George, correct me if I am wrong but the last time I was on the IPC web
site the viewer was there and it was FREE.
You don't have to buy anything to have what you had with SM-782.
However the web version did let you create land patterns but it was very
limited.
http://landpatterns.ipc.org/default.asp
If you wanted to have the electronic version of SM-782 (Excel format), you
had to pay $50.00 US.
I did buy that version and used it quite a bit.
Today IPC charges $50 for the hard copy of IPC-7351 and gives you a CD with
the viewer. No calculator with this package.
If you go to PCB Libraries you can buy the new calculator for $177.00 US I
think. That is more than what I paid for the old one but it works a lot
better.
http://www.pcblibraries.com/store/detail.aspx?ID=16
Anyway, just because Nick changed jobs doesn't mean that he or anyone else
is trying to "hoodwink" anyone.
IMHO. :)
Donald
At 04:51 PM 3/21/2005, you wrote:
><ONLINE>
>
>The thing I don't care for is that a company has the appearance of pushing
>thru a standard that directly benefits themselves. This is not a company
>getting indirect benefit from increased exposure, this is a company
>developing a tool that has the appearance of driving the standard that it
>supports, with the involvement of an IPC insider. Perhaps if some free
>functionality had been maintained (such as just providing the numbers
>without actually creating the package symbol), I would feel that we (the DC
>members) hadn't been "hoodwinked." As it is, the appearance is otherwise.
>
>The IPC "profits" (and I agree that some of those costs are necessary),
>PCBLibraries profits (which is not in itself bad), but the designers have to
>purchase a tool that provides the same function (admittedly with more
>features) as a tool that was previously provided for free. I have to
>believe that if the standard hadn't been championed by one of the developers
>of the (for-profit) tool, some volunteer effort might have upgraded the
>existing SM-782 on-line tool to continue to work for free. I would have
>been happy to contribute to this tool, I am sure other ( web / asp /
>JavaScript / java / MySQL / whatever ) savvy designers would have
>participated as well. PCBStandards would still have made money from its
>tool, IPC would have still made money to support its efforts from the
>standard, the designers would not have had to purchase a replacement for a
>tool they had used for years for free, peace would have reined in the world,
>and the Easter bunny would have delivered his eggs on time.
>
>Nothing personal, Nick, I am sure you did not see anything wrong with this
>and I am not trying to throw stones at you personally. But the appearance
>of some "funny-business" is there. And I had to vent in public, too, Chris.
>
><:^/
>
>--
>George Patrick
>Tektronix, Inc.
>Central Engineering, PCB Design Group
>P.O. Box 500, M/S 39-512
>Beaverton, OR 97077-0001
>Phone: 503-627-5272 Fax: 503-627-5587
>http://www.tektronix.com http://www.pcb-designer.com
>
>It's my opinion, not Tektronix'
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: DesignerCouncil [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris
>Ball
>Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 13:33
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications (or new subject maybe)
>
>
>Nick-
>
>I waited as long as I could.... Maybe I'm way off with this, and if so, I
>apologize, but... I'm thinking you might be a little biased.
>
>Does PCBLibraries get a % on every copy of 7351 sold? I have to say it
>feels kind of funny to get funneled into your company's website from a
>utility delivered as part of a spec from IPC.
>
>Even if PCBLibraries gets no $ from the sale of the spec, your voluntary
>participation garners you a whole bunch of exposure. Doesn't seem kosher to
>me somehow... especially knowing that you recently left IPC.
>
>I sense a change in the force, Luke.
>
>-Chris
>
>
>
>
>
> "Nick Ban (PCBL)"
> <[log in to unmask]> To:
>[log in to unmask]
> Sent by: DesignerCouncil cc:
> <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re:
>[DC] IPC Design
> Specifications
> 03/21/2005 01:46 PM
> Please respond to Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Please don't misunderstand me, I am not for IPC becoming wealthy. However,
>I
>would like to see it operational 5 years from now.
>
>Lowering cost of the standards may get more people to purchase more, but
>that does not necessarily mean that IPC will be able to make up its
>expenses
>in creating and promoting of the standard (ie sustain itself).
