Any bay area (or anywhere else) wants to get together for a Pushback
Saturday afternoon ride sometime. WE could take that route and name it
"Steve's route??
I can hear Steve groaning.
Replies to me and I will arrange it.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Gregory [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:03 AM
To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; John Burke
Subject: RE: [TN] [NTC]Re: [TN] Tin Whisker REVENGE
Ahhh John, you're making me miss the Bay area.
Sunday rides for me on my "Sleezuki Kana-tuna" would be to go north on
280 'till Half Moon Bay Rd. (Hwy 92) at Crystal Springs reservior, get
off and take it to Skyline Blvd., then go south back towards Santa Cruz.
Hit four corners and have lunch at Alice's restaurant, then take hwy-9
down into Santa Cruz. Go out to Lighthouse Point and bark at the sea
lions, then go get dinner at the Seabright Brewery washing everything
down with a pint of Resolution Red Ale (7.1% alcohol)...
Those were the days....and here I are, stuck in Tulsa.
-Steve Gregory-
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Burke
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] [NTC]Re: [TN] Tin Whisker REVENGE
Sunshine and a beer Steve?
I will be pushing the bike around bends on highway 9 this weekend out
towards Santa Cruz...................8-)
Have a great weekend all.........
John
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Mikell
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 1:14 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] [NTC]Re: [TN] Tin Whisker REVENGE
Phil,
we're talking about justice here. nobody but the lawyers see any money
(aren't judges lawyers too, wonder how they get their share?).
The idea here would be...
1. Correct a grave injustice against humanity 2. Screw the turkeys who
ignored their own written procedures to pass a law to gain some kind of
brownie points.
(question.. what ISO spec must governments operate under and be
certified
to????)
some things to think about....
critical systems that involved public safety were to be exempt.... isn't
the EU adopting an enhanced 911 type system called E112.. see link
http://wireless.iop.org/articles/news/5/12/4/1
So cell phones with e112 features should be considered exempt????
also... is it possible that regarding RoHS and WEEE have the EU has
ulterior motives which are not spoken of?
As an example of ulterior motives, I offer a cautionary tale from my
youth.....
The year, 1980. Location: USA, California's San Fernando Valley
Company: the world's largest independent manufacturer of computer
printers.
They decided to transfer all PCA production to a division in Hong Kong,
claiming via an internal memo, that it would save an average of 40USD
per unit. My boss decided I should do an in depth analysis, which
resulted in my publishing a white paper that showed about 4USD per unit
loss plus substantial intangibles that made this a bad decision. shortly
after publishing the paper, i was told to turn over all work product and
copies related to this project, and be a good boy and shut-up. Seems the
real reason was for tax accounting reasons, and to avoid paying taxes by
shuffling money out of the US (and 50% taxes) to Hong Kong (17%, as I
recall). Seems the internal memo was a cover for the IRS if they ever
looked into this.
While the original ideas behind WEEE and RoHS may have been legit,
Europe has been struggling with cheap labor more than the USA for years,
and these laws may have become an attempt to erect trade barriers. If
nothing else, these laws have provided support to capital equipment
manufacturers supplying new Pb-free machines. I have seen few
consultants or trade groups or other organizations speak against
WEEE/RoHS because it has been a windfall of work, grants, membership,
workshops, etc... so they aren't going to sling arrows at their golden
goose. Some heavyweights like Werner do speak, but they are few.
I don't have an IPC membership list, so when IPC claims it took its
passive, "fait accompli"? approach as being the will of its membership,
I don't know what that really meant. I did pull the membership list
from iNEMI, and found the following:
Institutes of education 4
EMS companies 5
OEMs 20
Agencies 7
Green companies 8
(companies who help you be green)
Suppliers to the industry 34
To my way of thinking, only the OEMs want RoHS stopped, but are afraid
of backlash. That would make the vote on RoHS 58 for and 20 against. The
non-OEMS would be pro-RoHS, because EDUs, EMSs, Agencies, greenies and
suppliers can look at RoHS as a financial opportunity, a chance to raise
prices, sell new products, break down barriers to sales, get new
funding, increase margins....
The OEMs need an IPC to be their front guy, to shield them from direct
attack. The IPC, as a technical group, can shout out that the EUs
Emporer has no clothes on..., but they wimped out.. (hey, but thanks for
letting us use your forums!!)
But now we have the Great and All Powerful Burke... Long live the
Burke...
Yes, that felt good... gotta get some sunshine this weekend, and a beer
Steve Mikell
> Phil Nutting wrote
> And will the lawsuit reimburse all the companies for what they have
> invested in this misguided change?
>
> Just my personal opinion.
>
> Phil
>
>
--
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To
unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
(re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing
per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at:
http://listserv.ipc.org/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
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e To
unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet To temporarily halt or
(re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET
Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL) To receive ONE mailing per day of all the
posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest Search the
archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/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
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/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
-----------------------------------------------------
|
