You did. You seemed to think that Texas Instruments selling into the automotive market made them uniquely special.

No, that is what your DELUSIONAL MIND thought - I said NOTHING of the sort.

You, as usual, jumped to conclusions (not that you can jump all that high). What you DON\'T KNOW is that the automotive specifications are much more strict than the industrial, which includes FAR MORE than just temperature..
What makes you think that? I posted a link to a website that made exactly the point about other temperature ranges, so I didn\'t need to spell it out..

What you wrote.

The temperature differences are the obvious difference - hermitic packages can survive in tougher environments than plastic packages, and we all know about that too (and have done for decades).
He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

Oh, what YOU know is from the 70\'s.
Some of it is.
Which isn\'t relevant FIFTY YEARS later.
Newsflash: that was FIFTY YEARS AGO! You, as usual, KNOW NOTHING!
Flyguy doesn\'t seem to learn stuff as he gets older. Newsflash - most of us haven\'t got Flyguy\'s problems. There wasn\'t any programmable logic around in the 1970\'s, and a neat idea that I had back then didn\'t get reduced to practice until 1993, when I finally got my hands on an ICT Place PA7024 which was (just) big enough to accommodate what I\'d wanted to do back then

More delusion on the part of SNIPPERMAN - this has NOTHING to do with the topic whatsoever. SNIPPERMAN\'s proclamations concerning TI are totally false..

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:28 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:16:12 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.

I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.

They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.

They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Sloman, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.

A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

Hey Sloman, who says that I DIDN\'T know that?

You did. You seemed to think that Texas Instruments selling into the automotive market made them uniquely special.

No, that is what your DELUSIONAL MIND thought - I said NOTHING of the sort.

You don\'t think did. You are great at reading stuff and finding that it means exactly what would suit you, especially when it doesn\'t.

You, as usual, jumped to conclusions (not that you can jump all that high). What you DON\'T KNOW is that the automotive specifications are much more strict than the industrial, which includes FAR MORE than just temperature.

What makes you think that? I posted a link to a website that made exactly the point about other temperature ranges, so I didn\'t need to spell it out.

What you wrote.

What you thought I wrote, which isn\'t quite the same thing.

The temperature differences are the obvious difference - hermitic packages can survive in tougher environments than plastic packages, and we all know about that too (and have done for decades).

He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

Oh, what YOU know is from the 70\'s.

Some of it is.
Which isn\'t relevant FIFTY YEARS later.

Quite a bit of it is.

Newsflash: that was FIFTY YEARS AGO! You, as usual, KNOW NOTHING!

Flyguy doesn\'t seem to learn stuff as he gets older. Newsflash - most of us haven\'t got Flyguy\'s problems. There wasn\'t any programmable logic around in the 1970\'s, and a neat idea that I had back then didn\'t get reduced to practice until 1993, when I finally got my hands on an ICT Place PA7024 which was (just) big enough to accommodate what I\'d wanted to do back then.

More delusion on the part of Sloman - this has NOTHING to do with the topic whatsoever.

Nothing that Flyguy can understand.

> Sloman\'s proclamations concerning TI are totally false.

I\'ve been avoiding designing in their parts when I can for quite a while now. I installed one of Cambridge Instruments electron beam testers at TI-Nice around 1985, so I\'ve probably been closer to one of their factories than you ever have. A few years later I got into TI Bedford to see their idea of an electron beam tester (which depended on a Mulvey lens). I asked how they dealt with the fact that Mulvey lenses run hot, and the boss of the project didn\'t like the answer I was given. The physicist who had given the answer moved on shortly afterwards.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 2:03:42 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:

Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:

The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.

I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.

They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.

They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.

Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Are you salty over them selling the laptop line to Acer or something?

I hadn\'t known that Texas Instruments ever made lap-tops. I was talking about the semi-conductor company, and the individual integrated circuits that it sold. products.

> Are you locked into TI made 4Mb DRAM chips?

No. I did have a development project that depended in Texas Instruments 64k serial memories back in 1979, which stopped making sense when 16k DRAMs got cheap, but that was a different kind of problem. DRAMs are industry standard parts, and nobody sane gets mousetrapped into using one that hasn\'t got multiple sources.

Sensible people tended to use bigger parts, even if they were a bit more expensive per bit when you designed them in because they\'d stay in production for longer, usually after the originally cheaper parts had become unobtainable.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Cydrome Leader]

Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 2:03:42 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:

The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.

I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.

They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.

They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.

Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Are you salty over them selling the laptop line to Acer or something?

I hadn\'t known that Texas Instruments ever made lap-tops. I was talking about the semi-conductor company, and the individual integrated circuits that it sold. products.

They made a well respected line of business laptops for years.

Are you locked into TI made 4Mb DRAM chips?

No. I did have a development project that depended in Texas Instruments 64k serial memories back in 1979, which stopped making sense when 16k DRAMs got cheap, but that was a different kind of problem. DRAMs are industry standard parts, and nobody sane gets mousetrapped into using one that hasn\'t got multiple sources.

