TECHNET Archives

August 1997

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:
Larry Crane <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 6 Aug 1997 10:55:12 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
The two comments below are very interesting.  It is my understanding that
the IPC is supposed to be non-commercial in its approach to technical
issues.  This is enforced during any technical presentations.  The
recommending of a company or product even by a third party seems to violate
the spirit of this.  On the other hand the second point on rapid
communication and the spread of information is very valid.  I believe that
the IPC board of directors should at least consider some guidelines such as
names of products and companies with no editorial comment on how good or
bad the product might be.

----------
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TECHNET] FAB: Flexible circuit suppliers wanted
> Date: Wednesday, August 06, 1997 9:10 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am of the opinion that if someone requests specific information on a
> supplier or process then it is acceptable to supply anecdotal information
> on specific suppliers including names, address, and phone numbers.  In
the
> last day I remember inputs on entec and a supplier, esd and a supplier,
> flex circuits and suppliers, BGA reclamation and suppliers, bellcore
> requirements and their supplier, IPC requirements and supplier, flux and
> suppliers, etc.
>
> In a technology as complex and rapidly evolving as electronics,
> communication is vital to our survival.  The knowledge of a supplier that
> can solve a problem via a proprietary process or product could be the
> difference between competitiveness and
> bankruptcy.  Can we really afford not to share this information?
>
> Denis Meloche
> Heraeus Cermalloy
>
>
> At 06:09 PM 8/5/97 +0000, you wrote:
> >Technetters,
> >Is this how we want to respond to all such inquiries?  Does each
> >manufacturer of a product need to scour technet to make sure we're
> >included on this type of reference?  I appreciate the time that the
> >person from Seagate took to respond to this query, but they provided
> >a very limited number of choices.  Do we have access to a list of
> >fabricators on the IPC home page?  Should our standard response be to
> >direct people to search that list of manufacturers to identify those
> >that meet their needs specifically?  I would appreciate some
> >comments.
> >
> >
>
>


ATOM RSS1 RSS2