TECHNET Archives

May 2007

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Ian Hanna <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 30 May 2007 10:45:58 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (276 lines)
Sorry if I mis-lead... a little quick on the trigger this morning...

 -- hopefully in another 500k or so when I'm shopping again I can find a
1/2 ton hybrid -- maybe with a small soya-eating diesel to charge the
batteries -- guess I'll have to give up the clutch though...

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Ellis [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 10:25 AM
To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Ian Hanna
Subject: Re: [TN] NTC RoHS compliant laptop with early failure

Sorry, it's not lead-acid but nickel-metal hydride and it weighs about 
28 kg! In fact, it is remarkably small. I haven't measured it but my 
visual memory says about 35 x 45 x 8 cm and that will pack enough oomph 
to do its job. It works at 156 V and packs about 1 kWh, which doesn't 
seem much, but will provide up to an extra 30 HP when needed for several

minutes, and recharges just as fast by regen braking.

Brian

Ian Hanna wrote:
> A 'lead-free' hybrid -- great, we save 12oz of nice reliable
> solder-joint, but gain 300lbs of lead-acid battery?  Not that I'm
> opposed to hybrids -- if I could get my Tacoma bio-diesel/electric I'd
> be all over that -- but the 'lead-free' bit made me think...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Ellis
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 3:21 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] NTC RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
> 
> After many, many, many months of waiting, I shall take delivery of a 
> hybrid car tomorrow. It is absolutely stuffed with electronics (at the

> last count, believe it or not, 237 microprocessors in it to control 
> everything down to the way it responds to how you breathe (almost!). 
> Being made in Japan, I imagine that it is all lead-free.
> 
> If a laptop with three microprocessors (CPU, GPU and HDDPU) fails
after,
> 
> say, 24 hours of use, this means that my brand new car should fail
after
> 
> 24*3/237 hours = 18 minutes. That means I cannot make it into any of
the
> 
> surrounding towns without having to call for help. Now, dare I suggest

> that a car suffers more climatic, vibration and shock extremes than a 
> laptop? Hopefully, it will not break down every 15 (or even 30)
minutes 
> so what's the difference? May I suggest that there are several
factors:
> - the car is designed for the intended purpose: the laptop is designed

> for minimal cost in a highly competitive market
> - the car designers are aware that if the drivers get killed, they 
> cannot expect them to replace their car after n years: the laptop 
> designer of brand X is not worried if, next time round, he buys brand
Y 
> because he knows tha the user of Brand Z will buy brand X next time 
> round, so the future of brands X, Y and Z are all cyclically assured, 
> deaths of the users being unlikely
> - cooling of laptops is hairy: fans reduce battery life and their
grill 
> is often blocked by the clothing on the lap of the unfortunate owner. 
> Critical electronics in cars are always positioned where cooling is 
> adequate: thermal design is a known factor (in laptops, the cooling
fan 
> is placed where there is a little space left over, in the hopes that
5% 
> of the air may reach hot components, if you are lucky)
> - etc.?
> 
> If you don't hear from me tomorrow, it may be because I'm waiting at
the
> 
> side of the road for help during my 40 minute drive back from the
> showroom.
> 
> Brian
> 
> Ian Hanna wrote:
>> I went shovel shopping last week -- there were three
>>
>> A beautiful resin handled, tempered steel, rolled edges with tack
> welds
>> and reinforcement at the stress points and seams for $39
>> A hardwood handled, hickory, one of similar quality for $29
>> And an unpriced chineese model -- inferior wood handle, much more
>> roughly shaped, with a wide grain -- stamped steel, no welds, no
>> reinforcement...
>>
>>  -- did a price check to compare -- it was $6.99 -- if I used a
shovel
>> every day I would invest, but for digging rocks now and then from my
>> road -- I couldn't justify the $20-$30 difference...
>>
>>  -- I am ashamed, but that is the current reality
>>
>> I fear soon there will be less shovel selection, I am a more
> discerning
>> shopper than most, and a professional 'quality guy'  and still --
> price
>> influences me
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bev Christian
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 10:53 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [TN] RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
>>
>> George,
>> As usual, I am in total agreement with you.
>> Bev
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wenger, George M. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 10:51 AM
>> To: TechNet E-Mail Forum; Bev Christian
>> Subject: RE: [TN] RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
>>
>> Bev,
>>
>> To add to your comment, I'm more convinced than ever that "quality is
>> dead".  Given three factors 1). Quality, 2). Cost  3).  Delivery.
>> Customers can choose any two but not three.  Even companies like my
> old
>> company (Lucent Technologies / Bell Laboratories) that changed from
>> being technology driven to supply change driven are now more worried
>> about cost and delivery.  They may still be concerned about quality
> but
>> when their customers want the products "NOW" and they want them for
> "AS
>> CHEAP AS POSSIBLE" then quality has to suffer. 
>>
>>
>> Regards, 
>> George 
>> George M. Wenger 
>> Senior Principle FMA / Reliability Engineer 
>> Wireless network Solutions 
>> Andrew Corporation, 40 Technology Drive, Warren, NJ 07059 (908)
> 546-4531
>> [log in to unmask] 
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bev Christian
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 10:34 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [TN] RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
>>
>> A man I respect in the industry on these matters said (and this
> applies
>> to more than electronics), that "quality is dead".  Remember the
> mantra
>> is "smaller, cheaper, faster" or some such.  In the late nineties
they
>> said "quality is of course assumed", but I think that has gone out
the
>> window now, in the general sense.
>> Bev
>> RIM
>>
>> The opinions expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily
>> represent those of the company that I work for. (And I am making no
>> inferences one way or the other about our own products.)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wolfe, Robert
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 10:27 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [TN] RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
>>
>> Joe,
>> Just a thought without any real data (but sure has me wondering
>> slightly).
>> EVERY single piece of electronic equipment I've purchased within the
>> last year has either failed almost out of the box or soon after.
>> This includes 2 notebook computers, a PA Amp, 3 cell phones, a
> wireless
>> phone, an all-in-one printer.
>> Now yes like many have stated here with out data there is no case and
>> there are many reasons that could be the problem, and may not have
>> anything to do with RoHS.
>> But from a John Q. Public buyer standpoint was I jinxed this last
year
>> were the odds not all in my favor, could be but certainly has me
>> wondering why 100% of what I bought electronically never had problems
>> till this past year everything had a problem (100%)??? 
>> >From my point of view I was starting to think maybe don't buy any
>> electronics for awhile?
>> Especially since the practice of many companies is, even if your unit
>> failed in only 3 months, you might get a refurbished unit that is
much
>> older back.
>> Yes they guarantee it is in perfect working order again, but just my
>> opinion, if the unit breaks in the first 90 days you should get a
> brand
>> new replacement. 
>> Bob
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Hudson
>> Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 1:02 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [TN] RoHS compliant laptop with early failure
>>
>> I would suggest that it belies your undoubted professional expertise
> to
>> make the assumption that this failure has anything to do with
>> RoHS-compliance or lead-free. Frankly, it smacks of hysteria. Surely
> you
>> can think of at least a dozen other potential failure modes, all
> equally
>> likely? Let's see some evidence in this case before you throw your
> toys
>> out of the playpen.
>>
>> Dave
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 15.0
> 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 15.0
> 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 15.0
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
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2