 
| Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
| Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Tue, 27 Aug 1996 16:34:55 -0400 (EDT) |
| Precedence: |
list |
| From [log in to unmask] Wed Aug 28 09: |
07:13 1996 |
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| Priority: |
NORMAL |
| X-Authentication: |
IMSP |
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| X-Loop: |
|
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| Resent-From: |
|
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0uvWc7-0000NkC; Tue, 27 Aug 96 17:28 CDT |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"cfteg3.0.qOG.oPt8o"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| Sender: |
|
| TO: |
|
| X-Mailer: |
Simeon for Windows Version 4.0.6 |
| Message-Id: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Greetings!
We are relatively new to the SMT assembly business. Our
vendor wants to switch from a glossy to a matte surface
soldermask to eliminate a process problem on their end.
Are there any issues we need to consider? I seem to recall
a discussion about solder balls hating matte finish.
Thanks
Barry Allen
SED Systems Inc.
[log in to unmask]
***************************************************************************
* TechNet mail list is provided as a service by IPC using SmartList v3.05 *
***************************************************************************
* To unsubscribe from this list at any time, send a message to: *
* [log in to unmask] with <subject: unsubscribe> and no text. *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