Sensible people tended to use bigger parts, even if they were a bit more expensive per bit when you designed them in because they\'d stay in production for longer, usually after the originally cheaper parts had become unobtainable.

So how did they gyp you back in 1957 or whever it was? Bad batch of
TIP31s?

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:49:31 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:28 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:16:12 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.

I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.

They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.

They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place..
Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Sloman, as usual, doesn\'t know what he is talking about.

Flyguy does like to claim that. Since Flyguy doesn\'t know what he is talking about he makes the claim more or less non-stop.

A large part of TI\'s business is with the automotive industry. These guys are VERY astute users of semiconductors and have much tougher specs than commercial products. TI delivers those products at competitive prices and have a huge backlog of orders from them.

Flyguy doesn\'t know enough about the semiconductor business to know that everybody - not just Texas instruments - always made at least three grades of devices - military, industrial and commercial - for three different temperature ranges.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_temperature

Hey Sloman, who says that I DIDN\'T know that?

You did. You seemed to think that Texas Instruments selling into the automotive market made them uniquely special.

No, that is what your DELUSIONAL MIND thought - I said NOTHING of the sort.
You don\'t think did. You are great at reading stuff and finding that it means exactly what would suit you, especially when it doesn\'t.
You, as usual, jumped to conclusions (not that you can jump all that high). What you DON\'T KNOW is that the automotive specifications are much more strict than the industrial, which includes FAR MORE than just temperature.

What makes you think that? I posted a link to a website that made exactly the point about other temperature ranges, so I didn\'t need to spell it out.

What you wrote.
What you thought I wrote, which isn\'t quite the same thing.
The temperature differences are the obvious difference - hermitic packages can survive in tougher environments than plastic packages, and we all know about that too (and have done for decades).

He probably doesn\'t know that Texas Instruments had a nasty habit of making \"industry standard parts\" to their own data sheets which offered lower performance than their competitors. Back in the 1970\'s when I had to put together company specifications for semiconductors (mostly op amps) we had to work out whether we could live with the TI parts.

Oh, what YOU know is from the 70\'s.

Some of it is.
Which isn\'t relevant FIFTY YEARS later.
Quite a bit of it is.
Newsflash: that was FIFTY YEARS AGO! You, as usual, KNOW NOTHING!

Flyguy doesn\'t seem to learn stuff as he gets older. Newsflash - most of us haven\'t got Flyguy\'s problems. There wasn\'t any programmable logic around in the 1970\'s, and a neat idea that I had back then didn\'t get reduced to practice until 1993, when I finally got my hands on an ICT Place PA7024 which was (just) big enough to accommodate what I\'d wanted to do back then.

More delusion on the part of SNIPPERMAN - this has NOTHING to do with the topic whatsoever.

Nothing that Flyguy can understand.

SNIPPERMAN\'s proclamations concerning TI are totally false.

I\'ve been avoiding designing in their parts when I can for quite a while now. I installed one of Cambridge Instruments electron beam testers at TI-Nice around 1985, so I\'ve probably been closer to one of their factories than you ever have. A few years later I got into TI Bedford to see their idea of an electron beam tester (which depended on a Mulvey lens). I asked how they dealt with the fact that Mulvey lenses run hot, and the boss of the project didn\'t like the answer I was given. The physicist who had given the answer moved on shortly afterwards.

--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

Translation of SNIPPERMAN\'s bullshit: he is STILL pissed about some imagined grievance that is FIFTY YEARS OLD. Note that this is typical of geezers who are entering dementia...

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 3:30:17 PM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:

Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 2:03:42 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:

The only typewriter company still in business is IBM, but they never made cheap (price not quality) consumer products, so their transition was easier and possible.

They aren\'t what they were, and their activities on the standards groups that I knew about was all about protecting their market share, rather than getting better standards.

I still think Texas Instruments is the model of a clever company that has always been able to adapt to the times.

They\'ve always been a crooked company, in much the same mold, always ready to shaft their customers. They have never been all that innovative.

They\'ve jettisoned entire lines of products, but it was always at the right time, and there was always something new to take its place.

Something relatively cheap and nasty ...

Are you salty over them selling the laptop line to Acer or something?

I hadn\'t known that Texas Instruments ever made lap-tops. I was talking about the semi-conductor company, and the individual integrated circuits that it sold.

They made a well respected line of business laptops for years.

So what? I repeat - I was talking about the semi-conductor company, and the individual integrated circuits that it sold.

Are you locked into TI made 4Mb DRAM chips?

No. I did have a development project that depended in Texas Instruments 64k serial memories back in 1979, which stopped making sense when 16k DRAMs got cheap, but that was a different kind of problem. DRAMs are industry standard parts, and nobody sane gets mousetrapped into using one that hasn\'t got multiple sources.