>
>It seems to me it's about choosing the lesser of two evils:
>
>1. Higher cost standards to cover the expenses
> - Some cannot afford and probably illegally reproduce
> standards; operating expenses met.
>2. Low cost standards to make more affordable
> - cost of creating standards remains high (even with the
> cutbacks of the last several years), and liabilities
> cannot be paid despite the fact that everybody in
> the industry uses the standards.
>
>While most standard users would prefer option 2, it is not a good business
>model of any company that isn't otherwise adequately funded.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ray Johnston [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:54 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications
>
>Nick,
>I don't think it about getting specifications and training for free. Its
>more about getting more affordable for the individual designer.
>Whether a member is an individual or a company should not be an issue when
>discounting to members. We all want standards to help get the job done
>right, but if they are unattainable then eventually the standard will be no
>more. It is more the individual then a company that keeps the standards a
>standard. I know from where I sit I get the (non-member)company I work for
>to buy standards from the IPC, because they are necessary. I am the only
>member at this company and in the past have had some trouble getting them
>to
>
>bite on the IPC standards.
>What I'm trying to say is that because a company has individual member(s),
>the company will buy standards at full price, and Rane (the company I work
>for) buys these standards for both Engineering and manufacturing.
>I would think this is worth more than a discount.
>
>Well thanks for letting me rant.
>
>Ray Johnston
>Lead CAD Designer
>Rane Corporation
>425-355-6000
>rayj@rane,com
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nick Ban (PCBL)" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 3:36 PM
>Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications
>
>
> >I saw the movie, not sure if that's exactly what it was called, but I know
> > what you're talking about. So IPC should basically give its standards and
> > training materials out to the industry for free to help it out.
> > Consequently, shut down due to lack of revenue. Isn't what you're saying
> > going to benefit the industry once and never again?
> >
> > IPC cannot function like the government and subsidize development without
> > getting some kind of income. The government gets your taxes (unless one
> > figures out clever loopholes and doesn't want to pay their due), IPC
> > doesn't
> > (that's why it charges for its standards).
> >
> > Companies like Hallmark, Coretec, Mentor and Overland can help the
> > designers
> > more directly because its core business is in another area and very
> > profitable. IPC mainly relies on membership dues (how much was the DC
> > membership again, $50? per year?) and sale of standards, among some other
> > things.
> >
> > I see how what you're proposing would benefit the industry in the next
> > year,
> > but 2, 3 or 5 years from now, who will? I suspect another entity would
> > arise
> > to fill that void with the same intent of supporting its continued
> > existence. Do we then we can ask them to give away its standards just the
> > same "for the sake of the industry"... and then repeat the cycle?
> >
> > Keeping in mind most volunteers are doing it as a "side job" to get
> > visibility and other intangible benefits, why would anyone even bother
> > investing in creating, promoting and updating standards?
> >
> > Like I said, if volunteers can find it in their hearts to contribute much
> > more than they do now (ie travel/hotel and time), for example
>coordinating
> > and signing off on meeting room contracts, catering, promotion campaigns,
> > graphics work, etc., the list goes on... basically satisfy all the
> > requirements of creating such reliable standards, why don't they?
> >
> > Hint: it would cost too much time and effort (not just once, but on an
> > ongoing basis) and they would probably end up having to charge people for
> > the standards like IPC.
> >
> >
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DesignerCouncil [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> > Brooks,Bill
> > Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 4:53 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications
> >
> > Nick... I see what you are saying...
> >
> > It just doesn't work that way in my mind.
> >>From where I stand, The industry as a whole stands to gain the most from
> > better trained designers... why not have 'the industry' help fund their
> > education? They make grants and scholarships to colleges and
>universities,
> > they support their political affiliations, why not invest in the designer
> > community that stands to make them the most profit through adopting
>better
> > design practices? Some companies already see this and are doing something
> > about it...
> >
> > We expect our government to spend money on R&D to further our economic
> > strength... well, why not support the designers of the products we want
>to
> > fuel our economy with? 'Pay it Forward' so to speak... you ever see that
> > movie? If not, you should rent it... what a great concept. Just like
> > designers need to invest in their careers, the PCB industry and the
> > foundations that support industry need to invest in its PCB Designers.
> >
> > That's where I am coming from... but hey it's just an idea... maybe it
> > will
> > never catch on... or then again it might... and what companies are going
> > to
> > get to claim the honors and praise from it if it does catch on and the
> > industry invests in it's designer community... ? I know Coretec and
>Mentor
> > are investing in the Designer community now... I'm sure there are others
> > that designers can name that have been big heroes, like Hallmark Circuits
> > for one, like Overland Storage for another, who helped the local
>Designers
> > here... I think there is a great opportunity here to 'raise the bar' to a
> > higher level and really make an investment in the DC... make it a much
> > stronger force for bringing together designers and industry and
> > strengthening our place in the world. We just need to see folks think of
> > it
> > as an investment in their own futures as corporations.
> >
> > Then someday making specs available will be a trivial matter. And they
> > won't
> > have to do all the copy protection 'stuff' to the disks. The DC will be
>in
> > the black instead of the red... and I will keep hoping for the day. Who
> > knows I may see it in my lifetime... it could happen.... not everyone is
>a
> > mercenary.
> >
> >
> > Bill Brooks - KG6VVP
> > PCB Design Engineer , C.I.D.+, C.I.I.
> > Tel: (760)597-1500 Ext 3772 Fax: (760)597-1510
> > e-mail:[log in to unmask]
> > http://www.dtwc.com
> > http://pcbwizards.com
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nick Ban (PCBL) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 12:55 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [DC] IPC Design Specifications
> >
> > When you take the top-mgmt compensation and prop it up against the
>overall
> > costs (many specified below), it just won't compare. As much as I'd like
> > to
> > believe that it could, I seriously doubt that by reducing - even
> > completely
> > eliminating - top management compensation will put any kind of
>significant
> > dent in the cost of the standards, forget about 'slashing' the price to
> > make
> > them much more affordable.
> >
> > Programming, website management, graphics design, meeting planning,
> > production, training, accounting, and customer support all sum up to much
> > more than what top management makes, and this is only staff compensation.
> > Then factor in the other operational costs.
> >
> > Our capitalistic society will find a way of doing things cheaper. If
> > someone
> > in the electronics industry knew that they can earn a decent living
> > creating, producing, promoting, selling, and updating reliable and ANSI
> > approved standards of the same caliber as IPC's ****at cheaper cost****,
> > I'm
> > inclined to believe they would have done it already, especially during
>the
> > industry's poor employment conditions of the past few years.
> >
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using
>LISTSERV
> > 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
> > To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
> > DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
> >
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site
>http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
> > for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask]
>or
> > 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> >
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> >
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>-----
> > DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using
>LISTSERV
>
> > 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
> > To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
> > DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases
> >
>
> > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site
>http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
>
> > for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask]
>or
>
> > 847-615-7100 ext.2815
> >
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>-----
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----
>
>DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
>1.8d
>To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
>the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
>To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
>DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
>Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
>E-mail Archives
>Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
>for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
>847-615-7100 ext.2815
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"This e-mail message is intended only for the use of the intended
>recipient(s).
>The information contained therein may be confidential or privileged, and
>its disclosure or reproduction is strictly prohibited.
>If you are not the intended recipient, please return it immediately to its
>sender at the above address and destroy it."
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----
>DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
>1.8d
>To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
>the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
>To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
>DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
>Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
>E-mail Archives
>Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
>for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
>847-615-7100 ext.2815
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-----
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV
>1.8d
>To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
>the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
>To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET
>DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
>Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases >
>E-mail Archives
>Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
>for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
>847-615-7100 ext.2815
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Donald Kyle C.I.D.+
(IPC Certified Advanced Interconnect Designer)
Senior Development Technician
281-285-7528 voice
281-285-8593 fax
[log in to unmask]
Schlumberger
Sugar Land Product Center (SPC)
Mail Drop MD155-1
155 Industrial Boulevard
Sugar Land, Texas 77478
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DesignerCouncil Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF DesignerCouncil.
To temporarily stop/(restart) delivery of DesignerCouncil send: SET DesignerCouncil NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
