 
| Received: |
by ipc.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #2)
id m0vFPj0-0000TjC; Mon, 21 Oct 96 14:09 CDT |
| Old-Return-Path: |
|
| Date: |
Mon, 21 Oct 1996 14:09:24 -0400 |
| Precedence: |
list |
| Resent-From: |
|
| Message-ID: |
|
| X-Status: |
|
| Status: |
O |
| X-Mailing-List: |
|
| TO: |
|
| Return-Path: |
<TechNet-request> |
| Resent-Message-ID: |
<"uxSvm2.0.fgG.VfyQo"@ipc> |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| From [log in to unmask] Wed Oct 23 14: |
55:42 1996 |
| X-Loop: |
|
| Resent-Sender: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 96-10-21 09:04:12 EDT, you write:
<< It always amazes me how PCB Fabricators expect OEM's to be
responsible for testing a board to prove the Fabricator has
done his job. Why doesn't the Fabricator test the board to
insure he has done his job properly? Why is this cost always
passed down to the OEM?
>>
Like buying a car , you get what you pay for!
you don't pay for the testing and expect boards to be fully tested. I
wonder how you get a Benz Mercedes for paying the price of a toy car.
***************************************************************************
* 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. *
***************************************************************************
|
|
|