Sensible people tended to use bigger parts, even if they were a bit more expensive per bit when you designed them in because they\'d stay in production for longer, usually after the originally cheaper parts had become unobtainable.

So how did they gyp you back in 1957 or whenever it was? Bad batch of TIP31s?

The first integrated circuit was invented at Texas Instruments in 1958, while I was still in secondary school. I didn\'t have enough to do with them before the 1970\'s to get peeved about them. One irritating incident involved them pretending to offer a counter and display driver in a single package, which did exactly the job I needed at the time, so I ordered a bunch and laid out a printed circuit for them. The part never went into production despite the data sheet. It wasn\'t the only problem I had with them, and their evil habits persisted for decades - one of their data sheets left out a crucial parameter - input capacitance - in the 1990\'s, which was just as irritating, if less time wasting.

Their power transistors were never particularly impressive, but they did work. I scored brownie points once when a bunch of TIP29\'s were blowing up, and I realised that they should have been TIP29A\'s. The - very good - engineer who had designed the board had specified them, but the \"A\" suffix had been drooped by the drafting shop when they created the production drawings, which shouldn\'t have happened.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 5:20:10 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:49:31 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:28 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:16:12 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:

<snip>

More delusion on the part of Sloman - this has NOTHING to do with the topic whatsoever.

Nothing that Flyguy can understand.

Sloman\'s proclamations concerning TI are totally false.

I\'ve been avoiding designing in their parts when I can for quite a while now. I installed one of Cambridge Instruments electron beam testers at TI-Nice around 1985, so I\'ve probably been closer to one of their factories than you ever have. A few years later I got into TI Bedford to see their idea of an electron beam tester (which depended on a Mulvey lens). I asked how they dealt with the fact that Mulvey lenses run hot, and the boss of the project didn\'t like the answer I was given. The physicist who had given the answer moved on shortly afterwards.

Translation of Slomna\'s bullshit: he is STILL pissed about some imagined grievance that is FIFTY YEARS OLD.

This is a typical Flyguy misapprehension. He does use the word \"translation\" when actually he\'s inventing some new and largely original narrative.
I\'m not pissed off about one single incident, but rather reporting my reactions to a series of incidents spread over about twenty years, none of which got me all that irritated, but did suggest - when taken together - that Texas Instruments parts were best avoided.

> Note that this is typical of geezers who are entering dementia...

Flyguy might know about that - he\'s been demented for quite while now, though he doesn\'t seem to realise it. It doesn\'t seem to have taught him anything about dementia. He thinks that Joe Biden is demented because he makes speech errors - though Trump\'s lying propaganda may come into that since Flyguy is gullible as well as very stupid.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:56:26 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 5:20:10 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:49:31 AM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:28 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 10:16:12 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:41:53 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 9:10:40 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 3:50:36 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 6:29:03 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:14:11 AM UTC+11, Cydrome Leader wrote:
bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
On 1/25/2022 6:41 PM, Cydrome Leader wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 25.01.22 um 18:40 schrieb Fred Bloggs:
On Tuesday, January 25, 2022 at 12:37:34 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
snip

More delusion on the part of Sloman - this has NOTHING to do with the topic whatsoever.

Nothing that Flyguy can understand.

Sloman\'s proclamations concerning TI are totally false.

I\'ve been avoiding designing in their parts when I can for quite a while now. I installed one of Cambridge Instruments electron beam testers at TI-Nice around 1985, so I\'ve probably been closer to one of their factories than you ever have. A few years later I got into TI Bedford to see their idea of an electron beam tester (which depended on a Mulvey lens). I asked how they dealt with the fact that Mulvey lenses run hot, and the boss of the project didn\'t like the answer I was given. The physicist who had given the answer moved on shortly afterwards.

Translation of Slomna\'s bullshit: he is STILL pissed about some imagined grievance that is FIFTY YEARS OLD.

This is a typical Flyguy misapprehension. He does use the word \"translation\" when actually he\'s inventing some new and largely original narrative.
I\'m not pissed off about one single incident, but rather reporting my reactions to a series of incidents spread over about twenty years, none of which got me all that irritated, but did suggest - when taken together - that Texas Instruments parts were best avoided.

Sure sounds like it. In any event TI is a major player in the semiconductor market, totally different from what you portrayed them as. Major automobile manufacturers depend upon TI, and I think they are much brighter than you..

Note that this is typical of geezers who are entering dementia...
Flyguy might know about that - he\'s been demented for quite while now, though he doesn\'t seem to realise it. It doesn\'t seem to have taught him anything about dementia. He thinks that Joe Biden is demented because he makes speech errors - though Trump\'s lying propaganda may come into that since Flyguy is gullible as well as very stupid.

Lyin\' Biden IS demented - he stumbles, mumbles, doesn\'t know where he is and forgets names of people like Obama. And your imagined wrongs fall into that category.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney